What's the best way to spend $1000 on a new camera system?

>>2951634

a6000 is best value for mirrorless right now.

You should be able to afford the body w/ kit and a couple cheap primes for $1000.

btw, you do know we have a gear thread where you are supposed to post shit like this?

>>2951642

>a600

ha.. haha.. HA... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>2951634

XT-1 if you want the best IQ. I (and most of /p/) would not generally recommend kit lenses but the Fujifilm kit lens is quite good, I would still recommend a prime though, the 35mm f/2 is god tier and should fit within the budget.

Buy the sony if yu like made in China/Malaysia/Thailand plastic construction, inferior image quality, literally the worst customer service out of all manufacturers and no good native lenses. It probably has better video and thats it.

XT-1 is full mag alloy, Fuji focus on achieving highest possible image quality, boat load of extremely high rated lenses, generally a slightly higher price tage (made in Japan etc)

File: IMG_20160926_120013.jpg (3MB, 3072x3840px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3072x3840px

>>2951662
>XT-1 if you want the best IQ.
Fucken Fuji cucks in every thread. You guys are the cancer of /p/.

>>2951634
OP of you want the best system on the market buy a real dslr like a t3i. No Pro would use mirrorless because it's not a real camera.

>>2951681

>No Pro would use mirrorless because it's not a real camera.

I made $140k+ last year with an 1 XT1, 10-24 and 50-140mm. I bought your mum a nice pearl necklace with the funds, fgt.

>>2951681
You know this is no true. Pro are using mirrorless, smaller bodies, faster af, smaller lenses, faster at shooting...
> Go Pana Lumix or Olympus Op!
> Go suny if you like big sensors!
There is no point of staying dslr today

>>2951681
>No Pro would use mirrorless because it's not a real camera.

I'm a photography student and several of my lecturers switched to either Sony or mostly Fuji for their work. This includes a World Press Photo Award Winner for General News. I'm a Nikon user btw.

>>2951634
Fuji's 18-55 is a decent but not stellar lens, and its AF is fairly slow by modern standards. I wouldn't recommend having it as your only lens.

>EM-1 and several prime lenses
This most certainly beats having only a 18-55, but Fuji has great prime lenses too, like 35/1.4 or 23/2 - the only downside compared to micro4/3 is lack of image stabilization on them.

The main difference between the bodies is that X-T1 has retro-styled fixed-function dials while E-M1 has controls like a semipro DSLR. You might prefer one or the other.

Both cameras have shitty video, by the way. If you want video, get some Panasonic like GH3 or GX85.

30$ on an old film SLR

Rest of the money on travelling where you will learn how to photograph. Thank me later

>>2951681

you are dumb

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg6HQ8RlPGQ

>>2951634

a6000 over XT-1.

It has a better sensor, considerably faster autofocus, and it is considerably cheaper.

You can get the body and a few of the fantastic Sigma primes for the cost of just the XT-1

>>2951634
What the fuck do you want a camera for in the first place is a good place to start.

>>2951716

>better sensor

topkek

>E mount sigma primes fantastic
>literally has to recommend sigma primes (there is like 2 of them) because no good native lenses

topkek

>>2951727
anon, forget it. This is clearly just another thread for Fuji and Sony shills to go at each other's throat. At least it's contained within one thread and not spilling over too much to the rest of the board

>>2951728

>topkek

It is topkek. Both sensors are Sony made, except the a6000 is a gen newer.

>no native lenses

He give himself the extremely limited budget of $1000.

Sony has some great primes, the 35mm OSS and 50mm especially. They are $350 and $250 though. With his extremely limited budget I figured the Sigma was the way to go.

File: dscf5188-copy~2-2400x894.jpg (509KB, 2400x894px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 2400x894px

>>2951728
There's 3 native primes from sigma

Sony has the best oem glass in the world, just most of it isn't in ops budget, op could get the a6000, 28 f2 and 50 1.8.
That's the best oem 28 and thrifty fifty currently on the market and offers a great upgrade path with sonys ff bodies if op sticks with the hobby.

>>2951694
>35 1.4
Looks like aids bro, pic related.

>>2951634
em5ii is better than em1 if you want to go that route.
panasonic is better until em1ii is out.

>>2951642
this guy is right.
a6000 + sigma 30mm f1.4.

File: 1466842491545.jpg (7KB, 199x242px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 199x242px

>another sony vs fuji thread

if you're so convinced sony is better why do you have to fight so hard to try to prove to everyone that they are

>>2951737

Don't forget the 35 1.4 autofocuses slow as fuck too.

>>2951739

Fuji is the one fighting hard. Just look at the second post of the thread. Completely disregards OPs budget then shitposts about how great XT-1 is.

