Skelbimas
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Kokį fotoaparatą pirkti?
Collapse
Tai svarbi tema.
X
X
-
Parašė Boxas Rodyti pranešimą25mm dauginam is dvieju taip ?
manau kambary bus siaurokas
Comment
-
Parašė vytauc Rodyti pranešimąLauke tiks, portretams tiks. Kambary kit'as + FL-36 ko gero pigiausias ir paprasčiausias variantas būtų.Pamišimas... Tų pačių dalykų darymas tikintis kitokių rezultatų.
Comment
-
Ieškau nojo fotoaparato ir jau baigiu pasiklysti jų gausybėje, išsirinkau kelis variantus ir norėčiau jūsų patarimų:
Canon PowerShot S5 IS
Nikon Coolpix P80
Sony DSC-H7
Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 18-70mm objektyvu
Panasonic DMC-FZ50
Jei turite geresnių variantų taip pat siūlykitia (kaina iki 2000lt).
Tai pat norėčiau paklaust, ką reiškia šie terminai-Contrast AF, Multi-area AF (single-point AF in AF-S), ir ar jie bent kiek atstoja rankinį fokusavimą.
Comment
-
Uz 2000lt iseina veidrodinis fotoaparatas, tad jei zadi bent kiek rimciau fotografuoti siulyciau ziureti tik i juos.
Pvz uz 2099lt gali gauti OLYMPUS E-420 su 14-42mm ir 40-150mm objektyvais, kuriu pilnai uztenka pradziai. Tik su 14-42mm kainuoja apie 1800lt.
Taip pat uz ta pacia kaina iseina: Pentax K100D Super su D-FA 18-55mm bei DA 50-200mm objektyvais. Atitinkamai pigesnis su 1 objektyvu.Jedi power!
Comment
-
O kaip įvertintumėt šitą aparatą?
Sony Alpha DSLR-A350 18-70mm
Arba šitą:
Sony Alpha DSLR-A300 18-70mmPaskutinis taisė syle; 2008.07.13, 19:27.
Comment
-
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp...ra350&show=all
Viskas ganėtinai aišku:
1549 Lt - A200
2149 Lt - A300 (A200 + vartomas ekranas ir live view)
2334 Lt - A350 (A200 + vartomas ekranas ir live view + 14 mp sensorius vietoj 10 mp)
Šie trys modeliai iš esmės skiriasi tik papildomomis funkcijomis, taigi įvertini, ar nori mokėti 600-800 Lt už Live View ir geresnį sensorių, ir apsisprendi
Comment
-
Parašė Ramunas Rodyti pranešimąTaip pat uz ta pacia kaina iseina: Pentax K100D Super su D-FA 18-55mm bei DA 50-200mm objektyvais. Atitinkamai pigesnis su 1 objektyvu.
Comment
-
Parašė x21 Rodyti pranešimąMatyt atėjo laikas ir man nusipirkti naują žveriuką.
Žiurių EOS 450D link. Tik va galvoju su kokiu objektyvu ji pirkti, ar ne per prastas kuris komplekte? Ar negeriau iškart kūną su geresniu pirkti? pvz. su IS ir USM? Ar yra čia EOS naudotoju?
Comment
-
Parašė x21 Rodyti pranešimąMatyt atėjo laikas ir man nusipirkti naują žveriuką.
Žiurių EOS 450D link. Tik va galvoju su kokiu objektyvu ji pirkti, ar ne per prastas kuris komplekte? Ar negeriau iškart kūną su geresniu pirkti? pvz. su IS ir USM? Ar yra čia EOS naudotoju?R. Dichavičius: „Turi būti alkanas fotografijos“
Comment
-
Parašė vytauc Rodyti pranešimą450 bent DPR buvo labai išgirtas, tai manau nesuklysi. Dėl konkrečių canono stiklų nepatarsių, bet jei finansai leidžia - geriau kitinį "praleisk".
Their {DPR}problem, if we give them the benefit of the doubt (instead of implying this is intentional). Is they have clearly never sat down and organized out what they are doing and have a defined process and test plan. They have it for shots and such, but they don't even look at those consistently. And for the rest they definitely don't.
They need to have a versioned test plan and processes with an explanation of them and then the version used posted. The version is important to know so as they add stuff to reviews, it's clear.
To me it starts from the very start were they cover the specs. The type up a new list for every model, instead of having a fixed table of all possible parameters and filling it in. So the data is never shown consistently. Things are often close, but not often the same.
The need to have very consistent measure and fill out testing, and then comparison with baseline requirements/scoring criteria.
They come up with a test, and randomly start adding it to reviews. But how they look at the results continually changes, and when a test is flawed, they never step back and re-design things. Their stability testing is sketchy at best.
