Gear Thread

I have a question: What is the purpose of photography?

File: Canon-EOS-Rebel-T5-Flash-Up.jpg (79KB, 550x620px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 550x620px

>coworker asks for advice on entry level dslr
>recommend T5 with the two kit lenses + 99$ 50mm prime lens

reposting for help
did i fuck up

everything online says canon is more popular for a number of reasons, so i expect a lot of contrarianism and butthurt about it here desu, but if you have any valid opinions i'd be interested

>>2750010
To provide an excuse for buying gear.

>>2750010
so spergs have an excuse to photograph women, and for women to pretend to be cultured and artsy

>>2750011
Canon's sensors are dramatically behind the curve as far as dynamic range, color, and high ISO. The Rebel series is using more or less the same sensor they were using 10 years ago. The lenses are okay, and if you're on a very tight budget, then Canon has some low price lenses that aren't bad.

A good bet for a starter would be something like a Fuji X-E2, or a Sony a6000, or a used D7000, or a Pentax K5mk2. Canon's flagship stuff is really nice, the 5Dmk3 and the 1Dx are impressive, but the low end bodies are just cash grabs trading on the mythos of the brand.

>>2750017
>canons sensors are bad
>canon's censors
>sensors

>the 5DS is a bad camera
-/p/

>>2750011
tell him to cop a pentax k-3 and be done with it
hell never need another camera

>>2750017
>>2750020
>buy these things you can't upgrade from
But why?

I sense that there's a lot of people who could never afford to move up, so they stay with the brands that preclude them from doing so anyway.

4chan is mostly poor NEETs after all, i suppose there are likely photoNEETs since you can scrape together some entry level hipster *SLR via neetbux, but maybe that's not as common since its an outgoing activity

>>2750011
You've already got the best answer you're going to get in the other thread.

The tl;dr is Canon sensors have a smaller usable dynamic range than sony's backlit CMOS sensors. That's literally the long and short of the canon a shit meme.

Pentax is your "gives you everything but the kitchen sink, and a handjob" for cheaper than everyone else charges for a body with like 1/3 the features but they don't have a full frame choice -- supposedly there's one in the pipeline, but until it hits the market that doesn't do anyone any good.

Sony/Nikon=spendy but best performance (spendy being about what one would pay for a Canon), but since they don't have nearly the consumer market share, if you want to buy used gear it's a pain and selling your gear will be far more difficult.

Fuji/Oly/Panny eh...decent value but I dunno, I just can't recommend them.

All of that said, all of these are capable of making great images.

>>2750021
>muh upgrades
does he want to go pro? does he not have a job that pays better than being an entry level photographer? what do you need to upgrade for if you've got a great camera system if you're just a hobbyist? and pentax is coming out with a brand new full frame slr this year if hes a full sperg and feels compelled to upgrade from an already great camera

>>2750024
except that sensor complaint only applies to the low level bodies, and canon has superior lenses.

>>2750024
>The tl;dr is Canon sensors have a smaller usable dynamic range than sony's backlit CMOS sensors. That's literally the long and short of the canon a shit meme.
>sony

mirrorless memers please fuck off

File: images-2.jpg (22KB, 332x357px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 332x357px

Current gear:

Bodies
- Canon EOS 6D
- Canon EOS M3

Lenses
- Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
- Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
- Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
- Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
- Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
- Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
- Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 SP DI VC USD

Flashes
- Canon Speedlite 90EX
- Canon Speedlite 430EX II

Is it worth selling off my spare 50mm f/1.8s (want to keep the STM) or the value of them has fallen so much I might as well keep them for spares? I haven't used either of them since getting the STM.

>>2750017
>Canon's sensors are dramatically behind the curve as far as dynamic range, color, and high ISO
Canon has absolutely no problem with color and there are many who solidly prefer the way the Canon systems render color (I say system because lens is as important if not more so).

Dynamic range of the sensor and High ISO are effectively the same thing with regards to how CMOS sensors work.

The "dramatic" is mostly in the minds of those who hate Canon for no reason.

>>2750032
>mirrorless memers please fuck off
Huh? You're aware that say the Nikon D810 uses a Sony backlit CMOS sensor, right?

I'm looking to upgrade from the D3100 that I have been using since it's release and have been thinking about getting either the d750 or the d810. Is the d750 actually a worthwhile upgrade or would it be better to just go to the d810?

could someone please post some technical details and measurements on sensor dynamic range

>>2750043
If you're not doing video, don't bother with the 810. Most all of the upgrades to the 800 were video specific. Your choice is between the 750 and 800.

Both are great cameras and will carry you for a long damn time. Budget is your primary factor here. Think about what holes you have otherwise in gear and if you can address those with the price difference of going with the 750 or if there's some phototrip/hiring a model or some such you could do to help build your port. Also, why do you want to go full frame? What's crop not doing for you?
>>2750047
http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/DxOMark-testing-protocols/Noise-dynamic-range
This isn't the only way, but the vast majority of the time you hear people talking about camera performance, they're talking about DXO's results.

Is the 5DS the best body in the world? And if not, what is?

>>2750049
>It's a bad camera because it's mediocre at video
Are you serious?

>>2750010
Providing an impression about articles you sell in stores or online in all places including eBay and such.

Providing fapping materials for everyone.

Providing evidence when you file complaints and/or start lawsuits.

Documenting the world for people you currently know. Or for posterity.

And many more.

>>2750054
>>It's a bad camera because it's mediocre at video
who said bad you dumb fuck? he just said its not the best in the world
fucking canonfags are literal retards

>>2750053
Phase One XF.

The only Key Performance Indicator of a Camera Body is the Noise and Dynamic Range Performance Of Its Sensor.

>>2750058
>studio queen
>best body EVAR
Yeah, the 645z has a better argument than that. You might as well go like 8x10 full movement camera or 16x20 or whatever other stupidly large format camera.

>Canon is the most popular camera of pros
>it's actually the worst brand

why is everyone so stupid

>>2750067
>why is everyone so stupid
Never stopped to think that what you consider important isn't?

>>2750065
XF is miles better than the 645Z which by the way is not FFMF. The XF 100MP is a true FFMF with 16-bit of colour, literally the best digital camera body in the world.

http://www.dxomark.com/About/Sensor-scores/Use-Case-Scores

Why is dynamic range even a criteria for landscape when dxomark's own definition says it's usually shot on a tripod and you can trivially do a proper HDR which easily exceeds the DR of any sensor on earth in a fraction of a second?

>>2750070
isoless

Anyone >>2750033?

>>2750072
Until you need to shoot in the rain.

>>2750054
> It's a bad camera
I did not say it was bad. I said it was not *the best* as you claimed, stating that
> This and many others flaws like no IBIS make the A7R II probably the better camera still.
But if I compare something to be "probably" worse than an A7R II -the best camera-, that thing still is going to be quite good at a lot of what it does.

> mediocre at video
The device only supports worse video resolutions and framerates than a cheap $60 Yicam. That's not mediocre, it's poor.

