Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Which Camera? **Please read OP first**

15455565759

Comments

  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 4,475 Mod ✭✭✭✭dory


    The A6000 is a great camera. I've seen some places still selling the A5100 for more than that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 694 ✭✭✭barryribs


    Has anyone here used Prima photo in Monaghan or any knowledge of them? Prices seem to be very competitive


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,836 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    barryribs wrote: »
    Has anyone here used Prima photo in Monaghan or any knowledge of them? Prices seem to be very competitive

    Their Delivery Information page says they ship from a UK warehouse to Europe (and from a Hong Kong warehouse for the US and Australia).

    https://primaphotovideo.com/pages/delivery-information

    Are they drop shippers? Is it grey imports they sell?

    Edit: They are grey imports:

    "Please note all products we sell are imports and are international versions.

    They will be covered by our own 12 month warranty, instead of the manufacturer's warranty. The warranty starts on the day that you take receipt of your product."

    https://primaphotovideo.com/pages/warranty-return-policy


  • Registered Users Posts: 694 ✭✭✭barryribs


    Their Delivery Information page says they ship from a UK warehouse to Europe (and from a Hong Kong warehouse for the US and Australia).

    https://primaphotovideo.com/pages/delivery-information

    Are they drop shippers? Is it grey imports they sell?

    Edit: They are grey imports:

    "Please note all products we sell are imports and are international versions.

    They will be covered by our own 12 month warranty, instead of the manufacturer's warranty. The warranty starts on the day that you take receipt of your product."

    https://primaphotovideo.com/pages/warranty-return-policy

    Thanks for the info. What is the general consensus on grey imports? I'm really not crazy by the warranty being offered by them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,670 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    barryribs wrote: »
    Thanks for the info. What is the general consensus on grey imports? I'm really not crazy by the warranty being offered by them.

    I've had a nightmare with EGlobal Central over warranty... They make it very difficult to make a claim


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,836 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    barryribs wrote: »
    Thanks for the info. What is the general consensus on grey imports? I'm really not crazy by the warranty being offered by them.

    You take a bit of a risk in regards to the warranty, but you usually get a cheaper product up front. I bought a grey market Sony video camera years ago form a seller on ebay - saved a packet and it worked out very well for me (camera is still going strong). Recently, I was buying a mirrorless Sony A7iii, and I decided against taking the grey market risk for that. Might do it for lenses, though.

    After that, it depends on the seller. See the e-global central thread for people's experience of great prices but very unreliable delivery and customer service. Personally, I'd steer very clear of them.

    Just checked a few products in Prima Photo against E-Infinity (a well established grey import seller). E-Infinity seem to be significantly cheaper for the handful of random products I checked, and I don't see the same type of complaints about them as we see about E-Global Central. Haven't bought from any of them, though, so I can't give any more insight than that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 693 ✭✭✭Conchurl


    I'm a beginner looking to get into this, this is the stuff I'm looking for can ye point me to a good place to get all this and maybe anything else ye think might be useful

    a canon 250d
    4-5.6 stm lens 18-55 lens
    A bag
    A Sd card
    A 75-300 lens
    a tripod


  • Registered Users Posts: 694 ✭✭✭barryribs


    You take a bit of a risk in regards to the warranty, but you usually get a cheaper product up front. I bought a grey market Sony video camera years ago form a seller on ebay - saved a packet and it worked out very well for me (camera is still going strong). Recently, I was buying a mirrorless Sony A7iii, and I decided against taking the grey market risk for that. Might do it for lenses, though.


    Thanks for the info. Its actually the A7III I'm looking at too, so will likely follow your advice and go to one of the specialists and try them out for lenses.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,836 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    barryribs wrote: »
    Thanks for the info. Its actually the A7III I'm looking at too, so will likely follow your advice and go to one of the specialists and try them out for lenses.

    Sony are doing €200 cashback on the A7iii until January 31st (if you buy from one of these retailers), so factor that in if you're planning on buying soon.

    Also, if you happen to have an older A mount camera, they're doing a trade in offer for the old body against an adapter to use A-Mount lenses on your new E-Mount body (motorised lenses work fine, but not all E-Mount bodies, including the A7iii, support autofocus with older screw mount lenses, though. MF works fine).


