If you have questions about a new camera, what lenses to buy and anything related to gear or wondering about getting into photography, post it in this thread.
Do not attempt to make a new thread for your new Rabal, broken glass and being new. You have been warned!
I repeat, ANYTHING GEAR RELATED goes in here!
And don't forget, be polite!
Previous thread: >>2750007
Hokay: in need of a new compact body. Not overly familiar with them, so after some recs.
- I shoot live music in the local scene, so am often facing extremely poorly lit stages. A good night is gonna be a couple of red stage lights. A bad night is gonna be those new bright blue LEDs.
- I shoot with a d800 and change lenses based on venue/needs.
- The d800 is heavy and too much bullshit to deal with when I just wanna go snap some bands and am not working professionally.
- I want a new camera to shoot live music/events with that is easier to carry. Had some sweet payouts, so gonna spend about $1,500 or so. Can go higher.
- Looking for something compact and pocketable. Either a jacket pocket, or at least something to sling around that's not a DSLR. Bridge/hybrids/ILCs not really preferred.
- Wide-ass aperture and super good ISO at low light is a must. Fast shutter speed would also be good, as would a fast focus on low light.
- Less needed, but probably nice: a decent zoom without going past f/2.8. Cold or hot shoe with external mic would be cool. Decent movie specs would be nice. All these I can let go if I can't get them with the other things above.
Pic related: one of my many options I'm considering.
I'm just wondering why the fuck no companies have brought out an AFFORDABLE APS-C compact camera that is 35mm equiv. Like yeh there is the ricoh and the new fuji x70, but both 28mm equiv. It is a big market gap
Well, you could have suggested the X100 line, which has a 35mm field of view, and is pretty good in low light, and is not an ILC, and is pretty small, or talked about the a6000, which at least has good AF and good video, or you could have brought up any number of other cameras that fit SOME of the points. But you went full retard and suggested a camera that fit literally none of his criteria. And now you're mad about it.
You strictly said you don't want an ILC. Now you want an ILC. Fuck you, you don't make any sense, and fuck helping you in any other way!
You act like a spoiled child which you probably are.
I wouldn't trust a point and shoot on such a thing. Always double the capacity to your real payload to minimize vibrations and wobbling, not to mention it spontaneously dropping your camera.
Why use lens front caps if you can use a filter to store them? Just wondering since darkness is one of the suitable conditions for fungus to germinate.
I own the Sirui T-025X and it's great.
Speaking of tripods, I've set me eyes on the MeFoto Roadtrip for my vagabonding through Asia and Europe. Thing is, is it worth going carbon fibre over the aluminium version?
Currently running with a Vanguard CX204 AGH and I want something a fair bit more sturdier (and with a built-in monopod).
I had a few questions about LF scan backs,
Better Light in particular.
Has anyone had any experience with them?
Are they the best manufacturer right now?
What's a good price?
Has Kodak's bankruptcy affected their supply and development of line CCDs?
Are they even still developing?
The most recent "breakthrough" on their website was the replacement of SCSI with USB 2.0
Hey /p/, I've been recently trying to find a decent camera to use just pretty casually. Mostly taking pictures of me and my friends, girlfriend, nature, stuff like that. Will probably be lots of indoor shots. I've done my research and have narrowed it down to 2 cameras in my tiny pricepoint of 200$ and under cameras. So my question is, which should I get? The 2 cameras are the Nikon Coolpix L840 and the Nikon S7000. I'm leaning towards the S7000, due to it being less bulky and better low light performance but I did a comparison and the L840 is a close match. So, any suggestions?
Indoor shooting = low light
For such a low-budget I'd go for a 2nd hand Sony NEX-5 or Canon EOS M. Not only do you get APS-C size sensors as well as DSLR image quality but you get it in a point-and-shoot size body.
The IS is effective on all focal ranges on the K-3, primarily optimized for stills. Sony's IS is optimized for video. Both fulfill their intended job.
The lens selection is good for covering most focal lengths on both consumer and pro/enthusiast level, some are serious pro level handcannons. Definitely bigger than Sony E and FE range and fits better in the average /p/ users budget.
Not sensor size, it is primarily dictated by pixel size, density and quantum efficiency.
What's your gear history like?
- Canon EOS 700D (SOLD)
- EF 50mm f/1.8 II
- EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM (SOLD)
- EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II (SOLD)
- Canon EOS 60D (SOLD)
- Canon EOS M (SOLD)
- EF 50mm f/1.8
- EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
- EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
- EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM (SOLD)
- Speedlite 90EX
- Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 SP AF Di II (SOLD)
- Canon EOS 6D
- Canon EOS M3
- EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
- EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
- Speedlite 430EX II
- Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 SP AF Di VC USD
Thinking about jumping into a Sony a7R II if Canon doesn't release a fool-frame MILCS.
I don't use Flickr anymore. 99% of my photos are for my clients and I don't publish them publicly. I do have a few thousand photos from traveling around Europe and Asia but those are only only my Facebook.