>>2750073
completeness of their testing and to give people another number to go autismal over

File: 1449749075683.jpg (20KB, 250x324px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 250x324px

>not realizing everyone is shilling mirrorless because people have to buy everything new
it's the biggest cash influx the industry has seen in decades

>>2750076
Put them on craigslist and see if you get any bites. Assuming good condition, you'll probably be able to get around $130ish for both...which might not be worth the effort.

>>2750077
There's to much compromise with the 645Z. It has inferior lenses (soft as fuck everywhere) and an outdated sensor. It is a beginner's MF system after all, like the Rebel line for Canon's pro bodies.

You wanted the best body? Then the Phase One XF is what the highest tier of professionals use.

>nobody in the field of photography uses dB
what the fuck guys

>>2750089
umm, sensor performance isn't logarithmic

>>2750093
>not expressing dynamic range in dB

>>2750094
Why the hell would you? It makes sense in other SNR applications, but doesn't make the slightest amount of sense in photography.

>>2750096
>Camera sensors aren't electronic devices
now you've lost me

>>2750100
Photographers are electronics technicians? That's news to me.

Hello. I've been using a Sony a37 for a few years now, and I got it as my entry level DSLR. I feel like I'm due for an upgrade to a non-entry level DSLR, but I'm not sure if I should even stick with Sony... Any suggestions, with reasons and information please?

>>2750103
>not measuring the performance of an electrical device in dB
not a best practice

>>2750105
Damn, looks like we'll never get that ISO 9000 certification.

Why are there so many nikon/pentax/sony posters here? it's very disproportionate to reality

>you're supposed to shoot priority and not manual
oh

>>2750096
Digital photography inherited a lot from the film era to preserve continuity, hence why we have ISO speeds and stuff like that.
Your method may make more sense for a technically literate like an engineer (like meself) but it means gibberish to an artist. Just look around the board, there are threads filled with idiot artschoolers trying to analyze or make sense of basic physical phenomenons and making complete ass of themselves while mystifying further the issues.
Just stay with the old jargon and be done with it, it will be better for everyone. Leave the technicalities for the r&d labs.

>>2750110
Because Canon sucks and Pentax/Nikon/Sony/Fuji/etc... are way better.

>>2750115
I think you hit the wrong post.

>>2750116
Why?

>>2750117
Yes, I may have. Sorry about that, it's late over here.

>>2750116
I'm not really sure how I like some of the newer things from Sony in general, but never took the time of day to look at other brands. I'm genuinely interested in which avenue to pursue, and which non-entry level DSLR to get from said avenue.

See >>2750104

>>2750119
Because the newest Canon sensors perform worse than a crop sensor camera from years ago. They are way behind in the sensor technology and it doesn't look like they are about to improve.
It is simply a very bad investment buying Canon, any other, even m4/3 is a better choice. What good is having great L lenses when the sensor cannot resolve the image, drowning all the detail into noise? You can't even sell your photos because a beginner with a Pentax provides better image quality. Most customers won't respect the time and money put into improving your art if it is covered in noise.

>>2750126
>there are some corner cases where sony's sensor is slightly better qed canon sensors just make noise
really hella epic dude

>>2750123
It is better to stay with DSLRs if you don't like the ergonomics of the new MILCs.
I'd suggest going with Pentax K-3 (K-3II doesn't have built-in flash) and getting a few DA* lenses (DA* 55 is a wonderful portrait lens, DA 16-85 is a great general zoom and the DA* 60-250 is a great telezoom for action and wildlife)
Other option is going with Nikon D7200 or the new D500 although I can't suggest any good lens because I don't know the Nikon system that well.
The difference between crop and FF is very small with modern sensors so it is not necessary to go FF for upgrade. Unless you really need the FF system which also means bigger heavier and much more expensive lenses.
I guess someone else will fill in the blanks on the lenses.

>>2750104
whatever you do, unless you hate photography, make sure there is an upgrade path to the gold standard of full frame.

>>2750128
Where did you quote that from? I can't find those words in the post you linked to.

>>2750130
>gold standard
>full frame
HA

>>2750129
Thanks for the response!
I was actually looking around at the K3-II a little bit, as I don't typically use the on-board flash anyway. However, lots of things I have read here make Pentax seem like shit for whatever reason. I was taking a peak a few minutes ago at the Nikon catalog and checked out the Enthusiast section, the DF looks very nice as a body, but only has 16 MP, which is the same as what I have. I'm not sure how important the MP really is though, but I'd figure going to 24ish would be an improvement I might want.

It looks like canon kills nikon at AF

best tripod under 200 bucks? should be suitable for long exposures and preferably pretty compact (my camera bag is a lowepro flipside sport), preferably under 18 inches or so collapsed. must be able to support my K-3 and hd 55-300 lens

>>2750134
Search a few photos with the lens I listed above on Flickr and see for yourself, Also the K-3 uses the same sensor that is in the Nikon D7100/D7200. Most of the hate comes from angry gearfags and brand shills. Don't listen to opinions, search some related photos and see the results for yourself.
Also Pentax is the easiest to adapt old M42 manual lenses Nikon is incapable of without image degrading corrective adapters.

>>2750137
Dic&Mic E302C from Aliexpress

>>2750139
Could you discuss more about the pros and cons of the MP upgrade, and why that Df is so expensive at 16 MP?

Further, if I were to narrow this between the K3-II and D7200, what would be the pros/ cons of each, in relation to each other?

>>2750135
it looks like nikon kills canon at subject tracking

canon made its reputation with fast, accurate AF at a time when Nikon could barely figure out why anybody would want AF. this gave canon a huge lead. meanwhile, Nikon eventualy went the other direction with fast enough AF, but excellent subject tracking and color matrix metering.

>>2750143
>subject tracking
badautofocus

>>2750141
Stop. Leave this board. Go to http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm and read them all, then come back and ask questions. You're miles behind the curve in what you know versus what you need to know.

>>2750149
>photosites
not a thing

so let me see if I've got this right:

sony fe: biggest, most expensive bodies. feature packed too. big lenses, unless you go for M-mount. small or expensive lens ecosystem.
sony e: only one body of note, one mediocre telephoto option, compressed raw, and 3 native AF primes worth mentioning. otherwise best AF and subject tracking of any serious mirrorless offering.
fuji x: lots of good bodies, excellent but expensive lenses that cover all the essentials, good controls and layouts, can't video worth a damn, adobe doesn't do good raw conversions, needs alternative software, continuous firmware updates.
m43: feature packed bodies, muh babby sensor, expensive lenses (for the size), big lens ecosystem, small size especially with pancakes
nikon 1: terrible lens ecosystem, quirky bodies, hands down best AF system on any mirrorless system.

>>2750104
> I feel like I'm due for an upgrade to a non-entry level DSLR, but I'm not sure if I should even stick with Sony
Your call, they released a lot of great cameras recently. But other brands also are doing okay. So it will depend on what you want to do, how much you want to pay, where your general priorities with glass and bodies lie...

> Any suggestions, with reasons and information please?
You didn't really give anything hints to narrow all the options down, so no idea.

>>2750151
>no canon

>>2750149
>he's measuring in miles
Good job :^)

>>2750139
>Also the K-3 uses the same sensor that is in the Nikon D7100/D7200
If you want something with just a sensor like that, your cheapest option is an A6000.

