Gear Thread - Anime Edition
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: >>2755923
Let's see those compacts /p/
Scored this on sale a couple months ago, normally I don't do low light with compacts but I can handhold 1/5th second at 200 ISO and the flippy screen lets me shoot it like a Hassy or Mamiya RB
For a waterproof and shockproof around 200 it can't be beat. There's an upgraded version with an F2 lens but this one seems to work well. My only complaint is no manual exposure or Av modes but if you're careful you can cheat the program mode into doing what you want. It even does ISO 6400 and the grain doesn't look too horrible for a compact.
did someone said anime?
Has anybody used a GX8 with a non-OIS lens? How does the 3 axis IBIS hold up to use? I'm choosing between an EM5II and the GX8 as a vacation camera. The GX8 hits the technical specs on the dot, but the EM5II seems like the better photographer's tool with better controls. The GX8's CDAF is at least as good as the EM5II's, but DFD is another trick in Panasonic's hat. It helps that the lenses I'm most interested in are the P20 and P14, with the O40-150 and P45-150 being effectively equivalent lenses. The EM5II's video seems to be lower in quality, but the IBIS makes things look like they're on a gimbal. I don't plan on making anything but simple vacation video clips, and I feel like the EM5II wins in that regard.
>The EM5II's video seems to be lower in quality
Oly should have made the EM5II of the same video quality as the Pana's. They will surely capture all the hipster videographers out there.
>implying I want to manually focus
>implying I want adapters
>implying I want larger lenses
>implying I want to do stop down metering
I don't care how many focusing aids there are, the reason I buy a digital camera is because I wanted the automation and speed. Also Oly's CDAF is as fast as it gets.
Dude, I was lucky to find the thread in time, the animeh OP and "X Edition" in the subject didn't make it easy to spot, still I already made another one.
Just be more consistent next time and wait for the bump limit.
Is this a good deal on the GX8?
Planning on getting a flash and i'm debating between these two:
Which would be a good entry flash? I haven't used the flash much with my previous camera but i figured i'd be nice to try it out and get some bounce lighting.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D800 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh) Photographer Richard Wong www.photobyrichard.com Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.1 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 1017 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 90 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 7360 Image Height 4912 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 2015:07:14 23:58:51 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/9.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/9.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Compulsory, Return Not Detected Focal Length 90.00 mm Comment Richard Wong www.PhotoByRichard.com Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 2000 Image Height 1335 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
anyone have any experience with these Nat Geo bags?
Shall I make a new one? Or you can make a m43/mirrorless/isi hate comment or whatever combination of them and watch it hit the bump limit at the end of the day. Criticizing isi photos at the technical aspect acts as a catalyst, just be careful not to burn yourself.
55mm Zeiss Sonnar T*
85mm Batis or 90mm Sony FE
28 mm Sony FE
Some Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster
Some Sigma Art
Some Minolta APO
Maybe some Rokkor or vintage Zeiss if you want something cheap
Obviously you can't get too many of these for $1.5k, but I personally prefer having good lenses over many lenses. YMMV.
I don't know the Sony lenses very well, something like a 24-70 or 24-135 with OSS would be good, you don't really need the bestest expensivest lenses for this.
Save your money for an actual cine lens with no focus breathing and calibrated T stop aperture.
You seem to have $1.5k, that should buy you 1-2.
For all I know right now, that's all you need.
Perhaps get the cheap-ish 28mm, optionally its wide angle adapter, the 55mm Zeiss f/1.8 and then some Rokinon / Samyang or Minolta Rokkor if you have a gap in your lens kit somewhere.
> a 'M' mount 35 or 50mm voigtlander
Not my kind of glass.
Because they (all of them? most of them? don't remember...) are not sharp until you stop them down to f/2 or f/2.8 or something like that...
> a telephoto rokinon
Should be a nice budget option.
if you're looking for a backpack i highly recommend pic related. lowepro flipside sport 15L. i have the orange one and it's great
Inserts are not as secure as dedicated camera bags, I had serious scuffing issue with one. Thank god the glass was unharmed but I lost half of the resale value.
That's when I ditched the insert and got the NatGeo. It was cheap, secure and actually didn't expect such quality finish and ruggedness from a presumably chinese copy. I'm sure it was manufactured on the same line and got "dropped" at the end to be sold on ebay.
I actually have to pull the detail slider DOWN a lot of the time, because even with 16mp, the files have too much detail a lot of the time.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-T1 Camera Software Capture One 8 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:11:06 14:28:35 Image Created 2015:11:06 14:28:35 Exposure Time 1/1500 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Brightness 6.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 23.00 mm Image Width 1000 Image Height 1500 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown
Various Zeiss are options, sure.
> leica and zeiss are one of the few glasses, that are sharp wide open, no other company makes sharp wide open glasses. especially not at f/1.4
How could you not know of these?
Sigma. Pretty much the entire recent "Art" lineup, actually. Have you been living under a rock?
Canon. The EF 35mm f/1.4L II, for example.
Also Samyang, Mitakon, and other slightly more "imperfect" options (some here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632460079569/ - of course there are more!) are *also* still quite a bit better than Voigtlanders at f/1.4.
Yep, Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8 is the defacto lens used mostly for nightscape and wide field starscape because it has the lowest corner aberrations and coma, smaller than the 6D pixel size.
Some people use it as generic landscape lens too.
As someone who is a photography casual but would like a decent point and shooty to take pictures with would a Ricoh GR Digital IV worth still worth buying or should I try to go for something more recent, like the GR II?
Depends on the bag.