>new camera every year
>700D, 60D, EOS M, EOS M3, 6D in 3 years
>2016, considering a new FF while having an already excellent low light capable camera and only using mediocre lenses.
You are the epitome of gearfaggotry, I bet you don't even use them.
This year try sticking to one for at least 2 more years, when you have enough excellent shots enough to fill up a decent book, then you can upgrade. A new body won't help you take better photos.
Well I do get paid work once every fortnight so yeah I do use them regularly. Kinda why I had to jump to FF because I wanted better low-light performance. Plus buying and selling gear is fun.
just got this gear off ebay for 10€
how bad did i fail?
Fujica AX-1 with 28-70 f3,5-4,5
ps: i am new to film fotography.
ps2: need a link (pref amazon) for the right battery. googled it but i am not sure wich one i actually need
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Samsung Camera Model GT-I9100 Camera Software LMY48B Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.6 Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 3264 Image Height 2448 Image Orientation Right-Hand, Top Image Created 2015:07:22 20:08:55 Exposure Time 1/25 sec F-Number f/2.7 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 50 Lens Aperture f/2.6 Brightness 3.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.03 mm Comment User comments Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3264 Image Height 2448 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
Just because you had a bad experience once doesn't mean that these threads aren't generally helpful. Look at the rest of this thread alone, and take the majority of the posts. Stop holding grudges.
Not much about spectrometry, unless you do gamma/alpha spectroscopty
i'm thinking about getting a bit more srs about my photography and want to by some manual lenses for my t3 to practice with
thinking about getting a jupiter 11
does that sound like a good fit yes/no fuck you?
Mostly doing optical emission in the 7000-1000Å range with metals, not really there with energy dispersion spectroscopy in the roentgen range but planning to get into that as well. Depends on my boss.
I'd suggest getting a standard focal length lens instead like the Helios 44M (not the 44-2, it is rubbish) or Pentacon 50. Much more forgiving to play around and perfect portrait angles on crop sensor.
You don't really need much practice, you just need focus peaking... can you install CHDK or Magic Lantern to get it, and is it quick and responsive on that camera?
If not, replace the body before you use manual lenses. Make it as easy, eh.
>too much camera for a beginner
this meme makes no sense. what's the point of buying a subpar body only to outgrow it and be forced to upgrade? why not just buy the camera you want? I almost made the mistake of buying a d3300, but I ended up getting a K-3 and I'm glad I did. Perfect camera for me. Just buy a camera you'll use. Nobody can complain that a camera has too many features, but the opposite is not true.
No, you can hand a kid an A7R II and they'll do fine. Even on manual focus as long as they have focus peaking. Good digital cameras are easy.
I think you should at least consider if you don't like the idea of having an IL camera, maybe a higher-end one.
Though if you picked this camera for compactness, it's pretty good at that.
>mfw Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
this thing is fucking awesome
now i just need a ring flash to compensate for my bodys not so great high iso performance
How do these things perform compared to large softboxes? Are they worth getting if you don't have the space to set up a lot of equipment?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 350D DIGITAL Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2011:07:26 15:43:50 White Point Chromaticity 0.3 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/20.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/20.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 33.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 600 Image Height 450 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard
>Fuji S5700 (sold)
>Canon EOS 1200
>Canon EOS M
>Canon EOS M3
>Fujifilm X-Pro 2 (hopefully)
There's lenses and film bodies in between those but I've pretty much shed myself from Canon Digital to film/Fuji over the last 5-6 months.
It would have been nice if Canon had released a MILC but they simply took too long and Fuji beat them at their own game. Hell. Fuji beat everyone at the APS-C game.
currently have a t5 and I'm looking at other cameras to upgrade from
what the hell do you guys do with your old camera when you get a new one? sell it for a quick buck? keep it and take it out and use it every once and a while?
Over the last 8 or 9 years,
Nikon D60 (SOLD)
Nikon FM10 (GIFTED)
Nikon D90 (SOLD)
Nikon D2h (SOLD)
Nikon F100 (SOLD)
Nikon D3 (SOLD)
Nikon S2 (SOLD)
Nikon D800 (SOLD)
Nikon V1 (SOLD)
18-55 & 55-200 VR (SOLD)
50mm 1.8D (SOLD)
35mm 1.8G (GIFTED)
85mm 1.8D (SOLD)
60mm 2.8D macro (SOLD)
70-200mm 2.8 VR1 (SOLD)
50mm 1.2 AIS (SELLING)
35mm 2.5 Skopar PII (SELLING)
40mm 1.4 Nokton
28mm 2 Ultron
If I was starting out completely from scratch, I'd just get:
X-Pro 2, 18mm 2, & 56mm 1.2 APD
and call it a day. I'm just too lazy to piece everything out and sell each bit and start over (can't even sell my a7ii for another 11 months).
I recently picked up a canon t5i with the two kit lenses (18-55mm and 55-250mm) but the narrow aperture isn't doing it for me. I've heard good/mixed reviews on the Canon EF 50mm II and at ~$100 it seems like it would be worth a shot.
