I looked that adapter up. The reviews are not that good with others have similar complaints. Surprisingly the Metabnes adapters ratings are nto a lot higher and as far as I know that is a well thought of adapter. Check with B&H and see what they recommend.
I'd talk to B&H if that adapter is not working as expected.
If I understand the second part of your question correctly theen "imagemeisters'" recomendation to use "focus peaking" is correct. It's on the "geared" Menu 2 as Manual Assist and you choose what color.
All exposure to the right means is that there is a... (
This is the version of ETTR that I understand and use. Anything more difficult than this seems unnecessary. I also wouldn't use higher ISO to raise the exposure level since that seems counter-productive.
Scotty, see my post in response to your request. Wait better yet, here's a photo taken, much like yours, in a room with window light for the primary source of illumination.
My theory is that you don't completely understand ETTR / EBTR and thus with to poo poo it as useless.
The orignal poster doesnt understand ETTR in the same way I do or I don't understand what he is saying. His use of ISO seems bacjkwards if I am reading this right.
This forum rocks! A topical education. I have begun a spreadsheet of cameras and lenses mentioned here - with pros and cons. Thanks, Uglyhedgehog "experts".
Is that spreadsheet avaialble? Sounds interesting.
I own a Sony A6000. I love it. I have never fooled with the Olymous cameras but I am familiar with the Fuji's and the Panasonic. The Fuji's takes really nice pictures in JPEG and is easy to use. It's probably my second favorite mirrorless camera. I say probalby becasue I think Panasonice is the most undervalued camera line out there. They are generally very high quality and usually very innovative. I don't shoot video enough to have an opinion but I ahve been told by people who do that Panasonic leads the pack in that area as well.
One of the biggest reasons I stay with Sony is that they seemd to be doing most of the innovation in newer mirrorless cameras and are by far the most popular. I read where the A6000 is the largest selling interchangeable camera in history. I don't know if thati is true but it sounds right. As a result of their popularity they have huge support. From fan forums to high quality, competively priced aftermaket lenses and the list goes on and on and on. That will only get better as so many manufacturers are now focusing on the A series Sony cameras.
If I have any recommendation it might be the A6000 in the bargain category. Nowadays it seems like a real bargain for a camera with that kind of power.
I suppose the best news is that you probably can't go wrong with any of those cameras.
I started with a Sony NEX 5 and moved up to the A6000. The common complaint that the auto focus system on mirrorless cameras is slow is a nuts on these cameras. It may be true on some ofther mirrorless brands or it may have been true years ago but it's definitely not true on any modern Sony camera that I am familiar with.
I have an A6000 that is basically a travel camera for the motorcycle. When room is no object, I still prefer the DSLR. Can't give good reason, as the 6000 has very good image quality and will do anything the DSLR will do except possibly higher ISO shooting.
I originally bought my A6000 to take pictures while traveling on my motorcycle. After the frist trip years ago I was also going to buy a new DSLR but the Sony A6000 convinced me that that was not necessary.
Most people point to the weight savings as the priary reaosn to buy a mirrorless but me I am not so sure about that. I think my camera is jus a tad too small sometimes. It's easy to travel with and it's easy to carry around but it seems just a bit too small to me. I think the later A6300 and A6500 might be slightly bigger and heavier. With my camera a full size flash feels top heavy. My daughters Nikon is laid out better than the Sony with more external buttons. I like that. However, I think the EVF on the Sony is the single best advancement I have seen on a camera in years. After using the Sony EVF I would never go back to an optical viewer.
The other appeal is the Sony company itself. They seem to be the most inspired camera company out there and have been making mst of the technical advances in camera technology the last few eyars with no sign of them slowing down.
Ultimately the thing that is going to hurt mirrored DSLR's is the expense. I just can't see most camera buyers paying the additional expense and living with the problems that go with a mechanical device like a mirror if you don't need one.