If you can, always check things out in person before you buy. I just got a pair of cheap ones off amazon. Shoved one into the other to keep things from rattling around, and sewed fabric loops on the exterior to anchor them to the interior attachment points on my pack. I made a padded PVC 'tube' with latches that holds my 600mm tele to the exterior of the pack. My heavy tripod just kinda latches to the exterior of the pack too.
Get a decent set of inserts and it shouldn't be a problem, or you can ghetto rig something like I did.
20mm, you can always get closer or crop if it's too wide, if it's not wide enough you may not be able to get closer.
this, russki glass is cheap, be sure to keep the date code under 1970 preferrably under 1960. Really early Soviet glass from the 40s and early 50s has actual Zeiss elements in it from war reparations
Nikon 85/2 with an adapter unless you need the 1.4
>what is Canon 70-200 f4L IS
>what is every Nikon 50 1.8 made
>what is Nikon 105/2.5 and every other Sonnar design
>what is Takumar 67 glass
Just to name a few
14mm has hellacious pincushion if I'm not shooting it that should tell you something as I am the resident expert of cheap shitty glass, as long as you don't have any straight lines in the shot like buildings or oceans or skylines or whatever it's okay
You might be the expert of cheap shitty glass but you are not the expert of cheap excellent glass. Also distortions are easily corrected by a single click in post.
The Samyang 14mm is much sharper than lenses 3x or more its price.
>if it's not wide enough you may not be able to get closer.
You retarded mang?
LINHOF Kardan ST-E
Anybody has any experience with this camera? Very little info about it online. Wanted to get into Medium format photography but then I saw this cam for sale on ebay and thought why not go all in and get a LF while I'm at it? Problem is, I have 0 experience when it comes to LF shooting...is it expensive? Tedious?
The camera also apparently has a scratch on the focusing screen and the water level is also broken. Also it comes without a lens so I'd have to buy that extra
Pic related minus the lens
Looking for a mirrorless camera as an upgrade from my shitty phone camera and the p&s canon ixus 800 IS.
I don't have any particular type of photography in mind. I've been looking at GX7 with a 20mm prime lens but it's a little out of my budget, unless I purchase just the body. (Ebay included) Are the older models like GF1-GF7 worth looking into?
If anything I'd like something that can take detailed photos for 3D texture work. That student budget though.
Depends on your priorities. Adobe is more or less the worst for fine detail, but does pretty well at colors, and is the best for overall organization, tagging, sorting, etc.
Capture One is a little better at detail, also good for colors, but lags behind in organization.
The others, Iridient, Photoninja, Silkypix are all terrible as far as UI and organization go, but Photoninja is the stand-out as far as fine detail,and if you can learn to wrangle the controls to get your color where you want it, it can produce some incredible results.
For double the bucks, yes. You stated you have student budget so I recommended the best low budget high performance camera.
You can go for the A7 or an A6000 but it will cost you much more. Plus DSLRs have faster and more accurate AF sensors, mirrorless still tend to hesitate more when the light drops from ideal.
I don't have any experience with either of those, I'm sorry.
There are rumors from unreliable sources that suggest that Fuji is working directly with Adobe to improve their processing of Fuji files, which, if true, could bring them back to the forefront. As it is, if you end up with the most up-to-date Camera Raw packs, you can more than get by with the amount of detail it can get out of your files. It's definitely less than you can get with PhotoNinja, but at viewing sizes, you can't really tell much in most cases.
Darktable is an excellent tools, has way more options and in my opinion nicer noise control than Lightroom. It can also do layer mask math like in Photoshop. Linux/Mac only.
Rawtherapee is also a very capable software but the UI is clunky and it is a bit too cryptic. Also available for windows but the help and tutorials department is much better on Darktable.
Horrifying in what way? Most of it is for developers and experimenting users. Literally the first couple images show you how to set it up for X-trans.
You now realize most of image manipulation is hardcore math, not that measly high-school or first semester university thing. What you see as "setting this color here and decreasing shadows" is a lot of calculations.
It might seem intimidating, but it gives you full control over your processing. Think of it as using manual mode after using auto only. If you don't know what something does, don't fuck with it and you'll be fine.
My first real camera is coming in the mail soon. I got a used X100S. I'm trying to figure out what else I need. Here's what I have on order:
32 gig SD card
Lens hood (JJC knockoff)
UV Filter (B+W)
What else am I not thinking of? Thumb grip? Better strap (Gordys? Black Rapid?) ?
I should also probably get Lightroom and some VSCO filters, huh?
It depends entirely on you, and your needs. Just like everything else you might buy. All you really NEED is the camera, the battery, a memory card, and a cell phone. (Shoot jpeg, and use wifi to transfer to your phone)
Literally everything else is a tool that only you can decide if you need.
We might be able to use our experience taking photos to help you if you tell us what exactly you'll be doing with it. Landscape? A tripod, and some GND filters. Night work? A good flash. Street while being a fag? Some gaffer tape to tape that bitch up. Etc.
Or maybe don't get anything at all, because they're enormous, and if he wanted other lenses, the X100 wasn't a great choice to begin with. Also, 50mm isn't really enough for portraits in most cases.
2nd the batteries, but I'd get the lens hood and a uv filter to ditch the lens cap. The thumb grip helps me a lot, and that camera is light enough that almost any Shit tier tripod will work
How precise is the Arca p0? I need something for landscape work with my large format set up and they say that this ball head is different than the rest, but how precise is it? Will I wish I had purchased a geared head or is this one good enough?
I'm also very curious about the planetary gears in this thing so I would also appreciated if anyone has a picture of this sawed in half or some sort of cross section.
ok so I realize you would probably prefer to just go out and piss away money on random fucking photography equipment but unfortunately I'm not 16 year old who has unlimited access to daddy's credit card.