Almost the sensor properties, but with more PDAF points on-sensor. Of course it has also disadvantages apart from cheaper price and largely better AF.

Just throwing it in the mix of options.

>2016
>still nothing better than bayer arrays
....

>>2750161
He already stated he didn't like the mirrorless ergonomics

Why are mirrorless cameras shilled so hard?

>>2750151
>sony fe: biggest, most expensive bodies. feature packed too.
No, they're certainly not the biggest bodies.

And not the most expensive either. They mostly cost no more than Nikon etc. and often are cheaper than pretty comparable Canons.

> big lenses, unless you go for M-mount.
The high-end of lenses (which the system mostly has) are no bigger than comparable lenses on Canon / Nikon either. And you can adopt a lot more than the M mount.

Sensible manual focus with IS and focus peaking is possible with about every lens ever, and they can also have adapters that can do AF with Canon EF-mount and Sony E-mount lenses now (Nikon F and Leica and others are in the works, prototypes have been shown by 3rd parties).

> sony e: only one body of note
Two, but they're almost the same.

> one mediocre telephoto option
All the FF options work too. The E-mount includes EF-lense.

> best AF and subject tracking of any serious mirrorless offering.
And generally great AF even as compared to DSLR... not so great subject tracking as compared to Nikon and Canon, though.

> nikon 1
> hands down best AF system on any mirrorless system.
Nope, that also is Sony. Particularly on the A7R II but also marginally on the A6000 and A7 II.

>>2750149
Hmm. Okay, I'm not going to argue. I think you might be right. I could use the improvement. Thanks for the suggestion anon.

>>2750166
Because they nailed a lot of things recently.

Again, the best camera last year by industry awards was the mirrorless A7R II. Mirrorless cameras also generally won for amateur photo/video combos and value and so on. Lots of stuff that matters and got some fans.

>>2750174
>an industry giving awards to the things that give them the most money
whoa!

there's a huge financial incentive for them because you have to buy a ton of things new

>sony sensor can't keep up in continuous shooting
interesting

>>2750176
> an industry giving awards to the things that give them the most money
Not really. It's not just the points of sale issuing awards.

It's also the expert press and reviewers in general. They get money if they create news and give people interesting facts.

If they lie or are much off the mark vs. the competition, they loose viewers and money.

The A7R II deserved it even when you look at all the competition too, that's all there is to it.

How the fuck do you shoot something live action with mirrorless? Doesn't the viewfinder blank out in continuous shooting?

>>2750177
What are you even quoting?

This seems wrong regardless which camera with a Sony sensor (Canon? Nikon? Sony? Some smartphone? ...) you mean.

Usually the remaining chipset / storage or something would be what can't keep up, not the sensor.

so basically sony is useless when trying to shoot continuous

>>2750183
Only Sony has Sony sensors, Nikon Pentax and the others have a Sony design sensor manufactured by Toshiba. Not the same architecture Sony uses.

>>2750180

How the fuck do you shoot live action with a dslr? Doesn't the viewfinder blank out in continuous shooting?

>>2750188
guess all those guys using dslrs for sports and wildlife are doing it wrong! haha

>>2750180
> Doesn't the viewfinder blank out in continuous shooting?
It's a stupid technical issue not all MILC have to have.

Actually it's the cameras with mirrors that necessarily will have this if you flip the mirror up and down, not the mirrorless cameras that don't do this. But well, Sony somehow made it happen anyways. Must be some kind of hardware transfer rate / buffer / processing power / software issue.

> How the fuck do you shoot something live action with mirrorless?
Easy, you don't shoot *extremely* close up (seeing the review from 0.5 seconds ago isn't a huge issue for anticipating motion then, and PDAF will keep focusing quickly).

Or in bursts as most do it anyways (you could see the live image again shortly after the last shot).

Certainly still something Sony should fix on their cameras ASAP so the sports oriented photographers can use the camera more easily.

>A7R II is the highest end camera they said

>it can't even do high end photography (wildlife/birds/sports)

...

>>2750190
Guess all those guys successfully doing sports and wildlife with mirrorless cameras are doing it wrong?

It doesn't follow, you can use either.

Bad PDAF would be a huge problem, but slight delays due to review photos showing (or brief blackouts if you prefer) is just an annoyance, not prohibitive for sports and wildlife.

Especially not if you get a larger resolution, then you don't need to frame & track quite as exactly anyhow.

>>2750185
You mean Nikon, Pentax, etc designed sensors manufactured by Sony, right

>>2750197
Nope. Get your facts right.

>digital has noise in black areas
>film has noise in white areas
how can we do a composite of film and digital

So, Canon bodies are weak, but there lenses make up for it because they are great? Should I switch from Canon to Pentax or Olympus?

>any photo website ever
>all their images are 45kb 500x300 pixel pieces of shit
why do you do this

>>2749382

I'm mainly looking at BW films, specifically Retro 80s, Ilford fp4+, Delta 100, and Fuji Neopan Acros

>>2750205
canon bodies are the best in class if you are shooting something that moves.

>>2750193
>it can't even do high end photography (wildlife/birds/sports)
Does this look like the guy had huge problems on his first NFL shoot?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIakt30iBGY

Is this some wildlife?:
A7R II: https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=ILCE-7RM2%20animal&view_all=1
A7 II: https://www.flickr.com/search/?view_all=1&text=ILCE-7M2%20bird
A6000: https://www.flickr.com/search/?view_all=1&text=ILCE-6000%20bird

Besides, "high end" photography also especially includes professional portraits, weddings, commercial product shots and all that. You know, the stuff that may be done with assistants. And maybe multiple $8k reflectors on strobe setups costing a few more grand each piece. And a lot more crazy expensive stuff.

>>2750214
>look at all this stationary wildlife
zzz

>>2750217
Not all animals are moving all the time, who would have thunk that wildlife doesn't only mean fast moving creatures like birds, wolves, and cheetahs

anyone used induro tripods? good? bad?
looking at the induro alloy 8m at114

Question about street photography legality.

Can i take pictures of anything/anyone? or do i need people permission to photograph them?

I'm in Australia.

Bought a used Pentax K-3 a couple months ago, and I find the focus is noticeably quicker in live view mode (at least in relatively low light) for some reason. Doesn't hunt at all, compared to when I'm focusing through the viewfinder which will sometimes take an extra second or two to actually achieve focus. Is that supposed to happen?
Everything else seems to work just fine.

>>2750171
>mentioning nikon/canon dslrs
this was clearly a mirrorless list. we're not cross shopping DSLRs.
>on the off chance of mentioning canon mirrorless
stillborn
>FE mount telephotos
so I get to choose between the 90G macro and 70-200/4. great. also not small lenses.
>adapting lenses
if I wanted to shoot manual focus, I'd get my film cameras
if I wanted to shoot canon lenses, i'd get my canon bodies, because you might as well when lenses cross a certain size threshold.
>a6000
>good af
good compared to a D3300 or other entry level cameras. not good compared to CAM3500 or Canon 65 pt equipped cameras.
>not knowing the nikon 1s have the best PDAF system of any mirrorless camera
can't blame you, the system is so shit it flies right under the radar. Nikon 1 is the only system that can AF and subject track as well as a DSLR, while ripping off 20 fps in continuous AF mode.

