/gear/ - Gear thread

>>3006850
>>3006852
>>3006858
>>3006860
>>3006861
>>3006867
>>3006868

bump

>>3006869
Found a Canon EF Zoom Lens - 28-135mm - F/3.5-5.6 going for £80. Is it worth the cop?

I'm mainly looking for a lens that will give me better film quality, but I'm also pretty broke. my 50mm looks pretty good on my c100 but the focusing can be a bit of a pain with film.

I also have a Tamron 17-50, and a 55-250.

>>3006873
if its only 80 I dont see why not
if you get that you wont have to keep switching between your two tamron lenses everytime you need to go wider or longer

Best tripod for £50? I have a gx80 so even with a lens it's fairly light.

>>3006879
>for $50
fatten up your budget and get a Befree

>>3006869
I like this picture. Usually when people take pictures of gear they're stupid and don't get the whole thing in focus. Body razor-sharp, text on the front of the lens out of focus. I applaud this gearfag for paying more attention to his depth of field.

Do you guys think the kit lens with this camera would be good enough for an all around lens? If not, what would go great with it? I'd like to carry only one around and not have multiple lenses.

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D7200-DX-format-18-140mm-Black/dp/B00U2W4FTI/

File: PhotoPictureResizer_170121_181808044-564x1000.jpg (151KB, 564x1000px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 564x1000px

Just bought this at a flea market for 40 bucks. Very good condition, everything works perfectly. Don't know much about the lens tho. How good did I do?

>>3006918
pretty good

How hard would it be to use an 85mm 1.2L ii for street photography if you strictly use auto focus and are always shooting wide open? I heard the auto focus was really slow so I think that would rule out most subjects that are actually moving around right?

>>3006918
The X-700 is great, now all you need is some proper Minolta glass for it. The Soligor lens is generic 3rd party slow zoom garbage you can toss in the nearest bin or whatever.

>>3006923
Pre-focus roughly to the estimated distance then the AF will lock in fast
Didn't you use a kit lens before?

>>3006925
Great, knew that brand sounded sketchy. Now I'm interested in a Minolta MD 50MM f/1.4, let's see if I can find a good price.

>>3006879
The Dolica tripod's around $50 are decent

Looking for a cheap manual focus 28mm f2.8 prime lens for nikon.

Which brand is good?

Vivitar, Albinar, Beston, Kalimari?

https://www.amazon.ca/YN560-IV-YN-560IV-Speedlite-Panasonic/dp/B00PGTOX26/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8

^ Is that a good flash to get started with portraits? I would like to get into self portraits and boudoir and only have a Pentax K3, tripod, 18-135 and Tamron 70-300.

I have a $500 dollar budget. What's the best DSLR I can get?

>>3006996
used d3300 or d7000 and 35mm 1.8 dx prime

File: LpBFCt9.jpg (92KB, 760x749px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 760x749px

Is this meme accurate?

>>3006996
used Pentax K-S2

File: PSX_20170121_165625-1494x1631.jpg (318KB, 1494x1631px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 1494x1631px

Just bid on this canon in a silent auction for $35 Can anyone experienced roughly identify it?

>>3007037
Looks like a Canon AE-1

>>3007048
Yeah it looks like that, thanks bud

File: all-1024x712.jpg (57KB, 1024x712px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1024x712px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3007110
Looks like a Ritter Sport bar

>>3007116

I was thinking one of those floppy disk cameras.

>>3007122
The Mavica? So this will be Sony's retro design...
I hope it will give a floppy drive sound when it boots up.

File: 747 KB.jpg (748KB, 732x1097px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 732x1097px

What's the best price to performance ratio in photography? In terms of best image quality.

Difficulty of shooting can be disregarded for the most part.

I am just getting into gearfaggotry but so far these things have interested me from this point of view

>used SLR cameras and good film
>used medium format cameras
>vintage lenses
>point and shoot cameras that happen to have really sharp lenses
>bridge cameras that happen to have really sharp lenses

How do you go about navigating these things to get something really good?

>>3007156

a6000 with vintage lenses

>>3006988
Anyone?