Well I use it for my Fuji 69 with no trouble.
I think it would solidly support a smallish view camera.
What do you mean by "precise" though?
It's a ball head, you position where you want and then clamp it down, it doesn't have gear driven movement.
The planetary mechanism refers to the built in gear reduction that allows you to put a very strong clamping pressure on the ball with minimal effort.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. Camera Model GR Camera Software Digital Photo Professional Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:08:18 10:43:08 Exposure Time 1/40 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Brightness 2.1 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.30 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1203 Image Height 800 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal
So I've used a ball head in the past (a shit one) and the traditional clamp made it so that that there was no way for me to precisely get any sort of position I wanted at all. My question now is, do the planetary gears make it so that I can actually control the tightness enough to level my camera?
That's quite a big camera, you might be well advised to step up to the P1.
But the p0 will probably still do the job.
The pan adjustment is just on that little comma shaped knob, which is an ordinary screw in to tighten thing, so it can flop on you.
But the actual ball clamp won't flop on you unless you slack it all the way off.
You can definitely loosen it off enough to make a small adjustment then cinch it back up again.
They also make a big deal of their assymmetric ball giving increased resistance off axis, again to stop it just flopping.
What's the best way to geotag your photos while traveling? I have a 6D with a built in GPS, but I heard it drains your battery like crazy. Is there a more continent way to go about doing this?
You could theoretically systematically use a smartphone to tag those photos after they're transmitted to it or on a network share provided by the camera or one of these WLAN SMB share SD card gadgets. Or do the same on a laptop after tethered capture. But that must be so fucking tedious to do...
Really, just buy a different camera if carrying more batteries is a problem, which it probably isn't.
That's less than 4kg, why not just use a not shit tripod head?
Arca Swiss's very high end head is nice, but for most it is just massive overkill.
Perhaps the issue is that I have no idea what the issue would even have been with the "traditional clamp" you described in >>2758560
either. Care to elaborate what the issue was? Was the head so shit that you had problems arresting it?
> Also, the Arca p0 isn't very expensive.
In an absolute sense perhaps not.
But very good Sirui KX (20kg rated) ball heads go at less than half the price; even 35kg rated ones from the same series will still be under 3/4 the Arca's price.
You can even get two complete 12kg rated Dic&Mic E302C carbon tripod sets with ball heads sent individually by DHL, and still pay $40-60 less vs. the B&H price for the Arca P0. [The 12 or 15kg ball heads from that brand individually without tripod are 1/6th the cost of the Arca P0...]
Anyways, if I understand better why it didn't work out with the last ball head, perhaps I can make these or other suggestions... or maybe the Arca P0 is just right.
Completely new to /p/ and i'm pretty sure i'm gonna pull the trigger on buying a D3300.
My question is though is, I have the money for a D7200 but i don't really understand the extra features and they don't seem mandatory, not to mention they both have the same amount of megapixels (unrelated). What i'm picking up so far is that MP don't matter which is why i'm looking at the 3300 and with the extra money i could be using it to buy more lens.
So to cut to the question, is a 7200 'really' that much different from the 3300, am i fucking myself up in the long run? Most anons are saying its about the glass and not the body and i think that if that's the case price and unnecessary extra feature are not needed.
Last thing, can somebody explain mirrorless cameras to me? I want to pick one up down the road for easier carrying and for its pros/different type of photography. Also are Leica's a meme?
> I have the money for a D7200 but i don't really understand the extra features and they don't seem mandatory
They are if you need them. Like, if you want to use AF on cheaper / older lenses that have no AF motor on their own, the camera body needs to have it. The D7200 does, the D3300 does not.
There are various features on a D7200 or another brand's camera (a A6000 or K-50 for example) that are much better than on a D3300.
The D3300 even lacks next to free features (software, buttons) that were intentionally removed by Nikon to artificially give you reasons to upgrade to a D5x00 or D7x00.
It's just annoying enough that this plan works in many instances. People get hooked on the D3x00, get bothered, and upgrade...
> Last thing, can somebody explain mirrorless cameras to me?
Nowadays the better mirrorless cameras are kind-of like slightly more advanced DSLR.
Basically what happened is that companies recently managed to get PDAF and other functionality on one single sensor module, together with the pixels that take your image. (Those additional sensors needed a mirror and a secondary set of sensors in the past.)
You don't usually need *both* a DSLR and a MILC at this point. Both have anything up to high-end cameras, so you can actually just go with one.
> Also are Leica's a meme?
Yea, they're mostly yuppie & lifestyle artfag cams.
Very expensive for how they perform. The competition offers the same or better cheaper in almost every instance.
bought the gx8 and a Panasonic 42.5mm F1.7.
I already have the Panasonic 20mm F1.7
so what are some other good prime lenses that are relatively affordable? I'm looking for other options aside from panasonic and olympus offerings.
Thoughts on old Konica AR lenses' IQ?
I'm pondering getting the K-ar 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 for night stuff while I travel. (street) Unfortunately that means around 80mm for me, so I think it's a bad investment.
>but i don't really understand the extra features and they don't seem mandatory
Key words here. No point spending an extra $500 when you don't even know if photography is for you.
Find a used P14 if you want another sweet ass compact.
Presumably you're not a telephoto shooter, otherwise you'd pick up the P40-145.
The P12-32 is kinda nice that the zoom is mechanical instead of electric, and folds up nice and small powered off. Also OIS, and about as sharp as a kit lens can get.
You may or may not be interested in the various Rokinon/Samyang/Voigtlander primes.
