Gear Thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEwpHChOkC0
How does this make you feel, gearfags?

>>2739224
Good thing.

I don't care to buy Leica bodies, but I'd love if we got to the point where all lenses can be used on all cameras.

I'd make for a far more competitive market there.

>>2739227 (correction
Misparsed the from-to part, but Leica -> Sony is fine, too.

File: DSC02718-s.jpg (142KB, 1000x708px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1000x708px

Zeiss Sonnar 55mm f/1.8 or Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8

I want to use it to take pictures of people, places and things.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7M2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	240 dpcm
Image Created	2016:01:06 20:43:38
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Brightness	8.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Shade
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard

File: s-l1600.jpg (136KB, 1200x894px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1200x894px

Where do I get cheap EF lenses?

>>2739241
55mm, more suited for outside work

>>2739244
From canon.
50/1.8 - $100
40/2.8 - $150

File: 001.jpg (214KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 800x600px

>>2739227
Imagine the implication of this technology.
All of the Samyang Rokinon lenses.
All the Voigtlaender lenses.

Every manual focus lens from every brand, adaptable and given Autofocus.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	800
Image Height	600
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2014:10:08 19:50:55
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/16.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Image Width	800
Image Height	600

>>2739241
55mm f/1.8 is more likely it.

But if you had a 85mm Batis or even a 90mm FE, I'm sure you'd still be able to shoot a great many "people, places and things". Just from a bit further back...

>>2739262
Sure. Not hard to imagine, because it already happened for Canon EF.

Good thing to have. Being able to do this should become the norm.

>>2739268
Canon EF lens have built in autofocus. This is unchartered land for lenses that used to be fully manual.

>>2739268
The difference here is that you wouldn't need to buy new lenses when they develop better focus motors.

File: 20160107_144259.0.gif (2MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x480px

http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/7/10733626/panasonic-transparent-screen-display-ces-2016

Leica just having an orgasm now.

>>2739269
Hm. I see. Yea, I guess that's something new.

>>2739272
Hm, I don't think ultrasonic and linear motors and all that can be external?

There were reasons why many AF systems went from "screw drive" motors on the body to lens internal motors, no?

>>2739262
How is this supposed to work with "every manual focus lens" if I may ask? Many lenses focus by moving internal elements closer or farther from each other. It's not always just a matter of moving the main lens element group closer or farther from the sensor, though there are some designs that work that way.

File: pentax-smc-pentax-f-1.7x-af-adapter.jpg (19KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 500x375px

>>2739262
Ahem

>>2739284
>1.7x AF adapter
What is this shit?

Hey guys, I'm going to buy a Canon SLR body under $23. Which is the best out of the EOS Elan II, EOS 620, EOS 630, and EOS 650?

>>2739290
Bodies don't matter.

d700 (seems to be in good shape) with 70k snaps for 500 $, good price or ripoff?

what should I get out of the tamron 35mm 1.8 and sigma 35mm 1.4?

>>2739304
pictures, you should get pictures out of them

>>2739290
Elan iie if you can find it

File: 630.png (300KB, 1497x672px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 1497x672px

>>2739293
>>2739305
I ordered the 630. Could've got an untested one a little cheaper but it's a gift for my dad so it better fucking work lmao.

>>2739290
>>2739330
The one that doesn't have a biblical appetite for 2CR5's.
Any EOS body needs to have a AA powered grip if it's going to live in my collection.

>>2739304
I'd get the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4.

What lens should I get for my Mamiya M645? Just bought it, without lens.

>>2739358
Probably a Minolta 85mm prime.

What's the perfect lens size for taking nudes of my gf?

>>2739363
fisheye

>>2739363
24-70

>>2739365
What size?

>>2739370
8mm equiv

>>2739363
Depends on where you shoot, but I'd start wtih 18-35mm-ish on APS-C. (The lens I'd grab here is the related Sigma Art with exactly that).

Or 35-50mm-ish on FF.

>>2739224
>People whining about 240p
>Not realizing it may be due to uploader's connection speed being slow as balls

Sigma 60mm/2.8 or sony 50mm/1.8 for an a6000?

>>2739382
I went with the earlier for sharpness.

You might want to go with the latter for an extra stop of aperture, IS and PDAF that isn't center only.

File: 0013104.jpg (1MB, 3419x2575px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3419x2575px

>>2739363
>my gf
You'll be needing the dream lense for that, anon.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH
Camera Model	GR DIGITAL 3
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2012:01:23 17:57:28
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/1.9
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	154
Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Brightness	1.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	6.00 mm
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal

>>2739374
>>2739371
>>2739368

Thanks senpai

>>2739384
I think I'm going to go with the Sigma since I really don't want to pay an extra $100 for one f stop and OSS.

>>2739382
>>2739384
sharpness is comparable when you stop down the sony.
i would get the sony for the oss. now you can use it at night.

>>2739398
> sharpness is comparable when you stop down the sony.
When you stop it down to about f/8 - f/11, yes.

You start to get diffraction patterns about at f/11 though, so that plan isn't entirely perfect.

I have a Pentax ME Super camera but no lens for it. The old Vivitar 70-210mm lens already has haze in it.
I have a Nikon 50mm f1.4 AI lens. Can I buy an adapter for it to be used on the Pentax? Or should I buy a 50mm K-mount instead?

>>2739412
Are you in Canada? If so, I can send you a lens if you pay for shipping.

File: 1332789615145.jpg (71KB, 500x346px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 500x346px

>>2739363
Whatever one this guy is using.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	500
Image Height	346

File: Screenshot_2016-01-08-00-33-49-1.png (974KB, 1419x935px) Image search: [Google]

974KB, 1419x935px

Would filming a documentary style video (think the office) be possible with pic related? Would I need a new camera or could I just buy gear for this one?

>>2739432
Omg stop

>>2739432
it's pretty solid. people are used to better but for what it is, it aint the worst

thinking of getting the pentax hd da 55-300
any objections? it seems like a great lens for the price (250)
not sure what size filters it accepts tho, any insight?

>>2739542
nm looks like its 58mm

File: DSC_0586.jpg (870KB, 4608x3072px) Image search: [Google]

870KB, 4608x3072px

Hi /p/

I got my first DSLR about a month ago (d3100 with kit lens). I want to get a prime soonish, and I'm trying to decide between 35mm and 50mm, both 1.8g.
I find myself using 35mm on my kit lens way more than 50mm, so I'm leaning more towards the 35. Thoughts?
Also, any experience with the d3100 and 35/50 primes would be welcome.