>>3007157
Anon, this is a $250 camera. Surely there is a better way?

Guys,

I need a camera backpack. My goals are a general purpose bag that I can carry the following with:
Canon 6D with 24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
150-500 5.6
iPad
Tripod
Chargers and wires.

Plenty of pockets, but I want to go as small and compact as possible for traveling. Ive been trying to find the "perfect" bag for a while now and haven't had much luck. I just want something that's comfortable and doesn't stick out like a hump.

If it's too much, I'd be okay with a bag that would fit just the 70-200 OR 150-500.

>>3007160

No cheaper options will come anywhere close to the IQ.

You gotta break $1k to get something better.

>>3007179
How would the image quality of the a6000 with its 1.5x crop factor compare to using a vintage lens and good quality film on a full frame SLR camera like a Canon 1V?

>>3007183

It is a modern digital sensor, so even though the crop is annoying it would still blow it out the water.

Plus you can mount way more vintage lenses on a mirrorless.

File: 20170121_144640.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

anything good on this two picture? looking to buy cheap camera for novice (myself).

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:21 14:46:40
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/1.9
Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Brightness	0.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Focal Length	4.30 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	A16LSIA00VM A16LSIL02SM_
Time (UTC)	14:46:30
Date (UTC)	2017:01:21

>>3007186

nah, those are both outdated garbage.

File: 20170121_144644.jpg (5MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5312x2988px

>>3007186
second photo, let me know. :)

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:21 14:46:44
Exposure Time	1/33 sec
F-Number	f/1.9
Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Brightness	1.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Focal Length	4.30 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	A16LSIA00VM A16LSIL02SM_
Time (UTC)	14:46:30
Date (UTC)	2017:01:21

File: 00G0G_93oKtvU55yD_600x450[1].jpg (46KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x450px

How about it?

http://lexington.craigslist.org/ele/5924214451.html

>>3007183
Better. Plus if you want even better IQ, just use a modern lens for your most used 2-3 lenses. Things got a lot better on the glass, too.

>>3007186
>>3007188
I see nothing enticing here

>>3007190
hardly seems worth the bother

>>3007190
Why would you want to spend your time with that?

>>3007194
>>3007187
thanks.

>>3007190
100%, it's sarcastic of my post. :)

any suggestion if i want to buy something in between £200-300 (UK)?

Film:
>Minolta X-700, more lenses than I can shake a stick at. I use a Vivitar 28 1.2 most frequently

Digital:
>Nikon 7100 w Nikon 35 prime. Got a great deal on it because it was old new stock, still unsure how to feel about it.

Any wide angle lens recommendations? I shoot primarily in abandoned buildings and car shows

>>3007156
iphone 6s.

You're going to have a phone anyway, right? A 12mp camera that can shoot RAW and has a fast lens is a lot of quality for a few more bucks a month to your mobile bill.

>>3007156
it really matters what you plan to shoot, and what you plan to do with the pictures

Recently picked up a Tamron 24-70 for Canon and noticed that the barrel had a little wobble/play to it, image quality seems to be unaffected...anyone have experience with this lens or problems like this with zooms? Or is it normal?

>>3006988
that flash has a couple problems that would be an instant no for some people
>no TTL
>less consistent performance/probable early failure time
>poor warranty support
if you're prepared to deal with all that, sure, it's a light, it puts off light, your modifiers will matter more to the quality of the picture. for studio stuff most people prefer strobes because they have much more power and you don't need batteries. I would consider getting something used if price is such an issue.

>>3007243
I'd like something under $150CAD that I can use for studio work. I'd like to get something that is a little more than I need right now so I can grow into it. OR, something that is a basic inexpensive workhorse.

This was recommended to me in an earlier gear thread and I think that's what I linked to in Amazon.ca (which would be cheaper for me than going through B&H)
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1251500-REG/yongnuo_speedlite_yn660.html

I don't take my photography as serious as I could so I'm very lost when it comes to accessories.