>>2951743
but its because the xt-1 is great

>>2951745
It's worse in every metric compared to the much cheaper a6000. It can't even do iso 100

Op, disregard bodies, acquire glass, glass will last 20 years and barely deprecates at all second hand, but todays $1000 body is next years $500 body, you can pick up the full frame a7 for under $500 if you hunt around. I'd never directly advise getting a new body unless you're a professional that wants the peace of mind of a warranty service.

>>2951751
>Op, disregard bodies, acquire glass

Yeah and fuji glass is fantastic

>>2951745

It is.

But the a6000 is a better camera and a better value.

>>2951685
>140k

how the fuck

teach me your ways

>>2951752
See
>>2951737

And let's get technical for a mo. If we take the xt2 and a7ii, similar megapixels, so similar sharpness, right? Well, no, because the photosites on the sony are 134% bigger, so the fuji lens would have to be able to resolve 134% more detail than the equivalent sony lens to have a similar apparent sharpness at the end.

Even if fuji allowed companies such as dxo and lens rentals to do objective testing on their products, do you really think they're going to be more than twice as sharp? And how many companies make autofocus fuji lenses apart from fuji? I think zeiss do one? In sigmas words "fuji are not important".

Lets not get started on the "you're buying into a dead size format" argument, just remember zeiss still make m42 lenses, because the 135 format isn't a meme cost saving measure.

And isn't it true there's still no mainstream software that properly supports fuji raws?

>>2951760
>And isn't it true there's still no mainstream software that properly supports fuji raws?

Lightroom?

>>2951761
Lol, no, unless you like that watercolour look.

>>2951702
>30$ on an old film SLR
>Rest of the money on travelling where you will learn how to photograph. Thank me later

This is what I would do as well

>>2951776
If you're gonna take over 250 photos it would be cheaper to get a 2nd hand nex 3, adapter and nifty fifty.

>>2951728
hurr durr.
there are 4 native sigma e mount.

>>2951751
iso measurements are different through the manufacturers.

>>2951785
yes, everyones is the same, apart from fuji who decided that standards don't apply to them because no one serious uses their products.

File: 72667958101e0fb68dbc9f71c91330bb.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>2951785

yeah fgt, only real pros use Sony this anon >>2951800 knows the deal

only real pros shoot sony

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2014:12:31 11:36:57
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	-2.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	16.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2951780
this

some sony mirrorless and vintage lenses is the cheapest and best starting point

>>2951841
using liveview/evf will also teach you about exposure much quicker than an SLR or DSLR.

>>2951870
desu manually doing everything will teach you shitloads.

It also gets quite enjoyable, since you can't just do snapshit, you have to think about your shot.

>>2951634
With some patience (about 1y) I got a perfect D800 with 30k actuations for 1.3k.
Think about it.

That was my best way to spend my money on a camera system.

>>2951758
>teach me your ways
Type imaginary 6 figure income on 4chin
Solve captcha
Press Post

OP here, this was surprisingly helpful!
The reason I want a camera and I picked the arbitrary 1k limit is because I recently got accepted to medical school and wanted a hobby that I can do to keep me from killing myself. (I decided on photography instead of getting a decent desktop computer or a mountain bike)

As for my reasons for getting it, I like to hike, run, cycle, and play soccer so I wanted to take pictures of these things as well as my classmates and activities and such. Video doesn't matter to me at all.

I didn't even think I could get a sony a7 with my budget, and now it seems like the best deal for the money. I intend to spend more as I feel like I can afford it and sony lenses seem about on par with fuji lenses.

>>2951702
this is a seriously great idea, but I will have no time at all to travel until after I finish residency in about 7 years.

>>2951760
>because the photosites on the sony are 134% bigger, so the fuji lens would have to be able to resolve 134% more detail

If this was the case, iPhone lenses would've been the best thing since sliced bread since they are able to resolve a fair amount of detail on photosites that are FIFTY TIMES smaller than on FF.

The thing is, crop lenses have to resolve 1.5x more lp/mm than FF lenses, but over 1.5x less mm, so it mostly evens out unless diffraction is involved. (Where did you get the "134%" number, anyway?)

>>2951887
>With some patience (about 1y) I got a perfect D800 with 30k actuations for 1.3k.

haha look at this idiot
you could've gotten the same for 700 if you were just a bit more patient (about 3y)

>>2951913
Just don't blow all the money you have on a body alone, no matter how hyped it is. Buying a body and then waiting for decent lenses is the stupidest thing you can do on digital because bodies depreciate very quickly.

One of my friends bought a Canon 5DII right when it came out because >muh full frame, but had no money for anything else so he used it with the cheapest lens he could find. Needless to say, the results weren't any better than a camera four times cheaper.