  • Registered Users Posts: 694 ✭✭✭barryribs


    Sony are doing €200 cashback on the A7iii until January 31st (if you buy from one of these retailers), so factor that in if you're planning on buying soon.

    Also, if you happen to have an older A mount camera, they're doing a trade in offer for the old body against an adapter to use A-Mount lenses on your new E-Mount body (motorised lenses work fine, but not all E-Mount bodies, including the A7iii, support autofocus with older screw mount lenses, though. MF works fine).


    Yea I've been shopping around for some time have seen that offer, fantastic, ends up knocking 10% off the price of the body alone. Will definitely pull the trigger in the next week I think.



    I've nothing to trade in, I haven't done anything resembling photography in almost ten years, I sold my NEX-5 so very much out of the loop on things.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭JIdontknow


    As someone who is considering getting into some amateur photography, and I know this is a very vague question but what dslr camera would you recommend (I will be buying second hand). I have used a Canon 6D before and liked it, so just wondering if I should stick with what I know or consider maybe a Nikon? I think the 6D is released about 9 years now. I see different D range of Nikon from D610 -D810. My budget would be maximum about 600-800 for suitable camera but would consider more if it included a lens etc. What I’m looking to photograph is mainly landscapes (and nature). As I said I know this is like asking “what car to buy” but if anyone has any pointers that would be great. The next question is lens but maybe that’s for another day!


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,515 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    The 6D is a full frame camera so you don’t have the same experience with a crop body. You’re better off investing in good lenses as bodies come and go.

    A secondhand 7D is probably a good all rounder. It’s an APS-C crop but has a lot of the pro benefits of a full frame.

    Landscape and nature both benefit from a good telephoto lens. There is a temptation to get a wide angle for landscapes but you’ll mostly capture lots of sky that way. An EF 70-300 is a good bet. You could also add a 50 mm f/1.8 in time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭JIdontknow


    5uspect wrote: »
    The 6D is a full frame camera so you don’t have the same experience with a crop body. You’re better off investing in good lenses as bodies come and go.

    A secondhand 7D is probably a good all rounder. It’s an APS-C crop but has a lot of the pro benefits of a full frame.

    Landscape and nature both benefit from a good telephoto lens. There is a temptation to get a wide angle for landscapes but you’ll mostly capture lots of sky that way. An EF 70-300 is a good bet. You could also add a 50 mm f/1.8 in time.

    Fair play, thanks for the information. I guess the only reason I was looking at some of the Nikon was because of the built in intervalometer for time lapse photos which might interest me with landscapes or seascapes, but I know very little about all this! My budget would stretch (from looking at them second hand they are well within budget and I’m willing to spend a bit more) so I could afford a more expensive / newer / better version of the 7D, but again I’m open to all suggestions as it’s all very new to me. Also thanks for the feedback on the lens, that’s good information to know.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,545 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    JIdontknow wrote: »
    Fair play, thanks for the information. I guess the only reason I was looking at some of the Nikon was because of the built in intervalometer for time lapse photos which might interest me with landscapes or seascapes, but I know very little about all this! My budget would stretch (from looking at them second hand they are well within budget and I’m willing to spend a bit more) so I could afford a more expensive / newer / better version of the 7D, but again I’m open to all suggestions as it’s all very new to me. Also thanks for the feedback on the lens, that’s good information to know.

    An Olympus E-M1 does timelapse and is a good bit smaller than a Full frame camera like a 6D. They seem to be obtainable used for around £220 on ebay uk. With on Olympus weather sealed lens fitted, you can leave one outside shooting a time lapse and it won't matter if it gets drenched.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,666 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    5uspect wrote: »
    Landscape and nature both benefit from a good telephoto lens. There is a temptation to get a wide angle for landscapes but you’ll mostly capture lots of sky that way.

    Agreed, with one caveat: wide angles are great for urban landscapes, where the space that the sky would usually be is full of "stuff" worth capturing! :)
    JIdontknow wrote: »
    I was looking at some of the Nikon was because of the built in intervalometer for time lapse photos which might interest me with landscapes or seascapes, but I know very little about all this!
    Setting up for a good quality timelapse requires a lot more than an intervalometer - a nice heavy tripod and ND and/or polarising filters to begin with. An independent intervalometer is a relatively insignificant addition to the gear you'll be bringing, so I wouldn't let that be a determining factor.