The P14 seems dirt cheap but i wish it was f1.7, i'm considering it though. You're right about not being a telephoto shooter, i mostly do product photography and if i go out i like to keep my kit small.
I tried the Oly 12-50 and i was really let down by the sharpness, it tries to do everything but it's no master at any of them. I mostly got it to do video work but so far it's the least used in my bag.
Please tell me about Rokinon/Samyang/Voigtlander, are they any good?
I had a python script that would pull time stamped vertices from regular handheld GPS tracks, and then just match closest time stamp from photo to one of those points. I'm sure there's something similar with a GUI etc. floating around.
Also, it's kind of amusing but a lot of the 3rd party geotagging units are way better than OEM.
Right, well like I said, are you going to stick with it? If so, I'd get the D7200. The controls on the entry level bodies are a pain once you're used to the higher levels of ergonomics. Also the autofocus system feels like a dream compared to the 11 pt system.
If anything, it might be easier to learn everything with all the controls at your finger tips.
Mediocre. But it's still a camera that takes pictures. Go outside.
The Konica 50/1.4 is probably one of the best 50/1.4's there is, aside from Sigma and Zeiss.
The 1.8 is very ordinary.
Most of the other Konica SLR lenses are nothing to write home about either.
Just bought this kawai!
The only problem - stiff focus ring after ~200mm and a little mechanical noise while focusing. Will focus ring be smoother later?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 50D Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.7 Serial Number 1630711983 Lens Name EF50mm f/1.4 USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2011:01:25 17:31:22 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/9.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/9.1 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 600 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness Unknown Saturation Unknown Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 33
Just got myself a Nikon EM with the cute Nikon Series E 50mm f/1.8 pancake, since there some of you praised it in the Nikon film camera thread from last week.
Ridiculously lightweight and small for an F-mount SLR. I'm thinking about having it surgically attached to my neck. Go buy one if you have Nikon gear or adapters. It's worth it for the lens alone and the camera is beautiful and comfortable.
I'll probably put more rolls through it then my F3 and my FE.
which one, dummy
the VRI has awful corners on FF
the VRII has focal length shortening at close range, but is otherwise optically satisfying
the f4 is very much a lightweight powerhouse
>A7S shoots expanded 409k ISO but is meant for video
>1DXM2 shoots expanded 409k ISO but is $6000
how come it's so hard to get a camera built for stills for night photography? nikon is bad too with the $6500 for a D5
I shoot concerts and events and it would be nice to not have to use a flash. and also nice to not spend thousands and thousands of dollars
a7s seems cool and I want it, but I feel like it won't cut it for fast autofocusing at concerts. I have a 5DM2 right now and it's not that great for autofocus anyways but I need low light capability to the extreme
what should I even do
I shoot shows and festivals all the time. I literally have a resident venue job
crazy ISO will allow me to take much better photos. I already take decent photos but I want to go deeper than that, obviously.
Not really good by my standards at least. But don't let that stop you from using it.
> a7s seems cool and I want it, but I feel like it won't cut it for fast autofocusing at concerts.
This impression is silly, if you can't make do with the still snappy CDAF you'd just MF.
But I guess if you need fast AF, buy the A7R II.
> I have a 5DM2 right now and it's not that great for autofocus anyways
... "anyways"? No, the A7S is not worse at all in weak light, never mind the A7R II which is just always better.
It's the 5DM2 that sucks balls with its AF.
Would shutter speed priority be the best mode for taking street photography for me? I don't mind noise from using high iso and depth of field doesn't matter as much to me as being able to shoot at a faster speed to make sure there's no motion blur.
About to purchase a NIKON D5200, comes with a 18-55mm lense, good for portraits which i'm really interested in doing. I also want to do sports photography, and going to pick up the Nikon Nikkor AF 70-300mm lense. Any last words? Budget is pretty firm, not looking to spend over 500.
They're not necessarily 'better', but they do tend to produce noticeably sharper images at a lower price.
Get a decent longer prime and maybe a teleconverter, then position yourself accordingly.
A lot of those massive lenses you see people using at large sporting events don't zoom in or out. I personally use an older 600mm manual focus prime for shooting birds and surfing once in a while, and it works just fine at a decent price.
> But what if I want close up shots when shooting sports photography?
You'd likely use a telephoto prime or very high-end zoom lens on a high resolution camera where you can crop.
Either way, it's a different lens at least (if not also a different camera). You can still use a prime for portraits.
The sport is paintball so it is relatively close. You still think the 300mm isn't enough? I just feel like It would be weird to be running all around trying to get different shots.
That always depends on where you're sitting.
I haven't played paintball in (jesus christ) 15-20 years. But I don't recall the sidelines being very far at all, so a 300mm prime is plenty, and might even be a little too much.
What kind of budget are you working with? There's a lot of nice deals on used lenses if you're patient.
the point is shooting 100k clearly and using a narrower f stop instead of using a camera that starts to suffer at 3200. it really isn't that hard
I've never actually shot with an A7S but I've been told the AF isn't that great and concerts require quick AF for energetic bands
I'm saying the 5DM2 sucks with AF and maybe when people are saying the A7S is bad at AF it's not as bad as the 5DM2. I can't find concert photographers who've shot with an A7S so at this point I either need to find someone with one to trial for a night or rent one.
A7RII looks sick but out of my price range. same with the S.
> but I've been told the AF isn't that great and concerts require quick AF for energetic bands
Told by who using what...?
Low light AF is never really quicker than that, except up to around -2 to -3 EV (depends on camera) where you could also still use the PDAF of an A7R II or D4S or something, which is very slightly faster.
But if you can't get that or it's darker than -2 or -3 EV, the CDAF is on the A7S or A7S II is as fast as can currently be.