>>2951913
This seems a good idea to me, I had an A7 until I felt that spending an extra $750 and part exchanging my A7 for an A7ii was worth it, for the ibis and slightly better autofocus.

One of the nice things about Sony releasing new bodies with significant improvements every year, is it pushes the price of the previous generation massively down, allowing you to get a heck of a lot of camera for your money, no matter what your budget, last year I got a nex c3 body 2nd hand for $30, so I had something to use in shitty weather and at the beach, the sensor in it is the same one in the pentax k5 and nikon d7000, which still sell for hundreds second hand.

>>2951920
I can get a D700 today for that money with your formula.

But they all have 100k+ actuations.

Great advice.

>>2951941
be more patient

>>2951949
Have been looking for D700 D600 D610 D800 for the same period of time.
By that time I saved up a bit more, otherwise a D600 would have had the best of chances.
D700 were all beaters.
Reasonably priced well preserved D800 were the most common.
Probably because of D810 spergs.

>>2951955
why didn't you wait 4 more years to get a d810

>>2951975
Why didn't you buy a F65 for 20 and start shooting this instant.

>>2951634
k70 with any lens

im seriously considering it going from an x100t

>>2951737
>There's 3 native primes from sigma
At least 4:
30mm f/1.4 "Contemporary"
19/30/60mm f/2.8 "Art"

Of those, the 60mm f/2.8 "Art" and 30mm f/1.4 "Contemporary" are extremely good, the other two are okay.

>>2952365

Whether there is 2 or 4 is irrelevant, the fact is there are nowhere near the amount of quality lens options for the a6000 series as there is for the Fuji system. Arguing that there is 2 ok sima primes and 2 average ones compared to the whole Fuji lens lineup is a non argument.

Not to mention that whether you like or dislike Fuji, every non shill is basically in agreement that the lenses they produce are extremely good, every review website has extremely positive reviews on essentially 95% of the lens lineup, with lenses that outperform even the best from Canon and Nikon (the 16mm f/1.4 is an example).

And the FACT is that Sony pretty much neglect their APSC lineup in regards to good native APSC glass.

>tl;dr, shove those shitty sigma primes right up your ass m80

I dont even hate Sony, in fact I have owned several different a7 models and my XT1 (now my primary camera for pro work) outperfrms them all in regards to IQ and Fuji lenses are beyond exceptional.

>>2952380
>Arguing that there is 2 ok sima primes and 2 average ones compared to the whole Fuji lens lineup is a non argument.
Eh, that's just the Sigma lenses - two of which Fuji can't beat.

You also get the Sony, Sony Zeiss, Zeiss, Samyang, Venus, Neewer, tamron, Yashuara, Lensbaby, SLR Magic, Mitakon, Handevision, Veydra etc. glass.

> And the FACT is that Sony pretty much neglect their APSC lineup in regards to good native APSC glass.
They still released around 16 lenses for APS-C, and you're absolutely not forced to use Sony APS-C glass...?

> and my XT1 (now my primary camera for pro work) outperfrms them all in regards to IQ
Uh, no. Not nearly so. It's an okay camera, but it's only a match for the A6000 at most.

> Fuji lenses are beyond exceptional
So the better Sigma and Sony and so on then are beyond beyond exceptional? You got some decent glass, but it doesn't really rival or beat the best E-mount glass (not all of which is the most expensive).

>>2951780
yeah but then you have to use some shit camera

>>2952390

Suck sonys cock more fgt?

>sigma lenses better than Fuji glass
>trying to convince everyone their is good native glass for APSC e mount
Sony a6000
>not a made in China, overheating no lens piece of shit

Jason please, 0/10

>>2952380
Why would sony concentrate on crop lenses when ff is inherently much sharper, And you can pick up a ff body for $500? Their crop cameras are bought by people who are either new to the hobby, and unlikely to spend much on lenses (90% of dslr owners never go past the kit lens). Or by existing sony shooters as 2nd bodies.

Come on now, what's worse, being stuck with only crop options and having a lens lineup that is all gimped. Or having the option of crop or full frame, but most of the lenses are full frame, so a little bit bigger. Oh and let's not forget, full frame lenses on crop only use the centre, sharpest area of the lens, whereas fuji lenses show softness and vignettes in the corners. And here's the real kicker, take 2 cameras with similar specs except one is ff, the xpro2 vs the a7ii, both similar price, both 24mp, the a7ii photosites are 134% larger, which means the fuji would need a lens that resolves 134% more detail to have comparable apparent sharpness, which is obviously never going to be the case (especially as sonys new lenses out perform anything fuji do).

...