>>3007247
read up on flash usage and lighting design, you are going to want to figure out more before you buy IMO. the yongnuo is decently powerful for the price, I guess, but for most classic portrait lighting you want more than one light source. and if you want one light source you want it to be stupidly powerful. monolights/studio strobes have several advantages - they supply modeling light so you can see what you're doing, and the good ones are more powerful. you may be able to find used light kit on ebay or something that lets you mess around and figure out what you want.

>>3007239
Okay, what if you plan on shooting sports like martial arts?

>>3007286
then the sweet spot is probably gonna be $2000+
sorry bro

>>3007293
You can buy a 1d mark III with lens and accessories for less than $600

>>3007312
with a decent sports lens though?

>>3007316
sure

http://www.ebay.com/itm/GOOD-Canon-EOS-1D-markIII-body-digital-camera-/322389932087?hash=item4b0feff837:g:JJwAAOSwopRYeVfU

$500 for the camera, $200 left to get whatever lens you want.

>>3007321
Oh, I just noticed that I had typed $600 before. I had meant to type $700. There were some auctions for $600 on ebay with camera+lens that sold for under that but the cameras were in rough shape.

>>3007321
yeah the question is, which good indoor sports lens do you have in mind that can be purchased for $200? bear in mind the criteria are: long, fast, sharp wide open

>>3007328
I don't agree the lens has to be super fast. Some noise is forgivable in sports photography.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-LENS-KIT-Canon-EF-50mm-f-1-8-STM-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5-6-Zoom-Lens-Filters-/191904248598?hash=item2cae627316:g:dWUAAOSwMNxXbAX2

>>3007329
samples with that lens
https://www.flickr.com/search/?group_id=1406096%40N25&view_all=1&text=sports

>>3007329
So you don't agree that the lens has to be sharp either?

>>3007333
Not especially sharp. Fast autofocus would be more important (and going by the reviews that lens isn't actually the fastest thing around so you'll have to git gud). The 1d mark III's 10 fps is what's going to be the thing giving you the edge.

>>3007321
>>3007316
>>3007312
related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk5IMmEDWH4

>>3007337
FPS is the least important thing for sports photography.
You get 10 trash photos with blur and excess noise in the same time someone else got 5 actual keepers, WOOH!

About to upgrade my X-T10 to an X-Pro 2 in the near future. For lenses I only have the XF27mm f2.8 that I've liked a lot, but wondering if I should sell that and get the XF23mm f2 as well. Having two lenses with such a similar focal length doesn't really make sense to me.

Usage would be street photography snapshits.

>>3007376
X-T2 or the X-T20 would be a better option though. Same features, some more refined and cheaper.

>>3007380
I prefer the ergonomics and optical finder of the X-pro2 though. I'll be buying used, not many used X-T2's around yet since it's so new.

>>3007110
Why won't sony make a square sensor camera?

>>3007247
Don't listen to >>3007243 >>3007251 there's nothing wrong with cheap speedlights for strobist work. Yeah, you might want monolights or strobes for proper studio work, but if you want to be cheap, nothing beats a small army of YN560/660s with a matching trigger.

>TTL
>studio
I'd get 1 TTL light for running around, but that's it.
>>3007376
If you like the size of the 27 keep it. If you prefer the 23's focal length, sell the 27.

>>3007380 isn't completely wrong though.

>>3007188
Not wholly familiar with British prices, but the D3200 with 35 1.8 DX seems like an ok deal, and the 70-300 VR behind it seems about right too. Literally everything else there is trash.

>>3007156
>>3007157 isn't wrong, given your criteria.

>>3007026
Comparatively speaking, yes. Nothing wrong with Gold in my opinion, but I personally love Ektar. Others aren't convinced it's as good as the marketing says it is.

>>3006916
Yeah, you'd be good to go, and the 18-140 is sharp enough.

>>3007216
Minolta: Unsure
Nikon: RIP your wallet. Try and find a Tokina 11-16/2.8, the Nikon DX wides are stupid expensive.

>>3007404
>I prefer the ergonomics and optical finder of the X-pro2
But the X-Pro2 doesn't have any of that

>>3007456
Correction, I was referring to ergonomics

Complete newfriend here.
What's some good bang for buck nikon f mount general use lense as a starter?
Around 100 max

>>3007542
The kit lens that came with the camera.