>>2750281
>Nikon 1 is the only system that can AF and subject track as well as a DSLR, while ripping off 20 fps in continuous AF mode.

then why do most sports and wildlife guys shoot canon

>>2750240
banned in australia. 10 years hard time for carrying a baby killing cop seeking assault camera with full automatic burst.

also they'll slap a hooning offense on you.

>>2750283
Mainly because of paid shills posing as "reviewers", hype, misinformation, people who don't know what they're talking about, and lastly thinking that the amount of lenses in a system matters more than what percentage of good glass that system is.

>>2750288
but /p/ is sony shill territory

>>2750283
More lens options i think.

>>2750288
It's like you enjoy being factually incorrect with whatever you say.

>>2750289
Shills aren't exclusive to 4chan, mang, they're found in fake Amazon reviews, too.

And like I said, lens quality should matter more than quantity, it's like looking at a huge plate full of food, and then realizing that you can't eat all of it.

I'm new.

I have a Sony a6000 and a Helios 44-2
What adapter(s) do I need?

>>2750294
more like good lens options

>>2750298
m42 screwmount, there's various different flavors of it. Speedbooster/focal reducer, tilt, tilt-shift, macro focusing, or regular adapter

>>2750301
Wow, damn thanks. Which do you recommend? Amazon link?

Sorry if this has been discussed to death, but are Instax (and other modern instant cameras) just mindless fun cameras to take to parties/start convos or can they be leveraged into good photos?

I've considered getting one

>>2750309
it depends.

>>2750312
on what?

>>2750319
How you use it, what you point it at, what the lighting is, what your expectations are, what your definition of a good photo is, your presentation of the images, the mood of the shoot.

>>2750319
your artistic talent. anything that can take an image can be turned into art.

you're probably not making money off of it though.
>>2750283
contracts, issued equipment, pro build (toughness and sealing), battery life, ease of controls, and being insufficiently big next to their SLR shooting co-workers


>>2750289
/p/ shills anything that has good value and spec sheets regardless of the real world performance as long as it's "good enough". Pentax, a6000, dic&mic e302c, and Ricoh

GR
R

>>2750325
>being insufficiently big next to their SLR shooting co-workers
So Canon's are the SLR equivalent of penis cars?

>>2750321
>>2750325
I wasn't planning on it. I was asking if the technical specs of the camera would even allow it. I'm not going to buy it if it's going to be like a Holga with "intended flaws and leaks" Thanks though

>>2750327
Nah, that's sony or nikon.

>>2750329
Nah, there's no shit like that with them, it's just instant film kinda blows from an IQ standpoint if you're used to digital or non-instant film. Search for shots on flickr.

>>2750194
>Bad PDAF would be a huge problem, but slight delays due to review photos showing (or brief blackouts if you prefer) is just an annoyance, not prohibitive for sports and wildlife.

Actually, slight delays can be a deal breaker. Even the shutter lag on cheap prosumer bodies like the D300/7D can be torture to a seasoned pro.

>>2750281
> if I wanted to shoot manual focus, I'd get my film cameras
I wouldn't, they don't have IBIS, focus peaking, or you know, the fast and inexpensive digital workflow.

> if I wanted to shoot canon lenses, i'd get my canon bodies, because you might as well when lenses cross a certain size threshold.
At this point I wonder what FF/APS-C lenses might ever be right for you.

> good compared to a D3300 or other entry level cameras.
No, good compared to the Nikon 1.

And if you want something better, get an A7R II.

> subject track as well as a DSLR, while ripping off 20 fps in continuous AF mode
Those might be advantages that the Nikon 1 has. Someone should compare the subject tracking to the A7R II's, I guess.

Why do people always suggest Canon over Nikon for video?

Pentax FF hype? I'm interested to see what they've cooked up.

>>2750345
Could be enough annoying / problematic to be a deal breaker to some, but that could also apply to not having IBIS or PDAF during movie recording or any number of other features.

The point was just is that you can shoot birds / sports / wildlife and a generally a lot of pro stuff very easily on an A7 II or A7R II without doing anything particularly skillful.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jackez2010/20957719974/

>>2750365
generally more control over recording, and also magic lantern

Anyone own a Pentax67? Thoughts? Mirror lock up seems to be a necessity

>>2750365
>not suggesting sony or panasonic
lol

Looking to buy my first 'upgrade' lens. Considering either the Canon 40mm f/2.8 or the 50mm f/1.8. I'm leaning towards the 40mm solely because of the small form factor and better build quality compared to the 50mm.

Still fairly new to photography so I wouldn't say I one thing I shoot. Will probably bounce around landscape and street photography with the occasional star chasing

>>2750466
Sounds okay - why not just grab one.

If you were hoping to hear alternatives, the Sigma Art 18-35mm and the various Sigma Art primes in the focal lengths applicable would be my suggestion.

No small form factors though, just image- and build quality in overall neat lenses.

>>2750084
is that the stock photo guy?

File: 83168_original.jpg (212KB, 1023x682px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1023x682px

wtf is that on the left

I have about 10 grand from graduation money, christmas money, and various things here and there.

Trying to invest in some nice glass. Any recs

my two mounts right now are sony a7 and Mark III

>>2750476
90mm FE macro.
85mm Batis (25mm also probably is good).
The obvious 55mm Zeiss.
Some Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster.

Anything Sigma Art or Sigma Sports.

>>2750478

Thank you this sounds good, ill look into it all.

>>2750474
It's called a blimp and it silences the camera. With it the set photographer can take pictures while they're filming stuff without ruining the sound or distracting people even more than he already does. He makes a lot of the pictures you see in promotional material.

>>2750277
It appears like that because of the lens. Screw drive focus is slower and more inaccurate than the DC or SDM focus drives, it is a 90s technology, but it works and is reliable. It really depends on the lens, for instance on my 50-200 short end the liveview contrast AF is as fast as the regular AF, when focusing on still objects. Moving subject is much different.
On the 35/2.4 the more accurate high luminance sensors drive the AF much more faster and accurate than the liveview AF, the 16-45 shorter focus throw also makes the regular AF faster than the liveview.

>>2750325
Except Pentax, a6000, Dic&Mic e302c, and Ricoh GR all have excellent real world performance. Which is why they are recommended the most.

>>2750325
>/p/ shills anything that has good value and spec sheets regardless of the real world performance as long as it's "good enough". Pentax, a6000, dic&mic e302c, and Ricoh GR
Literally everything you listed has great real world performance you fucking nignog

File: de_dust.jpg (224KB, 623x480px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 623x480px

D U S T DANGER D U S T
U
S
T

How to clean iphone 5s sensor from dust?
Has anybody done it?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 5s
Camera Software	DxO FilmPack 4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2016:01:22 13:49:21
Exposure Time	1/3731 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	32
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2789
Image Height	2148
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2750587
You throw it out and buy a new one. That is the Apple way.

>>2750587
You sure it's not just on the lens/ lens cover?

When changing lenses on my DSLR, Should i be worried about dust/airborne stuff entering the body while theres no lens on the body?