    I have a cheap one (think I paid about 20€ for it) that does everything an intervalometer should and also serves as a off-camera shutter release - very handy for those times when using the camera's countdown timer just isn't right for the situation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭JIdontknow


    Fair play thanks for all the replies. Will need to do a lot more research, but food for thought!


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭tbayers


    First time posting on this side of the site. So I have a Nikon d3100 with AF-S Nikkor 18-55 and 55-300mm lenses. Have it over 10 years now. Definitely outgrown it.

    Obviously looking to upgrade. I have a bought a good drone in this time so getting very interested in shooting some movie footage too..

    I was looking at Sony RX10 iv but slightly worried the sensor on this camera won't be a huge upgrade on current setup? But budget, zoom capability and the need for no investment in glass is appealing.

    Budget is €2000 or less. But I am struggling to find a camera that does good stills and more than decent video. Would be willing to go 2nd hand.

    BTW sports photography and landscape (surfing mainly) is main subject, hence the willingness to have good video. Not picky on FF, mirror less or cros sensors.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,545 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Panasonic GH5 does more than decent video. Almost nothing can touch it. Takes good stills also.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,670 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Panasonic GH5 does more than decent video. Almost nothing can touch it. Takes good stills also.

    Doe it focus? I believe the focus is ancient, particularly in video.


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭tbayers


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    Doe it focus? I believe the focus is ancient, particularly in video.

    This is probably my biggest function I want. Obviously my current set up is ancient but you can't use auto focus in live view, just jumps all over the place.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,670 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    tbayers wrote: »
    This is probably my biggest function I want. Obviously my current set up is ancient but you can't use auto focus in live view, just jumps all over the place.

    The Canon R Series or some of the newer Sony's would be the best for this type of use.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,666 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    tbayers wrote: »
    a camera that does good stills and more than decent video ...
    BTW sports photography and landscape (surfing mainly) is main subject, hence the willingness to have good video. Not picky on FF, mirror less or cros sensors.
    Bluefoam wrote: »
    The Canon R Series or some of the newer Sony's would be the best for this type of use.

    Having (briefly) looked into the R series last week, it sounds like it definitely does not meet tbayers' requirement for "more than decent" video.

    A one-line summary (from dpreview) that summarises everything I've read (no exceptions, none, not a one! :eek: )
    EOS R's video capabilities lag behind the competition considerably.
    (and I've been a proud EOS owner for almost 30 years)


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭tbayers


    Having (briefly) looked into the R series last week, it sounds like it definitely does not meet tbayers' requirement for "more than decent" video.

    A one-line summary (from dpreview) that summarises everything I've read (no exceptions, none, not a one! :eek: )

    (and I've been a proud EOS owner for almost 30 years)

    Yup just looked them briefly and wouldn't be confident with the video. Very close to pulling plug on the Sony A6600. Within my budget and a like new one on mpb. However, buying from sites in Ireland the 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 that coens with it would suffice until I invest in a bigger lens.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,836 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    There's Sony A7iii with a broken LCD for sale here (with kit lens, and maybe a 50mm too) for €700:

    https://www.adverts.ie/digital-cameras/sony-a7iii/22835880

    A screen is only $25. https://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-LCD-Display-Screen-for-SONY-A7III-ILCE-7M3-Digital-Camera-Repair-Part-A7M3-/263775107522

    Replacement isn't difficult: https://www.raiphoto.com/replace-lcd-screen-sony-a7a7ra7s/

    Obviously if the camera was dropped there could be other damage, so you'd have to be very careful and check out the seller carefully, but if everything else was OK with it, it would be a dirt cheap way of getting an excellent full frame mirrorless with great AF if you were any way handy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,545 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    Doe it focus? I believe the focus is ancient, particularly in video.

    If you are videoing birds in flight, you might want to pick a Sony FF, but ithe GH5 focuses adequately for a large number of people who buy and use them professionally because of the unmatched video quality. Lot's of them don't even use auto focus and use manual lenses - imagine that.