>>3007544
I can't seem to find that weirdly enough

File: IMG_2016-12-17 17:10:52.jpg (41KB, 409x690px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 409x690px

newfag here, looking to cop decent film RF camera.

Budget up to 1 grand, considering between Nikon S3 2000 Millenium and Minolta CLE w/ Summicron 40mm.

Nikon should be great camera built to last ages and new in box. Minolta is very light and packages bunch of very convenient electronics.

IDK are there any other viable options?

>>3007545
Should be already on your camera

>>3007548
I only got the body

>>3007447
Would this be good to get with the speedlight? https://www.amazon.ca/Translucent-Collapsible-Reflector-Photography-Situation/dp/B002ZIVKAE/

I have the option of 32" or 43" - is there one that will be of more use?

>>3007551
Sucks to be you, there are no lens worthy of talking below $200. When you have the money get the AF-S 18-55 VR II lens

>>3007554
But that lens is like 80 bucks

>>3007556
With busted AF, yes. You don't want to start with manual focusing on a beginner DSLR, trust me.

>>3007560
Ok. thanks a lot ofr the advice

>>3006869
I'm looking to get a printer and have strongly considered an Epson, specifically Ultrachrome driven. Are there any non current year models which produce well? Actually, any models at all which are recommended? My budget is fairly flexible and I'd like to print up to 13x19 if possible.

>>3007241

Anyone?

File: ZBEAUTY2.jpg (187KB, 1280x1127px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1280x1127px

I'm in need of some assistance. I'm looking to get a good camera.
My budget is anything under $1000 and I was wondering if anyone here could possibly recommend some cameras that I could get. I'm new to photography, so any advice would be greatly appreciated. Also, recommendations on lenses and other equipment?

>>3007581
Second hand 5D mk II, sigma lenses.

>>3007583
>Second hand 5D mk II
Good advice
>sigma lenses
Ahaha! no.

>>3007581
Any used Pentax upper/mid level like a K-S2 or K-70 will do for starters. Couple lenses along with the kit lenses like the DA 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 or a telezoom like the 55-300 PLM if you are into nature and wildlife as well.
Similar setup for Nikon, like a D3300 or D5500 with an AF-S 35/1.8G and 50/1.8G or an AF-S 55-300, along with the kit lens.

>>3006923
i would not recommend using this lens for street at all, especially at 1.2. Your DOF is so thin that even if you prefocus you still probably won't get the shot. that thing is huge, it'll get you noticed and ruin the moment too. i own the lens myself and would much rather use the 50 1.8 and simply get closer or something but you shouldn't be shooting street with wide open apertures theres really no reason to, stick to f8 or above

>>3007612
Get a 500mm catadioptric if you want to get sneaky shots from a distance

>>3007554
>AF-S 18-55 VR II lens
How is this lens? Worth sticking with for a while?

>>3006923
>How hard would it be to use an 85mm 1.2L ii for street photography
Not hard.
>if you strictly use auto focus and are always shooting wide open?
Are you having a fucking laugh m8?
It'll do street portraits for you and do what you need it to for static objects (people who have been stabbed).

Stopped down, assuming you have enough light and they're still not moving, you'll do fine.

>>3007660
It is literally the kit lens you get with the camera, intended to cover most used focal lengths so beginners will only need one lens to start out with.
Once you get to learn the camera and the exposure and you start to feel the limitations of the lens you can start investing in new lenses. Until then just stick with it.

>>3006923
>85mm 1.2L ii for street photography
You're talking about literally throwing money in the trash. Most of your shots won't have focus where you want it, and you'll wind up shooting stopped down all of the time, completely negating the only reason you would shell out the dosh for an 85 f1.2

That is a highly specialized portrait lens and a stupid choice for pretty much anything else

Behold my abomination

File: s-l1600.jpg (145KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1600x1200px

Am new.
Thinking of buying this used lens. Described as in excellent condition.
Aren't those a bunch of sand corn scratches or is it supposed to look like that?