Thank you!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3100
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	738
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:05 12:21:04
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2739542
May aswell try and win one before buying it: http://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/events/christmas-2015-giveaway-series.html

>>2739412
>>I have a Nikon 50mm f1.4 AI lens. Can I buy an adapter for it to be used on the Pentax? Or should I buy a 50mm K-mount instead?
You can put Nikon F onto Pentax K, but the difference in flange distances isn't big enough for you to keep infinity focus. Presumably you want that.

SMC-M 50/2s are common as dirt and can be had for like 20 bucks. There are 50/1.7s which are a bit better and not much more expensive, too.

>>2739542
It takes 58mm filters. which can be a bit annoying since the kit 18-55 wants 52s.

As to the lens itself, well, it's a consumer telezoom. It gets a bit weaker after 200mm, and it prefers to be stopped down to f/8 or so. But it really is a lot better than you'd think a $250 zoom that goes to 300mm would be. It very easily beats the 50-200.

>>2739545
well you already did the thing that beginners should do when deciding what their first prime should be, which is find out which focal length you prefer. 35mm is roughly normal on a crop camera, so that's a good general-use all-around focal length. Go ahead and get it.

>>2739545
>I find myself using 35mm on my kit lens way more than 50mm, so I'm leaning more towards the 35. Thoughts?
That's the obvious thing to get then.

>>2739559
>>2739588
Thank you!

File: Plustek_OpticFilm_120_mit_SilverFast_Ai.jpg (108KB, 600x425px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 600x425px

I'm looking to buy a film scanner under $300 to scan all my old 35mm negatives.

What would you guys recommend?
Bonus points if you know what software to use and if the scanner does RAW.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Phase One
Camera Model	P45+
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 6.0 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4852
Image Height	4252
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	96 dpi
Vertical Resolution	96 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2013:03:13 09:32:04
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2012:04:05 16:50:01
Exposure Time	3.0 sec
F-Number	f/18.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/18.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Light Source	Other
Focal Length	80.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	600
Image Height	425

>>2739634
Plustek 8100

>>2739634
>not using a dslr for dat dere 24mp raw scans

>>2739417
Nope. I live in asia too bad. Thanks though.

>>2739412
Is a 50mm f1.4 pentax k manual lens worth it for $50? Is it better than f1.7?

>>2739653
Seconded. Far superior, easier and cheaper option to a DSLR rig.

>>2739721
show us your setup then

>>2739724
>easier, cheaper
yes
>superior
lelno

Hey guys I don't want to make a new thread

I want to make a stopmotion film and am buying my first good camera for that project, so I have no prior experience with technology.

I know that digital is the way to go for convenience, especially since I'll be altering the video on my PC, but I like the way film looks quite a bit more.

The obvious problem is I'll be going through probably upwards of two thousand frames, and I'll end up buying a midrange quality DSLR to scan the negatives afterwards.

So should I go film if my heart's set on the aesthetic, or are digital camera's better than I think they are?

I don't care about cost or convenience, I'll learn to develop the film myself probably. I want my budget under 1,500 (that's a two cameras and all the film I need)

So to sum it up, I'm just here to get some opinions, maybe more realistic budget, (I don't need a 'big' camera, the objects are small) and maybe get criticized for undertaking an obscure complicated project with no real background.

File: image.jpg (283KB, 750x1333px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 750x1333px

Looking for a god teir lens for my Sony nex 7
Suggestions?
I'm an amature and shoot all around,
Nature, architecture, Astrophotgraphy, experimental ect.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	750
Image Height	1333
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2739981
I'd advise against that. If you develop and scan all the frames in a lab, it's gonna cost you a lot. If you develop them yourself, you're gonna have to be VERY consistent in your process to get all your frames to look the same, and replace the chemicals very often.

Go digital and apply film simulation software.

>>2739984
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983905-REG/sigma_210_205_18_35mm_f1_8_dc_hsm.html

What is a good zoom lens in the 70-200mm range for medium distance wildlife photography and sports?

>>2740014
ef mounted*

>>2740014
>>2740015
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS mk2

>>2740016
Anything for about $1000 cheaper?

>>2740019
any iteration of ef-s 55-250

>>2740019
Tamron 70-200 IS f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/4 non IS

>>2740003
Alright thanks for your input, but if I could ask what you mean by consistency? Per frame or per roll of frames would there be deviation, and what would that deviation look like?

>>2740024
Been looking at the Tamron, how does it fare against >>2740021 recommendation?

File: maxresdefault.jpg (86KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1280x720px

I Have Sigma 50-200 OS HSM and Tair-3 (300mm) - I want to replace the, both with Sigma 120-400.
Is it possible to shoot from that lenses from hands? I mean there is tripod leg - so is it supposed to be used only at tripod?
I've never used such long focal ranges. Tair-3 is quiet heavy and with stock give me some kind of stabilization too )

recs for camera bag?

>>2740025
just look at it this way

when you're developing film you're manipulating chemical strips physically, some parts of it will be agitated more than other parts of the roll, you are going to reuse a lot of developers and then there is already a deviation between each roll so even if you used constant lighting and camera settings it wont look good consistent across all frames

>>2739773
>>2739724
Depends.
It's not particularly easy to make a convenient DSLR scanning rig, but on the other hand, if your film is in uncut rolls and/or warped, getting it into the Plustek is going to be a huge PITA.

>>2740027
Less range, more price, better image quality, more weight, much wider aperture, better build quality.

>>2740032
should specifiy:
one camera
5 lenses, but only really need to carry 2-3 at any time

>>2740027
you can get 55-250 for used really cheaply and great condition cause it comes with some rabal bundles

>>2740039
>one camera with 2-3 lenses
you do realize there's a difference between a pentax fucking q and a 1dx with three 600mm telephotos

Sony a7rii

>>2740042
k3
50mm 1.8
hd 55-300
100mm 2.8 macro

>>2740033
so this is me basically having no clue how complex cinematic film really is. Time to read something I guess. thanks again.

Has anyone tried cross processing with caffenol?

What's the best lens size for street photography?

>>2740148
50mm

>>2740025
There are lots of factors involved: time, temperature, agitation, pressure. The developer will wear out and every developing session will yield slightly different results, even if you replicated the exact same conditions. There's also things you can't control, like small differences in light sensitivity between rolls due to different storage conditions, manufacturing time, etc. There will be variations, especially in contrast and grain.

You could theoretically find developing tanks (or make one yourself) that take 50 feet of 35mm film, buy in bulk and develop it all in one go. You'd also have to modify a camera to accept that much film (pic related). You'll get less variation that way, but it's such a hassle you might as well use your time more efficiently. It'd be a cool project nonetheless.