Besides, even if you did MF only and missed frequently, this is just never going to be worse than the motion blur on these "energetic bands" performing with almost all other cameras.
> and maybe when people are saying the A7S is bad at AF it's not as bad as the 5DM2
Of course it isn't. The 5DM2 has horrid CDAF and PDAF both. Maybe in the best circumstances (daylight) with a subject exactly sized right for its few PDAF points, it will outperform an A7S, but never in lower light.
> A7RII looks sick but out of my price range. same with the S.
Too bad. The A7R II would have been a nice choice if you wanted to adapt your Canon EF lenses.
I guess you'll have to make do with the A7S and some native lenses...
>works with all my Nikon lenses
>clicking ASA dial for exposure compensation
>designed by Giorgetto Giugiaro
>best shutter button position ever (over the film advance lever)
>film advance works with half-strokes
>no power button, it's always ready
>_marketed_ towards women
>can sell the body and keep the nifty-fifty pancake
>poor little fuccboi can't compensate exposure with the ISO dial
>ignores that every other manual Nikon and Leica ever has charged extra for black finish
>needs gripped F4S and 2.8 zooms affirm his masculinity
It's the cam so nice I bought it twice, bb.
Welcome to the masterrace.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SIGMA Camera Model SIGMA DP1 Merrill Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Focal Length Range 19 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 180 dpi Vertical Resolution 180 dpi Image Created 2016:01:27 10:20:40 Exposure Time 0.3 sec F-Number f/7.1 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash Focal Length 19.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 688 Image Height 800 Rendering Custom Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Unique Image ID 3030333132323837DB9FA85634334238 Resolution HI Exposure Mode A Metering Mode A Exposure 5/15467 Contrast -1.0 Shadow 1 Highlight -1.1 Saturation 0.9 Sharpness 1.0 Fill Light 1.0 Color Adjustment 12601/1296517459 Adjustment Mode 0.2752
Looking for a W/R camera for action shots. Looking at the d7200 but I'd rather spend less then $1400 for the body and lense. What does /p/ think?
So I got this Canon Rebel S II a while back, and I'd like to try it out now. I've never used a film camera before. I need to buy some film from ebay that doesn't cost very much just for the testing the camera works.
I'm looking spend about 5-10 dollars. Is this a good choice?
can pick up a k-3 at adorama for 650, 250 for the HD 55-300mm WR, and you can get the HD 16-85 WR for 400-500. and the k-3 has that sweet 8.3 fps burst rate so youll have no problems with getting the right shot
[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 2016:01:31 16:15:08 Exposure Time 1/500 sec F-Number f/5.8 Exposure Program Shutter Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/5.8 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
Ah, that also makes sense.
You could buy a camera rain cover like depicted, or one of a dozen other models. Works fine.
But if it needs to be a feature on the camera, I guess some Pentax would be the go-to.
Key word is 'reisistance', though. I've noticed that the term makes a lot of tards think they can abuse their gear without shit breaking anyway, with the end result being that something else would have lasted longer because they wouldn't have gone full retard. Same deal with bicycle helmets a lot of the time.
the ability to get shots in the rain is big. you cant go submerging it in a river (though people have and nothing went wrong) but weather sealing can be really important if you shoot wildlife/landscape
What the fuck is Pentax doing?
Where is their Full Frame DSLR?
How fucking hard could it be to release OONNNEE FUCKING CAMERA After all these years?
IMO, camera raincoats or just regular umbrellas often work better 'cause you may be able to keep droplets from falling too close to your lens & getting dramatically in the way of your shot, and they keep your hands warmer, too (you could use gloves or something, but I have some trouble operating cameras with that).
Of course, it's convenient to have anyways, not saying it's useless, but actually bringing an umbrella or a camera raincoat is quite prudent anyhow.
of course, but sometimes you get a bird flying over or some cool shot opportunity and dont have time to set up equipment. and a lens hood does a good job of keeping water off the lens most of the time, at least for telephotos with fully round encompassing lens hoods. i'm not a pro so im only coming from the perspective of a hobbyist/enthusiast
Hard? Not very.
Necessary? Also not very.
They're not just releasing a full frame camera. They're trying to release a full frame camera that will compete against established brands, which means having lenses as well. It's more of a process than just sticking a bigger sensor in a K3 and throwing it out the door.
It's not nearly as big a deal for wildlife or landscape, as some people make it out to be. The invention called the 'plastic bag' has worked better for me than any weather sealing ever has, and I beat the living shit out of almost everything I own.
A lot of of the time it can keep water off the lens, but certainly not when you're shooting a bird overhead?
Anyhow, umbrellas / camera raincoats are sufficient and preferable to me 'cause even just having your hands in rain for a while is usually getting painful.
>>2759568 of course definitely makes for a point to get full water sealing, maybe even a diving case to protect against hits and submersion.
Can a shift lens on a FX DSLR achieve the look of medium or large format photography? Is it worth buying and using as a staple lens? What shift lenses are good for a Nikon D700?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Model s Mark III Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 5640 Image Height 3752 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2011:03:28 10:50:27 Exposure Time 1013/100000 sec F-Number f/12.9 ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/13.0 Focal Length 17.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 400 Image Height 531
If you want a cheaper one, get a cheaper one, but the quality will be worse the less you pay. Are you new to the world of purchasing things? Buy what you can afford. If you can't afford the best, then weigh what you're sacrificing against your priorities. We don't know you, and there aren't that many options out there that it should be a sea of choices.
> the look of medium or large format photography
Mostly, it just looks high resolution to me. And those 40MP+ cameras with good lenses are pretty much getting there.
