Nielk Mike wrote:
Why spend another €400 or €500 if the phone does it?
Because it sucks infinitely to use a touch screen interface when trying to be creative? I wouldn't even consider using my phone as a camera unless it's purely for documentation. Takes all the joy of photographing away.
Makten wrote:
Because it sucks infinitely to use a touch screen interface when trying to be creative? I wouldn't even consider using my phone as a camera unless it's purely for documentation. Takes all the joy of photographing away.
By trying to be creative you mean setting shutter speed, f-stop, EV and ISO manually? If that is what you regard as fun, then we are back to my initial question: Why is the X-half more fun than the X-E with a pancake?
Nielk Mike wrote:
By trying to be creative you mean setting shutter speed, f-stop, EV and ISO manually? If that is what you regard as fun, then we are back to my initial question: Why is the X-half more fun than the X-E with a pancake?
I haven't used the X-Half so I can't answer that question. I simply explained why a phone is not an option for some of us. Just the difficulty to hold the damn thing and press the tiny "shutter button" without touching everything else is bad enough.
The X-E cameras are much larger and more expensive, so that comparison makes no sense either.
Makten wrote:
I haven't used the X-Half so I can't answer that question. I simply explained why a phone is not an option for some of us. Just the difficulty to hold the damn thing and press the tiny "shutter button" without touching everything else is bad enough.
The X-E cameras are much larger and more expensive, so that comparison makes no sense either.
Nielk Mike wrote:
True for the X-E5 - not true for the X-E3
Until now I have not heard anybody complaining about X-half size. It is small enough. Compared to a phone, one advantage is that X-half looks like a camera.
Zoom? Sometimes it is just more fun to shoot with a camera that has one fixed lens.
tuomkok wrote:
Until now I have not heard anybody complaining about X-half size. It is small enough. Compared to a phone, one advantage is that X-half looks like a camera.
Zoom? Sometimes it is just more fun to shoot with a camera that has one fixed lens.
It is not the size of the X-Half. It is just that the camera doesn't offer anything the X-E3 doesn't. In fact, the camera offers significantly less at a pretty steep price. Thus my question where the fun comes from.
My X-Half arrived yesterday. I spent the afternoon setting up the camera as the user interface was new to me and I also updated the firmware to the latest 2.0. While out this morning I had a chance to take some photos in beautiful sunlight.
This photo was rotated to the horizontal position. It was shot at f 5.6, 1/800s, ISO 200, Reala Ace and center weighted. I'm very pleased with the quality of the image. The image has no post processing.
The camera is so SMALL! It is much smaller/lighter than my X-E5/23 2.8. My X-Half was an open box and cost less than half retail price. I had wondered if I would like it. The answer is a resounding yes! It is not going to be for everyone, but for a fun take everywhere camera for me it will be great!
gaopa wrote:
My X-Half arrived yesterday. I spent the afternoon setting up the camera as the user interface was new to me and I also updated the firmware to the latest 2.0. While out this morning I had a chance to take some photos in beautiful sunlight.
This photo was rotated to the horizontal position. It was shot at f 5.6, 1/800s, ISO 200, Reala Ace and center weighted. I'm very pleased with the quality of the image. The image has no post processing.
The camera is so SMALL! It is much smaller/lighter than my X-E5/23 2.8. My X-Half was an open box and cost less than half retail price. I had wondered if I would like it. The answer is a resounding yes! It is not going to be for everyone, but for a fun take everywhere camera for me it will be great!...Show more →
Nielk Mike wrote:
agree. I can correct in post processing, but I wanted to show out of the camera. While taking the shot I could have backed off the exposure a bit to correct the image in camera. Using the small back screen in sunlight is a bit of a challenge.
Makten wrote:
Pointless comparing price to an old, used camera. But regarding size you are wrong.
Never said they are the same size. But the X-E3 is close and so much more capable. And affordable, too. So why limit oneself to lesser quality? What is the additional fun factor
Nielk Mike wrote:
Never said they are the same size. But the X-E3 is close and so much more capable. And affordable, too. So why limit oneself to lesser quality? What is the additional fun factor
Since you obviously can't fathom that other people have other preferences, there is no point in discussing this.
But just a hint: Not everyone find "capable" cameras the most fun to use.
christopher_icu wrote:
I'm always on the hunt for the smallest possible camera capable of doing quality work. The X-Half wins on size, but the image quality worries me.
The image quality is good with proper lighting and a steady hand. I wish I could shoot RAW, but, as you know, can't.
I quite enjoy my x-half. It’s something I bought on a whim in Japan and serves me well when I don’t feel like bringing a “real” camera out. The x-half basically just lives in my backpack and it’s always there.
My main benefit for it over the x-e3 that keeps coming up, the inclusion of classic negative, which is easily my favorite sim; that, and the 18mp pixel shots are surprisingly clear and crisp. I really love the photos that this cheap device produces.
It reminds me of my first camera, the Smena 8M, except that this one is fully automatic and digital. It is not a replacement for any of the more advanced cameras. It is fun, and kids love it. I am not sure how long this love will last, but maybe it will be a stepping stone to a more serious camera. One serious shortcoming is the lack of a close-up mode.
I am totally doing a few photo sessions with it just to see how much equipment does not matter