[quote=SharpShooter]Yes, we need to RING IN the new year with a good'ole fashioned UHH discussion! You know the one..., the one with raucous and colorful discourse!!!
So as the title says, why can't Nikon innovate on it's own? I don't mean natural evolution like a few more pixels or another f-stop of DR.
I mean like real innovation that changes the course of photography and camera design. Nikon sits and waits(conservatively) and then tries to improve it, sometimes winning, sometimes flailing awkwardly.
The Canon T90. It changed the world of camera design and the way EVERY camera looked in the future, including Nikons.
Electronic coupling(EOS). EVERY brand went to it.
IS(VR), It's only been the last 5 years Nikon finally put it into its Super-Teles.
Anti Flicker, I was sure Nikon would have it in a year, it took two!!
These are a few reasons why in 2003, Nikon fell to number 2, and Canon has not looked back!!!
Canon has deeper pockets than Nikon and that is hurting Nikon. The real question is why can't Canon innovate like Sony? The answer may in part be the same but it's worth noting that Sony, besides having deep pockets, has been super aggressive in a market that is in serious flux where mobile phone cameras maybe the future in all but pro level cameras.
The cameras that are very interesting these days are things like Panasonic, Fuji and Olympus. These brands seem to have found their niche and are excelling at what they do best. However they stand the most chance of being replaced by cell phone cameras.
First, I recently discovered this site and am very... (
I have the Mefoto Globetrotter. I think it folds to 16 1/2 inches and has around six feet of height with the ball head on it. I love it but there's a couple reasons for that beyond the quality of the tripod itself. The first and foremost is that I travel by motorcycle to take my pictures about 70% of the time so I really need a compact tripod. The second consideration is that I have a mirrorless Sony A6000 which doesn't stress out the tripod easily so I can get away with a lot lighter tripod than some other folks. I also have a Sirui ball-head on it which I like much better than the original. I didn't have any problems with the original but the Sirui is better all way around and it use only two knobs with a screw adjustment to adjust the drag on the ball head that enables you to adjust it without worrying that you camera will fall over because on most inexpensive ball heads there is no way to stop it. With the Sirui it has an additional adjustment that allows you to set enough drag on the ball so that it will move easily enough to adjust the camera tilt but it will hold it in place until you can adjust the final large knob to lock it all in place.
There is a Sirui tripod and ball-head unit available at about $300.00 that I like but if I had to do this all over again I would buy the Benro that was recommended a few pages back or the Feisol that Gene51 recommends. The Feisol is more tried and true and Gene51 who really knows this stuff loves it but I feel pretty good about both though I have never seen the Benro in person.
I looked at it close. It's very nice. It has the three detents to set the legs up at different angles which is the fist feature to be removed from less expensive units. You won't be disappointed and you will have it for years.
If you can't afford more for a new one I would definitely consider a higher quality used unit rather than a new entry level model.
I don't know that Gene actually dislikes Manfrotto but he has some qualifiers for the use of a few particular models.
I use to prefer Manfrotto myself but nowadays lean towards the Feisol, Sirui, Benro and probably Vanguard for quality yet affordable tripods and ball heads. I got onto the Sirui ball heads from Gene's advice and I agree with him that they are a "best buy" in their price/quality category. I love mine. For the most part Chinese tripods and ball heads are low quality copycat products but that is not true with Sirui. They are obviously trying to go their own way and create their own standards. I have only fooled with one of their tripods at the camera store and I was impressed with that as well. I would choose it over the more expensive Manfrotto I looked at at the same time.
I certainly don't want to imply that the A7Rii is not a fantastic camera. It is great in low light, high ISO, and has unbelievable image resolution and good dynamic range. My issue with wildlife, action, or sports is the occasional slow focus and unacceptable 5 fps burst speed. Otherwise is is amazing and perhaps one of the best full-frame bodies on the market today.
I don't understand the 5 fps out of an A7Rii. I should be easily twice that high.