EX1 + Adaptor vs FS100!

Amadou

Amadou

Carbonite Member
EX1 + Adaptor vs FS100!

Beyond weight and practical issues, how would you quality the pros and cons of each with respect to picture quality?
 
I would love to see a comparision! The FS100 is waaayy better in low light. Also, edge sharpness and overall image sharpness and detail is much better. I'm still in the 35mm adapter world, and I must say that the FS100 is the one that gives the most 35mm adapter-like image. If the FS100 would have built in ND's, I would go for it any day over my current setup...
 
Aside from the low light ability of the fs100, I don't think it would be all that much different. Of course that depends on what adapter your using. If it's a good spinner, in good light, It would look very close. The adapter setup would have a bit more grain though. which I like.
 
In my opinion, most of the DSLR cameras and FS/AF100 gives a sharper and much cleaner image. Edge to edge sharpness is often the thing that can tell me if it is shot with an adapter or not.

If your adapter is working correctly, it should never give any type of extra grain, that only means that it is spinning/vibrating too slow, or to fast shutter/wrong f stop. This must be the most common misunderstanding with adapters...

If there's any reason to go with an adapter instead of a single chip camera is that it makes you very flexible. You have a great run n gun camera, and with an adapter on it you have a totaly different look that, with the right lightning, looks almost the same as many DSLR's... Not to meniton proper audio inputs, no moire, aliasing, or wobbling. I love to shoot handheld with shallow dof, that would be very hard and ugly if I would do it with a DSLR...
 
Admir said:
If there's any reason to go with an adapter instead of a single chip camera is that it makes you very flexible. You have a great run n gun camera, and with an adapter on it you have a totaly different look that, with the right lightning, looks almost the same as many DSLR's... Not to meniton proper audio inputs, no moire, aliasing, or wobbling. I love to shoot handheld with shallow dof, that would be very hard and ugly if I would do it with a DSLR...
Click to expand...

Right, but with the FS100 there is very little aliasing, or moire. Unless you're shooting Bourne Identity stuff for every shot, I think the FS100 wins hands down.
 
robmneilson said:
Right, but with the FS100 there is very little aliasing, or moire. Unless you're shooting Bourne Identity stuff for every shot, I think the FS100 wins hands down.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree with you on that one. I would buy an FS100 any day if it would have built in ND's. I've held and shot a bit with the FS100, and I have never used such a unfriendly camera when it comes to ergonomics... The "top handle" is a joke, not to mention the placement of the monitor. But it does one great thing, it gives gorgeous images, and records to really cheap media.

I was reaallyy close to jump on the FS100 train after my test, but when you start researching about all the extra fuss with matteboxes, ND's, the mentioned ergonomics, I decided to continue with my adaptor.
 
Yeah, I hear you....not having built in ND's sucks. Luckilly I had a matte box from my 35mm adapter and DSLR days so it was never an issue for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top