Anyone own one and can vouch for it on a crop sensor? or is there something better within the low price range?
Does anyone else shoot multiple rolls of (35mm) film simultaneously. If I see a scene and I think 'this would look good on velvia' but I've got superia loaded in the camera, I rewind the superia, noting how many shots I've taken and load the half used velvia in. I make a mark on the film leader in which sprocket hole I put on the center sprocket, and take blank exposures using a light tight lens cap (yes, I checked) until I reach the next free exposure on the roll.
Does anyone else do this? I had no idea it was weird until someone told me yesterday. My dad taught me how to do it when I was a kid and I assumed most people did it. I don't do it often, only if I absolutely have to
I /could/ do it, but I don't bother to. Few people go through the bother of doing so.
Most people just switch to MF if they think their emulsion can't handle everything. Or they deal with it.
A 35mm would be a better first prime since it is the standard focal length for APS-C, it will be close to a 50mm on FF.
50mm on APS-C is more suitable for portraits with it's 80mm equivalent focal length.
I use digital as much as I use film. Two sides of the same coin, as long as your taking photos then I don't see why it matters.
You can't replicate the feeling of getting your prints back from the lab or seeing your slides on a lightbox for the first time. Digital is photography for the instant gratification age, not that that's a bad thing. I exclusively use digital for professional work
Just bought a m42 50mm f1.4, will be shiping soon. I'm using a K-5II and have never used m42 before. Any advice? Should I remove the pin or anything?
Also, are there any recommended cheap adapters? I'm hoping to buy more m42 lenses and I'd like to focus at infinity but I guess it's not a NEED. I heard some people buy adapters and keep it on their lenses so it acts like a K mount.
You don't have to remove the pin from the lens, but be careful of any protruding parts that goes further than the pin, it can get in the way of the mirror and break it. It's not very common, mostly some russian military adapted lenses have this, but anything designed for an SLR can be used without any trouble.
The M42 adapter is a cheap metal ring, any chinese part can be used without the spring. The original Pentax made is much better in quality and fit but throwing out the spring and the screw it will just werk. You put it on the lens, mount the lens and the camera will automatically switch to Av mode and meter everything. Don't forget to switch the lens from Auto to Manual aperture, focus with wide open, stop it down, meter with Green button if necessary (on my K-3 it is not needed), recompose and shoot, Kind of old school shooting but it's slow nature will help you think a lot more about your shot.
I have the small ring adapter that keeps the original flange distance. I tried it out first on a teleconverter and it got stuck, I had to take the TC apart to get it off. Spring went off the next second and it was perfectly usable.
Auto aperture won't work on DSLRs since there is no coupler that pushes the pin, you need a K-mount Pentax-A series compatible lens for that with the aperture lever.
Do you like the FF novelty or do you have an actual need for it?
If you really need FF, get an A7II or something from that bunch with an adapter.
If just novelty/hobbyist you are better off with a more recent APS-C. The modern crop sensors shit on the older FF ones and much more capable in low light and high ISO. There is no real reason to get the 5DII just so you can say you have a FF camera.
With that said you can still make good photos with it, also you can make money with it to pay off a new one.
I was asking because for hobby you can get much better performance for that money in the APS-C line. If you are not tied down with Canon in lenses then you can look at the Sony a6000, Nikon D7200, D7100 or Pentax K-3. All these have similar performance and has good options for most focal ranges needed for hobby.
I know the Pentax system, for the others someone else has to fill in.
Where to start with videography/filmography/cinematography?
lol, i knew someone was going to refer him to the video thread.
(and as they should. it's just funny because homeboy started his own thread and was then told to post in the gear thread)
Is this camera any good?
I just want to do quick snapshots and my phone camera is shit, like all phone cameras are.
Nikon Coolpix L31
Get a camera that's good enough for what you want to do. GH4, or T3i, or a6000 are Great/pretty okay/and good, respectively. Then get some prime lenses without aperture clicks, a tripod with a fluid head, a shoulder mount, a good mic, and some lighting that works well with the stuff you're looking to film. Focus very little on camera and lens. Focus some on audio. Focus a LOT on lighting, minor details in your shots (wardrobe, set, props, etc) and focus the most on pacing, writing, acting, and natural emotion/life. Practice editing, and start paying attention to every technical and procedural detail in the films you like. Get out of the story, and get into the set, the blocking, what the focus is doing, camera perspective, how it's lit, and WHY you like it.
Hey peeps, I'm off for a 6 week trip around the US in a few months.
I'm having trouble deciding which DSLR to take with me. It's between a D800 and a DF.
Obviously they have their strengths and weaknesses but I'm looking for some solid objective opinions.
- High resolution
- Weather sealing
- Tough as nails
- Great in low light
- Fun and easy to use
- Looks interesting
Anyone care to share their thoughts?
