Dawud
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
sebboh wrote:
your experience doesn't sound that surprising. if your a jpeg only guy i would go with an olympus or fuji mirrorless camera. i've never liked what i see from NEX jpegs unless i'm shooting high contrast b&w (on the other hand i definitely prefer the sony raw files). i've never had a camera that could get decent white balance indoors, if you shoot jpeg i think your going to have to set white balance manually no matter what camera you shoot.
with regard to the sony 16mm. it should be very sharp in the center from f/4 on, but the corners will never get super sharp. i stop down to f/11 if i need acceptable corner sharpness and even then they're kinda weak. if it doesn't look sharp in the center i would check that you are getting correct focus (my copy doesn't seem terribly accurate in AF) and return it if it still isn't sharp in the center.
I like the white balance my canon gives me. Yes, it's a very bit to yellow, but I like the warmer feeling.
The Nex turned my pictures into something blue. If I change the white balance to "shade" I get a better pictues, but the people have yellow faces then  . I don't feel like taking a white balance card with me and shoot that first before taking an other picture
I've only done a quick check with the 16mm, I'll need to test it a bit more.
LightShow wrote:
Take your 5N to the camera store and try out the Sigma 19 & 30.
There will be some Zeiss lenses next year that could be awesome.
If you want magical, jpg only shooting is handcuffing yourself at the beginning of the process.
I haven't shot jpg in a long time, and I doubt I ever will(other than for jpg only modes), the extra detail and bit-depth plus white balance flexibility, are just too important to me.
And as a bonus when new raw conversion software is released, I can redevelop the picture, it's like going back in time and giving yourself a camera from the future.
I would love the Zeiss, but it's currently really out of my budget. I don't want magical pictures, I want a great system. Small, light and compact. If the Canon EOS M would focus properly, I would get that. I tried the EOS M, but it's AF is really rubbisch.
mawz wrote:
Sony JPEG's suck, if you're a JPEG shooter get an 16MP Olympus m43 camera (OM-D or one of its smaller siblings) and be prepared to be amazed. Note I say this as a dedicated Sony shooter. You can get amazing colour from the Sony's, but it requires a RAW workflow (or shooting film. Provia and Velvia with Sony and Minolta glass is amazing)
Tomorrow or on monday the OM-D will arive in our mailbox. My girlfriend bought it together with the 20mm F1.7. I'm looking forward to testing it.
jonrock wrote:
Sony JPEG processing isn't too good so usually I normally shoot just in RAW. The best results I've gotten out of the system usually involves adapting legacy lenses like the Contax G lenses. However, the few good native Sony lenses I have like the 24 f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 are good performers. The Sigma 19mm and 30mm f2.8 are also good choices.
Maybe the 19mm will be a good choice.
|
. Another dissapointment. I was normally taking the NEX kit with me for my vacation to Cuba, but I think I'll take my 550D.