Atm, I change lenses quite quickly due to concern about things entering the body, Normally have my next lens ready with caps off and inline to drop into the body.

>>2750600
kinda, but don't stress over it. Dropping a lens because you're fumbling around is far worse than having to clean a little dust off the sensor, and getting dust inside of a lens is far worse than getting it on the sensor (they make sensor swabs that are cheap and easy to use, having a lens disassembled because there's enough dust in the interior elements is fuckexpensive).

>>2750591
oh no

>>2750598
no. the lens looks like shit as well.
But i guess there is no way in cleaning without taking the thing apart.

>>2750600
>Normally have my next lens ready with caps off and inline to drop into the body
Lmao I do this shit too, it's pathetic really when I think about it. Unless you're in an extremely dusty environment it really won't matter, it's not a bad habit though so don't worry about it.

I feel like I've outgrown my T3i and I'm looking to upgrade. If I had a budget of 600 dollars or so would a used 7D Mk1 be a good upgrade, or should I look into something else?

>>2750633
Well it's not much bigger. If you're still growing, consider something in the format of a pentax 6x7, Pentacon Six, or an RZ

>>2750633
The 7DMk1 is a very capable camera especially concerning action and sports, even wildlife. It is a very good upgrade and you don't have to switch to expensive FF lenses from your current lenses.

>>2750635

I shoot 35mm occassionally, and I find it to be a pain to get it developed and scanned, which I imagine would only be worse with MF. So I wouldn't want to use one of those as my main camera.

>>2750637

Thanks, how is the noise performance? You can't really push the T3i to higher isos most of the time without experiencing a lot of color noise at least. I'm also considering just saving up more money and getting a fuji like I wanted initially, but I want to keep using my lenses.

>>2750646
It is the same sensor more or less with newer image processor. If you want a new sensor then you need to get the 7DMk2.
What the pro body offers is accuracy, precision and better ergonomics, also the AF module comes straight from the 1D series.
While the sensor performance will be somewhat the same, the way you take the shots will be improved in many ways. Don't worry about the noise though, people make excellent photos with much worse sensors.
Although if you're not invested too much into the Canon system then it would be worth to take a look at the Pentax K-3 or Nikon D7100.
I know Pentax has excellent lenses that fit into a tight budget.

>>2750646
>I shoot 35mm occassionally, and I find it to be a pain to get it developed and scanned, which I imagine would only be worse with MF. So I wouldn't want to use one of those as my main camera.

The Joke

-------------

Your Head

>>2750661
The joke was quite shitty to begin with tbqh

>>2750654

Thanks for the help man.

>>2750661

you got me good senpai roflmao o_0

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (13KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 550x550px

I live in Germany, I have a max budget of 350 EUR.
I am looking an Android phone with the best camera. What is the best that I can get for this money?

>>2750730
>Anonymous 01/22/16(Fri)17:07:58 No.2750730

Stop being a moron and buy a Ricoh GR.

>>2750669
>>2750654
>>2750646
>>2750637
>>2750633
I would honestly consider the 70D better than the 7D
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-70D-vs-Canon_EOS_7D/detailed
Biggest drawback is that the 7D I believe is a little more ruggedized had has the awesome wheel and not the little crappy one on the 70D.

That said, how fast are your lenses? If using higher ISO is important, you can also attack that through getting wider aperture lenses...

Will a Sony NEX, E mount work on Sony a6000?

File: 2016-01-22 19.15.09.jpg (167KB, 674x620px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 674x620px

Anyone worked with a full frame wide angle 20mm lens?
Doesn't have to be the f4 zebra flektogon specifically, though that'd be a bonus.

>>2750793
Yes, the A6000 uses E-mount lenses...?

>>2750806
Yea I just got off the phone with Sony and with the limited info I gave them they seemed sure that it would work.

Hi people. I recently acquired a Nikon D3300 and have been using it with a 50mm 1.8D.
Now I'm looking to get a telephoto lens for landscapes*, nature, and wildlife in general. Is there any you can recommend in particular?
Thanks in advance.

*I know some might recommend me wideangles for this. I hate the effect and actually enjoy much more the flatter aspect of teles, so it's a deliberate choice.

>>2750796
Shit's wide. Be careful of getting your feet in the picture.

>>2750796

Yep. I use mine a lot.

>>2750867

This is literally only a problem if you are a retard.

>>2750796

Have Pentax-m 20mm f4, use on A7 oh, easily out resolves sensor wide open, really really sharp, corners aren't brilliant but I suspect this is an adapted issue rather than an optical one for the most part.

What's the best smaller/travel sized camera (mirrorless, etc.) For about $500? (I really don't want to spend more than 300, but I'm trying to be realistic.)
I've been using a D7000 with the kit lens + 50mm for the last 4 years and was looking for something that travels better.

>>2750967
Daily reminder that these are the people giving advice on /p/...

>>2750608
Yeah. I'm like wtf it's like I'm an over protective parent bubble wrapping their child from the nasty world haha.. >>2750602
Thanks, I guess I'm just being paranoid.

File: a6000[1].jpg (51KB, 630x419px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 630x419px

I'm just starting to venture more into photography and videography after using a simple point and shoot and now I want sometime better. I've been looking at the Sony a6000 for a while and it seems to fulfill most of the stuff I want in a camera.

Would you guys recommend it or is there other cameras that I should consider? I'm not particularly fond of DSLRs just yet since I want something compact and more easier to carry for on the go.

File: 514NNEJRM6L.jpg (42KB, 474x500px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 474x500px

I just bought pic related, with the 25-90 lens, any suggestion on which lens should i get as a beginner?

What brands and types of lenses should I look out for when I'm shopping eBay for manual telephotos?
Tair, Jupiter, etc.

>>2750988
Ehh one of the X series fuji cameras used? Not really sure

File: 28mmf2_frontviewx500.jpg (63KB, 500x576px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x576px

Just got it in the mail today, it's awesome
Next up is the 75mm heliar, and then I'm done for camera shit for the year

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS D60
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Photographer	Jonathan Koh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2008:08:26 11:38:30
Exposure Time	8 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	500
Image Height	576

>>2751164
Looks sexy

>>2751076
but that's a film camera.

>>2751074
I really like this camera as far as APS-C go. Performs very well for its price.

But I'll point out that I'm not using it for compactness. Mostly I'm using pretty big lenses on it. You'll only have about 5 AF lenses and then many manual lenses to pick from that are "relatively" compact.

I'm a backpack user (since before picking up photography as a hobby) so it really doesn't bother me, but you might consider getting a RX1R II or RX100 something instead if you just want very compact.

>>2751084
Minolta APO are a few of the telephoto primes that are still really quite great.

Maybe the rokkor are also good enough, if you're on a budget and will accept drawbacks.

Otherwise I'd pretty much suggest you buy a modern one. Sigma / Canon / Nikon or whatever.

>>2751074
wait a few weeks for the a6100 announcement.
you can get either that or a price dropped a6000.

>>2751250
People already stated at the end of the last year that an A6100 or A7000 would be announced in the middle of the year, then again before christmas and before new year, then in early 2016...

It's all shitty rumors. Until the announcement happens you won't know if it will be soon.