>>3007753
If the optics are fine and the function is fine I wouldn't give 2 fucks about that

>>3007156
where are his arms

>>3007758
Okay cool, thanks! Being pretty new I was wondering if it was worth the $70 price gap from just buying a new lens.

>>3007026
Ektar may be the best film every made so i guess... although gold is not garbage film i view it as a waste of time and money.

>>3007762
What is that? A 35mm f1.8 DX? Best bought used and in good shape. Make sure you check the optics with a flashlight and verify smooth focus

File: Paper.jpg (74KB, 1600x910px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1600x910px

>>3007553
anybody again?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Photographer	DEconomica
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	910

>>3007553
>>3007831
Yes, they're super handy, get a bigger one if you have space.

>>3007353
>FPS is the least important thing for sports photography.

straight into the trash

>>3007353
>FPS is the least important thing for sports photography.
>You get 10 trash photos with blur and excess noise in the same time someone else got 5 actual keepers, WOOH!
>implying a camera that does big fps is going to have shit AF and "excess noise"
>implying cameras designed for sports are done wrong and FPS is no issue
Confirmed for never having shot sports in his life

>>3007838
Thank you. :)

>>3007583
>>3007609
Thank you for the advice! I'll do some research on them and try and find some deals.

File: 6809_8_big[1].jpg (121KB, 1680x1260px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1680x1260px

Just for fun, here are the vintage lenses available on vatera.hu (Hungarian ebay) right now.

http://www.vatera.hu/listings/index.php?ob=16&obd=2&re=&c=&q=antik+objekt%C3%ADv&eo=&tr8=&p1=&p2=28785.92&ee=&de=&es=&exs=&exns=&ds=&re=&pci=0&se=&sdr=&us=&tmpsb=Pontos+keres%C3%A9s

Everything on here is under $100 USD. If a listing has "FIX" next to it then it is a "buy it now" listing for that price.

Remove "antik" from the search to see all lenses.

>>3008007
Scam

File: 25444_D700_front.png (196KB, 700x595px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 700x595px

I'm thinking of getting a used D700 as a budget full frame. I can one with a shutter count of ~37.000 for around 400£ or 500 euro.

What think? Should I save a lot of dosh and get a Sony A7 or something instead?

I'm thinking of trying out photography. After studying the options I've decided I'll try to pick up a used Canon EOS 550D/T2i or 600D/T3i for best price/performance.

There should be plenty of these around in good condition since they're entry level and people either don't use them as they abandon photography, use them very casually or upgrade to better ones once they really get into it. As far as I understand these models should still be quite OK for amateur even though they are quite dated.

Extra features I like:
>1080p@25/30, 720p@50/60
>Magic Lantern
>capture from gPhoto2

I should be able to get one around 200 - 350€ depending on condition and extra gear.

Some 550D deals I've seen:
>3600 shots taken, stock lens and peripherals, canon bag - 300€
>"good condition", stock lens and peripherals, bag - 240€
>10k shots taken, stock lens and peripherals, Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6, cases for lenses, 32GB card, backpack - 320€

Am I missing anything crucial? Do you think I should try to get one with extra gear or just the bare model with bag? Are there some other models I should consider at this price range?

I know that I will end up flipping this eventually if I either don't like photography or like it very much. I just want to get my feet wet without using a lot of money.

>>3008058
See
>>3007609

>>3008066
>Nikon D5500
>very few listings around, kit would be at least 500€
skip

>Nikon D3300
I'll have to investigate this one further, thanks!

>Pentax anything
Very rare in my area.

Found a listing for Pentax K20D with PENTAX-A ZOOM 28-80mm f/3.5-4.5, SMC PENTAX-M 28mm f/2.8 and Phottix BP-K20D handle for 240€ though.

I really need another eye looking at this for me, will this be worth the money ? A good starters set ?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01D93Z89W/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=marketorder-20&camp=1789&creative=9325&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=B01D93Z89W&linkId=8f47dc6632830310a4338620092249f8

>>3008054
you won`t regret. do it. best camera

>on shitbay looking for deals
>canon leica screwmount rangefinder body with nikon lens
>bid for teh lulz
i hope i don't win

>>3008054

Refurb a7 is what? $800?