There's also Super 8 cameras that do stop motion. The Super 8 cameras and film that Kodak announced this week fits in your budget with a lot of room to spare (and they'll likely have controls for stop motion). Look into it, maybe you'll be willing to delay your project for a year.

File: f3.jpg (41KB, 550x446px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 550x446px

>>2740160
Forgot the pic, it's a Nikon F3 modified to take 50 feet of 35mm film used to record a stop motion sequence in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

>>2740148
Pancake

Ok fags I have a question about digital cameras without a colour filter(b&w digital cameras, no bayer for example). If it takes pictures directly in b&w, will there be a way to adjust the light information in the picture according to it's length(colour) ?
Like with normal raws you can change how much red, green, blue light you let in getting different types of details in your pictures.
Will physical filters be the only way to do this ? Or do they have some special type of RAW format that records extra info ?

>>2740176
>ok fags
yeah I'll gladly give you adivce

File: Panasonic.jpg (146KB, 570x854px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 570x854px

>>2740188
Checked.

I forgot how much of a normie board /p/ is. Let me rephrase.

Hello chums, sorry to take up space on this bustling thread but I was wondering if I might inconvinience you with a question. There's this thought that's been on my mind for the last few days in between helping my old neighbour take out her trash, oh how sweet of her to have baked cupcakes for me last week, and helping in the local homeless shelter.
I was wondering wheter theses new black and white digital camera, those with their Bayer colour filter removed for example, offer a way to adjust the light affecting the picture based on it's wave length. You now the way you do it in Light room or whatnot. Post process, certainly, as using physical filters would be a smidge too inconvenient for me.
I wanted to know this so that I may get the absolute highest quality pictures when I record myself fucking your mom, you little shit.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A700
Camera Software	ACD Systems Digital Imaging
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	202 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2008:04:13 10:27:22
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/2.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	250
Brightness	3.8 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	570
Image Height	854
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2740201
You won't have color channel flexibility anymore, and you'll have to rely entirely on physical color filters.

>>2740202
That's a bummer. Is the slight extra detail worth losing this flexibility then ?
I don't think I've ever turned a picture b&w by just desaturating it, it always looks too... flat.

>>2740210
That's entirely up to you. If it were my only camera, I wouldn't do it, but I would absolutely love to have a monochrome backup cam. I tried to pay some people to strip the array off an XPro1 for me, but no takers.

>>2740045
bump
the lowepro flipside sport bags look perfect for what i need. if i buy from china on ebay will i get a cheap knockoff or will it be of decent quality. im not a brandfag, i dont care too much if its not genuine, i just dont want to buy junk thats going to fall apart on me. the guys got 23000+ feedback score so it cant be that bad i imagine. first link is to ebay listing, second to B&H listing for same product

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lowepro-Flipside-Sport-15L-AW-DSLR-Camera-Photo-Bag-Backpack-Rain-Cover-Orange-/321619992207?hash=item4ae20b9e8f:g:bjsAAOSwiCRUkbwp

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855681-REG/Lowepro_LP36424_PWW_Flipside_Sport_15L_AW.html

>>2740009
Have this one tabbed

Might go with it,

>>2739215

Any aftermarket battery packs for muh K-x?

>>2739288

1.7x photomultiplier with the contacts for the lens through it, so it all still works

>>2740042

>Implying anyone actually carries 3x 600mms

I'm gonna buy a Nikon 35mm f1.8, but I was also thinking about getting another lens that's just as versatile. I was looking at the Tamron 18-200mm and 70-300mm, but can't decide.

>>2740299
That adapter itself has a focusing group. It has the lens contacts go through except the AF contacts. Turns any compatible manual lens into AF lens, like a Tair 300s.
The 1.4x AF adapter has no focusing group but lets through all contacts including the AF contacts.

>be a gullible pentax owner
>buy a Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4 because /p/ says they are such hot shit
>put the lens on my camera
>immediately notice yellow cast in lens
Whelp.

Apparently, it's possibly to clear up the yellow cast slightly by putting the lens in a window and exposing it to direct sunlight for a month. Right now it's winter, though, and where I live, it's generally overcast consistently until about April.

Any other solutions? Should I just try to sell the thing on ebay to some other gullible fag?

>>2740344
>buy a Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4 because /p/ says they are such hot shit
/p/ was right, they are full of hot particles because radioactive Thorium mixed in the glass.

>>2740344
Yep, >>2740346 is right, the radioactive radiation (more precisely the gamma radiation that follows all alpha and beta emissions) makes the glue in some of the groups turn yellow. You can lighten it up with UV light, either by putting it out the windows to direct summer sunlight or just make a UV box with a UV light bulb. Make sure it doesn't switch on when it's open.

>>2740347
>gamma radiation that follows all alpha and beta emissions
that's not true, unless you mean the brem/xrays. gammas dont always follow other forms of decay. tritium and sr-90 for example are pure beta emitters, among others

>>2740350
lol you artschoolers trying to understand science always crack me up.
Try going to school for once.

File: shit.jpg (2KB, 218x23px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 218x23px

>>2740351

>>2740353
Yes, I will totally believe something you just screengrabbed from Word.

File: cover.jpg (115KB, 1206x680px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1206x680px

>>2740354

>>2740346
>>2740347
>>2740350
>>2740351
>>2740353
I know it has radioactive coatings and that's what is causing the yellowing. My problem is that I can either wait until spring to try to get enough sunlight to clear it up, I can buy a UV light (extra cost), or I can just cut my losses and sell the thing.

Is there any hope of clearing it up completely with enough UV exposure? Some of what I have read indicated that people never got their lenses too clear. Or is the yellow cast supposed to be desirable for these lenses?

>>2740356
It's not coating, the rear element is thoriated glass. Don't put it near your eyes, balls or anything.

Does anyone here have any experience with the jupiter 3 50mm f/1.5 on the a7r or the like?
How is it?

>>2740376
Flares. Which is apparently good for video.

>>2740381
good thing about old glass is that it takes just enough off the edge of bleeding edge technology if youre into that

>>2740356
>is the yellow cast supposed to be desirable for these lenses?

I'm sure if you advertise it correctly you can make hipsters pay extra.

>>2740253
> if i buy from china on ebay will i get a cheap knockoff or will it be of decent quality
Probably decent, like on Aliexpress.

eBay is usually overpriced 'cause of how much it costs sellers a lot of money, though - costs which they forward to you.

>>2739634
I would suggest not getting a film scanner under $300.

Waiting 2-8 minutes to get one negative scanned pretty poorly isn't fun.

Spend $500 on a Reflecta / Braun, or do a DSLR/MILC "scan" where you photograph the negative with any adequately sharp lens suspended in front of any reasonable light source

How's the Xiyaomi Yi? If you have one or have used one, what do you use it for and how do you like it?

>>2740529
Literally the same as the mobius action cam.

>>2740529
It's like a GoPro Hero 3 something edition.

Works fine.

>>2740534
Uh, no. Not the same.

The Xiaomi can do 1920x1080 at 60fps and some 2304x1296 30fps, has better build quality, and generally is a different device.

Is the D300s still worth buying in 2016? Or the D7xxx is an way better option?

>>2740546
If you are looking for a generic use DSLR, get the D7xxx, if you want a semi-pro rugged build DSLR get the D300s. Those things are used to track glacier movements in timelapse.

>>2740546
A D7200 is really quite a lot better.

>>2740546
The D300s is still worth using but not worth buying because of a userbase that insists that its the best camera ever made since the F3 and price accordingly

Any recommendations for a Canon portrait lens? What I'm looking for in order of importance: bokeh > price > leaning towards shorter focal lengths

Narrowed my choices down to either an 85mm 1.2L ii, 100mm 2.8L Macro,135mm f/2L. The 85mm is my first choice I'm leaning towards, the only thing I really have against it is the price.

File: help (1).jpg (19KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 400x400px

hey guys i really need you help, im totally new to this board but making story short - im going to buy my first camera ive already taken few of your advices about choosing manual camera for the begining adventure with photography but there is one problem - im from the thirld world country where manual films camers are hard to get. there was one auction with Pentax K1000, but lot of people are biding eachother right now and my chances to possesion this well know gear becoming lower and lower,
hopefully there are few more cameras available like; >CANON AT-1
>OLYMPUS OM 10
>FUJICA S6 605N
>YASHICA TLE
ive never head about anyone of those, so if you have to choose what would you pick?
thank you in advance

>>2740588
> The 85mm is my first choice I'm leaning towards, the only thing I really have against it is the price.
The price is what stops you from buying all of them too, right? Otherwise, start with an Otus 85mm...

But for more modest budgets, I'd suggest to prioritize the versatile 100mm macro or to get a cheaper Sigma 85mm... or a Sigma Art 50mm.

>>2740600
The Canon, Yashica, and Olympus are all decent options. The Canon and Olympus are slightly more modern cameras, but the difference isn't huge. The OM lenses are modern designs with a bayonet mount and tend to be fairly inexpensive. There's a huge lineup of Canon FD lenses that vary from excellent to crap. The mount is kind of an odd external bayonet thing, but it works. Canon FD lens prices range from fairly expensive to practically free, but on average they're slightly more expensive than Olympus for equivalent quality lenses because Canon cameras are more popular. The Yashica uses m42 thread-mount lenses, which means they're cheap and plentiful, but the designs are generally not as modern (there are exceptions though) and it takes longer to change lenses. If the prices are the same, I'd probably go OM, then Canon, then Yashica. Otherwise whichever is cheapest. I've never seen the Fujica so I can't comment on it.

File: 4331710-batman+is+confused.jpg (10KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 259x194px

I was always told it's either canon or nikon, why is /p/ full of people talking about other brands

>>2740849
Hipsters.

>>2740551
Maybe they will all upgrade to the D500 soon, and dump their D300s.

>>2740849
/p/ is full of people that look beyond consumer-level products

File: stalker4.jpg (259KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1366x768px

greetings.i'm about to have my first nude photoshoot in like a month and i was wondering what lenses would be useful for that.recommend me something /p/.

what i own so far:
6d
50 1.8
85 1.8
a few flashes here and there

i've been thinking of getting the 17-40 f/4 L,i think the wideness of it will prove useful for the shooting.

am i thinking right?what do you suggest /p/

pic unrelated(great movie tho)

>>2740872
You own a 6D and you're going to do a professional photo shoot with a nifty fifty, plastic fantastic?

>>2740872
it all depends on what youre framing. is the background/environment dominating? then wide

but if youre putting an emphasis on nude then any portrait lenses. 50 or even 85 will do, i doubt the background will be of any importance compared to your model so you dont have to get anything else

>>2740874

bought that while having the 1100d,does it's job...can't complain :)

>>2740876

pretty much...was thinking if i ever needed bokeh i'd have the 85 & 50.i'm planning on going for a set of photos focusing on the model itself then another set focusing on both the model and the background,both working & complimenting eachother.

thanks for the advice

>>2740849
Because contrarian hipsters.

>>2740849
because most people dont know anything but canikon.
when i was first looking into phography and getting a digital slr, i looked at nikon and olympus because nikons a prevelant name, my dad used olympus om-1 and om-2 slr cameras, and canon sucks. then i checked out pentax and ended up going with them because i could get a great camera in the k-3, and 50mm 1.8 for 650 USD. weather sealing is nice because i get lots of rain/snow, and they offer weather sealed lenses without $2k price tags. not to mention the ergonomics are far superior to a friends canon 7d i used to shoot this presentation for uni. that shit was fat and awkward.

File: LS27D590CS-EN_1_classic.jpg (14KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x250px

Monitors. I'm on a budget of about £200ish and want the best bang for buck monitor to replace my current piece of shit. Narrowed it down to either a:
24" Dell UltraSharp U2415
or
Samsung S27D590C 27" Curved

Anyone have experience with either of these? or any other monitors around this price. What do you use?

File: 20160108_175356.png (342KB, 1080x1704px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1080x1704px

I'm packing up for an airplane flight to Texas and I want to bring my Nikon d3200 with me, will the airport be anal about it or can I just carry it with me on the flight

>>2740914
>anal

why?

>>2740914
they won't give a shit unless you're a sand nigger or regular nigger.

>>2740914
Of course not. Think of all the tourists going in and out with cameras. And you DO want it on your carry-on, and don't let it go through the XRay scanner. They should ask first anyway.

best/cheapest lens for pentax for landscape/astro

>>2740955
>don't let it go through the XRay scanner.
Wait. Why not?

>>2739588
>>2739559
>>2739545

kinda related sorta

should i sell my 50 1.8
if i have a 35 f2 is usm?
>>2740989
word on the street is it fucks the sensor

File: 1452392276815.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Be jelly faggots.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SPH-L710
Camera Software	L710VPUDOH1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.6
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:09 21:20:09
Exposure Time	1/18 sec
F-Number	f/2.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/2.6
Brightness	2.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	3.70 mm
Comment
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	ZDFI02

>>2740999
Xrays fuck cheaper cards, I dont know about sensors

>>2741014
Oh. thanks for setting that straight anon.

How cheap can you be not to get an evo card though, a 32gb x ray proof one is like $15. $12 on sale.

Good point and shoot film camera? Not looking for an expensive one. Just wanna give film a try for a little while

I just bought a Nikon N70 from a Salvation Army. Seems to work well, though haven't developed anything, and got it for $45 dollars with a lens (35-80mm, f1.4-5.6). Is this a good camera, or just shit? Bad deal, or good find?

>>2741012
Congrats, you got my Zeiss 50mm AEG Planar f1.4 rehoused for $3,000 more dollars.

Of all the CP.2s, that's the one they put the least effort into.

File: eos.jpg (154KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 640x480px

About to buy a used 6.3MP Canon EOS Rebel digital camera from a reputable seller on EBay. Comes with an 18-55mm lens, too. It's my first serious camera, not looking for anything fantastic. It's really affordable (college student income) and I think I'll like it because it'll let me play around with exposure settings a little. Could I do better? My price range is $100-200.

>>2741041

canon ae / nikon fe

>>2740989
just for safety. You can put the camera in the bin and not the scanner easily, as everyone else does.

File: resized.png (1MB, 995x659px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 995x659px

My darling grandmother just got me a $25 gift card for ebay. I'm thinking about getting a filter for my T3i 58mm kit lens. What would be the best thing for a beginner to get? Or should I get something else other than filters?

>>2741061
Get lens/sensor cleaning stuff. Lens pen, dust blower, microfiber cloth, ... You'll need it.

>>2741057
>Could I do better?
Yes, how?
>buy a film camera
learn to develop and scan/print your own.
>b but but, I'm worried that I'm going to fuck up my shitty snapshits.
Snapshits are snapshits and are not worth the time showing anyone else.

>>2741061
It's unlikely that you'd need filters.

Put it toward a YN560 III or IV speedlight or its YN560 TX controller, or something.

>>2740955
>>2740989
>>2740999
Wait is this really true? I thought the xrays only affected the film.

File: IMG_6237.jpg (2MB, 3024x4032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3024x4032px

Tested the weather proofing on my 6D, went pretty well.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6s
Camera Software	Photos 1.3
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:09 17:14:40
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	1250
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	-3.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3024
Image Height	4032
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: Samyang14mm.jpg (182KB, 706x434px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 706x434px

Stupid question here, what's the difference between the two Samyang 14mm lenses? One has a red ring while the other has a yellow ring and a different build. Is one better than the other?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016-01-10T15:52:06+10:00
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	90.00 mm
Image Width	706
Image Height	434
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Unknown

>>2741125
AFAIK red ring is newer, but the differences are only very cosmetic in nature on this model.

>>2741120
Pretty great to have a weather-sealed DSLR, isn't it? I've hiked with my K5 IIs through all day downpours, camera outside of my rain coat the whole time, with no water coming into the camera or lens, and I can honestly say that I'll never go back to cameras that can't do the same. Rainy skies have some of the best lighting for outdoor photography, and there are some great photos that I just wouldn't have been able to get if the camera had been in a waterproof case. Even average photos depicting the unusual are nice to have if the alternative is to not have gotten the photo for fear of ruining your gear.

The only time I've had an issue was when some water came into my tent and the camera was sitting in a couple inches of water for about 10 minutes before I realized what was happening - a little bit of moisture got into the front element of my 18-55mm lens, but quickly evaporated when I left it in the sun the next morning. Weather sealed isn't the same as waterproof, of course.

>>2741131
Okay cheers man

>>2740959
DA 35/2.4, DA 50/1.8, kit lens, DA 16-45/4 (I have the 35/2.4 and 16-45/4, nice, clean shots)
Ultimately Rokinon 14/2.8
When you go for milky way shots, go for ETTR method and astrotracer

>>2741136
I have the exact same set up but do you have a uv filter on the 17-40? i was only told it was completely weatherproof once it has a filter blocking the front element!

>>2741270
I spent a day in the forest in similarly rainy weather, K-3 and DA 50-200 WR kit telezoom. I didn't have any filters but I always kept the lens hood on as a sort of rain shelter for the front element. Not a single drop of rain or any sign of moisture was inside the lens at the end of the day. Although I always wiped the lens a bit when I was about to zoom out.
Pentax actually makes the sort of weather sealing available on their kit and consumer level lens that Canikon gives on high end only if you put on a filter to make it a complete sealing.
If Pentax can do it on low end, why doesn't Canikon do it on high-end?

>>2741276

I don't think any lens with moving front element is weather sealed without a filter.

If the front element is fixed (ie: internal focusing) there should be no need for a filter.
Maybe Pentax uses more fixed front elements in their designs?

You should also not exaggerate the issue.
You won't get water through the front element unless you point it up, or against a strong wind.
And even then you have to do this for quite a long time. - couple of seconds to take a shot should be fine in any case.
Just keep the lens pointing down when you walk around.

>>2741292
The moving front element is seated in a long barrel that goes deep into the lens barrel with a coule of sealing o-rings. The focusing barrel also has o-rings.
Actually you only need o-rings and some special sealing rings to make them weather sealed and Canon designs are missing some in key places, or not having as much as needed.
You can perfectly seal moving parts with proper sealing, this is a question of precise engineering and design.

>>2740381
Flares are subjective. Some people want clean video, some don't. Simply doing it to do it is bad and annoying. Doing it with purpose will look much better.

>>2741012
>stooping to this level
really Sugar, it's kind of sad to be quite honest.

>>2741046
It's a solid camera, a little weird since it handles differently compared to the rest of Nikon's lineup. I got mine body only for $15 so you didn't do too bad at all, probably paid what it was worth with the lens.

File: yashica124g-1.jpg (450KB, 1000x830px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 1000x830px

hey /p/eople, got a question for you manual MF creeps. I just got myself a slightly beat up Yashica Mat 124 G off the bay (pic obviously semi related). Besides some dents and scratches on the housing, the shutter seemed stuck at first, not closing at times slower than 1/30. I was able to run it free again, times might be slightly off but its working good enough for bw film.

what bothers me now, is that the wheel for setting the exposure time is still quite stiff. i can turn it without using brutal force, but its no match compared to the aperture wheel. i have no camerastore nearby so I would have to mail it off if I want to have someone look at it. Yashica friends, how easily should it rotate? Is there a way to fix / lube it, without taking the camera apart?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Photographer	unknown
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2008:08:18 20:31:23
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	830
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2741061
Filters don't really do much on DSLRs Although a 'UV' Filter is nice to have, they do next to nothing but are good little shields for your front element. They'll tale a good hit for your lens if need be. Saved a 50 1.4/f of mine before

>>2741352
UV filters usually deteriorate image quality a little.

A lens hood is generally sufficient shielding for your front element.

>>2740900
bump

>>2741357
more so for never getting that front element dirty. Its nice to have one in certain conditions, espeically if just starting out and its just the kit lens. Not really gonna effect anything in a serious way

File: img_1257.jpg (936KB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

936KB, 5184x3456px

Looking for something no more than 110$ on amazon for my rebel t5. I already have the kit lens and the 75-300. Any feedback would be lovely.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:09 13:09:18
Exposure Time	1/5 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	41.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Canon 35mm f2 or Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art? The Sigma lens is surprisingly cheaper for some reason.

>>2741381
will you upgrade to FF at some time? --> canon
which lens renders more appealing to you? (imo canon)
which has better focus performance? --> canon

which suits your budget better and probably is an awesome lens too? --> sigma

What's the difference between the canon ef 50mm f/1.8 stm and ef 50mm f/1.8 II?

>>2741381
The Sigma lens is optically better but the focus electronics is reportedly ass, overtravels most of the time and can't be calibrated precisely with the desktop calibration unit. Get the Canon.

>>2741422
The II has different build and has USM AF drive. The optics are the same.

>>2741361
> more so for never getting that front element dirty
The UV filter itself will get just as dirty (a little more so if it's not behind a lens hood) and will equally need cleaning.

Sure, you can take it off and wash it under running water, but the difference there is really marginal in normal use.

> Not really gonna effect anything in a serious way
It can lead to very ugly flaring and more.

>>2740645
thanks for the anwser, fortunately i managed to buy the good old pentax k100 with PETRI 35-70 MM,1:3.5-4.8 lens (i dont even know what it means now) for about 20$ so i look forward for delivery and hope to learn as much as i can about photography and slowly become oldfag on this board

I have been shooting analog for a while and school needs me to have a digital for the sake of ease. I have shot in my phone but i need a bit more control over my image at the tip of my fingers.

I am looking for suggestions about a low-mid range camera with a good layout of knobs basically, nothing fancy.
What should i look out for?

Ima get a D7000 soon, should i get the standard 18-105mm lens it comes with or splash and get a 18-55mm as well as a 35mm? Is there any point getting both? I've heard the D7000 has shit low light skills and the 35mm fixes that up.

>>2741377
Books on composition

>>2741270
>>2741276
The 17-40 F4 L is only weather sealed with a filter on it. I didn't have one because it wasn't raining THAT hard, but I do have a B+W clear protection in the mail.

>>2741322
Yeah, that was my thought. Worst case, I'll resell the lens for no loss.

Good dslr cameras for ~$500?
Good reputable website for ordering lenses?

>>2741564
Canon 5D MK I
Nikon D700
Pentax K5 if yuo like cropfagtor
Lenses: Ebay, B&H if murrican

>>2741536
don't get shitty kitlenses, buy Tamron 17-50 2.8

is the difference in price between the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM and the IS II worth it?

>>2741270
The Pentaxes don't need it.

>>2741536
>I've heard the D7000 has shit low light skills and the 35mm fixes that up.
It will surely help, but "fix" is maybe too much said.

Not that you shouldn't try this, but be realistic and expect a compromise solution where you might have to use longer exposures than ideal, or postprocess in a way that looses you quite a lot of detail in many instances.

>>2741593
Bump, bid ending on the latter soon, €50 cheaper but comes with a lens hood too.

>>2741081
Thing is, I specifically want a DSLR. Was asking about a better deal/better camera capable of better shots.

>>2741617
do it then

>>2741630
are you sure? Lens hoods are like€10 and the difference between the lenses on B&H is €150.

Looking for one of those mobile photo printers. I've found the "Impossible instant lab photo printer", "Polaroid Zip mobile photo printer", and "Fujifilm Instax Instant Smartphone printer". Are there any other ones that I can get that might be better?

>tfw you lose your DK-17

RIP in piss

those new DK-17F look mighty fancy

>>2741645
really whatever format you want, you should just consider cost of film and consider how much you want to spend (you listed from highest priced)

i got fujifilm because at urban outfitters they have a "Spend X get Y off" and if you buy at the maximum threshold it ends up being half a pack

>>2741645
Canon Selphy perhaps.

>>2740550
Why exactly? D7200 clearly has a better sensor and low light performance, but what about AF? Asides from the fact that D300 and D300s are pro bodies
>>2740551
D300s bodies cost more or less the same than D7100 bodies in the same conditions, and I think that the D5xx hype will lower their price a bit

>>2741677
>Why exactly?
Massive difference in image quality primarily.

But also more:
http://cameradecision.com/compare/Nikon-D300-vs-Nikon-D7200

> but what about AF
Pretty sure it is also better on the D7200. Sorry, it has been a long time since I even touched a D300.

> Asides from the fact that D300 and D300s are pro bodies
And that will help you how in this case?

>>2741012
What camera is that?

>>2741564
Keh for lenses. BGN grade is often what an ebayer would rate as 80% or higher.

>>2741535
bump

>>2741535
Fuji X100s

Recommended lens caps for my Pentax 35mm f2.4 and 55mm f1.7 TOPCOR lenses? I think the 35mm needs a 49mm lens cap but I'm not sure what the diameter of the TOPCOR is. Seems like 52mm. What about lens mount caps?

Also, what camera bag do you guys recommend? I was thinking of just getting an insert and putting it in my backpack.

>>2741535
pentax K-3 or K-3 ii

>>2741830
>pentax K-3
>1,5k dollars
is there anything at a lower range?
thanks for the reply

>>2741835
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1007545&gclid=Cj0KEQiAn8i0BRDur-HV1PCTy4UBEiQAPuFr9NEZhRvv4nIzmttdkCEXKTP1ek0WmyDoOFc1DP5lsM4aAlD28P8HAQ&is=REG&ap=y&m=Y&A=details&Q=

What's the best way to shoot b&w without the Leica?

Do China do knock off lenses? There's canon ef-s lenses on eBay from China for cheaper than anyone else is selling by a good margin.