...
And as has already been pointed out, the $500 35 1.4 gets rekt even by the canon nifty fifty - one of the worst ff lenses on the market. And lets not miss out on the fact that an a7ii with either the sony or canon 70 200 f4 is lighter than fuji with it's 50-140, in fact fuji with it's equivalent lens is almost always heavier. How the fuck did fuji manage to create a camera with a sensor half the size, no ibis, gimped crop lenses STILL weigh more.

Fuji has no lens argument, what was on the first page when i googled the weight of the 50-140? A post on fm complaining of how ugly it's bokeh is. It's no surprise fuji users say bokeh is a meme, they can only get a little bit, and what they do get looks rougher than Satan's freshly ploughed button. And if fujis version of a lens isn't to your liking, are you gonna get the equivalent from sigma? Tamron? Zeiss? Tokina? Or none of the above because none of those companies see fuji as worth the time or effort, in fact the consensus from every other camera company in the world is that you're not worth wasting thoughts over. not even for manual focus lenses that would need 5 minutes of work to be changed from the sony version.

We had a whole thread for fuji vs sony, the conclusion after 350 replies was clear, the only defense fuji had for their product was that they had an emotional connection to their camera and it did what they perceived as "good" jaypigs.

>>2952413
> sigma lenses better than Fuji glass
Fuji's glass simply can't beat the 60mm f/2.8 or the 30mm f/1.4. Yep.

It wasn't a general statement about all Sigma lenses being better though. The other two lenses (19+30mm f/2.8) are not terribly amazing - they are only good for ~$150 glass.
Those probably are at least marginally beaten by some almost certainly more expensive expensive Fuji glass?

>not a made in China, overheating no lens piece of shit
Overheating only happens with video in pretty hot environments. (A6300's 4k video also might overheat in milder climates).

I never hit the issue on my A6k. Arguably I'm also primarily using (and discussing) it as photo camera - I only recorded a bunch of hours of video in to total.

I don't mind China manufacturing stuff, they're usually really good at it.

>>2952406
It changes iso, shutter speed and aperture. It has the same sensor as the xpro1 and xt1 and xe1, what more do you think a camera needs? It works with hss flash too.

That's more features than any current fuji and it weighs 225 grams, less than any fuji and it came out before any fuji.

>yfw fuji has never outmatched sonys cheapest offering.

>>2952425
It's as simple as doing this.

>No fuji combination can out resolve a sony a7 with nifty fifty.
>all of fujis lenses are overpriced as fuck considering they're a dead, meme format.

>>2952425
>>2952413

>China

Thailand actually.

>>2952436

Literally worse than China

>>2952436
>>2952444

Sensors are Japan, bodies are assembled in Thailand.

Most lenses are Japan.

Cheap lenses (i.e.-kits) are either Thailand or China.

>>2952447
Why does it matter,
Are you implying fat, diabeetus riddled American hands screw in tiny screws better?

Qc is set by the company, not the country. Sony hasn't had any issues with their bodies, and lens issues were down to the design, which was rectified.

>>2952451

It doesn't. I was just saying.

Besides, the parts that matter (sensor and lenses) are made in Japan.

>>2952457
Because jap hands are better than chink hands?

The fuck is wrong with you?

>>2952488
https://www.techinasia.com/talk/china-japan-speed-quality

its cultural. like, youve seen jiro dreams of sushi? in japan theres a focus on and merit in doing one thing again and again until youre the fucking best at it.

>>2952501
>comparing knife skills to screwing in screws skills

One of these does not take long to master, and there's zero variance in what they're working with so need zero initiative.

I used to work at dairy queen, it took less than a week to go from never pulled a cone in my life, to every dessert is identical to the poster. This is arguably more difficult than screwing in screws.

>>2952504
>manufacturing lenses is just screwing in screws.

theres visual testing and laser testing for imperfections in the glass, even the people screwing in the screws needs some level of perfectionism; checking for dust, a glass piece being off with half a millimeter could make the lens useless, etc.

>>2952515
Modern lenses are made to tight tolerances that weren't possible with previous mfg methods, the days of shimming, skimming and manual correction are gone.

Sony lenses go through a laser testing rig that makes sure it's all lined up as good as it needs to be before sale, if it fails the glass gets removed and rejected. Because it's far more likely the glass isn't centred after grounding, as opposed to it's mount being off.

The lenses and bodies are assembled in a clean room, there is no dust.

>>2952518
Should have added, i can only comment on sony as I've not seen inside any other plants.

>>2952518
>days of shimming are gone
No, they're not. Go look at lens disassemblies on lensrentals blog, manual adjustment and centering is still a thing.

>>2951662
Its a pretty good camera when paired with a decent lens.

>>2951690
>This includes a World Press Photo Award Winner for General News
link please