Even if Sony frequently releases cameras, we don't even know if they'll release more MILC APS-C.

>>2751255
announcement first week february.

>>2751257
Sony has announced that they're going to announce the Sony A6100 in February?

How does this even make sense, unless it's yet another shitty rumour?

Of course, with them internet oracles pretty much predicting it happening every month, there's a chance of someone being correct eventually, but it's really quite ridiculous overall...

Buying a 17-50 2.8.
Tamron is 300€, Sigma is 390€, no used ones available. Is the Sigma worth the 90 extra euricos? It's in Pentax mount so neither have IS.
Thanks!

>>2751292
Get the Tamron. Otherwise search them on Flickr and see if the IQ is feasible.
Why would you need IS for standard and wide focal lengths?

>>2751296
Thanks.
I just mentioned that because there are multiple versions of the lenses.

File: telezooms.png (73KB, 563x795px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 563x795px

Say I want to get a telezoom for astrophotography, are these /p/ approved? The longest lens I have right now if my 24-70mm f/2.8 :(

File: Pleiades.jpg (553KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 1200x798px

>>2751305
For astrophotography, get a TAIR 300 photosniper or a 400mm refractor with field flattener and a decent tracking mount. You don't need expensive AF lens for nebulae. Even your slow kit telezoom lens at 200mm is enough for most parts. There are plenty of stuff to photograph on the sky with even a 50mm lens.
Pic is a bad attempt to track the pleiades on a flimsy tripod with awful vibrations on a kit 50-200 telezoom.
Your tripod and mount is the biggest factor in the images.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Photographer	Tamas Sterbinszky
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	300 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:10 21:24:52
Exposure Time	30 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	200.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>2751307
Well I'm >>2750033
and a Canon FF RABAL shootan and I want IS rather than AF and only AF lenses have IS.

Plus I would like to use this lens for general/wild-life shootan too.

The best dslr for filming? Money range about 500 € Preferably a canon.

>>2751310
IS for what? It won't track for you unlike the sensor shift IS in the Pentax cameras.
You will need a solid tripod and a tracking mount. Those lenses you linked are heavy and have zoom creep, have unnecessary corrections for mid range focus and colors. You set the zoom and the focus manually and when you point it upwards it will creep away destroying you exposure. Even a tiny fraction of a mm will make a huge difference.
For astro, get an astro gear, for sports and wildlife, get the ones you linked.
Get an old fixed prime or a small refractor if you want to do astro.

>>2751312
Sorry, I meant manual focus prime, not fixed.

File: 91lIcinq-7L._SL1500_.jpg (230KB, 1500x1388px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1500x1388px

My GF bought me this for Christmas present when she saw some of my pics from autumn. Its my first own camera. I've not taken a single 'good' picture with it yet, but... is it good camera? What should i buy to it first? Any general tips about Nikon or this camera? Help.

File: 400mm5.6L.png (222KB, 1337x629px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1337x629px

>>2751315
>>2751312
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12129-USA/Canon_2526A004_400mm_f_5_6L_USM_Autofocus.html

What about this then?

>>2751317
It is a good entry level DSLR. Practice more and learn to use the exposure settings, leave Auto and scene modes forever.
Start by reading Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson

>>2751318
Could be used much better than the zooms, but why would you buy such an expensive lens when you can buy a Tair for $80 and have a crazy sharp lens?

>>2751321
My budget is around $1,500 and I do want a want to use this lens for general photography as well. Otherwise I'll be spend more money since I need a tele lens anyway.

>>2751322
Buy it used and get a Tair also.
The Canon still has lots of corrective elements for general purpose which is useless for astrophotography. The Tair has a telescope like formula with 3 elements in 3 groups and still having sharp results with all colors.
In that situation I would buy the Tair 300 for astro only and get a 100-400 L used for general purpose tele.

>>2751340
>2.18 MB, 2229x1624
No.

File: rsz_12016-01-23_104546.jpg (341KB, 800x583px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 800x583px

$73 did I do gud /p/ee?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-P605
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2016:01:23 10:43:52
Focal Length	3.40 mm
Exposure Time	1/17 sec
ISO Speed Rating	400
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
F-Number	f/2.4
White Balance	Auto

>>2751342
Yes, good job taking a photo OF a lens and camera instead taking photos WITH them. You are a good goy I mean gearfag.

>>2750013
rthrth

>>2751344
>gear thread
>question about gear price /w image of said gear
>he posts in the gear thread calling someone a gearfag

I've seen peoeple on /p/ be mad at many things but you take the autist cake, anon.

>>2751342
shit.
you can sell that lens for a huge profit.

>>2751348
You already bought it, what the fuck do you want? Take photos with that old piece of crap!

>>2751342
>4/20
Dank lens friendo

>>2750141
go pentax unless you want to spend thousands on lenses and lighting in the near future. pentax has wayyy more bang for the buck than pretty much any DSLR at the expense of a high-end upgrade path

>>2751344
>good goy
he can sell the lens for $200 easy.
who is the goy now?

>>2751405
The original image showed hints of fungus strands, it worth less than half of what he bought it for.

>>2751409
oh, so you actually are the same hutthurt samefag who managed to shitpost >>2751341 before I realised I posted the unresized version and were so mad that afterwards, not having any valid reason for negativity, made this gem >>2751344

Lel. I'm honestly amused someone hangs around /p/ vindictively mad at people, making up shit to top it off.
You're the only fungus strand around here, faggot. Why didnt it cross your mind that I can verify your bullshit by just taking another picture of the lens?

Why would you even attempt to depreciate it in any case, unless you genuinely don't know what lens fungus looks like, that's your only excuse.

File: 20160123_163858_Richtone(HDR).jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>2751416
:^)

here's your fungus mate, stay mad, stay tight, this place needs good comic relief like you

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-P605
Camera Software	P605XXUCNF2
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	32 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:23 16:38:58
F-Number	f/2.4
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	3.40 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Unknown

>>2751416
mad as fuck.
pollack plumbers in the uk gets mad cash.

>>2751429
Just because they don't pay taxes. All it needs is a few phones and emails to get them exposed to investigations. Tax evasion is a crime you know.

>>2751435
>Tax evasion is a crime you know
Being a faggot is a crime in many countries also, but that's not stopping you is it?

>>2751439
Look who's mad now

File: P1230036.jpg (285KB, 1000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1000x1333px

The SHARPEST LENS IN THE WORLD.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Photographer	Robin Wong
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1333

File: P1230456.jpg (473KB, 1200x901px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 1200x901px

>>2751456

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Photographer	Picasa
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	1200
Image Height	901

File: P1230456a.jpg (612KB, 1200x901px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 1200x901px

>>2751457
THE 800% CROP.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Photographer	Picasa
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	1200
Image Height	901

>>2751458
>800% crop
You don't know what it means, do you?

>>2751456
Can you post the bandaid photo? I haven't seen it in a while.

>>2751476
WHY?