It's much newer, is designed properly, it's more like families in the park where the D800 is hiding in the bushes.
It will get you into interesting conversations and will help you meet new people. And if your phone dies you can also use it as a camera.
For my first camera I have quite a lot of dosh to spend. (1200$).
I am considering hopping straight to full frame, the Nikon D610 in particular. Though some have suggested something cheaper for my first DSLR because it'll be easier to learn for someone at my skill level. Though after learning the difference between crop and full frame sensors....I don't know if I will ever be satisfied with the former.
Start with APS-C, get the D7200 instead. The D610 while having a FF sensor is a beginner body with limited features and weaker shutter compared to the D7200 which is the top enthusiast body with full feature set. Only the D500 will be higher class but it's not out yet.
You will be much better off with a top shelf APS-C and will make you learn to use the full camera features so when later you will feel the actual need to upgrade to FF you can go for a much better body like the D750 or D810.
Getting a smaller system is not a good idea for the sake of learning, but it is a good idea for the sake of price. Your "quite a lot of dosh" is actually not very much "dosh" at all.
That amount wouldn't even get you a new D3300 with a high quality zoom lens, let alone something suitable for a D610.
Check out an a6000 or Fuji X-E2 with a good lens.
Posted my own thread but got redirected here.
Hi /p/ can you help me out. I don't know all that much about cameras. I'm looking for a DSLR that I'll be able to use while traveling to take pictures but also use to record good quality videos.
I've got a budget of $500 AUD max.
All I've found that appear to meet my needs are below but as I said before I don't know all that much about cameras.
Anyone here scan film with a Ricoh GR? I tried it today using my phone as a lightbox with a DVD case over it to mask the pixels. Here's a comparison of my quick 'n' dirty scan vs a Noritsu minilab scan. Any tips would be appreciated, lab scans are fucking expensive. I have access to a DSLR, but not a macro lens or tube
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:01:27 18:13:56 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2382 Image Height 1533
>mfw I am not trolling
I am serious bro, tell me.
Sirui G series should be good, if you're lucky you can also find a KX series (which usually are just over $100) on Aliexpress.
No clue if it is the best. Probably not the best deal for most, a Dic&Mic or something ball head usually also does the job fine.
> $350 USD
You are way below the price range at which you get good quality videos.
If you don't want to save up until you can afford something actually decent, that A5000 (linkage isn't working, just going by ILCE5000) is probably about as good as you can get.
TFW I got an adapter and tried out my film lenses, the Olympus OM 50mm f1.4 is fucking soft until f8, the 50mm f1.8 is better at all apertures pretty much...
I think I should just sell it and get another Zuiko. Any other OM shooters, what's your favorites? The 28mm f3.5 I already have, tried it out adapted as well and it's pretty damn good although slow. No wonder I've enjoyed shooting film with it so much.
I've had an OM20 for ages now, only put half a test roll through it, but that 50/1.8 is a gem. This is at f/2.8, but it's got great contrast wide open too.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:11:05 18:55:11 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 559 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Daylight Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
Looking to get 2 lenses to round out my collection. I want a wide angle and an every day zoom. I have a Canon 7D.
Would the Tokina 11-16mm be the best choice for a wide angle? Is the Canon 10-18mm any good?
I don't want to spend a fortune on an every day zoom, what are some of the best bang-for-your-buck options?
Yeah for a kit lens, it definitely is brilliant. Kind of disappointing really as I hunted for a good condition & well priced f1.4 version for months, and it seems the free f1.8 that I got with the OM-40 I got from my mom is optically superior. Maybe it's true that the >1million s/n f1.4's are where it's at, mine is ~800,000.
I've gotten good shots with it, and I did feel like it was better than the f1.8. I had pretty much just started with photography when I got it, and the f1.4 does make the viewfinder noticeably brighter, so together with the OM-1's great viewfinder it's pretty damn easy and nice to focus.
I gotta make some more tests but I think the f1.4 will go and I'll replace it with a 24mm or 21mm, or perhaps the 35mm f2.
It's possible, but I don't think I'll bother. I have a nice fifty already anyway, I just didn't realize it before doing a comparison yesterday. As a beginner I just thought faster = obviously better.
Nowadays I don't even tend to shoot wide open much anyway, at least if I can avoid it.
Yeah, faster lens only means more light, it doesn't have any connection to optical performance. Same for the first version of Canons 70-200/2.8 L, it is very sharp if you stop it down a bit, but wide open it often results in a soft image.
Some of the sharpest zooms are f/4 or primes at f/2.8 or even f/3.5 with some ultra wides.
You should compare real world images to decide between lenses, but after Flickr is kill I don't know where to find such a big database.
I'm not sure what you mean, you want to shoot film with the OM-4? Get the basic multicoated 50mm f1.8. IIRC the ones regarded as best say Made in Japan in the front.
Pretty much all the Zuikos are good.
I have a 5d mark ii and I'm not super happy with the lowlight or the autofocus on it.
i'm not sure if i can afford to trade up to a mark iii or 5DS.
Would it be worth it to trade for a 7d mkii or a 6d?
Reposting from my not knowing about gear threads:
First time on /p/ and I come to you all for a little advice.
Please don't tear down my choice in camera too much I literally can't afford to get in too much deeper with a gift I got for my gf.
I bought her a Sony a5000, but am considering exchanging for a Sony a5100.
Is there any reason I should not do the exchange? Would you recommend the exchange?
I'm really not looking to delve into a whole other line or manufacturer as she really loves the camera as is, but from what I gather (tell me if I'm wrong please) the 5100 seems to have a leg up in a few areas, would be grateful for any advice.
Ok yeah from what I know and have learned I kind of gathered that but I was kind of intruiged by the touch screen and all, I think I'll go look and if I'm feeling saucy I'll do the exchange but I appreciate the confidence boost in the camera I already own.
Is there any lens you would recommend? Mostly for family photoing and shit like that or the kids sports
I've already got that. I am shooting film with the 50mm 1.8 now. Just wondering if there are any lenses I should specifically work towards getting down the line and an adapter or if I should pick up some cheap eBay lenses.
Get the 16-45, it has the same macro ability as the Venus without the tilt-shift and is the sharpest lens this side of the budget fence, actually a lot sharper than the DA* 16-50 and the DA 17-70.
Don't worry about the limited lenses, get the DA 35/2.4 and DA 50/1.8 and have fun.
About to buy my first DSLRish camera. I'm between Sony's A58K and Nikon's D3300. Sony is 140 quid cheaper, but I don't want to end up having a crappy piece of shit for saving a bit of money.
Help me out, gods of /p/
>Reasons why I shouldn't buy a SONY A58K
or if you prefer
>Reasons why I should buy a NIKON D3300
Also how good is a 1.44 million dots EVF compared to today's standards? Will I notice a crappier quality than an OVF?
>Reasons why I should buy a NIKON D3300
Sony A-mount is dead. Nikon D3300 is an excellent camera for a beginner, has great resolution, no AA filter.
The lens options are much more established, plenty of aftermarket lenses.
Get the Nikon D3300. OVF is the best quality, no lag, you see what the lens see.
Along the Nikon D3300 the Pentax K-50 is a much better alternative option than the Sony.
the a5100 has autofocus that isn't ass. it's an a6000 without a viewfinder. i'd get it.
I dont know about Canon, but current APSC does a pretty decent ISO6400. combined with the 7DII's top spec AF system, I dont think you'd be disappointed. the 6D will feel like a compromise.
>mirrorless battery life
>sony's mediocre subject tracking
>entry level body menu diving
>just received a price drop
>top of the line Sony APSC sensor
pick your poison mate
Sony is killing A-mount, all the good lenses are made for E and FE mount.
You can have a good sensor but what is it without a good lens? Both Nikon and Pentax has great budget lenses and excellent high quality lenses if you move further up. Sony either has the not so decent kit lenses and the mighty expensive ones. No middle ground for a beginner like you.
The Sony is better but on a semi-dead lens mount (maybe they'll still make more SLT cameras, but no one really expects many lenses now).
Because of that, it's very budget-friendly for how good the camera is. And there are adapters that work well that let you go to the E-mount later on (just costs extra).
The question probably is if you can't directly just get an A6000 and skip this transition...
> Why do you all say A mount is dead?
Probably because the E mount is what Sony focuses on now? It got far more releases.
And they're apparently very successful with it; so few would expect them to change this strategy and invest very much into the A-mount now.
After extensive research, I still cannot decide if I want to save up for a Canon 70-200mm 2.8 or get a Tamron instead. Will the Canon still be a good resale value in the coming years as now?
I am looking for a DSLR camera under $500 that needs to be very rugged and must have a strong weather seal. Would the Pentax K5, (non II model), be a good choice?
I'm thinking about getting a tamron 24-70 f2.8 vc
what do you guys think about this lens
is it heavy? is it sharp? how does it compare to my 18-135 kit lens?
canon 60d. i take all genres of pictures
>Focus some on audio
>some on audio
Nigga, audio will make or break anything but abstract bullshit. If you don't get good audio you may as well throw that shit in the trash or seek a deaf audience.
source:did film and video for days before I got into marketing.
I have one. It's an amazing camera for a lot of things but the autofocus and the lowlight performance on it are very dated.
But it's definitely a nice enough camera to use at various jobs, assuming you can work it properly.
So, I just picked up a 110 camera to play with, and I'm wondering if the focus is forgiving on these? I'm not able to see the focus in the viewfinder, obviously. Also, am I supposed to just keep the focus for shots between full body and bust shots on that dot, or is that whole area meant to be fully utilized?
The Tamron doesn't have weather sealing. Not that the Canon has a prticularly good weather sealing, but it is something if you wish to use it on long trips in the forest or shooting sports in non-ideal weather.
If weather sealing is not a necessity then get the Tamron.
Get the Canon mate, accept no less. The Tamron is a great lens but it is useless if it breaks on your first trip outside, and just be a waste of money.
Or alternatively sell your gear and get a Pentax K-3 and a DA* 60-250 or a HD DA 55-300. Both have serious weather sealing.
Sorry, most people having trouble buying L lenses have much lower class bodies so I assumed you have a 60/70D tops. If it involves larger distances, it would be better to get a 100-400L, you should find the older pump zoom for a good price. Maybe a Sigma 150-600 Contemporary with a cover since it has limited sealing.
got a pentax k-x but no portrait lens yet. thinking about getting something old cause i won't need AF anyways and it's cheaper.
is it worth it though? too risky to have scratches or dust from ebay? or usually shit anyways?
yeah i know but if i could get a decent 1.4 to play around with for as cheap as some ebay sellers go down to .. i'm honestly considering it.
DA50 obviously safest bet. just trying to find out more about using old lenses like that, cause i have not a clue.
f/1.4 doesn't mean it is sharp. It only means it lets more light in. The DA 50 is a modern lens, modern optical formula and well corrected for the thicker stack of a digital sensor. It also has better coating, better contrast and better sharpness than film lenses.
Having an AF is just an extra on top of the above.
It is the wise decision, but don't give up on manual lenses, they are fun to play around, all have different characteristics.
When you are comfortable with the DA 50 look up a few cheap manual primes and experiment with them.
Hey Anon, newfag on /p/ here.
I'm a big Youtuber in my country and I purchased T5I with 50mm f/1.8 II without much knowledge on DSLR or lens. My question for you is what kind of lenses can I use to make facecam videos with camera infront of me? the 50mm f/1.8 are not very wide and I have to stand really far to just capture part of the face, I want to have the camera stand on my table not too far from me. My second question are lenses for small products, when I get too close with the camera to small products they get blurry, what kind of lenses work good for those products?
this is a picture from the upcooming D500 at ISO 51200
FIFTY-ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED and it's acceptable even if the sample is low resolution
that's quite impressive
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D500 Camera Software ViewNX-i 1.2 W Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.9 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 934 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 90 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:01:27 10:48:37 Exposure Time 1/160 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 51200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Spot Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 60.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1280 Image Height 853 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control High Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
> FIFTY-ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED and it's acceptable even if the sample is low resolution
So, basically like the A7S, just two years later?
Actually, what are the odds that Sony sold such an A7S sensor to Nikon at a premium, but didn't sell IBIS from the A7S II along with it...?
it's a crop sensor and it's outperforming the likes of the 5Dmk3.
everyone knows Nikon cameras use Sony sensors and Nikon's image processors usually get better results out of them. The D5's high ISO performance will probably look like witchcraft.
Hey /p/, I have a Nikon D7100 and i'm searching for a lens with a focal length with less than 35 mm for street photography and landscapes, I'm thinking about a 300 euros price range, any suggestions?
WHY IS DIGITAL MEDIUM FORMAT SO BLOODY EXPENSIVE
WHAT THE FUCK
Yo /p/, got a question.
Currently, my opinions so far are:
Megapixels = doesn't really matter unless you're printing billboards.
Dynamic Range = gives better quality to a photo, and post-processing capability.
Body size/weight = can be very useful to have compact. I had a 15 inch, 4 lbs laptop once, now I have a 12 inch, 0.7 lbs laptop I love, I think portability is VERY useful if its primary function remains the same.
So that makes me wonder, should I get an a7s to maximize my wants? It's small as fuck, just get a pancake and blam, it's a digicam. It's so small, it's discrete as fuck, I wouldn't look like some kind of professional photographer if I put some small lens on it. 12 mp is something I could work with. Dynamic range is said to be one of the best.
I like doing night/astro/landscape photography, where dynamic range applies. My only concern would be the lenses.
What I liked with my K-5 was that I could buy cheap manuals for it and be pretty satisfied with it. I guess I could invest in more expensive glass now, only at a slower pace.
I went with nikon instead of the A7 to make sure i had enough lens choices
I now only own and use 2 different lenses.
From what i know, the A7 has amazing low-light , iso features, one of the main reasons I wanted it
Lens choices won't be a problem. Adapters exist, Sony is getting fairly popular, and I'm good with any lens that fits my focal length and aperture needs.
>From what i know, the A7 has amazing low-light , iso features, one of the main reasons I wanted it
Well thanks for the insightful answer.
>Dynamic Range = gives better quality to a photo, and post-processing capability.
Mostly correct except this. Dynamic range provides more INFORMATION in a photo, not necessarily more quality. It will let you edit more dramatically. But if you don't know how to use that dynamic range in post processing, it will do nothing to add quality to the image.
