Gear Thread - Anime Edition

File: 1116750.jpg (349KB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 2500x2500px

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.

File: leica blown out of the water.jpg (282KB, 1000x669px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1000x669px

>>2757788

>>2757788
I have a Pana LX-5 and I love its manual controls and the 1:1 crop ratio. But yeah I wish it has a flippy screen as well for street photography.

>>2757803
i want it i need it

File: yama25OVA [Yunaishero].mp4_snapshot_08.55_[2015.04.02_17.31.36].jpg (118KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1280x720px

>>2757777
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.

File: vlcsnap-2013-10-30-12h13m36s227.png (381KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 720x540px

>>2757825
>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.

>>2757825
buy gx8.
buy some intel 6 core.
use mdepan on avisynth.
crop your 4k video.
instant ibis.
still look better than olympus.
get olympus 17mm 1.8 instead.

>>2757850
>olympus 17mm 1.8

>not getting cheaper manual OM Zuiko/Takumar/Canon FD lenses + adapter instead

>>2757852
>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.

>>2757855
a7r ii + fe 28mm f2 + fe 55mm f1.8

Should I get the 20mm 1.4 Art or the 24mm 1.4?

>>2757777
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.

File: Panasonic_Lumix_Gx8_review_02.jpg (428KB, 2000x1335px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 2000x1335px

Is this a good deal on the GX8?

http://www.adorama.com/IPCDMCGX8AT.html

Planning on getting a flash and i'm debating between these two:

http://www.adorama.com/IOMFLLM3.html
http://www.adorama.com/MZ26AF1PL.html

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

>>2757919
The Metz has articulation, I'd get that one. Be sure it is compatible with the Lumix system.

>>2757920
So does the olympus but it's smaller and is powered by the camera which means it's not as powerful.

File: Screenshot 2016-02-01 08.10.03.png (1MB, 2028x1058px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2028x1058px

anyone have any experience with these Nat Geo bags?

>>2757921
The oly looks like a weak little shit. I'd not buy it.

>>2757923
I have that backpack, it's good.

>>2757862
24mm 1.4
the 20mm is hueg like xbox.
get it if you really want to go wider.

>>2757919
breddy gud, basically a free microphone. You'll need a 2.5-3.5mm adapter though.

>>2757919

I have two the the Olympus flashes from my EM5 MKIIs, They're surprisingly effective and powerful, but the cycle time does take a while because it gets its power from the camera.

>>2757862
I'd probably get the 20mm. You wanted wide, that one does wide.

>>2757923
> $70
Why? They should be cheaper on aliexpress.

>Anime Edition
Fucking kill yourself whoever made this thread

>>2757954
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.

>>2757777
I'm looking to buy lenses for my Sony A7. Video purposes as well as photography. I understand I might have to adapt a few.Trying to keep entire budget below $1,500. Suggestions?

>>2757964
>video
Jupiter 11, Helios 44M, Pentacon 50 and 135 bokehmonster
You can use these for still photography too.

>>2757964
Native:
55mm Zeiss Sonnar T*
85mm Batis or 90mm Sony FE
28 mm Sony FE
Some Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster

Adapted:
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.

>>2757969
Thanks. Could you recommend a zoom as well?

>>2757777

why not a Pentax 67 OP photo, you cunt?

>>2757972
Thanks to you too.For real, If i had the cash, i probably wouldn't even be asking, i'd just buy the native zeiss and sony lenses, but they are expensive af

>>2757973
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.

>>2757976
probably the rokinon/samyang ones

>>2757975
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.

samyang 85mm?

>>2757987
perhaps

>>2757981
instead of the 55 1.8 i was really thinking about getting a 'M' mount 35 or 50mm voigtlander, and a telephoto rokinon.

>>2757990
my thoughts exactly

>>2757991
> 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.

>>2757923

They're a bit heavy, but I guess that's part of the appeal. I found that inserts in a regular molle pack work better for me when I'm hiking out somewhere though.