File: PowerShot G16_BLK_web imagery_FSL_02_tcm87-1076598.jpg (48KB, 530x265px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 530x265px

I got a question.. first of all, I'm dont know so much about cameras but I'm traveling alot in nature and I got a Canon Eos 1100D, which i have had for years. I want to start filming the places and so on, and what I've heard the Canon Powershot G16 is pretty good (?), this is why im asking you, I have no clue. The camera I got takes avarage ok pictures, but what about the G16? is it good? for both photograph and filming? I dont want to waste so much money on it.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2013:07:17 08:25:37
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	530
Image Height	265

>>2751492
The 1100D will be a lot better for pictures. But if you have to ask, it's really not going to be any different for you. If you aren't getting good pictures out of the 1100D, it's 100% user fault.

File: Sloss30compressed.jpg (4MB, 4608x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4608x3456px

>>2751476
Sure! Since the original file is too large to upload, have a highly compressed version.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-M1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Color Filter Array Pattern	890
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	64 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4608
Image Height	3456
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2014:07:12 22:16:54
Exposure Time	1/2 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	32.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	4608
Image Height	3456
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2751495
And for video? You recommend any lens for nature photography? or any tripod?

File: image.jpg (840KB, 2250x1394px) Image search: [Google]

840KB, 2250x1394px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2250
Image Height	1394

>>2751528
>K-O1
This photo is just sad. not to mention >2250x1394

>>2751342
>$73
what?! are you missing a decimal point?
Fuck no.

>>2751456
>>2751457
>>2751458
Mfw m43 is only 12 mpickles
Mfw diffraction softeness @wide open, getting worse when you stop down
mfw m43 is an abbrefiation for meme aspect ratio
mfw gooble picasso

>>2751492
IMO, get a better camera than either of these.

>>2751499
I would also recommend getting a decent lens and tripod if you can, sure.

File: wasd.jpg (342KB, 1600x1600px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1600x1600px

Is this a gud lens. Should I buy it

>>2751622
Looks like a ridiculously mint M39 screw mount rangefinder-dedicated you-can-see-the-name-and-specs-on-the-picture with a M42 adapter (further adaptable to EOS and other modern bodies), the real question is, what do you need it for? A collection? I've yet to see any 135mm focal pictures that weren't created solely because someone got a 135 lens and wanted to test it. Too long for portrait, too short for srs tele work. How much do they want for it?

Opinions on the Sony/Zeiss FE 55mm 1.8?

>>2751622
Don't know this lens specifically.

Most Soviet lenses were quite okay, but not really a match for a modern Sigma Art or Zeiss or anything else that you might want on a decent modern camera if you have money to spend.

>>2751662
Really great glass. Can't really go wrong with it if you need a 50mm on a FF E-mount Sony.

One of the very few alternatives even worth considering is the Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 on a smart adapter, with the A7 II / A7R II.

>>2751658
It's a Jupiter 11.
I want a telephoto and don't want to spend over a grand (Canon telephotos) and don't want a shitty soft zoom with ChromAbbos out the ass. And yes, the condition is a factor. super great shape.

It's about $150 USD

>>2751668
> don't want a shitty soft zoom
But from sample photos, it does seem like a pretty shitty soft prime?

I guess you're getting about as much as you will for cheap, though...

>>2751668
That's about $75 more than it's worth in eastern europe, it IS in great shape, I told you all the specs including calculated/measured IQ are on the datasheet/guarantee card in the picture, it's a copy of Zeiss leica optics, check flickr or google for sample images, obviously, if you'll be using it on a crop it's good enough for telephoto, but sticking to a set focal length's not that great, unless you've already worked with telephotos and know what you're doing/what you want. If not, get a shitty soft zoom with ChromAbbos from the 80-200mm generic everyone-made-these in your favourite mount flavour (M42 as usual the cheapest trite) and get a feel for working with zooms b4 getting an antique silver russian display case paperweight. I mean seriously, look at the IQ they specified (лин/мм = lines/mm): 43 in the center and a measly 21 at the edges, with prolly a slight increase as you stop it down. That's shit compared to later generic jap/german 135s.

>>2751674
thanks for the help/info

>>2751610
Nope. M4/3 is 20mp standard, and 50mp in high res mode. M4/3 is sharper than A7RII. Diffraction doesn't start until f/11.

What's the next step from taking photos with an iPhone?
I gotta ease myself into this hobby, so a dedicated camera with just a few more options than iphone is where I want to start.

>>2751690
>What's the next step from taking photos with an iPhone?

Getting an actual camera.

>>2751257
Source?

>>2751610
>only 12 pickles
>4:3 is meme aspect ratio
>same aspect ratio as older televisions and 645 format

Your internet must be really bad, cause mft hasn't been 12 pickles since 2011

>>2751667
>http://www.verybiglobo.com/sony-fe-55mm-f1-8-z-vs-canon-fd-50mm-f1-2-l/
Or the FD 50L if you want to invest in a lense that will retain its value and get an extra stop of light.
>>2751662

>>2751721
>4:3 is meme aspect ratio
>same aspect ratio as older televisions and 645 format
Wow, so 70's sitcoms and 90's wedding photographers are your artistic references?
>>2751688
>fatboy slim is kekking in heaven

>>2751459
i swear to god you're the same guy who took a fat shit in my thread when I said I did a tighter crop

tell me, what is 'crop'

>>2751262
>>2751720
Source for the announcement:

http://thenewcamera.com/list-of-sony-upcoming-products-at-cp-show-2016/

>tfw one month left to go

Haven't read most of this thread, but i'm looking for an upgrade, body that is. I started off with a d200 then moved onto the d7000. I've had the d7000 for a while and I don't know if I want to pick up a d800 or d500. I've worked with the d800 and I love it.
Unsure what to get.

>>2751740
>FE 58mm f/1.2 G Rokkor never

>>2751742
A D750 is often a good choice.

>>2750740
I've tried out the 70D. It's GREAT for video if you're just by yourself and unable to focus the camera since the AF is nice, but you might as well go GH4 or something for video quality if you prioritize video over stills. If you don't want video, the 7D's high fps is great and it's a well-built camera.

File: Takumar 50mm f 1.4.jpg (21KB, 500x335px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x335px

Should I get a Canon FD 50mm 1.4 or the SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4?

>>2751945
the takumar is radioactive.
if the canon is fdn, get it. i have it and it's pretty good. sharp starting f2.
the older fd with the silver breach lock is heavier but should be comparable.

>>2751967
I got the silver breach one, it looks cooler than the FDn but get definitely get the FDn if you can cause its lighter

all canon 50/1.4 lenses are pretty much the same except coatings cant really go wrong there

>>2751945

get the Pentax SMC 1.4 (non-m), same as the takumar but with a k mount and not radioactive.

>>2751975
Thanks, yeah might try and avoid radiation if I can
>>2751967
>>2751973
They both look like great lenses, I think I'm leaning more towards the Canon, but I think I'll get that Takumar as well, a bit later on.
Thanks

File: DSC_0804.png (1002KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 1000x750px

I hope you are a photographer and not just a camera and accessory collector, /p/.

File: ecaadf8a0c2b85cec23c49a9cdee53ba.jpg (58KB, 710x473px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 710x473px

>>2751991
Yeah, but I bet you don't have one of these

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

Hi!
How do I set the aperture if i get the non auto fotodiox adapter for my a7r to use the nifty fifty?