That's not how it works. SOOC jpeg, the photos between a canon 40D and an a7rmk2 will look more or less the same, dynamic range wise, if the exposures are equivalent. What the extra dynamic range means is that, in editing, you can go in and bring up the shadows a lot more dramatically. It won't just automatically look better.
if you had a 120-sized silicon wafer and it had a big crack down the middle you could still make a few APS-C sensors with it or a fuckload of tiny phone camera sensors. You couldn't make any medium-format sensors with it though. Stuff like that makes cost of production increase exponentially with increased sensor size. Also other stuff like the mirror and prism have to be huge
> So that makes me wonder, should I get an a7s to maximize my wants?
It's a good camera. Why not?
Note that unlike the A7R II and A7 II, it doesn't have PDAF.
> I guess I could invest in more expensive glass now, only at a slower pace.
Yes. If you're going with manual glass again though, maybe just get the A7S II for IBIS.
is it safe to use this to clean some fingerprints off my lenses? i fell for the sensor cleaning swab meme, don't want to do that again
I think quite a lot of people are happy with their Fuji's knobs and stuff.
That said, to me it seems their midrange and up seems a bit lacking / too expensive.
For example, Fuji's X-Pro2 looks quite okay, but it is already quite a lot more expensive than the corresponding Nikon (D7200) or Sony (A6000 with heavy NR looks about the same).
I'd say just us a small fine microfiber cleaning towel, dry.
If you need it wet, use any decent window cleaning fluid. Apply it to the towel - not the lens.
I'd think this Canon product also is basically window cleaner, not sure about the fabric piece. Soft fuzzy cotton might work too, I guess?
I'm thinking about trading in my Fuji X-E1 for a Nikon. Something like a D7100. I got the Fuji because I went travelling and lived out of a backpack for a year. It's only marginally lighter than a DSLR, and Nikon have a giid range of Lenses. I don't really want to go back to Canon...
Stop switching brands and work with what you've got. You're distracting yourself from the core issue at hand by thinking that you jumping ships will improve your photography (or your experience).
Nikon or Sony is what I'd personally go with too, yes.
(Sony has got a stellar range of lenses if you like using MF with IBIS on an A7 II or A7R II, and still a good one if you primarily use normal range high-end primes. Otherwise, it's not so good.)
That said, the very high-end Canons (5DS / 5DS R) are certainly good, if you still have FF lenses for them you might consider them.
> You're distracting yourself from the core issue at hand by thinking that you jumping ships will improve your photography (or your experience).
Better camera, lens, accessories (speedlights, light modifiers, tripods and stuff), software always gave me a lot more options and better photos. Okay, in a select few instances, it was also just more reliability / lower weight / faster shooting speed.
I'm not sure how you could even think otherwise.
>Forgot to add question... Good idea?
I didn't get that bit?
> I'm sick of the Fujis' shitty raw conversion...
I recall some people here said it was Adobe's shitty RAW processing, and that it was better with Photoninja and stuff.
I am inclined to believe them on this one. Adobe has a decade-long record of making slow, shoddy software, even if it arguably often met some business needs.
>I'm not sure how you could even think otherwise.
Because I've been doing this for 15 or 16 years.
Because I've got both Nikon AND Fuji cameras and speak from experience.
Because "speedlights, light modifiers, tripods and stuff" work equally well on Nikon and Fuji.
Because Fuji has terrific lenses.
Because switching brands doesn't fix the fact that you simply don't shoot enough in the first place, which is your own fault and not the camera's.
Scheiße...I have such a mess in my head with models and brands that I honestly thought a6000 didn't have incorporated EVF. I'll check all specs because for me having a viewfinder and an audio input is a must have. Don't really care if mirrorless or dslr. I'll get a system that gives me the most for the less and has at least a couple of fixed and ultra wide angle lenses. Maybe a tele as well.
I can get an X-T10 on sale for $600. I kind of really want it, but I just bought a lens for my 550D. Should I get it and flip it to put money towards a better camera/lens? Or should I bite the bullet and try it out? This will be my first mirrorless if I go for it.
> Because I've been doing this for 15 or 16 years.
If you're counting amateur shooting years, I've got more than that. Most older people do, eh.
> Because I've got both Nikon AND Fuji cameras and speak from experience.
Yes yes, me too. And I had a few more camera brands than that (also includes Minolta, Olympus, Canon, Polaroid, Panasonic, and more...).
Now, only a handful of them were digital cameras, but the difference when I got something better always was pretty damn noticeable, especially on digital cameras.
> Because "speedlights, light modifiers, tripods and stuff" work equally well on Nikon and Fuji.
Speedlights work equally well on Fuji?
As far as I know, absolutely not. 1/180 regular sync speed and no HSS on most cameras, no RF TTL, ~1/1000 usable max on the few models with leaf shutter, poor lineup of speedlights, and so on.
Anyways, I was more generally talking about "jumping ships". When you actually can get better tools, it helps - regardless if it's a tripod or camera body or lens that you jump away from.
> Because Fuji has terrific lenses.
So does all the competition in consideration.
And unfortunately, the problem mentioned before is still on the bodies: Nice controls, but they just barely reach a D7100-D7200 or A6000's standards of sensor IQ on a much more expensive X-Pro2. Well, I guess you can choose to live with that if you have a lot of lenses, but generally speaking, why...?
