I want to start taking photos with something that's not my phone, but I want it to be something that's easy to carry around.
I can't stop hearing about the Ricoh GR here. Do I take the plunge with this, or do I look into the Fujifilm X100S/T?
Which would you recommend for a beginner who doesn't want a DSLR and is probably not going to upgrade this camera for a while.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
X100T if you want a tactile feel (similar-ish to a older film camera) and nice aesthetics, GR if you want the smallest size possible as well as greatest image quality. I own both (don't ask me why) and I like them both, but they're very different. The lack of viewfinder on the GR doesn't bother me really, I own a cheap Olympus ovf which does the job just fine. Try both and find which one you like
>"I want it to be something that's easy to carry around"
>"get a DSLR"
Is it possible that you never learned to read?
I bought the Ricoh GR II a few weeks ago, and so far I think it's a great camera.
Small, intuitive and great image quality. And unlike my Canon gear, images have a lot of dynamic range. The original color profile is a bit flat, but that is easily remedied in post.
So far, no issues with dust, but when it's not in use I always keep it stored in a small carrying case.
Lack of viewfinder doesn't bother me, although obviously there are times when it would be helpful.
the GR is a brilliant camera. it's small, fast, sleep.. the IQ is great.
imo the only weakness is that it's not that fun to use.
X-E2 and adapter/manual lens is cheaper in Euroland than an X100s/t or a Ricoh GR.
If you stick with photography then you can buy other lenses or use more and it's a great camera to learn with (like the X100). The X-E2 also has a firmware update coming out real soon that adds electronic shutter for silent shooting.
If OP isn't 100% sure whether they'll stick with photography then there are other compacts and mirrorless options out there that are cheaper too.
>There is no good reason to buy X-E2
Except for the fact it has the same sensor, has a flash built in, can shoot at a faster burst rate and has a new firmware due very soon that enables electronic shutter and includes the latest AF system all for the same price.
There is only one good reason to buy an X-Pro 1 over an X-E2 at the same price and that's the OVF/HVF.
I get it. You really want to force the OVF/HVF on people
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2015-10-30T22:13:02 Flash No Flash Function Image Width 466 Image Height 466
I use an X-Pro 1 for a second body to my D600, and it's definitely worth the current price of them.
Get the 27mm f/2.8 pancake for it, and it's as small as the X100 series, with a few higher end features. And if you end up wanting to get a little more serious, it has changeable lenses, so you don't have to buy an entirely new camera.
How the fuck can they add an electronic shutter with a firmware update?
X-pro 1 and x-e2 have the same AF system and firmware.
Maybe you are thinking of the X-E2S, which is a new camera.
Either way, you are fucking idiot.
>X-pro 1 and x-e2 have the same AF system and firmware
The X-E1 has the same system as the XPro1. The X-E2 has a newer system.
Nah m8. The X-E2 is a different camera from the X-Pro 1/X-E1. The X-E2 is getting the Electronic shutter refresh that the X-T10 and X-E2s has added in the next update. There is no physical change required for this to work as all ES does is refresh the sensor to capture an image (this gives shutter speeds from 1/32000 - 1s).
With this update, it's now ahead of the X-Pro 1 and is a completely sensible choice unless you NEED an OVF/HVF. The X-Pro 1 is abandoned now, just like the X-E1. It's time for the X-Pro 2 to shine. You just got to face facts that the X-E2 is now an objectively better camera for a beginner who doesn't need an OVF. Electronic shutter actuations don't wear out anything mechanically either, which allows a beginner to learn how to expose things differently too.
I wouldn't expect the X-E2 to get another firmware update after this though. Any other updates or features will likely be added into the X-E3 or equivalent.
Either way, you are a fucking misinformed idiot. I'm not suggesting you go full gearfag but I'd at least suggest you read up on changes before recommending cameras to people. :^)
Its main selling point is the auto focus, that's really about it, nothing too spectacular about the image quality, or low-light performance
its basically for beginners wanting to shoot sports, like their nephew's soft ball game
Sony suffers from no lens syndrome. It straight lacks some needed focal lengths and optical qualities from its lens lineup or the only options are bloody expensive.
The best beginner option is still a DSLR, be it Pentax, Nikon or Canon. The performance is more or less the same with mostly less in the case of Canon on high ISO and low light. There are great lens options for beginners that fits into a tight budget. Other than the obvious kit lens there are cheap fast standard 35mm (50mm equivalent) and 50mm (75-80mm equivalent) for portraits, both are around $100-150, not to mention the Canon 24mm pancake which is an excellent piece of glass also around $150.
If you seriously considering picking up photography as a hobby I'd suggest starting with a DSLR.
I'm the guy that was shilling sony earlier, and the guy that was arguing with that guy too. And I have to say, in honesty, this guy is right. When you start with a DSLR and a 'normal' prime you'll develop your eye, mastery of fundamentals, and best of all you'll develop habits. then if you feel those habits lend themselves to other camera types, do that. I started with a DSLR and bought an X-T1 because I found my style well suited to the manual controls. Then an A7 because I fell in love with the Loxia lenses.
Anyway, my point, to add to the post before is that the best way to determine what gear is best for you is through experience. And don't worry about the 'gearfag' thing. I'm going to keep floating around gear until i find that "extension of my eye" to stroke HCB. And i'm sure as shit not going to care if /p/ labels me a gearfag.
shoot some photos, learn what you like, buy that thing, repeat until you're retired with a leica M
The Canon SL1 with either a 24, 40 or 50mm prime would be a nice, small (for a DSLR) and inexpensive camera. Granted it's not as small as a Ricoh GR II, Fuji X70 or Sony RX100/a6000, but you'll have access to plenty of glass and it's actually one of the cheapest options at about $550 with body and an aforementioned lens.
I wouldn't, if he's looking to buy something along the lines of an x100 or a Ricoh. The manual lenses are actually quite clunky and really make the pocket able size of the X-E2 useless. I let myself got convinced to get the X-E1 instead of the X100 or 100s and I have barely taken 200 pictures with it in the past 2-3 months. Probably gonna sell it for a Ricoh or X100s soon
No, not really. The T has got the 'classic chrome' film emulation filter, a more refined/distinct handgrip and a slightly better AF.
If you want classic chrome, then google will be your friend. There is a way to make it work with an X100(s).
i'm in the same position as you and I bought a GR Digital III. Personally I find not having a viewfinder really annoying and not that great. (Plus buying a viewfinder for it is another $200)
i'd go straight for a dslr if i was you
I ended up compromising between the idea of getting a super portable camera and a DSLR by getting an X100s.
Hopefully I didn't make an awful decision. What do I need to know about it once I start fiddling around with it? It sounds like I should mess around with aperture priority setting first to get a feel for adjusting ISO and aperture before going full manual?
It has a built in 3 stop ND, obv only use it when you would normally use an ND and not for the sake of it.
I switched from Nikon DSLR to x100s a few months ago and am not going back, i love the colours, even the jpgs straight out of the camera. Just play around with it, use p or Aperture or whatever mode you normally would.
First real camera. I have no idea what the hell I'm doing. I'm reading up on the exposure triangle right now.
I guess I should just take it out and fiddle around with the settings in order to see what comes out and get used to everything?
Try manual mode.
The luxury of digital is you can snap away and not waste any money.
I grew up with film point and shoots and SLR's and was a poor fag so I couldnt fuck around and experiment.
Going banans with manual will teach you cause and effect. "Shit, everything is black! A little tweaky here. Click. Oh, i can see shit now".
Keep practicing, master the controls.