Sure, most large format cameras also can shit and tilt, but eh, that's not really a large format *specialty*.
>Good camera costs thousands of dollars
>Good lights cost thousands of dollars
>Good lenses cost thousands of dollars
>Locations, models, travel costs thousands of dollars
$250 is nothing in photography. That's "get it as a christmas gift" land as far as cost.
Posting in here because it seems like the most active thread.
Let's say I'm gonna get an image like this printed. I'm a foot fetishist, so I wanna see the soles of her feet in the highest quality possible. I intend to scan the image in the highest dpi I can. I'm offered either matt or glossy print.
Which do I choose? (Don't fucking ask anything...)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand
Uh, I think it depends mostly on what quality you had and the paper and printing machine can provide, plus to an extent how good / careful the respective printing company is about processing digital files.
Glossy is popular though, why not go with that...
that's one heavy fucker, I know
try $500, at the minimum. you cant get any telephotos for $250.
you can get the mediocretastic 55-200/300 afs VR for about $200-300. the best value is a used AFS 70-300 VR for under $450. sharp lens, and decently fast AF. the old AF 70-300 is neither sharp, nor does it AF on a D5000 series body.
oh and the cheapest 300mm prime is either the old 300 f4.5 MF prime, which you'll have lots of fun focusing with, or the 300/4 AFD, which wont autofocus on that body and still goes for $600. the only af compatible 300mm prime is the AFS 300/4 for $1000. might as well get a 70-200/4 VR in my opinion.
pardon the dumb question, but what mount is this? It's from an old Sigma, and allegedly fits a Canon. FD? I understand its manual but will it fit to EOS with an adapter from Amazon?
I just bought some Minolta macro bellows.
I'd like to adapt my Canon EOS to the Minolta and then to my Canon FD lenses at the other end.
Where do I find these adapters?
"EOS Minolta adapter" brings up nothing on Ebay.
Yes it's an FD mount, however there is no Sigma glass that old that's even worth the effort of using, let alone the cost of the adapter.
Additionally, any FD mount lens will not be able to focus to infinity on an EOS camera.
Any adapter that CLAIMS to give you infinity focus will have a glass element that further reduces image quality, and cost a lot more too.
>just give up
Or beter yet, buy an FD mount Canon and shoot patrician film.
How much did you pay for it?
It's expensive compared to how much film you get with other formats.
Since you are going to be using it for landscapes mostly, the film doesn't cost too much because of how little you will use of it.
Of course it's tedious, it's meant to be; not more so than what you can handle, however.
Fuji has a lot of strange little settings that can pretty dramatically affect the way you shoot. I don't advise you to just take someone else's word for what you should do since what's good for me might not be good for you. Find a youtube video where they walk through the menu and talk about the settings.
If you want the best AF performance, you should have high-performance mode on, but you'll take a hit to your battery life. Also, different Fn buttons for your needs, etc. The dynamic range modes may excite you, or you may want to leave it on auto. More or less, it can be any camera you want it to be. If you have specific questions, ask here and I'll try to help if I can.
I'm a complete newbie and I'd like to start experimenting with the exposure triangle. I set high performance on already.
Should I just keep everything else default for the moment as I mess around taking photos that aren't going to go anywhere or probably even bet processed (though I would like to start learning how to use Lightroom soon too).
Well yeah, if you don't have a good reason for changing a setting from default, don't do it, because you could end up making the camera less usable for you.
If you're going to be playing with figuring out exposure, I suggest using it in EVF mode so you can see the final photo before you take it. If you won't be doing much editing after the fact, you should go into the custom functions and set up a couple of different looks (I have a "negative film" look, a "slide film" look, and a B&W look that I bounce between, all set up to my specifications with sharpness, color, highlight and shadow intensity, etc.
> Should I have it set to just RAW or RAW+Fine?
Usually just RAW in most enthusiast's workflow, as far as I can tell. 'cause it goes camera -> PC -> some coarse image processing fixing (maybe also a lot of detailed work for the best / commercial shots) -> output with preferred settings.
Of course if you usually don't fix anything, you can use the "fine" JPEG already and archive the RAW in case you need it. Some people also do that - YMMV.
You can doing try stuff as he likes to do them.
But he is neither a photography prodigy nor particularly objective. Very little of his arguments are based on testable facts, and most based on his taste and gut feelings.
If you're doing something that he doesn't like to do in the end, that's not even particularly likely to be wrong.
Your call, actually - use whichever seems more expedient in the respective situation.
You could also subject focus lock and recompose on some cameras. Or just use MF.
Hell, if you have a high enough resolution camera (+ a wide enough lens for the situation), you can even just basically centre focus and then recompose in post.
i've been using back button focusing to focus, then recompose, but remember that the focal plane changes when you recompose, whereas changing the focus point has no effect, since your not moving the camera after focusing
depends what system you shoot. nikon users can focus and recompose, and the system will move the af point to stay on target. canon tries to do the same and fails. some mirrorless cameras have good subject tracking that will work like nikon's system.
also it depends if you even have subject tracking enable.
most people will focus and recompose, unless you're so close, or your lens has such a severe field curvature, that recomposing puts your subject out of focus. an af point left at center is easiest to use, since you point, focus (and af-L for shutter button focusing plebs), recompose, and shoot, instead of wasting time moving an AF point.
shoot in a priority mode. shoot jpeg fine, and maybe play with the film emulation modes. leave AF to what you find the most dependable, maybe AF-S center point. leave metering to matrix/evaluative. don't worry about things like recovering dynamic range until you've got a handle on your exposure triangle.
You'll need to connect the lens to an adapter, that adapter to the bellows, the bellows to another adapter, then that adapter to the camera.