    An E-M1 III or X focuses very well and has the best video image stabilisation you can get, so it all depends on what your video needs are. If your video subject involves low light - limiting your ability to stop down - and subjects moving towards the camera at a significat rate, then maybe the GH5 isn't your best pick, but other than that, if you would like to point out a mixed stills video cam used more by pros, name it. There is an entire accessory industry based on making stuff for the GH5, like gimbals, cages, lights, off camera recorders.

    ac4c94-7abdc7-gh5filmkit.jpg

    Gh5-rig-1.jpg

    These sorts of professional video setups exist because Panasonic have the best video quality you can get in a consumer level stills camera. This has been the case since the GH2.
    Panasonic GH2 video better than Red, Arri says Coppola
    https://www.zacuto.com/great-camera-shootout-2010

    Zacuto ran a blind test involving movie industry professionals where skilled film makers used everything from the latest iPhone to movie industry pro staples, with the resulting footage judged blind by hollywood industry pros like Coppola, and the GH2 footage was very highly rated and the top pic by many.

    The Panasonic GH line has only gotten better since then and has never slipped from being No1.

    But, if fast tracking AF is a high priority, then there are better performers, but if you don't have that c-af requirement, then the GH5 will deliver better video quality than almost all other options.

    Panasonic have the best video quality, Sony have the best auto focus, Olympus have the best image stabilisation. None of them are best at all three, you have to prioritise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭tbayers


    "Panasonic have the best video quality, Sony have the best auto focus, Olympus have the best image stabilisation. None of them are best at all three, you have to prioritise."


    That's a nice summary. Leaning towards Sony and maybe even the FF A7 III. At heart of it all its photos where I want to excel at, video is a bonus. As I said earlier post the Sony Rx10 iv is very tempting but the sensor limitations will frustrate if I to grow quickly in my view

    Thanks all for tips


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,545 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    tbayers wrote: »
    "Panasonic have the best video quality, Sony have the best auto focus, Olympus have the best image stabilisation. None of them are best at all three, you have to prioritise."


    That's a nice summary. Leaning towards Sony and maybe even the FF A7 III. At heart of it all its photos where I want to excel at, video is a bonus. As I said earlier post the Sony Rx10 iv is very tempting but the sensor limitations will frustrate if I to grow quickly in my view

    Thanks all for tips

    You might find this of some interest:



    It's about using the currently cheap as chips E-M1 II to shoot sufing video and stills, but the results aren't too shabby.

    My personal number one priority for video and stills photography is in body hand held stabilisation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭tbayers


    Jeez this is getting tough. Looking at Nikon Z-50 now too. I can upgrade in years to come to Z6/Z7 if need be then and keep the lenses. Won't hit wallet as much either. When I started on this process a few days ago I wasn't aware of the choice that's out there


  • Registered Users Posts: 214 ✭✭Rmulvany


    I'm looking at the Olympus E-M1 as my next camera.
    On HDEW I've seen a decent bundle offer on the Mk. II including 12-40 lense which is tempting.
    They also have the newer Mk.III (body only) which is about £500 dearer.

    Would anyone be able to point out a decent comparison between the Mk.II and Mk.III?
    From quick comparisons I've seen the Mk.III has a newer processor, and offers 80MP high-res mode (vs. 40 MP in the Mk.II).

    If the differences aren't overwhelming then I'd be tempted towards the Mk.II bundle, but if anyone can help with the comparison that'd be great.
    Thanks


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,545 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Rmulvany wrote: »
    I'm looking at the Olympus E-M1 as my next camera.
    On HDEW I've seen a decent bundle offer on the Mk. II including 12-40 lense which is tempting.
    They also have the newer Mk.III (body only) which is about £500 dearer.

    Would anyone be able to point out a decent comparison between the Mk.II and Mk.III?
    From quick comparisons I've seen the Mk.III has a newer processor, and offers 80MP high-res mode (vs. 40 MP in the Mk.II).

    If the differences aren't overwhelming then I'd be tempted towards the Mk.II bundle, but if anyone can help with the comparison that'd be great.
    Thanks

    Side by side comparison, but a bit funky and not enough detail: https://cameradecision.com/compare/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II-vs-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-III

    The III has hand held hi res - which I personally would consider a big deal. It also has the stary sky autofocus, which again would be worthwhile, and according to a user who has both cameras, the eye detect AF in the III is better than the II. You also get 20% more shots on a battery charge with the III, than the II.

    The III also has 1.5 stops better in body IS than the II.

    You can see the detailed specs of the two here: https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/index.html#anc01

    I use an original E-M1. I'd get the III just for the HHHR.


Advertisement