>>2741845
theyll knock off anything. ive bought used lenses on ebay like a sigma 28-200 for 40 bucks, but if im buying a brand new lense ill either buy it from B&H, adorama, or an authorized seller on amazon with amazon fulfilment. could be legit, but u never know

>>2741844
fuck with sliders in post

Hi interested in street photography, maybe more if I learn. Have some experience and a bunch of friends that know what theyre doing to teach me. Currently have preowned sony a3000 and I want to upgrade to something better for shooting w/o the video aspect to it. I have a small budget but still want bang for my bucket, wanting to spend under 500$ what do

>>2741894
I like my A6000 a lot better than the A3000 (which I never bought).

But let's start with what exactly you don't like about the A3000, and see if $500 can fix it, right?

So where exactly does it get in your way?

>>2740900
For a curve monitor you have to sit a couple of feet within the monitor to get the full effect. Every other position is shit

>>2741945
I wouldn't be more than a foot or foot and half away from the screen. Just unsure whether 24" dell ultrasharp or a bigger Samsung.

Hey what are some brands I can look into for really cheap lenses-specifically for the Sony E mounts? I'm talking really low quality lens that cost less than 50 dollars. Do these even exist?
PS I need these to experiment with, and I specifically need shit quality lenses.

>>2742049
Get vintage lenses and adapters.

>>2741835
Pentax K-50 with DA 35/2.4 and DA 50/1.8

>>2742049
I got a Minolta rokkor 58mm f/1.4 for £36 and its awesome. eBay has lots of good cheap lenses if you can find them.

>>2742054
>>2742059
Thats great thanks, looking at these images its hard to tell if people are editing them or if its a display of quality of these lenses..

>>2742066
Specifically, you're looking for Super Takumar's, Pentax SMC's and the likes.. theres some dirt cheap 50mm f/1.7's and 1.8s to be had. Good luck!

>>2742126
>>2742049
Just realised you said specifically shit - I listed specifically good ones - so dont waste these haha

>>2742055
thanks i think this is in the line of things im looking for. I need it fairly urgently so I cant spend too much on it. thank you

>>2742248
Get a Pentax O-ME53 magnifier eyecup, it will make a huge difference on your experience. It will make the APS-C viewfinder look much more like the 35mm full frame viewfinder, also much more comfier then the regular eyecup.

>>2742292
cheers, i just might. this looks really promising, any clear downsides to this purchase? again megapixels count doesn't bother me, i shot all my projects last term on my phone.

I'm also wondering about photo enlargers and a drum for a darkroom, in the mood to experiment with it. i do have access to a high end dark room but im wondering whether making these experiments myself might be productive. opinions?

>>2742307
to the purchase of the pentax k-50 i should say, not the eyecup of course

>>2742307
>>2742311
The used lens market is much slimmer, but you can put relatively cheap WR lenses (weather sealed, including the kit lens) and go out where no Nikon or Rabal users dare to wenture. Outside, in any weather.
You can use most old lenses with a simple adapter ring (remove the spring from the M42 adapter) without any limitations. Just set the Aperture ring in Av mode and it will meter automatically.
Basically it is just like any other beginner/intermediate camera with extra features and no artificial limitations. Much more camera for your money than the others in its class. If you can, get the HD version of the 55-300 telezoom for events, sports and nature/birding.

>>2742316
thanks friend, i think i found love with this camera.

What's the sharpest/highest quality point and shoot camera in the market today? How does it compare to an entry level DSLR like a Canon t3i?

>>2742341
Sony RX100 IV, Lumix LX100, Ricoh GR, Fuji X100T etc...

>>2742341
The RX1R II, unless you define it as something else because it has too many controls - but it is a fixed lens, compact, pocketable camera people will primarily shoot in full auto.

It's *much* better than a T3i. It compares well to FF DSLR, because it actually is a FF MILC. Priced as such too.

/p/ is usually not buying devices this expensive, so I'd suggest to have a look at the RX100 series instead (III / IV especially, as far as I'm concerned - but the RX100 is still okay, too).

>>2742353 (cont'd)
> FF MILC
Damn, I meant FF Mirrorless camera, not interchangeable lens.

>>2742353
>RX1R
>Pocketable
HAH!

>>2742362
113.3 x 65.4 x 72.0 mm, right?

Either way, it fits into a jacket, or cargo pants' side pocket or a small back pocket on a backpack, or a pocket in a woman's handbag or messenger bag.

Just into a great many pockets. Not really problematic for pocket-ability.

File: sony_cyber_shot_rx1r_hands_on_photos_05.jpg (67KB, 799x675px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 799x675px

>>2742368
A cell phone fits in a pocket. This does not.

>>2742368
As much as any APSC mirrorless with a kit lens. Face it, it's not meant to be a pocket streetshooter, it is designed to be a status symbol. Something to show off rather than used for serious work.
The GR or the X100T are much more serious cameras.

>>2742353
Interesting. I was just wondering if the technology was out there. I'll probably end up settling for a Ricoh GR myself.

File: rx1r II.jpg (47KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x500px

>>2742373
> A cell phone fits in a pocket.
Pretty much the only thing that fits into skinny jean's front pocket or such, sure.

> This does not.
No, it is just fine in a ton of pockets, including cargo pants' side pockets or jacket pockets or whatever.

>>2742374
> As much as any APSC mirrorless with a kit lens.
Definitely smaller than the average of those.

And this isn't an APS-C, but FF.

> Face it, it's not meant to be a pocket streetshooter
It's a pocketable camera.

And pretty much everything portable can be a street shooter. There are no particular standards in street photography.

> Something to show off rather than used for serious work. The GR or the X100T are much more serious cameras.
Lel. Because why?

File: 1434597652559.jpg (36KB, 177x174px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 177x174px

>>2742380
>cargo pants' side pockets

>>2742378
> Ricoh GR
Yea, sure. That's another popular option around here, and it's a decent camera.

>>2742380
>>2742373
once I fit a 70-300mm in my front jeans pocket

>>2742383
What? You can have 2 or 4 of these on your pants, so carrying a smartphone and a camera of the size of a RX1R II is not a problem.

If your thing is to wear only a tutu and shirt, I guess you can get a leg holster, heh.

>>2742380
>Deliberately posting compressed telephoto picture of the camera to hide the fact the lens is huge.
It is not pocketable by any means.

>>2742393

Cargo pants are for disgusting goons.

>>2742385
ricoh got a ricoh, had it for a week and then BAM dust

the dust meme ain't just a meme, it's truly a shoddy build

>>2742400
It's easy to clean, don't be such a whiny pussy

Random question. How many people here calibrate their lens' autofocus? Is it something that you just expect every photographer to know how to do? I'm afraid of managing to fuck up everything even worse trying to do this.