Yes, it has an EVF.
And the audio input part is stupid on the A6000. If you want a standard jack, you're only getting that by proxy of a Sony hotshoe mic.
Also, the A58k and the A6000 both don't have headphone outputs for monitoring audio. You'd want some A7 series or an external recorder (maybe still mounted in a hotshoe) if you need that.
Maybe it's a great idea, maybe not. Why do you want this camera specifically?
It's not one market, it's a marketplace with many sellers.
So basically, as good as your seller is. Most people are all right though, it's not like cameras are especially easy to break, or breakages hard to detect in most cases, so even amateur sellers usually sell decent goods.
Used both, never had any issues with any of the purchases I've made eBay. Shipping from Japan is hit or miss, I received one package a couple of days later, another took about a month or so. KEH tends to be more expensive, but the gear quality score they give tend to be very conservative. You can usually find some good bargains if you're willing to wait for them to appear on KEH.
I wanted to try out mirrorless and I liked this camera's design and features. It's very tempting now that it's on sale. The 18-55 is an extra $160, and even then it's at least $300 less than the same configuration on Amazon.
so, im bidding on one of this with other cameras,
minolta 450si with a lens 35-70 af
canon AE-1, Rebel 2000, no lens on this
a nikon FE,
camcorder RCA CC547 and a panasonic OmniMovie.
Im really bidding for the lens, I dont know how good it is.
How much should I bid on it? im thinking 50 tops. I plan on keeping the nikon lens, the minolta camera and lens, and maybe one canon camera. the rest is going to resale or giving it away.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D40 Camera Software GIMP 2.4.2 Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 3462 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 39 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2008:01:21 23:22:45 Exposure Time 1/60 sec F-Number f/4.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 200 Exposure Bias -1/3 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Auto, Return Not Detected Focal Length 26.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3008 Image Height 2000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown ISO Speed Used 200 Color Mode COLOR Image Quality FINE White Balance AUTO Image Sharpening AUTO Focus Mode AF-A Flash Setting NORMAL Auto Flash Mode Built-in,TTL Flash Compensation 0.0 EV ISO Speed Requested 200 Tone Compensation AUTO Lens Type Nikon D Series Lens Range 18.0 - 55.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6 Auto Focus Closest Subject, Center Selected, Top Focused Shooting/Bracketing Mode Single Frame/Off Color Mode Landscape sRGB Lighting Type SPEEDLIGHT Noise Reduction OFF Camera Actuations 84 Image Optimization NORMAL Saturation 2 AUTO
Hello friends. I've been looking to find just the right time/deal to hop into this hobby, and I just found a sale tonight. The guy is only selling the body of a Nikon D7000 from around 2010-11. Never been used except for testing, it has otherwise stayed in the box. My biggest concern, however, is that there are no lenses with it, and I feel completely lost as far as what to look for in buying lenses. The body is being sold for around $400-500. I'm more interested in landscape stuff, if that helps at all.
I kind of figured as much. My dad didn't have much insight as far as this goes, so I was in the dark on what I would need. Everything about this camera seems to be perfect for my needs, so this is good news
Speaking of ebay, what the fuck is wrong with the people on there?
Depends, both are nice but the Pentax is noticeably sharper. If you need more speed, get the Tamron, but if you need sharper details then get the Pentax.
I have the DA 16-45 and can hardly find any flaw with it. Use a high quality circular polarizer on it.
What's that one manual lens from russia or something that gives off a weird looking helix like bokeh? It's just a weird looking shape but it looks kinda nice. I think it was like Jupiter soemething?
Or anything similar to these kinds of manual lenses that gives off a nice bokeh.
>I bought one for the maybe one ISO stops I get. Is there some huge drawback I'm missing to the bigger sensor?
Drawbacks are larger and more expensive lenses, and harsher depth of field constraints. That's about it. If you can afford it, and you don't mind lugging it, then you're all set.
It is old, a d200. Ive been watching the price on the d700 forever and finally did it. The body and controls are the same and the price was right. I am looking forward to playing with this thing.
This feels like the last dslr I am going to buy though. The mirrorless stuff looks interesting.
I can throw my DSLR into my backpack and it is definitely not space consuming. Also there are many more ways to photography other than the meme hipster street.
Like I said, hit the gym, don't be such a whiny weak-ass faggot.
>Few years late
>16fps continuous shooting
>Useable AF in video mode
>late in the game
Keep in mind I'm not a fanboy, just someone who likes good shit on a camera's feature set
I cant see buying a new body ever
Right, wrong, or indifferent I am locked into Nikon
The focusing is the other thing that i need to see work. The reviews(2008) make it sound like it can see in the dark.
Used xe1 with 23 2.8, or if you really want the ovf wait for xpro2 to age a little and get that. It'll be as slim as the x100's and be way better, plus half the price, and interchangeable