Then you'll want to hope that all of those elements remain in perfect alignment with the sensor plane, and can remain still throughout the exposure.
Congrats, you've spent $100 on trash from ebay that could have gone to a real macro lens that fits on your camera and can focus and expose automatically.
I figured I would set it to aperture priority and go start taking pictures of a tree or something outside and mess with different apertures and ISOs to get a hang for what's going on there.
I also have Understanding Exposure in the mail, which I've heard recommended a great deal.
I bought a sony rx100 m3 for about 450. But now im thinking instead I should just get a iphone 6s and a waterproof case (maybe those addon len's). I dont think im going to be getting to much into photo apart from basic pointing and shooting and maybe a bit of vlogging
Hahahaha holy fuck sorny
Nice trips, you can find it for $350usd during holiday sales but that's long past and you'll likely want the kit lens if you're just starting.
The one on keh(great used camera store) has some cheaper ones at the moment as well so always an option.
Fucking loonie right now, likely won't get to save on gear for another two years
A Samsung NX1 started floating around in my area with a kit lens for around ~150$.
I'm already planning on picking it up, but I'd like to ask if anyone knows of any smart adapters for Canon EF to Sony NX? Or if not, what lenses would adapt well to the system.
Vibration reduction, and if you buy just the "body" you don't need the kit lens, the kit lens is just good for starting out.
What lens you do want depends entirely on what you want to shoot.
When I shot with the d3200 my favorite lens quickly became my 50mm 1.8 but a lot of that was personal preference.
here's my newest 3d conversion of a nikon dslr, it allows me to photograph 3d
Any suggestions on lightweight messenger bags?
Ideally I'd like it to hold a 12" laptop, a mirrorless camera and a couple of lenses, and a couple of other knickknacks. I don't need huge amounts of padding, but adjustable pockets for the camera, and some laptop padding wouldn't hurt.
Generally speaking, check Aliexpress.
Maybe a Nat.Geo - multiple models are available under $30. But the one I'm thinking would be a tight fit; it'd depend on the exact width and length of the laptop.
Thanks mate, didn't expect a response so fast.
I'm checking aliexpress and those national geo bags are out of fucking control. The price is so cheap, and bags like the NG5160, which every second seller seems to have, have all the versatility you'd ever need and look great to boot. 14" Laptop storage, compartments, rain jacket, side and bottom mounting straps, drawstring top, all for $40? Fuck me.
I'll keep checking around for something more compact, but I'll probably grab a national geo bag because why not, it's so cheap. Thanks for the hot tip.
No problem. There are a lot more bags there from various sellers, just look around.
[I think the Chinese sellers would be amused at you thinking the bag is "cheap" at $40. But eh, good if everyone is happy.
And I personally am glad that I don't have to pay western extortionist reseller brand prices for the same gear or at least gear equally made to the same quality standards in Asia.]
What should i know about m42 lenses before buying? How does the inage quality compare to standard lenses. Geting a xpro1 really cheap soon. Gona have to save some cash before getting something more modern. Any specific lens recomwndarions that are worth looking into? Looking for a nifty 50 and a decent tele.
Are the postings on eBay for used Ricoh gr's that are around 150-200$ fake?
> What should i know about m42 lenses before buying? How does the inage quality compare to standard lenses.
Some are pretty good.
But it's really a bit like the sensors and devices on m42 are linearly lower in image resolving power as compared to FF or APS-C alternatives.
You'd usually buy m42 primarily to get slightly lower cost / size.
I'm only starting to get into post processing. Is this stuff really worth it? Which is the best pack to start with?
Google lightroom and photoshop tutorials on photo processing, color corrections, various b&w conversion techniques and experiment with tone curves.
If you ever need VSCO then just torrent it. You won't need it.
My five cents: This shit is never worth it.
If you have too much money, get some of these: Photoshop, ColorPerfect, DXO Optics Pro, Corel Aftershot Pro 2, Capture One, Photo Ninja, SilverFast HDR Studio, [...]
You know, software that "does" stuff for you. Not overpriced "artsy" presets.
Hell, try Hugin (and maybe Darktable on Linux). Even more post-processing options.
> stable build of Darktable for Windows
I don't think there is.
Official homepage today still has this under "Windows" downloads:
> Unfortunately the community of this commercial distro didn't natively build dt yet.
I think there was a (apparently very) unstable 3rd party build mentioned somewhere, but I haven't tried it.
Looking for accessory recommendations for Fuji x100s.
What are your must haves for the X series?
I'm looking for a solution for a strap or small cover/bag for travel/street shooting. all suggestions welcome.
Getting my first camera and it can come with a 55-200mm lens or a 55-300mm lense for the same price. The only reason to get a 200 over a 300 would be to save a couple ounces in weight, right?
> mirrorless AF performance is not as good as DSLRs.
Uh, no. At least on the Sony cameras, PDAF is basically just as good now as on DSLR.
It will be interesting to see how much better the A6300 got when there can be tests. If Sony managed another increment of the size that got it to the A6000 (or just made it all as accurate & snappy as on the A7R II with more AF points), we might really have by far the best AF on all APS-C cameras on that one.
>Uh, no. At least on the Sony cameras, PDAF is basically just as good now as on DSLR.
No, it isn't.
Screen blackout alone will prevent that from being true (how can you track during a burst if your screen is off)
It's super lens dependent, and in good light, it's pretty close, but in bad light, tracking AF is still not even up to a mid-level DSLR.
>is basically just as good now as on DSLR.
Have you tried shooting movement, or even fast movement?
Trust me on this, Even the newest most gearfagest A7RII can't focus for shit when the subject is moving, especially when the light is just a tad bit lower than ideal.