If they did this, when a camera is missing stuff it would stand out. They would also have to explain how a camera is some how not meeting what is needed for a particular thing. Additionally when they start looking at new things, it would be well noted and considered from there on. They could also have documented what the "bar" was set to for a particular test.
A side thing is simply they need to explain out side of reviews why some things are good or bad. Like explain how a manual pop up flash is bad (would be interesting to see them do that one). Instead of just saying something is bad. Much of their oddness is just their random opinion on something at any moment, if they had to hold themselves to the same thing over and over, that could be controlled much better.
They have the basis to do this, but they just aren't doing it. And now they have 4-5 people doing reviews. which makes things even less consistent. I do rather miss Phil doing DSLRs and Simon doing P&S. Now depending on who you get, the review is all over the map.
But in the end, there is all sorts of ways to do reviews. I think DPR has now dug a hole. They aren't doing informal reviews, they are doing very formal reviews, but they haven't implemented a proper process that we can all see to give it any meaning. Which begins to make them no better than informal reviews people do. I like Thom Hogan and his reviews, much of his is on using the camera, how well did the design work, and he will even tear a camera apart to see what is going on. He was the one who confirmed the D300 sensor is made by Sony (says Sony on the sensor) and has now confirmed the D3 sensor is designed by Nikon and not fabricated by Sony (he tore his D3 apart). But even more I like folks like MR at Luminous Landscapes who is very good at finding good honest faults in camera and thinking about how one uses it in the field and he makes clear what he uses, and he uses multiple brands, and has no problem dumping one and moving on. Which makes MR a bit better than Thom who is definitely packing Nikon bias. But Thom isn't unlike David Kilpatrick who while definitely has some open bias, can also see when others do something right, or when Nikon does something wrong. I used to like Phil and crews stance that they won't say what they use, and just use what the are reviewing. But over time I have decided this is BS and they need to disclose, it would save them a lot of grief at this point too.
Comment
-
Parašė _Bead_ Rodyti pranešimąPriklauso nuo to kokie tavo poreikiai...
...platus, zoom...
Ir kiek gali isleist optikai...
Bent pradedanciajam geriausias variantas 50mm 1.8f astrus, pigus.
Comment
-
Parašė x21 Rodyti pranešimąPoreikiai turistiniai. Pries 5 metus nusipirkau Pentax Optio S, tada jis buvo gan neblogas.
Bet dabar ziuriu kad jo nuotrauku kokybe visai netokia kokios noreciau. Noras tureti grazesnes nuotraukas atsirado dar ir del to, kad pradejau dalyvauti siame forume ir lyginti savo nuotrakas su kitu dalyviu...
Turistui zoom'o daugiau reikia nei fisheye...
Kadangi objektyvas konservativesnis irenginys nei pats aparatas, tai jam pasiruoses skirti pora kilolitu...
Kitas nemalonumas - palyginti tamsus, t.y. prireikus siauros ryskumo zonos didelio pelno nebus.
As asmeniskai pradeciau nuo Tamron 17-50/2.8, uz savo pinigus jis yra tiesiog nerealus. Astrus kaip britva, sviesus, vidinis fokusavimo mechanizmas.
Na o toliau matysi ko truksta - ultraplaciakampio (10-22 ar pan) ar televyko (pvz 70-200/4L (geriau +is)).
Comment
-
Parašė a_p Rodyti pranešimąOrientacijai - tavo dabartinio fotoaparato "matymo kampas" yra ekvivalentiskas 35-105 objektyvui ant pilno formato kameros. Arba 22-65 ant 450d.
O kas tose nuotraukose netenkina? Turek omeny, kad knopkes "sedevras" i 450d dar neidejo.
Ziurint kur turistaut ir ka fotografuot. Pazoomint iskerpant dazniausiai pavyksta, o vat suklijuot panorama jau zymiai sudetingiau.
O del turistiniu nuotrauku, tai daugiau miestu vaizdai... kaip atskiri objektai, taip ir ju grupes... peizažai kol kas antroje vietoje...
Su pora kilolitu sakyciau kad bus anksta. Kit'inis objektyvas blogas tik tuom, kad is pigiai atrodancio plastiko. Todel tipo "nerimta". 50/1.8 beje irgi
Kitas nemalonumas - palyginti tamsus, t.y. prireikus siauros ryskumo zonos didelio pelno nebus.
As asmeniskai pradeciau nuo Tamron 17-50/2.8, uz savo pinigus jis yra tiesiog nerealus. Astrus kaip britva, sviesus, vidinis fokusavimo mechanizmas.
Na o toliau matysi ko truksta - ultraplaciakampio (10-22 ar pan) ar televyko (pvz 70-200/4L (geriau +is)).
Comment
Comment