Cheers

>>2752040
You don't. You just have to put up with wide open, soft as hell images color fringing and aberrations.

>>2752040
Get a nifty fifty with an aperture ring.

>>2752121
A Pentax M or SMC f/1.4 50mm would be much sharper

>>2751456
>>2751457
>>2751458
very impressive, too bad it's so expensive. That lens and the em1 is literally more expensive than a D500 and a 200-500 f5.6, and the same price as a D7200 and 300mm F4 PF+1.7X TC. I like that it exists, when I'm too old to hold big camera gear comfortably I'll go m4/3.

anyone have experience with the pentax/samsung 16-45mm? would love to get the 16-85 WR but dont have the money for it right now.

>>2752157
I have the DA 16-45/4 AL
It is a considerable step up from the kit lens, it is sharp has great color and microcontrast and minimal to zero aberrations. It has noticeable distortion at the 45mm end but it is easily fixed in post or in-camera conversion. Search for it on flickr and see if the sharpness is good for you. I think it will be.
The only problem with it is the barrel extends to the wide end and the built-in flash casts a shadow at 28mm and wider.
In the open, doing landscape and general shooting it is a great lens. It also has very short (around 30cm) close focus making it a kind of macro lens.
I would definitely recommend it.

File: IMGP2865-HDR.jpg (410KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 1000x665px

>>2752161
thanks. i got my k-3 with a 50, so i dont have the kit lens. i have my 50, the hd 55-300, and a sigma 28-200, but its pretty crappy on the low end (see: that green fucking line along the left of this photo), so i just need a solid wide angle zoom. sounds perfect

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	42 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:23 19:00:36
Exposure Time	1/2000 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>2751622
It looks like it's in amazing condition, which is rare, but it's not a particularly good lens both optically and mechanically.
Get a Jupiter-37 if you want a decent Soviet 135mm.

Also, that's a rangefinder M39 mount, so the M39-to-M42 adapter ring will not help to mount it on a SLR. I don't know why the fuck it is even included.

>>2752163
Russians were crafty buggers with lenses, for example the Tair 300 had generally M42 mount but they included a bunch of others. Taking off the M42 and putting on another meant taking out 3 screws and putting them back in. Flange distance was not a problem, kinda like with the adaptall system. I could imagine they have a rangefinder connection mechanism in there which you can take off and put on the M42 adapter with flange distance in place.

>>2752162
My setup is similar with a 35/2.4 the 50-200 WR and an old Sigma MF 400mm APO, the 16-45 fits well into the focal ranges.
The flaring is well controlled so you will find you don't always have to use the lens hood.

>>2752162
How do you like the HD 55-300? How is the IQ on the long end and how accurate the AF?

File: IMGP2851.jpg (312KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1000x665px

>>2752264
i like it. this is a cropped shot at 300. its really sharp around 200. as for autofocus, i've only had it for a week or so, and havnt shot any birds or anything to really test the AF

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	450 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:24 11:39:29
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>2752267
Nice, it is a lot sharper than my 50-200 at 200mm. I might bite on this one next month.

File: DSC_0222-3.jpg (983KB, 1620x1080px) Image search: [Google]

983KB, 1620x1080px

Got my first Dslr on Christmas
D3300 Meme
Came with Standard 18mm-55mm af-s
Lots of guide suggest the 35mm af-s Lens

how worth it is to buy for a noob like me?
will it help me learn how to make a better use of my camera?

thanks

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3300
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	762
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	57 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:13 19:11:56
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	38.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2752291
It is a good camera, not a meme. You could've spent that money better but only a few dollars more on a Pentax with weather sealing and prism viewfinder. So it's also a pretty good value camera.
35mm af-s is the standard focal length on APS-C which gives you close to natural angles and better control on DoF or faster shooting in low light. It is pretty much a must have lens for a starter, next one should be a fast 50mm for portraits and a speedlight.
Have fun.

>>2752294
thank you!

>>2752291
no

>>2752291
There isn't all that much to learn from getting a better lens as such.

There isn't even much to learn on a better body.

They largely just werk, the stuff you can learn is pretty trivial.

>>2752291
Read Understanding Exposure from Bryan Peterson, then read the rest of his books. You will learn a lot from those.

>>2751492
If you want Canon the G7x is much better for filming.
But Panasonic and Sony are two of the best for video stuff, specially in fixed lens cameras.

I took photography classes in high school and want to get back into it. That was with film. Mostly black and white. I want to start with something that I can carry around easily. I'll probably stick with whatever camera I buy for a couple of years, if not more, before upgrading.

I really like the idea of a viewfinder. Is an RX100 III a good idea?

>>2752400
If you want a camera to carry around easily then use your phone. If you want a decent camera, get a DSLR or MILC.
You will only waste your hard earned money on point and shoots.

>>2752408
My phone feels very limited. It takes poor low light photos and has shoddy focus. I've taken photos with the latest iPhones, which have some of the better phone cameras, and was not much happier with the quality. I usually take pictures of nature.

What can be had <$1000 including a lens that isn't huge and clunky? XPro-1 seems cool but is a little old.

>>2752411
Fuck that guy. The RX100 mk3 is great. It's an excellent sensor and lens, has full manual, and a viewfinder. It's a great choice if you want to get photos rather than gear

>>2752411
Here's the news for you, point and shoots take poor low light photos and have shoddy focus. There are specialised pro point and shoots like the Ricoh GR, Fuji X100T or the Sony RX100 line, but you need to know what you are doing with these. An older used DSLR would be a better starter, like a Canon 40D with a good fast prime.

>>2752420
That's why I was considering an RX100. It seems better than a GR and cheaper than an X100T.

I sort of know what I'm doing since I used to develop film. I know basic techniques.

>>2752424
>better than a GR
HA!

>>2752425
The GR doesn't have a viewfinder.

>>2752428
You can put a voigtlander OVF on the hotshoe

>>2752430
You can glue a D800 to the side too, but it feels ridiculous, loses you all the ability to view your settings, your histogram, your TTL framing...

>>2752433
Do you know what you are talking about? Because it doesn't make sense.

>>2752430
That's not nearly as fancy as the Sony or Fujifilm viewfinders but costs as much.

Maybe I'll go with an X-Pro1. That would give me a lot more options.

>>2752434
Which part of that post doesn't make sense? Can you see your aperture, shutter speed, ISO, or exact framing through a third party hotshoe viewfinder?

>>2752437
Now that is a much wiser decision.

File: 1431039018413.jpg (12KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 250x250px

>just got new lens friday
>terrified to scratch it, as even the most minute of 1nm scratches or dust or other artifact renders the lens usefuless forever
>haven't used it but once as a result

Do I have to put the polarizer on every time i take the lens cap off, or does the filter sit under the lens cap?

>>2751321
>but why would you buy such an expensive lens when you can buy a Tair for $80 and have a crazy sharp lens?
what

What is a tripod thats under 100 $ (or around it) is sturdy, and can be fit in a regular suitcase? Ive been doing some astrophotography and I've really started to like it but i need a tripod, balancing a camera on some bricks over a balcony doesn't cut it any more. PLS HELP