>>2742409
You only do it if you're having a problem, and if you are, there's a very scientific and accurate way of fixing it. It's not just a feel thing. If you aren't having issues, don't bother with it.

>>2742402
how do you remove dust from inside the body of a ricoh

>>2742414
You take off the lens, clean the sensor then put the lens back. If you can hold a screwdriver straight and don't go barbaric on it the it is a quick and easy task and only takes a few minutes. There are tutorials on the net.

>>2742422
>If you can hold a screwdriver straight and don't go barbaric on it
O-Oh. I guess I can send it in somewhere to get serviced then.

File: GR2.png (376KB, 562x433px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 562x433px

>>2742400
That's why I got myself the GR II instead of the GR. Yes, it's a tad more expensive but I can keep it in my pockets without having any sort of dust inside the lens/on the sensor. It seems to me that they really did work on the sealing in some way. No dust-related complaints over here so far.

>>2742422
voids warranty :\

pretty sneaky ricoh

Pals, I have a 5 years old Canon 550D and the 18-55 3.8-5.6 IS and 50mm 1.8. I miss the sharpness in my photos. Would i change the camera or buy better lens?
I suppose that i can focus well but now i doubt of all. Thanks a lot!

>>2742436
You can do both, actually.

Start off with some good glass. Invest a good amount of dough, don't be stingy.

If you ever feel the need to get even more sharpness, spend your money on a camera with no AA filter.

>>2742433
If anything else happens it also voids the warranty. Ricoh cameras have high enough quality control to not have electronics problems and even in the rarest cases those come out earlier than the dust problem.

>>2742436
If you have a 550D and a 50 f/1.8 you can get very sharp photos. You can't buy technique. Post some examples.

>>2742400
>the dust meme ain't just a meme, it's truly a shoddy build

Doesn't every camera with fixed telescoping lens suffer from similar dust?

Every time the lens extends it has to suck in air.

>>2742395
It's ~6cm wide at the lens, less wide than a man's fist.

Unless you're a tiny manlet, the camera will generally fit in pockets where your fist fits.

>>2742464
Put it in your pocket and take a photo of it

>>2742436
> Would i change the camera or buy better lens?
Depends. Probably a better lens.

>>2742464
Pockets are not designed for fists. You put a wallet or your phone in there, maybe a pack of paper tissue and some change.
What kind of barbaric slav shit are you if you put your hands in your pocket clenched into a fist?
The RX1R is not pocketable. Deal with it.

>>2742466
Don't own one. But fortunately there is footage of a jacket pocket, eh:
http://cnet1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2015/10/14/d8a72c4b-6915-4613-a10f-ae4dcd471f17/resize/770x578/db3668f3ef310777612bcb14c4f4d852/sony-rx1rm2-15.jpg

File: Thnks 4c.jpg (3MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5184x3456px

>>2742437
Thanks :D
>>2742457
Lets see this. I manually focused her right eye, i had the focus confirmation light. I like the result but i think it can go sharper,,, What do you think? Thank you

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/3.2
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/3.2
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2742478
Focus is on her eyebrow, also the Canon nifty plastic 50 is not very sharp. Get a 50/1.4 if you want sharper.
BTW the shot is actually good for a smaller print. Not A4, probably A5 or somewhat less.

File: Screenshot 2016-01-11 17.05.19.png (2MB, 1859x853px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1859x853px

>>2742478
Might I ask what you're using this photo for, that pic related isn't sharp enough for you, but that you aren't bothered by the poor lighting, poor color, poor composition, and poor editing?

Also, if this wasn't on a tripod, 1/50 is not fast enough, and you will squeeze more sharpness out of the equipment with better technique.

What sharpening methods have you employed in post?

>>2742482
>>2742468
Thanks :D

>>2742486
>but that you aren't bothered by the poor lighting, poor color, poor composition, and poor editing
That shot doesn't look like a professionally posed portrait, more like a personal snap from everyday life. You don't have to do a perfect lighting for every shot. The color needs a little adjusting though, skin could be a tad bit warmer and adjusted for the lit side of her face, but that's for my tastes on my screen.

>>2742478
I think your technique was okay in terms of sharpness. (A bit more light might have been nice, perhaps).

Figures you might want a higher resolution camera and lens, yea. But I couldn't tell you if you can make do with "just" a Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 or if you want to get a new body too.

There is a lot of difference between that and a A7R II or 5DS R with a Sonnar T* 55mm / 90mm FE or Otus or something like that stuck on it, unfortunately both in terms of effective resolution *and* cost.

File: 1452549391387.jpg (4MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5184x3456px

>>2742478
This photo has all the sharpness you could want unless you're printing the size of a living room wall.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5184
Image Height	3456
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:11 17:21:16
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/3.2
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/3.2
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	5184
Image Height	3456
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: Canon-Speedlite-580ex-II-Flash-Comparison-Front.jpg (41KB, 500x397px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x397px

HELLO GEAR THREAD

I need to purchase a canon flash that can fire on the second flash curtain. ( I will be photographing some fire dancers in the near future, they move fast and I want to combine image blur and frozen movement into the same compositions)

Now, what flash should I buy? I've been advised to stick with canon because they talk to the camera. Should I get a 580 ex ii or 430 ex ii ? What is the difference and which flash will be best for me?

>>2742496
>This photo has all the sharpness you could want
It's pretty poor, actually. Hairs are unsharp, iris has poor detail, and a lot more.

Fine if you personally like this aesthetic, but things can and should look a lot better as far as I'm concerned.

Also, it's not skill, it's gear:
Random Flickr post called "My first portrait using a flash", dude shooting his son:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/101043605@N04/23449133623/in/pool-2844482@N21/

>>2742505
>Random Flickr post called "My first portrait using a flash", dude shooting his son:
with a flash, at a proper shutter speed
weird eh?

>>2742505
>Hairs are unsharp,
No, they aren't. The hairs in the thin focal plane are very sharp.
>iris has poor detail
Because it's out of focus, and exposed poorly, and the shutter speed was about 50% too slow to be hand held.

>>2742501
any flash can do this, it's about whether or not your camera supports second curtain sync.

>>2742508
Yes, he had more light, but that is not what made the other image look not so sharp.

And also not nearly all the color range difference is due to lighting.

The flickr shot is really a pretty poor snapshot by photographer technique, but it's just more striking due to better sharpness and colors that show far more detail.

That is ultimately why you might want a better lens ... and maybe, better camera... for portraits.