DSLR AF is designed on much larger scale since it is a separate module, doesn't have to fit between pixels and is much more sensitive, even on a (recent) beginner DSLR.
I hate to break it to you, but on DSLRs the mirror flips up and also blacks out the AF sensor. Bigger sensitivity and being separate from the sensor makes it better for motion and low light.
>I hate to break it to you, but on DSLRs the mirror flips up and also blacks out the AF sensor. Bigger sensitivity and being separate from the sensor makes it better for motion and low light.
OVF blackout on a dslr is a LOT shorter than EVF blackout currently.
Do the math and try again. The mirror can only flip back after the exposure is done.
Also it's not about the OVF blackout. There is a smaller mirror behind the main split mirror reflecting downwards to the AF sensor optics.
OVF has nothing to do with AF.
> Screen blackout alone will prevent that from being true (how can you track during a burst if your screen is off)
0. You focus with PDAF before getting a shot or burst in, that's actually the primary function. There is no blackouts here either way.
1. The A6300 has no more blackouts at all. Complain about 8 FPS view "only" next?
2. PDAF will continue to do its job regardless of blackouts, so it's pretty unrelated anyhow. Ditto for locks on suibjects.
If you do long uninterrupted bursts (which you don't have to), frame a bit wider, track the review shots, and crop in post
3. Also, no blackout when you record video. Even with PDAF.
> but in bad light, tracking AF is still not even up to a mid-level DSLR
Tracking AF != PDAF.
Plus actually the high-end Sonys basically match or *beat* any DSLR in low light. A7R II at -2 to -3 EV on PDAF, and the A7S at -6 EV or so in CDAF basically perform better than DSLR.
>Have you tried shooting movement, or even fast movement?
>Trust me on this, Even the newest most gearfagest A7RII can't focus for shit when the subject is moving, especially when the light is just a tad bit lower than ideal.
The latter video shows why the camera isn't ideal for video (rolling shutter), but you can see how well it tracks. The still photos shot on both also are fine.
> DSLR AF is designed on much larger scale since it is a separate module, doesn't have to fit between pixels
Is it so much easier? So why do the DSLR PDAF systems not nearly have full frame coverage?
Or 425 PDAF points, like the a6300 will have (/ 179 points on an existing a6000 or 399 on the A7R II).
Using a mirror actually probably has only downsides if you have enough technology to move the PDAF stuff on the same image sensor as the imaging pixels. They PDAF points don't have to get less sensitive either or whatever. It's probably just more complex to manufacture.
Anyway. the A7R II obviously does PDAF just fine to even professional standards, the A6000 isn't bad for APS-C, and if Sony says the A6300 is better again... well, we will see.
First of all, >Jason "Fedora faggot" Lamier
Second, I've seen them and Fedora cuck didn't show anything with the subject having higher angular speed, and the second clip showed video, obviously lower quality capture than a still so it doesn't count.
Go outside and find some action to shoot. That is how I practice shooting, not reading charts and watching some brony wannabe talk about himself and shilling for a brand not giving a single fuck about him.
Mirrorless AF is just not up to par on fast action yet, it is a fact. Don't feel bad about it, just go out and shoot up your local uni. There has to be some skaters or sportsmen around there to practice. Plan ahead, snap at the perfect moment. People before in the manual focus era used to shoot some bloody gorgeous sports/action photos.
> First of all, >Jason "Fedora faggot" Lamier
He got hundreds of good shots in any situation from a football match easily, that's all that matters for the context of this discussion.
> and the second clip showed video, obviously lower quality capture than a still so it doesn't count
You mean it can't count because it shows way too conclusively how well the PDAF works?
Or are you proposing it must somehow work worse with photos, which we also have?
> Go outside and find some action to shoot. That is how I practice shooting, not reading charts and watching some brony wannabe talk about himself and shilling for a brand not giving a single fuck about him.
These examples are literally results of someone going out there and shooting.
Whether or not you like the person, PDAF works just fine. Apparently even for a photographer who you give a single fuck about, because it was the camera.
> Mirrorless AF is just not up to par on fast action yet, it is a fact.
... yea, no it isn't. Everyone just played and drove extra slow. It's all a Sony marketing stunt.
Latter half of the game is with stadium illumination, but I don't know how bright that stadium is.
I otherwise only remember this little test:
> The a7R II, when paired with a bright lens, can match or exceed the performance of the best DSLRs with respect to low-light AF ability.
Sorry, I don't have more than that. But I think it's abundantly clear that it works just as fine as DSLR overall without being very lax on details. And then we have more AF coverage and better low light AF...
So that means to have an AF performance matching a DSLR with budget consumer lens you have to use lens $1500-$3000 a piece on an A7.
Cool, I think I'll use my DSLR and lens I can actually afford instead of not shooting.
Protip: contrary to /p/ and sony gearcucks beliefs, you don't need expensive gear to make excellent photos.
> So that means to have an AF performance matching a DSLR with budget consumer lens
No, stupid summary. The point is the A7R II's AF matches or beats *the best of all DSLRs*.
Even with a great lens on those DSLR, too.
> with budget consumer lens you have to use lens $1500-$3000 a piece on an A7
Heh, even with that relatively stupid idea that you'd stick a piece of shit lens on a D4S or 1DX, it's still basically cheaper to use the A7R II!
Those DSLR cost $6000 each. And the A7R II is $3200 (B&H prices, body only, rounded by up to like five dollars tops for simplicity).
The A6300 gets another, announced to be again improved iteration of the Sony PDAF. With also more points. That leaves more than just a little hope for something amazing.