>>2757998
uh... 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

File: _DSF0519.jpg (685KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 1000x1500px

>>2758046
*cough* Fuji *cough cough*

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: Lowepro-15L-outside.jpg (82KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 450x600px

>>2757923
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

>>2758046
What are Pentax SMC and Takumar lenses?

>>2758048
Smaller than the NatGeo, looks wimpy too.
The NatGeo actually looks like something you would bring on week long hike into the woods.

>>2758047
>>2758049
>poorfags in denial

File: shitposting.gif (32KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 250x250px

>>2758052

>>2758051
>week long hike
yeah if that's what you want, the lowepros not your bag

File: 2016-02-01 10_27_32-Capture One.jpg (346KB, 1927x1340px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 1927x1340px

>>2758052
No really though. Fuji.
100% crop with the 23mm at f/1.4

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Greenshot
Image-Specific Properties:

>>2758056
The woods is not the only harsh environment, the city jungle can eat up your bag as well.

>>2758045
I've got a regular molle pack but I'm having a hard time finding good inserts

Have any recommendations?

>>2758066
its not that it cant take it, it just isnt big enough for holding anything but a camera and gear, tripod, and water.

>>2758068
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.

File: _DSF5165_1.jpg (642KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 1000x1500px

>>2758061
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

>>2758046
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.

>>2758072
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.

>>2758077
Oh and there is the Venus Laowa 15/4 tilt-shift 1:1 macro lens

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?

>>2758068

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.

>>2758070

Get a decent set of inserts and it shouldn't be a problem, or you can ghetto rig something like I did.

>>2758082
> Ricoh GR Digital IV
Not really good, no.

RX100 III / IV, G1X Mark II, LX100 are some good options, maybe have a look at them.

>>2758082
The GR has a fixed focal length lens, much like your phone. It has an excellent image quality but only buy it if you don't mind not having a zoom lens.

>>2758084
> G1X Mark II
Woops, I meant the G7 X. The newer one.

>>2757862

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.

>>2757969

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

>>2757987

Nikon 85/2 with an adapter unless you need the 1.4

>>2758046

>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

>>2758077

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

>>2758100
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.

File: thanos sense.jpg (267KB, 753x830px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 753x830px

>>2758100
>if it's not wide enough you may not be able to get closer.

You retarded mang?

File: linhof.jpg (233KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1600x1200px

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

>>2758100
Sugar how are these lenses:
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8

>>2758144
Sigma 24-70/2.8 is garbage, get the Tamron version instead.
70-200/2.8 is okay, not as good as the Tamron 70-200/2.8 but still okay.

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.

>>2758174
get a used sony a7

>>2758174
Nikon D3300 with kit lens and 35mm or 50mm prime

So I have an X-T10 and have now started shooting raw. Which raw developer to use?

>>2758189
lightroom

>>2758189
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.

>>2758180
That's even more expensive than a gx7

>>2758183
Is there a mirrorless equivalent? (Not a big deal but DSLR's are pretty big)

What 35mm would you recommend to fit in that low price range?

>>2758200
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.

>>2758193
>>2758194
What about RawTherapee or Darktable?

I think I can afford Lightroom but damn, I get the same vibes from Adobe as I do from Digidesign/Avid. I do recording freelance and couldn't be happier after finally ditching Pro Tools for good.

>>2758209
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.

>>2758209
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.

>>2758227
Is this specific to the notoriously difficult Fuji raw files? Or just in general?

>>2758228
Just general. I have no experience with X-Trans RAWs but this could be an interesting read:
https://www.darktable.org/2014/08/using-x-trans-cameras-with-darktable/

>>2758231
That looks pretty horrifying. If I wasn't being forced to use that for lack of other options, I wouldn't.

>>2758243
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.

Is there anything I need to know about buying a light meter? Can I get away with a cheap one? I am a poorfag that just started shooting film.

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?

>>2758288
I think a tripod, spare batteries and 2nd SD card would be more useful than a lens hood, thumb grip and lightroom for now.

>>2758288
wide converter and teleconverter.

>>2758315
Don't have the money right now.

I imagine the teleconverter would be more worthwhile than the wide converter to start, right?

>>2758321
Get the wide first.

>>2758321
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.

>>2758322
Really? I figured the 35mm could deal with most wide situations like street or landscape, whereas the 50mm would open up portraits and the like.

>>2758325
Then get the portrait adapter.

>>2758333
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.

>>2758337
I didn't really, but it's nice to know I could upgrade with lens converters once I get the hang of what I'm doing.

>>2758337
It is on APS-C

>>2758294

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

>>2758363
You forgot the circular polarizer.

>>2758342
It doesn't take the 23mm lens and make it a 50mm lens (75mm equivalent) it takes the 23mm lens and makes it a 35mm lens (50mm equivalent)

>>2758391
Ah. Then it is useless.

Get get get get got got got got
Blood rush to my head bit hot lock

i have olympus XA with a desilvering rangefinder
i have a fuji ga645zi, a bit bulky and heavy

should i buy a contax tvs ii or should i go with what i have?

File: 1438119416563.jpg (312KB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 2500x2500px

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.

>>2758462

>literal gearfaggotry

>>2758488

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.

>>2758368

That is a possibility, but I didn't suggest it since it's an item that I literally used only once.

>>2758430
How is the GA too bulky?
Do you want *good* photos, or soft 35mm snapshits?
If carrying an actual camera with you is too much effort, why are you on /p/?

File: R0210009.jpg (411KB, 1203x800px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 1203x800px

>>2758462
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

>>2758546
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?

>>2758560

How heavy is your camera? "large format" means a variety of things.

>>2758561

It's a Sinar F2, so not that heavy but still enough to fuck up some shit tripod heads

>>2758571
>Sinar F2
That camera. I would like it.

>>2758560
>Sinar F2
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?

>>2758614
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.

>>2758571
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?

>>2758634
The 4kg is probs without a lense or film holder.
Also, the Arca p0 isn't very expensive.

>>2758647
> 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.

File: Screen Shot 2016-02-02 at 2.59.52 AM.png (42KB, 1042x240px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1042x240px

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?

>>2758662
> 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.

File: purchase.png (68KB, 504x601px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 504x601px

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.

>>2758685
>that awful flash
H-have fun anon.

>>2758775
if it doesn't work out i'll return it. no one objected to it when i posted before. what would you have gotten instead?

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.

>>2758662
>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.

>>2758685
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.

>>2758819
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?

>>2758614

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.

Any recommendations on wide angle (28mm) lenses for M42 mount? What brand should I look for? My budget is around 40€

>>2758892
I can tell what NOT to buy, Pentacon 29mm is complete garbage. Look for a Flektogon or its russian copy (Mir something?)

>>2758892
I would also be curious.

>>2758819
but would the extra 500 be better in the long run?

im going with >>2758669 so far so if i ever want to upgrade i wont have to sell the old one and take a neg

>>2757777
I just got a Nikon J1 for free from my sister since she upgraded.
Is it a good camera? Iv never really had a camera before so i dont know anything about it.

>>2758928
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.

>>2758935
Mediocre. But it's still a camera that takes pictures. Go outside.

if i have a shit body and a shit lens
which do i upgrade first?

(been thinking about either getting a 35mm prime or an eos 7d)

>>2758950

Lens, if you aren't going to switch systems.

>>2758965
alright, thanks familia
for reference, right now all i have is eos 400d and a 18-55 kit

>>2758813
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.

File: 6596_tam70-300_1.jpg (78KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 600x800px

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

Second hand market for camera related stuff in Canada, what do you guys use? EBay and Kijiji are looking pretty dry at the moment.

>>2759159
I just use keh

>>2759159
canada where exactly? check local auctions

>>2759160
Forgot keh existed haha
>>2759163
Halifax, I'll take a gander thanks for the heads up

>>2759160
>suggesting keh with the cad so shit

you're better off buying locally m8

File: nikon-em-camera.jpg (67KB, 600x520px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 600x520px

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.

Anyone have the Nikkor 70-200 2.8? I've used the 80-200 and it's breddy gud, but is the 70 worth pursuing over that?

>>2759212
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

File: 12669479_10153478089076896_5789724160894914931_n.jpg (113KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 720x960px

>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

Whats the best film scanner I can buy for <$400 AUD?

Thx in advance senpai

>>2759255

get gud scrub. people have been shooting concerts long before 409,600 iso was even a thing.

>>2759275
this, git gud

>>2759275
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.

>>2759279
i'll fight you

>>2759280
>>2759282

You sound upset. Also, what candle lit shows do you need 409k for?

SLOW GLASS
L
O
W

G
L
A
S
S

>>2758935
Not really good by my standards at least. But don't let that stop you from using it.

>>2759255
> 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.

>>2759298
Don't know your camera but yes, that seems like the mode to try. Go test it.

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.

>>2759298

Can't hurt to try it.

>>2759312

...both copies that I had of those two lenses were kinda shit. Are opposed to prime lenses?

>>2759328
Why would I want that over the zoom lenses?

>>2759328
disregard, just looked up differences. It is apparent that the Prime lenses are in fact better. But what if I want close up shots when shooting sports photography?

>>2759312
I'd also get a prime for portraits.

Otherwise, why not...?

>>2759331
Because kit zoom lenses are not sharp, and portraits just look better when they are sharp.

>>2759331

They're not necessarily 'better', but they do tend to produce noticeably sharper images at a lower price.

>>2759335

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.

>>2759335
> 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.

File: yweaas.jpg (101KB, 1224x816px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1224x816px

>>2759342
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.

>>2759346

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.

>>2759346

And can you get that camera (or a slightly better one) at a discount without the kit lens?

>>2759351
>>2759350
Yes I found just the body for only 300, going with that. Found a prime 50mm lens for 100. My budget for a 300mm lense is ideally 200 but can go up another 50.

The sidelines are not far off at all. 4 steps from each outer bunker is the sidelines.

>>2759352

Yeesh, not sure what would be ideal with that kind of budget. I'm sure someone else here has some ideas.

>>2757927
How durable is it for bringing on hikes and stuff?

>>2759283
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

>>2759287
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.

>>2759210
>Nikon EM

>full manual? not even once brah
>boring black finish
>made for women

Should have gotten a Nikon FG/Olympus OM-1/Pentax MX.

>>2759359
> 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...

>>2759364
>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

File: EMsandAISNikkors.jpg (275KB, 688x800px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 688x800px

>>2759364
>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.
>>2759210
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

>>2759352

Which 50mm prime are you looking at? It might end up more like a 75mm equivalent on your camera.

I think the Nikon 18-200mm DX lens might work if you get it used.

File: 1453263053793.png (194KB, 500x378px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 500x378px

>>2757777
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?

File: 5338315887_2bf992bd2a_z[1].jpg (94KB, 640x611px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 640x611px

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?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-Rolls-Fuji-Superia-X-tra-ISO-400-Color-Print-Film-35mm-Film-24-Exp-2017-NEW-/172074161411?hash=item28106b5503:g:-0AAAOSweuxWQ7l4

>>2759401
Pentax K-3, K-S2, K-50 and HD DA 16-80 and HD DA 55-300 lens

>>2759401
D7100

>>2759447
>action shots
>no buffer

>>2759401
W/R what? WLAN remoteable?

Anyhow, A6000.

>>2759532
Weather resistance. Something the A6000 doesn't have.

File: IMGP3445.jpg (113KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1000x665px

>>2759404
/thread
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

File: Camera-Rain-Cover-New-Rainproof-Waterproof-Against-Dust-for-Canon-Nikon-Pendax-Sony-Coat-Bag-Protector.jpg (135KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 800x800px

>>2759535
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.

>>2759535

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.

>>2759555
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

File: 1413252329089.png (518KB, 763x992px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 763x992px

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?

File: GSFY-Professional-Digital-SLR-Camera-Cover-Waterproof-Rain-Coat-.jpg (29KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x500px

>>2759559
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.

>>2759564
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

>>2759567
and it can be really useful for photographing while white water rafting or other times when you only really have a camera

>>2759562
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.

>>2759403
Really? You need advice buying 35mm film?

>>2759559

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.

>>2759584
This just proves you have never shot wildlife in your life. The noise of fiddling with a plastic bag scares away any wildlife in sever hundreds meters.

>>2759567
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.

>>2759403
http://curatingcuteness.com/2013/05/35mm-film-guide/

some examples

>>2759589

Not really. Tape it down and you're fine.

I've also gone hunting pretty often since I was a kid, and you're clearly exaggerating.

>>2759616
depends what you're shooting. birds scare easy. bison don't

File: tiltshift-photo1.jpg (107KB, 400x531px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 400x531px

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

what is the go-to 35mm prime for a poor canonfag?

>>2759636
35mm L mk2
or
Sigma 35 art

>>2759637
i think im getting bamboozled

>>2759639
Okay.

>>2759641
i mean, they are expensive af, is that really the low price tier?
im bad at gear, don't laugh at me

>>2759639
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.

>>2759646
yeah, i get it, I just specified that im poor, so im looking for cheap lens
and one of these posted above is pretty much as expensive as my car

>>2759620
Yep, stags run away from as much as a twig or dry leaf cracking.

>>2759650
Your car costs $700?

The cheapest you'll get first-party is the 35mm f/2.

>>2759620

My shitty jacket that I use when hunting deer makes more noise than the trash bag I slap in my camera. Shits fine if you don't go full retard.

>>2759634
> 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*.

>>2759653
~2000$ almost like the 35mm L mk2 according to google
i guess i've gotta save up some more, thanks anon

>>2759657
The second suggestion, the Sigma 35 art, goes for less than $700 used.

The 35 f/2 can be had used for less than $250, which in photography, is nearly free.

>>2759660
> the Sigma 35 art, goes for less than $700 used.
It's ~$700 new here in Switzerland. Figures it's approximately the same or cheaper in Japan or on parallel import.

>>2759660
so, photographers are that stupid with numbers?

>>2759672
>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.

File: 06111507.jpg (43KB, 364x560px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 364x560px

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

>>2759679
Glossy probably. It's mostly a taste thing.

>>2757777
Checked.
How is that guitar attached to her tho?

>>2759679
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...

>>2759283
Don't be retarded. 409k isn't what it's about. A usable 128k, that isn't noisy as shit, means you can have a smaller aperture for a usable DoF with a decent shutter speed.

>>2759383
>gripped F4s
pls no
that's one heavy fucker, I know
>>2759352
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.

>>2759733
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.

File: 0101.jpg (65KB, 700x525px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 700x525px

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?

File: Minolta.jpg (38KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 300x300px

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.

>>2759776
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.

>>2758142

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.

Okay, I just got an X100S and I have no idea what I'm doing with it. What sort of settings should I enable and what not? Should I have it set to just RAW or RAW+Fine?

>>2759842
also, should I listen to Ken Rockwell's site and use his settings?

>>2759842
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.

>>2759847
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).

>>2759810
That's incredibly stupid and it won't work, but whatever.
Search md-eos adapter.

Also, what's better to get into the habit of as a beginner: focusing and recomposing or changing the autofocus point?

>>2759856
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.

>>2759859

Why wouldn't it work?

>>2759842
> 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.

>>2759845
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.

>>2759873
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.

>>2759897
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

>>2759873
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.

>>2759842
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.

>>2759883
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.

cool thx

>>2759904
>you've spent $100 on trash from ebay

lol more like $4
I didn't even spend that much on my camera.

Thanks for the suggestion, though.

>>2759901
K.

