Nailed it!

:thumbup:

I bought the Olympus MSC ED M. 60mm f/2.8 for macro use only -- and now I love it so much I never take it off! I may have to walk around more in order to get the right composition; but, hey, I need the exercise.

It's just so darned sharp, even at 2.8, and it gets better stopped down. I only wish it came with a lens hood. (But Olympus is more than happy to sell you one of those.)

You did right by leaving these things out.

Nice job -- and great inspiration about the spout.

Interesting. My reaction was just the opposite. I like the grainy texture -- makes it seem almost skin-like. Then the abrupt transition to noiseless black. Very dramatic.

Funny how different people see things.

I'd keep the title as is. A mureto is a type of Portuguese wine grape -- although it's a little more red than blue. Close enough, though. :)

For my taste, yes -- but that's obviously a very individual thing. I'd consider cropping just slightly below where the top of the building lands in the reflection -- maybe including just a little of the darkening horizontals.

Wouldn't change a thing at the top or the sides.

Nice shot.

When DxOMark did an analysis of low-light performance, the d3300 was the absolute best low-light model among APS sensor cameras. Who'd a guessed the little guy would beat out the big boys?

This can be a major plus for a beginner who might not want to mess too much with tripods and fancy lighting.

http://www.adorama.com/alc/404/article/17-best-cameras-digital-low-light-photography-tested-and-compared

OK -- point made. Just considering these two, to me the RX100 has to take the cake -- larger sensor, larger aperture, bigger pixels, higher extended iso, and it has an anti-aliasing filter, which is really a plus in cutting down the moire. Hence, overall, better low light performance all around, without having to mess with a tripod. The only plus, to my mind, for the HX90V is the greater zoom -- which isn't that big a deal to me personally, since most of my shots are in the normal to wide angle range.

For the price (<$300), it's hard to beat the Sigmas -- 60mm F2.8 DN for portrait, and 19mm F2.8 EX DN for the wide angle. Both have the Sony e mount.

Isn't posting his question on this forum part of his basic research?

If you think you might like to shoot in manual mode, I'd suggest the Olympus OMD EM-10 as an alternative to the A6K. The oly has dual control wheels, which make it a breeze to adjust both aperture and shutter with ease. The sony has only one control wheel, for shutter speed. To control aperture you have to use the dial, which, to my fingers, is a pain.

Also, a lot of "left eye" people don't like the placement of the evf on the A6K.

To me, the oly is just more pleasurable to shoot. But the image quality of the sony is certainly very fine.

I, too, have the original 5. I tried hard not to like it, since I've been a loyal Pentaxian for years, but I just can't get over how handy and powerful the little em is. I've gotten so many shots with it that I just couldn't get with my Pentax K5iis, great as that dslr is. And the quality is nearly always well within the ballpark -- even pixel peeking at 4:1.

One thing -- if you're considering the original EM-5. Be sure to enable the Super Control Panel - marked as LIVE SCP in the menus. The SCP is a fabulous interface and I don't know why it wasn't the default on the original. I think the EM-1 and the 5ii have it as the default.

I have the K5 iis and love it. It has everything good about the Pentax line -- rugged, great interface, superb jpg processor, top-flight ergonomics, etc. Like all Pentax dslr's, other than the new KS2, it lacks an articulating or tilting lcd. (The older I get, the more attractive this feature gets. I don't like getting on the ground to compose through the viewfinder (optical viewfinder is excellent, btw) for those special shots (and getting up again is even more trouble!)

The big issue, though, is the absence of an anti-aliasing filter, which was deliberately removed on the 5iis in order to sharpen the image up. The K5 and the K5 ii both have the anti-aliasing filter in place. The K3, I believe, lets the user select or de-select this feature through use of a simulator.

Whereas the absence of the filter does arguably make the image sharper, it also increases the risk of getting moire, which can turn up in the darndest places if you're not careful.

Take a look at this web page for a technical explanation and a really good example of the real-world consequences of moire where you might not expect it.

http://users.wfu.edu/matthews/misc/DigPhotog/alias/

If this kind of thing bothers you, it might be better to look for the Pentax K5ii (without the "s"). The price is even better (though not by much).

Either way, I'll bet you'll be happy. I'm a pixel peeper and I love blowing my images up 200 to 400% and marvelling at how good they look, even at ISO 1600.

I'm thinking of buying the new KS2 for one reason only -- the articulating LCD, a first for Pentax in their DSLR line.

Other than the fixed display, I love my K5iis and would keep using it for years. But I really have a problem these days getting down on the ground (and back up again!) for those special shots. Framing in live view with an articulating display would be just the ticket, I think.

Anyone have any experience with the KS2? Or the KS1, which appears to be very similar except for the fixed display. Do these cameras give the same IQ as the K5, K3, etc.?

Thanks.

Have you looked at the EM5 Mark II? The sensor shifts over a series of shots to give you a 40mp capture -- but only, as I understand it, if there's no movement whatsoever, either in the frame or of the camera. If you're shooting landscapes or portraits it might be your dream come true.