I took it from a bus. I can do something with the reflections.
I'm not sure why sometimes the Equalizer Filter works better than at other times.
Did you select a particular area of the image to be equalized? If so, did you specify that you wanted to equalize the selected area only to evenly distribute only the selection’s pixels? Or did you choose to
"Equalize Entire Image Based On Selected Area" to evenly distribute all image pixels based on those in the selection? These choices would result in differences in the finished product and might explain why you're happier with some outcomes rather than others.
New to this site yes. But new to DSLR vs MiLC I doubt that and that is why I asked.
Why do you doubt that? Do you know something about the OP that the rest of us don't? Why would the OP ask if (s)he already knew?
Not everyone in the world knows about the fascinating topic of DSLR vs MILC. In fact, my guess is that the average person on the street wouldn't know what DSLR or MILC meant, and wouldn't care even if you tried to explain it to them.
Get a Lumix G85 instead.
Why do you say that? Is it for the dual IS?
I would echo the recommendation for the Panasonic ZS100. It's got a decent zoom lens (10X Leica), in-body stabilization (really nice to cut down on hand shake), a touch LCD, and Amazon has it discounted down to $547 -- great value.
I would like to know what kind of digital cameras to buy that don't break the bank (under $500 if possible).
I'd suggest looking into the Canon EOS M100 -- a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera with a 24.2mp APS-C sensor (so called crop sensor, but still bigger than m4/3 or the 1" sensors in your other options.) The camera with a 15-45mm Lens can be had for around $450 new. One big plus is that an adapter is available to enable you to use all the Canon EF lenses.
Downside, it doesn't have a viewfinder. If you want one, you'd have to step up to the Canon M50, for an additional $150. However, the M100 has a tilting touchscreen lcd, which is easy to use and may leave you feeling that a viewfinder isn't all that important.
I’ve been very disappointed with my Nikon 1 and have been looking for a really good replacement. The new Nikon Z6 and Z7 have caught my eye. But they are terribly expensive. So I am wondering if they are worth the money or if there are other great mirrorless cameras I should look at? Your thoughts.
Well, as expected, you've seen quite a variety of responses. My suggestion is to make a list of the aspects of a camera system that are most important to you. It can be a short list or a long list. In my case, for example, it's quite short. (1) small size, so it's easy enough to shoot one handed if needed, (2) maximum amount of stabilization, whether in-body (preferable) or in the lenses, or, both (which is totally doable nowadays). This gets my shutter speeds as long as possible, thus keeping the iso out of the statosphere in low light. (3) flippy-tippy lcd. Of course a good array of lenses goes without saying.
With those as my priorities, I chose the Olympus OMD Em-5, and I'm still using it (the original) and it's going strong. If I had my druthers, it would have focus peaking, but the dang thing won't die and I don't want to spend a few hundred bucks just for focus peaking.
Your priorities may be completely different, leading you to a totally different choice. For example, I shoot raw only, so Fuji's wonderful jpg processing is lost on me. For you, it might be just the ticket.
Bison Bud wrote:
Before you ask, I am on a fixed income and my photography budget is a lot lower than I like it to be. Therefore my personal, yet optomistic, budget would have to be under $1000.00 and I would prefer to find something used and save every dollar I possibly can. I'd be very willing to do without things like GPS and WiFi as long as there is real improvement in the low light performance. Thanks and good shooting to all.
I'm going to respect your budgetary limitation and recommend you consider the Nikon D5500. Definitely not the latest, but a very decent dslr with strong ratings for low light performance; including good scores from DXO. Here's a link to a field test on Imaging Resource that provides some samples taken at iso's as high as 25,600 (!) and not looking too shabby at all.https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d5500/nikon-d5500-field-test-part-i.htm
Cost is around $500 for new and less for refurbished. Pair this up with the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS HSM -- a fast lens with stabilization which will also help enhance low-light quality by bringing down that high iso. You can get the Sigma for under $300 -- so the total cost is well under budget.
Topaz Studio is a free standalone photo editor that can also operate as a plugin to LR and PS. It includes a number of free tools as well as pro adjustments. You can get all 24 of the pro adjustments for just $250. This is about a 60% reduction from retail. This price will be decreased if you already own some of the adjustments. This deal will be available through 11/26, cyber monday.
I am considering the Olympus Pen F and the Lumix GX9.
I would like your thoughts on micro4/3 and the relative merits of the two cameras.
I'm a big fan of mft, having used the OMD E-M-5 (original) ever since it was introduced. Of your two choices, I would recommend the Pen F for the following reasons:
1. It 's smaller. This may be splitting hairs, because the G9 is no behemoth, but with the high-end lenses, the G9 is not far from dslr territory when it comes to size.
2. If you shoot jpg, the Pen F has remarkable profiles that equal fuji, in some ways.
3. If you use the right lenses, the Pen F will enable "sync is" which combines the IBIS in the camera with the IS in the lens to give unbelievable output handheld at slooooow shutter speeds, even >1 second. An example of such a lens is the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f4.0 PRO, which, when mounted on the Pen F, will give you 6.5 shutter speed steps compensation at 200mm (35mm equivalent).
4. Pen F is cheaper.
Downside -- Pen F is not weather sealed, G9 is. Could be a deal breaker depending on how you like to shoot.
For macro photography, whichever camera you choose, consider the Olympus MSC ED M. 60mm f/2.8 maco. Fabulous lens.
As for me, I'm waiting for my Em- 5 to wear out. It 'll probably be a long wait.
I really like my Pentax k30 but never here any conversations about it. Anyone out there have any comments or ideas for using it. It seems like it's all about Nikon Canon or Sony.
I've had a number of Pentax dslr's (and also the mirrorless K-01, which I still use) and the only one to ever give me trouble was the K-30. It started underexposing images on what seemed to me to be a random basis -- very maddening. Turns out there was an issue with the aperture motor on this model that was fairly widespread. Sounds like you're not experiencing this problem, so that's good for you. At the time, I simply stepped up to the K 5iis, which is a great camera.
Side by side in the OP, I liked #1 better; but when I downloaded both, #2 came alive, while #1 was a bit over the top with the contrast slider.
In a recent video, youtube guru Tony Northrup has pretty much categorically declared the MFT format all but dead. He gives it about 2 years on life support and then --- kaput. Here's the link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjXSnNMZ0PU
Plus, he definitively states that compact cameras are also obsolete, victims of the smartphone.
In the comments section attached to the video, Tony also stated that he and wife Chelsea will no longer be recommending that people buy DSLR's, now that the Sony A7Riii has, in his opinion, trumped the Nikon D850.
So, soon (within the next couple of years) the camera buyer will have basically two choices: smartphone or mirrorless full frame, with maybe a little niche for mirrorless APS-C.
What do you think?
I’ve been using Oly mft and Nikon crop and FF. Just picked up a Pentax K-S2, lovely piece of kit, I know nothing of their lenses, anybody here have an opinion?
I, too, have a K-S2 and think it's a super camera. It is definitely the last DSLR I will ever buy. Most of my shooting is now with MFT cameras and the wonderful zoom lenses native to that format.
I'm keeping my Pentax for use with the "holy trinity" of primes, which are, IMO, the equivalent of any glass anywhere -- (1) SMC Pentax-FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited, (2) SMC Pentax-FA 43mm F1.9 Limited, and (3) SMC Pentax-FA 77mm F1.8 Limited.
Otherwise, Pentax glass, while very good, often doesn't outperform 3rd party manufacturers like Sigma and Tamron, which usually have lower pricetags. Just my opinion, of course.
Lots of wonderful pictures in this challenge. Here's a couple to add to the mix: