Gear Thread

I just bought a used X100S with a shutter count of 3.5K, did I get really lucky?

>>2760777
Why would that be lucky? What did you pay for it?

>>2760777

Depends on the price.

Seems to be the story for the X100 line, though. I got mine with about the same number of shots run through it. Dudes buy it thinking they're going to be the next HCB and then never use it.

>>2760777
A little.

But it's also not extremely rare. Not too few people think they are going to shoot quite a bit with a specific model of camera, realize that they don't, and sell when they get something else...

>>2760777
That is quite a normal shutter count for a used camera of that age. Even used DSLRs with fast burst rates have shutter counts in that range on ebay.
Don't be a gearfag, go outside and shoot some people on the street.

>>2760777
That's nothing

I have a nikon d3300 and am looking into getting my first prime. I want to shoot shit outdoors so would the 50mm be better over the 35mm?

>>2760783
What's the spected life on shutters?

>>2760861

Depends on what you shoot. I personally use my 20 and 35mm more than anything else

>>2760865
If you don't mind me asking, what exactly do you personally shoot with those

>>2760864
Depends. Entry level DSLRs have shutters designed for 100,000 actuations, mid/high level ones are designed for 150,000-200,000 actuations, pro bodies have shutters designed for 400,000 actuations with real exposure time sensors to adjust for wear induced slack.

I was planning on selling my 7d. should I get an a7r? I really only shoot landscapes, and the low light on the 7d is absolute shit.

>>2760872
If you're shooting landscapes, why are you doing it in low light?

Bring a tripod, and use longer shutter speeds....

File: 400tx-1.jpg (220KB, 650x431px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 650x431px

>>2760861
Get either and find out if you like it yourself. Live and learn, man. Personally right now I like using the 50 because it makes "quiet" pictures easy to make... but sometimes I do use the 35.

Really the only way you can say one is better than the other is if you've tried them, and it's just your personal preference anyway. That being said the 50mm does tend to have an advantageous wide aperture which allows for easier (and sharper) low-light shots. Bokeh is also a thing if you care about that. So those might be two reasons to go with a 50.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	EZ Controller 6.20.027 (141211)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:05 16:22:32

Sony A3000 or Nikon D3200?

The sony is $40 cheaper

>>2760872
People did excellent nightscapes and low light photos with worse cameras.
Stop blaming your gear, a new camera won't make you a better photographer. Start experimenting, look up tutorials and look at the exifs and when you actually run into limiting factors, then switch bodies. If you would have legit needs you wouldn't stop at FF and go for a Pentax 645D or 645Z instead.

>>2760886
Pentax K-50

>>2760871
all electronically controlled shutters self correct their exposure times.

>>2760876
I shoot widefield astro as much as I can. it's noise is horrible even at iso 1600

>>2760901
Astro is a shit on Sonys. Get a Nikon D7100 or a Pentax K-3 instead. Or even a 6D.

>>2760887

Depends, some kit doesn't work well for specific things, or just isnt ideal

>>2760901
a7s or use iso100.

>>2760968

Iso 100 will probably get the stars streaking pretty good, he probably doesn't want that

>>2760748
Since the announcement of the amazing OG Sony Lenses, For my a7 I was wondering should I get them? Or should I buy a Tamron and adapt it?
Sony Lenses are cool but damn expensive, I could get 24-70 and 70-200 in the same price of one sony lens. What do?

>>2760901
get a7s2. It has native ISO of 5,200 if iirc. Ofcourse it has only 12.1 MP camera, so that's also something to consider

>>2760973
I was thinking of that, but its out of my price range. It may be the best option though.

How accurate are white balance lens caps compared to grey cards?

>>2760971
As far as I know, the A7 isn't that great with adapted lenses' AF, even A-mount ones on the LAEA adapters, and not just Canon EF?

Probably buy native. But your choice, really.

What do you guys think about those National Geographic backpacks on eBay and Aliexpress? Probably fake, but are they worth the price?

>>2761023
Not sure if they're fake. Either way I think the Aliexpress ones are well-made.

>>2761021
>>2760971
Expanding on this question, currently I take working stills, which is why I need the zoom. But I really want to start getting into Street Photography. Good E mount or M mount lenses to use for that?

>>2761036
> currently I take working stills, which is why I need the zoom
Which part of working stills "need" zoom?

> Good E mount or M mount lenses to use for that?
Street photography has no particular rules or standards. It's pretty much "do whatever the fuck you want". You can do it with a tele lens from afar, or shoot like, a 12mm Samyang from only inches away.

I think you need to know what you like to do there, not us.

>>2761045
I meant more like casual while at work. I don't take stills, so zoom helps while I run around in the middle of rehearsals taking shots

>>2761048
Well, it's a matter of shooting style and location, I guess.

But unless it is very crowded, I personally usually prefer to stick on a prime lens on, and just do the extra step or two to "zoom", in return for more sharpness (which is good to have when cropping and just for the overall result).

You barely save any walking with zoom lenses in many people settings anyway, simply because most walking tends to be to position yourself in the right angle. A few extra steps to "zoom" into the right distance aren't too noticeable. Plus you might also kinda have to do the distance steps either way when using speedlights...

how do you maximize battery life with mirrorless cameras with EVF? if I carry the camera by my side, won't my camera turn the evf on as the eye detector senses my body?

>>2761061
> how do you maximize battery life with mirrorless cameras with EVF?
What for? Just have another one or two of these tiny 45g (for Sony) batteries in your bag if you even need them. In most situations, you won't.

I also tend to have a ~$12 10Ah Xiaomi battery pack for my smartphone and stuff on big trips, you can theoretically charge no only your smartphone but also cameras with USB in a bind, and other gizmos (reading light, small fan, whatever).

> if I carry the camera by my side, won't my camera turn the evf on as the eye detector senses my body?
Uh, yes, if you have it turned on? There's an on-off swich on all cameras. It usually is off when you just "carry it by your side", though.

Also, the automatic switching between EVF and live view is quick and automatic in actual shooting situations - that is, it will also switch back to live view when you take the camera off your eyes.

>>2761062
>What for? Just have another one or two of these tiny 45g (for Sony) batteries in your bag if you even need them. In most situations, you won't.
because I dont want to spend so much time fiddling with batteries, and because i'd like to stretch one battery to a day's worth of shooting
>Uh, yes, if you have it turned on? There's an on-off swich on all cameras. It usually is off when you just "carry it by your side", though.
what good is a camera that takes a whole second to turn on though? is there any sort of sleep mode where the displays and sensor is off, but the camera is ready to leap into action? specifically looking at the olympus cameras.
>Also, the automatic switching between EVF and live view is quick and automatic in actual shooting situations - that is, it will also switch back to live view when you take the camera off your eyes.
oh great, now it'll eat even more battery? I only need live view on demand.

>>2761065
> because I dont want to spend so much time fiddling with batteries and because i'd like to stretch one battery to a day's worth of shooting
That simply will depends on how many shots you take. But either way it's going to be a ridiculously insignificant fraction of that shooting day. It's like 1/15th or less than the frequency you'd have to swap out film or something.

And really just nothing in general. You can amortize like a decade worth of swapping these batteries by not spending as much time coming up with and writing this kind of "concern" for a day.

> what good is a camera that takes a whole second to turn on though?
Not good enough for The Flash, is the answer. Cameras presumably must turn on and focus in Planck time - nay, even when time runs backwards- else shots become very difficult!

> is there any sort of sleep mode where the displays and sensor is off, but the camera is ready to leap into action? specifically looking at the olympus cameras.
I don't know. Maybe?

> oh great, now it'll eat even more battery? I only need live view on demand.
The difference is next to nothing. On some cameras the EVF is what uses a bit more power even.

>using a DSLR
>only have to charge the battery once in a month
>1000 shots per charge
>bought a spare battery a year ago, never used it
Mirrorless cucked

>>2760892
didn't know that, neat

>>2760748
How often should you upgrade your camera, if you're not a gearfag. I just got into photography and I've taken about 13k+ images with my current camera

>>2761093
once a week

>>2761093
According to the people who use "gearfag" nomenclature, probably just about never or only once the cameras are cheap & weak.


I'd suggest to upgrade when you have good reason to suspect to get something significant enough from it. Doesn't need to be the camera though, might as well be your glass or speedlights or whatever...

Should I avoid over-reliance of the EVF on a x100 if I'm just starting to learn the fundamentals of exposure, or is it a helpful tool that I should use to see what exposure I'll get before I take a shot?

>>2761105
It's a helpful tool, use it.

>>2761093
When your current camera begins holding you back consistently, and you're absolutely sure it's not your own fault.

(small embarrassing loophole for dream cameras XPRO2 HERE I COME)

>>2761105
When you're trying to knock down a wall, are you worried about an over reliance on sledge hammers in stead of small nail-driving hammers?

All that matters is the final photo. If there's a tool that will help you get that photo, use it.

>>2761105
no. get a light meter instead.

Do youll cowards even wide angle?

>>2761124
>tfw apsc
no anon
no i dont :(
at this rate i'll probably get an m42 converter and some 25 dollar crapshoot of a lens

>>2761129
>tfw apsc
Not really.

There are good Samyang / Rokinon lenses for almost all of them, and you probably also have some native choices.

File: ELITE.jpg (142KB, 1000x963px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1000x963px

>>2761129
>>2761135
Fear not my crop brothers. Fuji will show you the way.

File: samyang_12mm_fisheye_side.jpg (128KB, 600x559px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 600x559px

>>2761137
Looks like good glass. But so is this 12mm (even if you rectilinearize it).

You can also get the already rectilinear 12mm APS-C variant from the same brand.

Looking to start branching out a bit more with my photography. I currently have an X100S. I don't think I want to upgrade to a mirrorless/DSLR yet, so I'm considering one of the converter lenses to change something up.

Which one is more practical to get, the wide angle converter or the teleconverter?

>>2761155
> Which one is more practical to get, the wide angle converter or the teleconverter?
This is completely dependent on what you shoot. 6mm focal length also isn't "more practical" than 600mm.

One makes your FoV wider, "zoom out". The other narrower "zoom in".

Pick whatever you had more problems with shooting until now.

That said, I'd suggest you actually do what you don't want to do: Switch to an IL camera. [If you want more, what are the odds that this one converter lens is just exactly it and nothing else is required...? Especially since you were not like "a bit more range as an option, and it's perfect!"...]

>>2761155
for what, retard

>If you don't know what lens you need, you don't need it.

>>2761160
>>2761164

I meant more versatile in general.

>>2761170
Neither is "More versatile in general"
A zoom lens is more versatile in general, and a prime lens needs to suit your uses.

If you don't know whether you need a wider lens, or a more zoomed in lens, then don't buy anything. You don't need it.

>>2761170
That this "general" case does not exist is exactly what I meant with my explanation from before.

If you need a another analogy, microscopes aren't "more versatile in general" than telescopes either. They are catering for different needs.

File: Canon_EOS-1D.jpg (249KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 1024x683px

How much would Conon EOS-1D Mark I (2001) cost, a few body scratches otherwise works perfectly.? I want to sell it and get something full frame with video support.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 20D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 Windows
Photographer	Elliot Lowe
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2006:10:28 16:28:01
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/16.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	42.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1024
Image Height	683
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2761347
>go to ebay
>enter name of product
>look in side menu for "show only"
>select "sold listings"
>???
>profit

>>2761347
Why not google it? They'll be on sale at Amazon, ebay, keh, etc. You can see what they're selling for.

Be sure to mention that it still shares the exact same sensor and specs as the upcoming 1Dxmk2.

>>2761036
The 28mm is a good general purpose lens.

>>2761347
About 3.50.

I just found a Voigtländer Vitoret in excellent conditions in an antique shop, but the focus ring seems almost loose, like very very quick to turn
Is that a normal thing or is it just this camera ?
Also it feels pretty damn stiff when I rewind the film

>>2761347
>8 Mpickles
>8.5 fps burst
>muh ff sensor (but its canon so its shit)
just buy a K-3 or k-3 ii
>24 Mpix
>solid high ISO performance
>8.3 fps burst
>smaller, sweet ergonomics
>non shit, non canon sensor
k-3 can be had new for 650, similar to a used 1d. k-3 ii has dat sweet pixel shift for ultra resolution tho

>>2761372
>>8 Mpickles
>>8.5 fps burst
>>muh ff sensor (but its canon so its shit)
You're not looking at the 1D if those are the specs you're coming up with.

>>2761372
I would rather by Sony A6000 if I wouldn't already have a few Canon FF lenses a. Better suggest me alternative FF canon which wouldn't be a downgrade in quality.

File: kaiman.jpg (20KB, 288x288px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 288x288px

Oh mighty gods of gear, please enlighten me:

>Nikon mount
>CHEAPEST zoom lens that covers 35 and 50 mm
>As fast as possible (2.8 at least, preferable fixed but could be 2.8-4 or something like that)
>With built in auto focus motor (AF-S or third party equivalent)

If you name one that besides all that has zoom lock I'll jizz my pants on the spot.

>>2761347
hard to find the original 1d on ebay without coming up with a bunch of results for newer models, but the 1d mark ii goes for less than $300 so don't expect to get much.

>>2761411
kit lens.

>>2761413
>At least 2.8
>Kit lens
>mfw

I'd like to shoot in low light conditions and get decent boke on stuff that is less than 1 mile away from the subjet.

>>2761420
Get a 35 prime then

>>2761420
>CHEAPEST zoom lens

Beggers don't get to be choosers. Fast wide zooms are not cheap.

>>2761422
I need 35 and 50mm covered in a fast, zoom lens with built-in af motor.

If you don't even bother reading then keep your condescendence for yourself.

>>2761426
Tamron 24-70/2.8
It's not cheap.

>>2761423
Cheap means that cost less than others, not that it costs 200 bucks.

If you're moving in a range of 700-1500 bucks then a 750$ one is cheaper by definition.

>>2761427
THIS------->>>2761429

Also thanks.

Is there any better alternatives to the Fuji X-T10(around 480€ body only) in the <700€ price range lens included?

>>2761448
*sigh* For what?

>>2761383
> if I wouldn't already have a few Canon FF lenses
Aren't you going to just get an A7 II or A7R II with adapter?

That should work great.

>>2761448
There are many other entry level cameras in that range.

Nikon D3300, Pentax K-50, A6000, and quite a few more ... have a look around on your own, or specify better what you need.

>>2761450
Something all-arounder would be too vague? I'm planning to buy a camera for the first time so I found that the X-T10 is kind of good but I was wondering if I there are any better choices. Thanks!

>>2761459
There are better choices for certain things, and worse choices for certain things. It will serve you perfectly well for general photography.

>>2761459
Pentax K-50. Pro level viewfinder, weather sealing, ergonomics and UI you can only find in mid/high level cameras on other brands.

>>2761093
Like that other guy said, when the camera holds you back. Probably every five years or so, but maybe a fancy new lens would solve your issues instead.

>>2761411
DX 17-55 f2.8

>>2761464
>Probably every five years or so
How do you come to this number directly after saying
>Like that other guy said, when the camera holds you back

shopping for my first DSLR. Not gonna ask for recs but,

Are EVFs worth it? I figured I should learn on an EVF if that's to be the standard in the future, but I'm turned off by the initial lag you get when holding it up to your eye (they sense your eye then turn on) because you could very well lose your shot in that split second.

(narrowed it down to Canon T6s and Sony a77ii)

>>2761475
Get the Canon, but not the T6s. Go for a used 60D or 70D instead. Better viewfinder, rugged build, some limited sealing.
With the Sony you will limit yourself because the A-mount is dead. You will have much difficulty finding lenses. Even a Pentax K-3 is better on lens selection.

>>2761475

IMHO you won't actually 'learn' from an EVF, you'll learn from actually making photos.


Personally I don't care for them, but I wouldn't shit all over them either.

>>2761475
I enjoy my EVF, but I have an X-T1 which is one of the best. People using slower lower quality ones (Like in the X-E1) are not usually as pleased.

If you're worried about that eye-sensor lag (which really isn't an issue because of how quick it is) you can (on the X-T1) Turn that off and just leave the EVF on the entire time the camera is on.

>>2761479
Can you set it so the viewfinder is on even when the camera is off?

>>2761483
On an XPro1 and XPro2, yes, but otherwise, no. If that is a feature that is important to you for some reason, then you're probably better off with a DSLR.

>>2761475
I like EVF better than OVF due to the extra information and features they can provide.

Exposure preview and focus peaking are really quite neat.

>>2761475
If the switching to the evf makes you lose the shot, you were gonna lose the shot anyway

So if I wanted a dedicated portrait lens on my crop, I'd be looking for something in the 50-85-100 range?
Someone suggested the sigma art line, worth looking into?

>>2761541
Correct. And yes, the sigma art line is fantastic.

>>2761541
Yes.

And yes, the Sigma Arts are practically all great, and cheap for how well they perform. You probably want to look at the 50mm one.

>>2761541
>>2761542
>>2761546
The Sigma Art lenses have one problem only and that is the overtravel issue of the AF drive.
Prepare to manually focus and correct a lot.

>>2761557
I haven't had any issues with my Art 35 1.4, but maybe that's because it's relatively forgiving since it's a wide.

>>2760748

Will the IBIS of the Sony A7 compliment the new Master G lens IS?

>>2761025
Well made for the price or just well made in general? I've a poorfag, so I can't spend much on bags, but it might be worth it to have a backpack/camera bag on trips.

>>2760748

If noise turns images to shit after ISO 1600 or 3200 on most cameras, why do manufacturers keep raising the sensitivity?
Are people using 1D Xs' and D4s' for nighttime surveillance? Why are medium format cameras the only cameras designed to go below ISO 100 without losing dynamic range?

>>2761686
They also raise the level at which noise becomes overwhelming. You can shoot very nice looking images on an X-E2 at ISO 6400, for instance.

>>2761411
since you need an in-lens focus motor, you're clearly a cropfag. in which case, your only choice for a fast normal zoom is the Sigma 18-35.

if you weren't such a jew, you'd be able to choose from the 35-70/2.8D, 24-85/2.8-4D (the only lens in this post that's actually cheapish), and 28-70/2.8 AFS. of course, you could buy the 16-85 VR or the 16-80E for loadsemone too.

no nikon has zoom lock, unless you count the collapsed position on the 18-55 VR II.

>>2761683
OSS lenses already act in concert with the IBIS.

>>2761686
because a noisy image is better than no image, especially when it's denoised and resized to 600x600.

what're the EVF power rankings?

XPro2
XT1
EM5II
GX8
A7
a6000
EM10II
XE2

something vaguely like that?

metrics include EVF black out under continuous shooting, color/level accuracy, refresh rate, lag, brightness, and I guess some other stuff.

>>2761707
The X-T1 maybe above the XPro2. The refresh rate is faster on the XPro2, but the size is noticeably (and benefically) bigger on the X-T1.

>>2761433
What >>2761427
Said, or if you're planning to save more money you can get the Sigma, although it's not recommended

>>2761704
>because a noisy image is better than no image

I understand that; I'm talking about ISO 102,000+
What's the point?

>>2761704
>OSS lenses already act in concert with the IBIS.

Neat. Does that make Sony's IS superior to others?

>>2761726
see above. again, news outlets dont give a shit if the image is a noisy mess, as long as they can lower the chroma, run it through some de-noising algorithms, and the subjects in the photos are clear.

the average photographer might see ISO 12800 with a modern camera. That's 5 stops faster than ISO 400. at 1/250 f2.8, you're getting a good exposure at EV ~5. that's good enough for night streets. not that the average gearfag would hit the streets at night with their toys.

>>2761735
No. IBIS is constrained by the size of the image circle and sensor size. Sony FF IBIS is worth 4 stops? Sony IBIS+OIS is worth 5 stops? Olympus IBIS is worth 5 stops. Panasonic IBIS is worth 2 stops. Panasonic dual IS is worth 4-5 stops. Fuji/Canon/Nikon OIS are worth 3-4 stops?

>>2761736

ISO 12,800 is still low compared to the numbers that they are boasting about.

Is the 1D X MkIII going to undermine their 10,000,000 ISO specialty camera?

Why don't they spend any research on low ISOs besides their limited 50 that would be of more use to people?

>>2761737

So for a full frame, Sony has the best IS system?

>>2761748
ISO 800 is perfectly clean. Why do you need to be below 100? Get an ND filter.

>>2761750
>so for full frame, Sony has the only IBIS system?
no other FF camera has IBIS, so it's hard to compare. but yes.


>>2761748
well canon was advertising that 3mil ISO wildlife remote capture sensor a while ago, and then Nikon says they can boost the D5 to 3 mil ISO. it's all marketing either way, max usable ISO for any camera is topping out at around 100k right now.

>someone showing off their A7Rii

>"so whats mirrorless?"
>"the camera doesnt have any mirrors so theres no shakiness in your pictures"

lolwut

>>2761752

Wouldn't ISO 50 or 25 look better?

>>2761777
Why would it look better? In what way is ISO 100 (or 200 in some cases) not doing it for you?

Be specific.

>>2761783

Overall.
I can't tell on my 350D because the lowest it goes is ISO 100. My A60 looked better at ISO 80 than ISO 100.

>>2761797
>overall
I said be specific.

Whats the difference between a x100, and a x-e2

>>2761813
interchangeable lenses, optical viewfinder... man google it.

>>2761815
We'll I'm trying to understand how people are so into the x100 when the x-e2 seems all-round better. I just don't see it.

>>2761821
Well the X-E2 doesn't come with a tiny little lens (X-E2 with the 23mm is dramatically larger), and also doesn't have an optical viewfinder.

Your priorities are not everyone's priorities.

How do I make my photos look more hipster like the stuff floating around on tumblr?

>>2761902
Uh, probably use a smartphone... gratuitously apply those "cool" image filters in various photo apps.

>>2761707
The A6300 will probably be somewhere on top of that list there.

>>2761684
In general. China is good at textiles overall.

i have a konica minolta maxxum 5d. it's a sony alpha mount. i currently have the kit 35-70 lens, and a $60 50mm i got on ebay. I'm going on a trip to Maine next week, what lens should I pick up for it

>>2761913
I'd get a Sigma Art 18-35mm, or the 35mm.

Plus probably the 50mm prime.

>>2761683
Not of the A7, it has no IBIS. It'll just be the lenses OSS.

But of the A7 series, especially all those second generation "II" that have IBIS - sure.

>>2761758
Pentax digital MF has IBIS, the coming FF will have IBIS also.

Can I justify the extra cost of the Nikon d610 over the D7100?

For the full frame glory?

>>2761800

Shadows in high contrast scenes.

>>2761964
No. The D610 is an entry level FF, the D7100 is a high level semi-pro APS-C.
The D610 might have a bigger sensor but in features, ergonomics and build quality the D7100 is much higher.
Just a tip: sensor size is a secondary or tertiary aspect to a camera, first and foremost it's build and the available lenses are what counts. Judging only by sensor size is a sure way to gearfaggotry.

>>2761972

noted. I have no nikon glass, so more funds would left over for glass

>>2761964
It's probably worse, unless you primarily need lots of wide-angle lenses.

But a D750 would work out to be all around better with matching glass, perhaps get that instead?

>>2761975
Oh, no existing glass and it also has to fit in a budget that isn't much larger?

Get an A6000, D7100/D7200, Pentax K-50 or K-3 or something like that instead, spend a little more on glass. It's the correct choice for almost everyone.

>>2761978
>>2761979

a d750 is too expensive I think.

I don't really have a budget. I have a Fuji X-E1 that I am considering selling... The autofocus, lowlight performance make me want to change. Also I don't know if I want to invest in more fuji glass...

>>2761989
> The autofocus, lowlight performance make me want to change.
Well, I'd have suggested the A7R II. That one would essentially have it all - autofocus, low light performance, and it's only about half the cost of a 1D X or 5DS (R).

But since you say the D750 is already too expensive, perhaps get the D7200 or A6000. Or wait for the A6300 - even if that one will cost around $1k at release.

Maybe even an A7S or A7S II if you're primarily doing low light (costs more, but you can theoretically amortize a lot of "fast lens" expenditures with that sensor). Though it will not have particularly great AF in daylight situations.

File: large_Samsung-NX1-mirrorless-camera1[1].jpg (107KB, 963x1024px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 963x1024px

Guys I have to decide what camera to buy from this two models of choice.

They both are excellent to me but I can't really decide...I'd buy the Sammy but it uses only NX lenses, on other hand the Panasonic has much much more choice.

Also, I'm afraid that the NX1 won't have support because of the Samsung photo department situation.

Destination of use: stills photos, animals and landscapes, also videos at amateur level (nothing serious).

>>2762088
You can use Pentax lenses with an adapter on the NX1.

>>2762088
I forgot to mention the models of choice: Panasonic GH4 vs Samsung NX1.
>>2762094
Thanks for the info

hurr durr me didn't see this and opened a new one
>>2762083

>>2762088
Buy the NX1 if it seems better now.

> Also, I'm afraid that the NX1 won't have support because of the Samsung photo department situation.
Move on to another camera once you actually have a problem.

[If future prospects were the primary base for your choice right now, how could you not go with Sony, Nikon or Canon?]

>>2762104
> d750's swiveling back - is that sturdy?
Sturdy enough that you can't easily break it by hand.

Not rugged "can drop it anywhere" - like the rest of the camera and your lenses.

> d750's weight
Do you need help opening a soda bottle yet? No? Then this is not going to be a huge problem.

> oil issues with the d750?
Sporadic reports, not really frequent like on past models.

> I'm doing mostly street photography with the occasional studio session.
> light weight is key since I'm shooting all day long
RX1R II, RX100 IV, A6300, A7 II, ... all usually lighter on average, even with pro lenses on the IL cameras and DSLR both.

> and occasionally have to use the camera as a flail in case I can get in a fight
Pentax in a box seems like the way to go, but I think this is really something that should not be in your list of requirements any more than it being able to catch bullets when you get shot at.

Cameras are not sane weapon choices.

>>2762104
For street and a little bit of portraiture, your D7000 should be treating you just fine. Why do you need to upgrade?

>>2762110
it's all about the mm's. I've grown a love relation with the 28mm/2.8 in street.. that I can't get the equivalent of it in a crop body and maintain a stealth look. my tamron 17-50 is just too big, awkward and screams 'look at me". also, depth of field

>>2762117
>maintain a stealth look
That's not a real thing, but you'll figure that out for yourself.

Spend the money on a GR. Perfect for street, 28mm, and you still have your D7000 for portraits.

>>2762119
have you ever had a go at a jaw with a ricoh gr good sir? it's of no use

>>2762153
joking aside, I want to be able to use my assortment of lens on digital like I do on film, hence the two cameras comparison

>>2761683
the 24-70 2.8 and 85 1.4 have no oss.
haha.

>>2762088
NX1 is an excellent camera, but Samsung has really dropped the ball by killing its photo department. So get it only if you don't mind that you'll have to sell both the camera and all of the lenses when it becomes obsolete.

Micro4/3 has slightly worse sensors, but a far wider lens choice. Why GH4 though? If you're mainly shooting stills, you should be looking at E-M1.

>>2762094
You can adapt almost any SLR lens, but you'll only get manual focus and aperture control - NX adapters are passive.
Micro4/3 has an adapter to use Canon EF lenses with autofocus (from a dodgy company, but said to work ok)

This might be a dumb question, but I'm curious:

Those of you who wear glasses, how do you deal with viewfinders? I'm finding it just a tad hard to see everything in the viewfinder of my X100S at once. I can scan through and find everything I need to, but I don't always get to see the full shot.

Do you just deal, use contacts, crop stuff out afterwards if it sneaks in on the edge of your picture?

>>2762248

Depends on the camera and viewfinder in question. I have the same problem with the X100S, I just kinda got used to it. I have zero problems with the viewfinder on my D800, on the other hand.

>>2762248
I can adjust the viewfinder so it works without glasses.

>>2762249
So you find you just get used to it and it doesn't really affect your composition badly? I can live with that.

>>2762250
I feel like it would be annoying to constantly pull my glasses up though.

>>2762252
> I feel like it would be annoying to constantly pull my glasses up though.
If that bothers you, a MILC would just let you use its backside LCD without the drawbacks of having to go into some live view mode.

>>2762254
NVM, you have one? Just use that, then.

>>2762254
What do you mean?
how is that different than what an X100s or DSLR offers?

Completely new here

I'm trying to get into photography/filmmaking and I've checked the video thread, but it seems like every camera in there (unsurprisingly) is dedicated towards video. Can I get a DSLR that will serve as a kind of multipurpose camera for both stills and video or is it really only for stills?

If a DSLR might be good for both, what are some cameras you could recommend?

>>2762269
Look into the A6000 (or the a6300, now)
5Dmk3, 70D, T5i, GH3 or GH4

>>2762264
The X100S probably works the same.

For a DSLR, "live view" is a special mode - usually CDAF only with the mirror up, no PDAF.

Okay, some DSLR camera models can put the mirror down, do PDAF, then up again, but that's not really quite the same either.

>>2762252

It doesn't really hurt your composition once you have a good 'feel' for the camera IMHO. I could just use the LCD on the back, but it feels awkward to me.

>>2762269
> Can I get a DSLR that will serve as a kind of multipurpose camera for both stills and video or is it really only for stills?
Most MILC (Panasonic and Sony especially get frequently used) and some DSLR (Canon cameras compatible with the "Magic Lantern" firmware are noteworthy) can do okay amateur video.

Well, other DSLR/MILC also can record video, but these are often chosen, from what I can tell.

File: image.jpg (24KB, 285x400px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 285x400px

Thinking of buying the a6000 in a couple of days.

What lenses would you guys recommend? I'm looking to buy two. I primarily do portraits (and some street photography/scenery here or there). I'm on a budget with the lenses so please keep each under $300 or so. Thanks.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	285
Image Height	400

>>2762283
Sigma Art 30 & 60mm, perhaps

Wider?
Both 12mm & 14mm Samyang (MF lenses, but that works fine on the A6000)

>>2762285 (cont'd)
I forgot, there is also the 28mm f/2 that you might pick over the 30mm Sigma Art.

Probably over $300 but with the 60mm being ~$150 it should remain under $600 total.

>>2762248
You deal with it. I can't see the whole viewfinder on a FM2, but a F3 HP I can because of the long eyepoint.

>>2762283
The two Sony pancakes are real compact. The 20mm isn't quite a winner in the sharpness department though.

Is it worth paying $400-450 for a user Ricoh GR right now? Or is there something better I could get with that price range?

>>2762318
*sigh* For what

>>2762321
*verb*

>>2762321
For a user Ricoh GR.

>>2762293
>The 20mm isn't quite a winner in the sharpness department though.

Neither is the 16mm. But it's not too bad considering the price.

Whats a good entry camera for a complete newbie? Im planning on mainly use it to take photos of people swimming since im working on a project related to that sport. After that I'll use it for my camping and field trips maybe or some amateur photography as a hobby.
I've read about people recommending any Canon EOS Rebel for newcomers but I know jack shit.. pls respond

>>2762283
I would wait until the A6300 hit the market, since the price can be back down to $500

For a USED Ricoh Gr. Fucking auto correct.

>>2762353
If you plan on shooting near water and going into dirty and wet environments, your best bet is a Pentax with weather sealed lens.
A Pentax K-S2 or a K-3 would be a great start, or if you are on a budget the K-50 or a K-5IIs. The 18-55 WR and HD 18-50 WR kit lenses are weather sealed, makes a nice sealed system with the body. It doesn't mean you can chuck it into the water, it's against water spray/splash, rain and dirt. If you need telephoto for field trips then get the HD 55-300 WR. Don't bother with the 50-200 WR, it's ass.
Ultimately you can get the two cheap primes, DA 35 and DA 50 for street and portrait shots.
I'd recommend buying used, most used cameras are well maintained.

>>2762353
Theoretically, the best camera you can afford with the best lenses you can afford.

Cheap popular options include the following:
Nikon D3x00, Pentax K-50, Sony A6000.

I am buying my first DSLR on Monday. Think it would be either Nikon D5200 or D3300. The former one costs 50$ more in local shops. Which one should I get?

Their specifications look quite similiar. The key features that I like about D5200 are 39 focus points and bracketing. Are they useful?

I am concerned because D3300 is newer. Can there be some subtle improvements that are not reflected in the specification (e.g. better noise reduction)? Or am I just overthinking this?

Here is the comparison chart for them:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_d3300&products=nikon_d5200&sortDir=ascending

I've got a bunch of film rolls stored at room temperature I bought a couple days ago. The thing is I probably won't be using all of them in around 4 months.
Should I store some of the film rolls in the fridge?
Rolls are Ektar and Superia 400 negatives btw.

>>2762392
It doesn't hurt to keep them in the fridge. Indeed, some people will buy Gold as fresh off the line as they can, refrigerate it, then shoot the whole roll off and develop it the same day for more vibrant colours.

>>2762390
D3300 has a slightly better sensor.
D5200 has a screen that flips out, which is nice for video.

Both are fine as entry level DSLR's.

>>2762390
>The key features that I like about D5200 are 39 focus points and bracketing. Are they useful?
Sure?

AE Bracketing is useful for far more quicker capture of the source shots you need to create HDR compositions, or some other tricks. (Shame on Nikon for removing this software feature from lower-end cameras).

More and better focus points help you focus more reliably / quicker / over a larger area of the sensor - this is where an A6000 or A6300 would shine, though.

> I am concerned because D3300 is newer. Can there be some subtle improvements that are not reflected in the specification (e.g. better noise reduction)?
It has a bit higher ISO sensitivity, but that's on various spec sheets you can find online.

You usually run noise reduction algorithms as part of your postprocessing workflow, maybe in DxO Optics Pro, Photo Ninja or Lightroom.

>>2762353
For swimming you probably need a very long lens.
And a large aperture if it's indoors.

If it's just for a project consider renting a lens instead of buying.
Or buy a second hand professional lens and then try to sell it again for the same amount.

Buy a body to fit your lens.

>>2762390
The CAM4800 is a vast improvement over the CAM1000 in the D3200. The minor improvements in noise handling and other software features isn't really worth going for compared to an all around better body in the D5200.

how much difference is there between the tamron 24-70 f2.8 vs the sigma 24-70 f2.8? is one just straight up better or are they similar in preformance

So I've got a k-50 and the da 50mm 1.8, 35mm 2.4

Is there any decent real wide lens like the 21mm but maybe a bit wider around 16 or 18mm?

I think if I had the 55-300 and a real wide lens I'd be set with my pentax shit forever

>>2762492
You can google this. Easily. With less words, and much less wait time.

File: IMGP3723.jpg (449KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 1000x665px

>>2762495
i dont have it, but i've heard the 16-45 is good, and the tamron 17-50 f2.8

you'll love the HD 55-300. just got mine a few weeks ago. fantastic for the price

[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 17:06:39
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
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

Are there any '80s-'90s Canon EOS lenses that are valuable and aren't obvious? (Obviously anything 1.2/1.4/2.8 is still worth something.)

The long story is that my aunt was a serious amateur photog with a huge gear budget, but passed away around 10 years ago. My uncle is getting ready to sell the house, which has basically sat empty for the last few years, and my cousins don't want any of the photo stuff, so I've got free reign over pretty much anything I can find. I know there's a Hasselblad setup with at least one lens and some studio gear, which I'll be taking all of, but she also had a lot of Canon 35mm, and I'm a Nikon guy, so it's not really useful to me. I might be able to sell or trade some of it, though.

She had a custom-built dedicated darkroom with C41 processing and enlarging gear too, I wish I could take that stuff but I've got nowhere to store or set it up.

>>2762516
see
>>2762498

>>2762495
>>2762499
Depends on your budget, if you can afford it, the HD DA 16-85 is an excellent lens, fixed aperture, sharp allaround and has weather sealing.
Budget option is the DA 16-45 (I have this one) which doesn't have weather sealing and you can forget about using it indoors with flash because the barrel extends towards the wide end and casts a huge shadow. Apart from that it has a very good image quality, sharp, has excellent color contrast and aberrations are well controlled. Also fixed aperture and can focus quite close so you can use it as a sort of pseudo macro lens. It was a good step up from the kit lens.

>>2762516

just catalog the loot and google/ebay.

>>2762516
>She had a custom-built dedicated darkroom with C41 processing and enlarging gear too, I wish I could take that stuff but I've got nowhere to store or set it up.

Take it and figure out where to put it. You'll regret it if you wont have it.

Is a Hasselblad 500C worth getting?

What's currently a good price on a body in excellent functional and cosmetic condition?

>>2762404
>>2762406
>>2762416
Thanks! I will stick to D5200 then.Cannot wait till tomorrow now.

How long will the battery for the light meter last in a Pentax K1000 if I leave the cap off? I don't want to have to constantly remove the lens hood when I'm out shooting, but I don't want the battery to die if I just leave the cap off.

Is the X-T1 really worth the $500 more than the X-T10?

>>2762757
No, but that's from the perspective of someone who wouldn't buy Fuji even if he had to start from scratch right now.

However, I figure that to some Fuji buyers, the ISO dial, focus assist button & larger buffer is worth it already...?

>>2762757
I have the X-T10 and have fiddled with the X-T1 many times at a store, because it's what I initially wanted.

The X-T1 feels much more solid and the viewfinder is just beautiful. The ISO dial is also nice.

Yet I ended up with the X-T10 because it essentially does all the same stuff for much cheaper. Only thing I really miss is weatherproofing, I've been out shooting in the rain and snow and I'm a bit afraid for the X-T10, which has handled it fine though.

I'm looking for a Tripod + Head setup that will reliably support a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II + Canon 6D.

That is my maximum weight setup, I have other lenses but here are my wants:

Ability to do panoramic shots with ease. Durable enough to withstand beaches / saltwater. Approx. 3-5# Tripod + Head, so carbon fiber.

Other uses will be for action shots, and macro photography. I probably won't be doing macro photography for ground level things very often, but something with the ability to go low or an accessory to purchase in the future to go low would be nice.

I do not and never will do studio work, almost never will do portraits. I will do some animals and nature.

A monopod recommendation would be welcome, as well. Thank you.

>>2762879

Adding - that weight setup appears to be about 10#. So I assume I need a 20-30# setup.

File: P224S_P324S_P424S-9.jpg (85KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1000x1000px

>>2762879
Dic & Mic E302C, unless you're really frequently exposing it to salt water.

Constant exposure to salt water (even putting it in there) leaves you with like, Gitzo Ocean or Sirui W. Way higher up in the price range.

> Ability to do panoramic shots with ease.
Feature of your chosen head. Should be workable enough for Hugin with a Dic&Mic standard head already.

But if you do your panoramas manually I'd advise getting a specialized panorama head thing that can do exact steps with some precision.

> A monopod recommendation would be welcome, as well.
Dic&Mic and others can be reassembled into a classic monopod.

But generally: Sirui PS, because of mini ripod feet. Haven't tried the Dic&Mic variant of this, but I can tell you that the the smaller foot on Manfrotto's variant sucked.

>>2762889
It's 1.5kg for the lens and another 1.5kg for the 6D. Maybe a few hundred grams to a kg for your head, if you even use another one?

Easy. Even the cheap Dic&Mic E302C is rated 12kg

Looking to buy some sort of photography gear as a present for someone who mainly likes to photograph events, weddings and stuff like that. Was thinking of maybe a softbox, but have no knowledge about photostuff. Is this the place to ask for help?

>>2762893

So the thing I'm seeing around the internet where you shouldn't exceed either 30% or 50% of the tripod's max rated support weight isn't really true?

File: DiC-MiC-E302C.jpg (135KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1000x1000px

>>2762901
IMO, not really. Well, it is that way with craptastic tripods, but the legs of a Sirui / Gitzo can take noticeably higher loads than specified. Dic&Mic also a little higher.

(Result of my own unscientific testing, on only one tripod model each).

Now sure, the ball head is usually rated for mostly centered weights. If your lens is shifting the center of mass of your setup a long distance forward, it's probably just time for a lens tripod collar near the center of mass anyways (maybe mounted on a gimbal head in that instance).
Only if you don't want to do this, you'll maybe only be able to put 50% of the rated load on that ball head.

But eh, even the cheap Dic&Mic E302C ($110-120 on Aliexpress with DHL) with its stock head is more than sufficient even in this instance, and so would a lot of Sirui heads be.

Screen protectors, yes or no?

I can never align the damn things properly, and end up ripping them off later.

>>2762879

If you just wipe your shit down with a rag after, you don't *need* carbon fiber. If you're on a budget you can get away with other materials if you don't mind the weight.

Nikon D3100 or Canon T1i for a beginner?
(Both are used, both owners ask $250 for camera+charger+18-55 lens)

>>2762991
Sony A6000 hands down. Sony is the best combination of features and price. Nikon and canon can't compete.

I'm a X100 user, which is my only camera. I'm considering investing in a DSLR/Mirrorless system.

Would it make sense to stick with Fuji's X series?

>>2762999
You're not heavily invested into Fuji? Also not a complete fan?

Then I'd look around on the current market for glass and cameras and just decide freely.

Is the Sony A6300 or A6000 or A7 II perhaps nicer? Or a D750 or D3x00-D7x00? Or perhaps some Olympus or Pentax? All with their corresponding glass options of course...

beginner here, how bad did i blew it?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000I1ZWRC/ref=ox_sc_saved_image_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A3VG6O5APZX233

>>2763002
Oh, I like the camera a great deal, I'm just not heavily invested in it since it's all I have and isn't interchangeable or anything.

But I assume I'd feel more comfortable with an X-Pro1 than changing to something else.

>>2762991

I would go $100 on a T1i, max. What is your budget on this, and what do you plan on doing? Canon/Nikon isn't a bad route though, since there's a ton of decent used lenses floating around and not a whole lot of hassle with them.

The problem with Sony is the native lens selection is shit.


>>2762999

The first thing you need to ask yourself, is what exactly do you plan on doing? There's literally thousands of great choices, but there isn't any one size fits all option.

>>2763005

Well, considering that I've seen those things on craigslist for $50, you paid a lot more than I would.

>>2763007
Well, to me personally some of the ones I mentioned look *far* better (A6300, A7 II, D7200, D750, ...).

But tastes, needs and budgets are different. Without any particular requirements, listing some that seemed interesting to me is all I can do.

>>2763011
>>2763011
theres none in my city and the nearest ones are similarly priced

>>2763007
It depends on your feelings about the X100. If you love the feeling and the files, then you'll be happy with other Fuji stuff. If not, check elsewhere.

If you do just have an X100 (not the S or T) then the XPro1 will be more or less the same, just with interchangeable lenses.

If you want a little more horsepower at the expense of a bit of the unique styling, look into the X-E2 or the X-T10

>>2762997
Gonna check it out on amazon.
>>2763010
My budget is $250 tops. I am a complete beginner and have no idea how to choose my camera. Pls send halp.
Goal is take good HQ pics and have fun.

Guys I know nothing about photos but I want a camera since I don't have one. I'm thinking of getting the sony alpha 6300, what do you think?

>>2763026
It's looking like it will be a really great camera (maybe even the best APS-C of all) when it's out some time this month.

But it's not out yet.

>>2763022

Honestly, I'd suggest saving up to~ the 4-500 mark. Decent lenses make the biggest difference, and those aren't cheap.

>>2763022
Pentax K-30 or K-50. Those should be around $300 with a lens.
I'd suggest getting body only and getting a DA 35mm lens.

File: IMGP5801.jpg (305KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1000x665px

>love shooting wildlife
>super tele lenses are expensive as fuck
>still in uni, no aspirations to be pro photog, just a hobyy
>can't justify spending the dough
the tamron 150-600mm isnt too bad but still cant justify spending 1000 bucks for a lens

[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	99999999 dpi
Vertical Resolution	99999999 dpi
Image Created	2016:02:06 17:22:56
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	250
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
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

>>2763029 (cont'd)
By the way, though not nearly the most expensive of cameras, it's also not going to be really cheap.

You'll be paying $1k for the body plus possibly more than $1k for glass - just depending on what you want there.

Stupidly put, it really looks like it will be a great camera - but if you just want to make five photos of your cat and a shot of the sunset, I figure you could have that much cheaper...

>>2763036
Dude, just get an old tele prime like the Sigma 400mm or Tokina 400mm AF
Those are going for a few hundred bucks on ebay.

>>2763010
>sony lenses are shit
Prove it. They are affordable and great value. I want people to stop spouting this meme just to justify going with another (shittier) system.

>>2763040
All their primes are fantastic wide open! Shame that "wide open" on a sony prime is f/4.5

>>2763029
>maybe even the best APS-C of all

That would be the Nikon D500, obviously.

>>2763044
That doesn't seem to work out:

D500 costs twice as much
Only 20MP rather than 24MP resolution on the A6300
Less video capabilities (A6300 can do 120FPS FullHD with S-Log)
55 visible and 153 invisible AF points vs 425 PDAF points
10 FPS vs 11FPS burst
No built-in flash

And some more. We will see when the reviews are out if the A6300 has some big non-obvious problems, but I suspect it will be just better.

>>2763043
Doesnt matter when the sony cameras are such a beast at low light photography. this is why sony is the best, you don't need to spend thousands on f1.0 lenses just to shoot at night time.

>>2763043
No, it's mostly f/1.8 to f/2.8 for primes.

>>2763036
>buy a6000
>adapt 70-300 IS
>???

>>2762879
What's your budget?

I have Feisol CT-3342 3-section legs with a Photo Clam head (I think it's the 38NS) and love it. It's not the most compact tripod on earth, but it's rock solid and reasonably light. I spent around $700 on the setup, including a custom camera plate and a lens foot plate, and it's super stable with a D3S+70-200.

I personally don't recommend a monopod for a 70-200, it's not a heavy enough lens to need one and you get a weird fulcrum point when panning or tracking targets because the foot is so close to the body. I have a Calumet-brand (sadly defunct now) CF one and it's great for big lenses, I especially like that it's almost 7' long when fully extended, which means I can shoot from a short stepladder or when standing on a hill.

File: 0ec7328ec76528d07f7d9d0a77130255.jpg (51KB, 500x679px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x679px

a6000 or g7 ?

I really can't decide. I like taking pictures and video. Only downside to each camera for me is that the g7 has only 16 megapickles and the a6000 has no 4k or a dedicated external mic jack.

I know about the a6300 but I'm not dropping 1,000+ on a body just yet.

File: IMGP4845.jpg (269KB, 665x1000px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 665x1000px

>>2763059
>see exif
i have a 55-300 for my k-3 but sometimes its not enough. this shot for example. even cropped it's not enough. i would have loved just a tight shot of one bird a lot closer but 300mm wasnt enough

[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	99999999 dpi
Vertical Resolution	99999999 dpi
Image Created	2016:02:05 17:48:51
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>2763067
If you're unwilling to expend $1k+, I think you just want the G7...

>>2763076
Sigma 50-500, Sigma 150-500 are your best choices. Tamron tanked it's Pentax mount support.

>>2763082
yeah. ill probably just wait until i graduate and get a nice job, then buy the pentax FF, keep the k-3, and get the new pentax 150-450 which looks pretty nice

>>2763090
The 150-450 will have the same viewangle on the FF as your 55-300.
Have you tried trying to get closer to the birds? At a certain range your 300 would be more than enough but it needs practice.

>>2763098
yeah, i've gotten some good ones (wont dump but if you want to see any others https://www.flickr.com/cameraroll), but songbirds especially are skiddish and hard to get close to. sometimes ill have to crop, but with 24 Mpx its not too big a problem. i mentioned keeping the k-3 because of the crop factor that i could use with the 150-450. id really like to get the FA* 600mm but like i said i cant justify the price currently, and i've only been shooting since Christmas

File: Cristo-Rey-Film.jpg (97KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x450px

>>2763032
>>2763035

Thanks guys, I have more money, but I can't spend it on a camera right now, since it's only going to be a hobby for me.

So I repeat my question : between the Nikon D3100 and a Canon T1i which one would you say is more suitable for a complete beginner?

If you wanna suggest another camera, make sure it costs less than $250 (used is fine for me).

File: logo-tipa-2015-aside-200[1].jpg (13KB, 200x228px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 200x228px

>Samsung NX1
>16-50mm f/2.0-2.6 S
> 30mm f/2
>4 years of total warranty

2200$. All brand new.

YES/NO

>>2763040

The lenses aren't shit, the selection is. l2read.

>>2763115
>dead camera system
>TIPA award
nah

>>2763107

They're both pretty shitty imho, but if i *had* to I'd get a used canon since there's more used lenses on craigslist in my area.

>>2763120
What's the best beginner camera under $250 in your opinion?

>>2763119
What do you consider to be a comparable setup for excellent stills and videos?

>>2763122
Something that hasn't been announced as discontinued.
Just be like all the other mirrorless plebs and get a Sony.

>>2763121

>under $250
>decent

Choose one. I honestly think you're better off sticking with a cell phone or a high end P&S until you can afford something decent. I did what you're thinking of and I still regret it years later.

>>2763123
I hate sony's mirrorless ergonomy, if I had to stay in the mirrorless area I'd prefer something like the Panasonic GH4 body.

>>2763125
What about an old, high-end DSLR?

>>2763038
Shouldn't I be trying to get the best or at least decent camera?

>>2763133

You'll still be paying more than your max budget on the body alone. You can get older high end P&S cameras with all the manual controls for less.

>>2763133
You can get an ancient beat up 1D for that, but you won't have a lens to put on it.

Nikon D3300 or Nikon D5100?

>>2763136
> Shouldn't I be trying to get the best camera
That's certainly an option and not wrong if you ask me.

If the figures I quoted don't bother you too much, then why not? Unless some reviewers find -against all expectations- a good reason to pan the A6300, I think it'll be *extremely* nice to work with that camera and some good glass.

It was already very nice with the A6000.

> Shouldn't I be trying to get the at least a decent camera
You can also see it that way.

And a camera could be decent from like $350 up, at least when the situation and conditions at the shooting location are okay, and you don't want extremely much details in your image.

It's not that paying more is nonsense for everyone, but some people have enough at this point. They can shoot their cat, sunset, stuff quite okay during the day and early evening, and then it's good.

Or some can do what they want after they have a slightly different lens than the kit lens. You get the idea...

>>2763133
I'd seriously consider >>2763035
Or something along those lines. Budget wise you won't get anything better though, Pentax offers a lot of camera for the money.
For the same price as a K-50 you can get a Canon or Nikon but you will miss a lot of features later on. Weather sealing is one thing, but the seamless integration of old manual lenses, high sensitivity sensor, bright and accurate viewfinder, well designed UI is something you can't get form the others.
You said you wanted to get into the hobby, but with that small budget you would ending up wasting it all on a too old camera or a p&s bridge. Your best bet to really get into the hobby is shelling out a bit more for a decent DSLR, you won't regret it.

Hey guys, I'm looking to start filming and I'm looking for a camera.

I'm interested in narrative video (film, basically), so it doesn't need to be practical for YouTube vlogging or anything.

I hear a lot of people talk about the Canon EOS 70D, but I think that one might be a little pricey for a starter. Is the 70D a good camera to start with? If not, what are some good/better alternatives?

>>2763167
If you don't mind not having AF during recording (and you shouldn't be using AF during recording) then get a used 60D and put MagicLantern on.

Hey guys which is better? The very first Sony NEX3 model or the RX100?

What would you recommend for 250 dollars or less?

>>2763366
Good old .22 rifle.

>>2763366
Use your phone.

>>2763366
craigslist

>>2763321
Thank you!

>>2763361
RX100 is for easy pocketability, NEX3 for image quality.

Though you'd better get an A6300 or A6000 over a NEX3. Much better bodies for what might end up being expensive glass.

>>2763404
Alternatively a NEX 7 or NEX 6 would be a good choice also, maybe a NEX 5n and an EVF.

>>2762732
Get a real (newer) camera.

Ïm currently usng canon 7D, im thinking of getting a second Fullframe body for landscape and stuff. I know what canon has to offer, but i really like to know what other brands i should look at. Any recommendations?
I mostly have APC-S Lenses so i have to get new ones anyway.

>>2763404
Sony A6300 is amazing.

>>2763435
You don't need a FF for landscape, learn how to operate your camera and you'll be fine. Use a nifty 35 for panorama.

>>2763440
I know, but since i shoot a lot of wildlife with big lenses, i really hate changeing lenses all the time, so i want to get a second body.

This is more a technical question than it is gearfaggotry but I don't think it deserves a thread.

So I recently acquired some pretty fast glass (1.4) and I'm into portraits among other things.

So straight to the point, I use flashes to light up my subjects, the problem is that even at minimum ISO, all the flashes at minimum power it is sometimes hard not to overexpose my subjects due to the glass being pretty fast.

What's the solution to this? ND filters? Darkening filters on the flashes?? Can't think of any other logical solution really.

>>2763452
How about just using short 1/4000 or 8000 exposure time (if you don't want to close the aperture for shallow DoF and bokeh effects)?

With a quick shutter, you shouldn't have huge overexposure problems...

>>2763456
What is flash sync time?

>>2763456
this >>2763470
boy have you ever used a flash?
I guess i'll just put a ND filter on front of my camera but that's gonna look weird af in a studio environment.

>>2763483
moving the flashes away from the subject isn't an option?

>>2763483
>>2763470
Yea, what is HSS (high-speed sync)?

>>2763511
Could be, but I'm trying to get massive catch lights in the eyes and I like
>muh inverse square law falloff
when they're close to the subject as well.
I'm trying to get something similar to Peter Hurley's work, but he uses medium format so he gets lots of bokeh even with f6.3 lenses, that's cheating.

I guess ND it is.

>>2763515
my flashes are not capable of that, and I'm not into GAS

>>2763518
you might want to check out flash light modifiers then.. there are some pretty crazy ones out there

File: canon-ef-16-35mm-f28-l-ii-usm.jpg (24KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x500px

cheaper alternatives?

>>2763519
> my flashes are not capable of that
Would be easiest to fix this if you frequently do flash photography with such lenses.

> GAS
Using a HSS flash when you have already encountered a situation where it's easiest to do so isn't gear addiction for shit.

But fine, go about it with a ND filter or some diffuser or something that takes light out of the flash...

>>2763531
Sigma 24-35mm f/2, not entirely the same range but just better.

Tokina 16-28 f/2.8.

Canon 16-35mm f/4L.

>>2763531
Canon EF 17-40/4L

>>2763515
not just HSS, but a HSS flash firing at minimum power, optically triggering another flash at max power. this gives you a high power flash at speeds up to max shutter speed.

>>2763567
hahaha what????

>>2763572
fire a HSS flash at 1/8000 and front curtain sync and minimum power. this gives you the shortest pulse possible at the start of the exposure, triggering another flash at max power. the max power flash gives a long high power pulse that lasts the entire length of the exposure, instead of being chopped off like you'd experience when normally shooting at above max sync speed. look it up.

>>2763584
I will try it...

File: image.jpg (39KB, 851x315px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 851x315px

>>2763584
>max power

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	851
Image Height	315
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Any recommendations for a /fa/shionable shoulder bag that I can stick a dslr in?

>>2763531
Crop? Sigma 18-35/1.8
FF? Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC

>>2763590
Billingham Classic
NatGeo Whatever
Crumpler

I want to get into photography. Is an Olympus OM10 a good camera to start? I don't want to/can't spend huge amounts of money on a DSLR.

>>2763646
>Olympus OM10
It's pretty good, but you're going to spend on film and development/printing/scanning

>>2763646
You don't have to spend huge amounts to have a decent DSLR.
You can get a used Pentax K-50 or K-30, Nikon D3300, Canon 550D for around $300, put on a fast 35mm lens and you are set. Later on you can invest in specialised glass depending on your needs (wide-angle zooms, telephoto zooms, portrait lens etc...)

>>2763655

Yes, of course. I just don't have that kind of money unfortunately.

>>2763659
It would be better to save up that money, until then you can practice composition with your phone.

>>2763659
If you can't afford $200-300 to buy a used point and shoot or dslr on Craigslist or whatever used marketplace you have available, you can't afford a year of shooting film. Film is expensive, and developing/scanning is even more so. Consider that shooting 36 pictures on film, including the inevitable blurry, improperly exposed, or out of focus pictures you will make, will cost anywhere from $15-30. Every time.you can do this at home, but will pay $100 for a black and white developing kit and then another $200 for a scanner.

With digital, you pay up front and then you pay nothing later. Film is fun, but it will make you broke.

>>2763026
The a6300 is superior in every way to all other aps-c.

>>2763667
Well, maybe not ergonomics, available lenses, EVF size, or battery life, but other than that, yeah, pretty much.

>>2763667
NEGLIGIBLE

>>2763671
*rhythmic stick tapping*

>>2763669
It's 2.4m dot EVF that's as big as most mirrorless AND it's oled 120fps. No other camera has that. The lens selection is good, tell me one lense that isn't covered or is lacking in quality with no alternative. As for battery life, doesn't matter as they are cheap and small to carry.

>>2763671
Negligible? Down right slaughter of the competition.

>>2763685
>It's 2.4m dot EVF that's as big as most mirrorless AND it's oled 120fps. No other camera has that. The lens selection is good, tell me one lense that isn't covered or is lacking in quality with no alternative. As for battery life, doesn't matter as they are cheap and small to carry.
resolution isn't size. The size isn't as big as the X-T1. The quality should be very good.

Lenses:
fast 85mm equivalent for portraiture
f/2.8 24-70 equivalent
f/2.8 70-200 equivalent

>battery life doesn't matter
To you, but to others it may.

G7X vs. RX100 mkIII? On paper G7X seems better (longer lens while still being fairly fast), but some sites say the RAWs are bad or something? Or it might be the overall handling (RAW shot-to-shot, AF etc). I don't really care about the EVF on the RX100.

>>2763697
GR

File: 359900-canon-selphy-cp900.jpg (6KB, 275x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 275x250px

I'm traveling through China again this summer and last time I went I found an Instax was a great way to break the ice with local kids but it's a bulky camera in itself and the lens is crummy. A Selphy seems like it might be a good digital alternative and would pay for itself in one trip in terms of reduced media costs (last time, I burnt through about 20 packs of Instax and paid a small fortune to have some shipped to the middle of nowhere). Are they any good?

>>2763701
can we stop praising the GR already? it's 2016

>>2763714
I think they're good, from all reviews that I've seen.

You probably should try it out.

>>2763729
Thanks.

File: john-oliver__140110023442.jpg (927KB, 3441x2388px) Image search: [Google]

927KB, 3441x2388px

>>2763724
>it's 2016

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D4
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	Jeff Kravitz
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	1065
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	240 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2014:01:09 18:15:32
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	240.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3441
Image Height	2388
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2763701

Spoiler: I already have a GR. I was thinking of having a backup still being pocketable but with a zoom lens though.

hey /p/, whats a decent prime lens to go with the kit lens of the pentax k50 ?

>>2763867
both the 50 1.8 and 35 2.4 are great and cheap as shit

>>2760748
Into photography for about 3 years, always used my friends T3i or my grandmother's D5500 whenever I got a chance. I am now in a position to get my own shit and I think I have decided on a T6s. I figured it will give me plenty more room to grow and learn how to shoot at a decent level before I would ever need to get something better. Good, bad or retarded? On a side note I really enjoy stills but my friends are shooting videos at the moment and I thought that the video capabilities of the T6s were sufficient.