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

suggesstions

File: unnamed.jpg (56KB, 650x489px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 650x489px

>24-70: $2198
>85: $1798
>70-200: TBA

Hahahaha holy fuck sorny

I asked in the other thread, but no one responded so I guess I'll try again. I can get an Olympus M5 II with the 12 - 50mm kit lens for £800.

Is it worth that price?

>>2759965
why don't you google it? Check amazon, and ebay, and keh?

>>2759945

Did they even show a picture with that 70 200 mounted to a sony body? kek

Tell me about the D3200

>>2759991
why does it wear the lens

>>2759991
It's alright if you get it on sale, good all around beginner dslr

>>2759997
what price am i looking for

>>2760000
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.

>>2760002
which lens kit do i want? what is vr?

theyre cheap as chips on amazon

>>2760009
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.

>>2760011
nevermind i just bought a k-3 instead

>>2760033
BASED

>>2759945
It's as though these are pretty much priced like Canon "L" glass, while probably being better again...

File: IMAG0003.jpg (480KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 667x1000px

here's my newest 3d conversion of a nikon dslr, it allows me to photograph 3d

>>2760083
That is just going to shoot flash in those colors. If you want your Nikon to shoot 3D you have to put those things in front of the lens.

>>2760083
Your camera looks like a cool guy from a 1980's teen comedy drama.

>>2760089
This is definitely how it works.

one cup is never enough guy should definitely do that.

How does the Sigma 19mm lens for Sony stack up against the standard 18-55mm lens in terms of sharpness? Trying to decide if it's worth stepping up from the kit lens for wide angles

>>2760161
Certainly a little sharper. at 19mm, but not great compared to the 30 or 60mm Sigma Art.

The Samyang MF lenses (like the 12mm f/2 or 14mm f/2.8) also are better.

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.

>>2760268
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.

>>2760281
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.

>>2760289
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.

File: Screenshot_2016-02-04-10-19-45.png (846KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

846KB, 1440x2560px

Are the postings on eBay for used Ricoh gr's that are around 150-200$ fake?

>>2760381

Haven't used ebay in years, I'm assuming they still have seller ratings?

>>2760388
Yea they have ratings but just seems too good to be true...

>>2760391

Google their user IDs? I haven't used ebay in forever because I got tired of dealing with people. These days I just stick with KEH/Adorama for the most part.

>>2760348
> 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.

>>2760381
they're real, but that one isn't the apsc one....

>>2760404
Which one is asp-c ?

>>2760381
Those are the old GRD II, not the new GR II. So they're real but probably not the camera you're looking for.

File: Untitled.png (46KB, 1158x788px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1158x788px

I'm only starting to get into post processing. Is this stuff really worth it? Which is the best pack to start with?

>>2760541
No.
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.

>>2760541
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.

>>2760556
There is a stable build of Darktable for Windows. Just saying.

>>2760558
> 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.
> http://www.darktable.org/2015/07/why-dont-you-provide-a-windows-build/
I think there was a (apparently very) unstable 3rd party build mentioned somewhere, but I haven't tried it.

>>2760562
http://www.partha.com/
You're welcome

>>2760566
Yea, that's probably the unstable 3rd party build that I heard about.

Thanks for the linkage!

>>2760574
It is actually more stable for me than the native version was on Ubuntu.

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.

>>2760627
Get a comfortable wrist strap, and the 35mm teleconverter.

>>2760627
A case, some photobooks, some purplegreen against gearfaggotry.

>>2760630


which case?

Is there any reason to get the gx8 over say the a6300 or any other camera in it's price range?

>>2760634
Not really.
I'd suggest getting a proper DSLR instead, mirrorless AF performance is not as good as DSLRs.

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?

>>2760639
Both are somewhat shitty, get the 70-300 VR instead. Not the older non-VR 70-300, that one is as bad as the others.

>>2760638
> 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.

>>2760673
>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.

>>2760673
>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.

>>2760676
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.

>>2760677
>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.

>>2760678
Nope.
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.

>>2760676
> 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.

>>2760677
>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.
Works fine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIakt30iBGY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvWgXgEQdAg

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.

>>2760677
> 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.