Probably find used for a little less. Worth a look at least.

>>3008054
For a couple hundred more you could have a D600 which is better in every way from an iq and speed standpoint. D700 is a good camera though.

File: IMG_2680-1.jpg (725KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

725KB, 1000x1500px

I finaly found my first zoom lens, and I think I got a pretty good deal.

70-200L F/4 IS : 620€
Absolutely untouched, with receipt (1189€), box, hood and pouch, it's still under warranty until May 2018, which means it made it out of the store 8 months ago.

I'm heading out right now to play with it for an hour or so.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

>>3008135

You will enjoy that, it's a great lens.

>>3008140
I just came back, and yes indeed, it feels pretty great to use. The focus is damn quick, and I'm glad I found the IS version for that cheap, usually 500-600€ is the price of a clean non-IS f/4, and the IS is closer to 900€ with a few scratches, no warranty of course.

So far I was using a 24mm STM and a 50mm STM 1.8 on my 760D, I'm not really into nature photography though, the reason I wanted a proper tele is to play with more compressed perspectives.

>>3008135
Get a tripod collar for it

>>3008173
Yeah I already looked into it, the OEM ones are quite expensive. Would you recommend any other brand? Otherwise I'll buy a used one.

>>3008081
> A good starters set ?
> will this be worth the money ?
Not really. I'd go with something else. A6000, K-3, D7200, something like that.

>>3008176
Buy a cheap one off ebay or amazon, they're pretty good. Had one for my old 70-200mm as well.

https://www.amazon.com/Tripod-Mount-Ring-Collar-Canon/dp/B00DAAFH0K

>>3008176
It's a piece of metal, I don't think you specifically need the OEM one. Check first if it sits flush in it's groove then tighten until it is snug. Don't go full retardmuscle, you don't want to overtighten it.

File: IMG_2043.jpg (44KB, 400x403px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 400x403px

Is Sony A900 still relevant? A pawn shop near me has one on auction and I'm pretty sure that the final price would end up being somewhere around 200-250€. Do you think its worth that much?
The specs do look fairly good for a camera this old:
>25MP full frame sensor
>IBIS
>Big (x0.75) ovf
>Weatherproof
>5fps with c-af
>Accepts cheap Minolta glass

[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	400
Image Height	403
Scene Capture Type	Standard

I've recently switched system and I need a new flash. I've always used a ~€160 Metz, and I was looking for something cheaper. Is the price very important? Would any flash do? Speed isn't important but the battery life is.

Ken Rockwell said zoom on flash isn't important, is it true? I'm using a 75mm eqv. and plan buying a ~40mm eqv.

What TTL flash would you suggest me? Possibly under €100. Is the Amazon Basic flash ok?

>>3008128

>comparing a entry level fx with god tier d700.
>implying

>>3008184
Amazon Basic doesn't have ttl metering so you'll have to adjust it manually. A cheap Yongnuo (for example YN-565EX) or some other chinese cheapo brand could be a better alternative.

>>3008183
It sounds like you about get what you pay for.

Then again, it's not really good at this point - why not get a newer model?

>>3008184
Godox or Yongnuo perhaps?

You could get a Godox with a lithium battery (V860II) but it costs more than 100.

The AA powered ones should be close to 100Eur, but obviously THEIR battery life will depend on you using good batteries (Eneloops, Turnigy, whatever). Or an external battery pack, which I guess is a solution but also usually costs around 100 without even the flash.

>>3008210
Godox TT600 accepts Eneloop AA batteries. Cheap and reliable, more so than the lithium battery one with identical electronics.

>>3008207
What would you recommend in the same price range?
t.>>3008183

>>3008213
The TT685 is the otherwise identical AA model. TT680 is older.

But the difference is there either way; even with Eneloops it has only ~half the battery life of a 860II and of course the lithium pack also recharges the flash faster (mostly relevant at near full power, at lower power there is no issue either way).

>>3008217
Uh. I personally basically wouldn't.

I'd buy a good new midrange camera (higher-end APS-C/normal FF) 'cause for my time and effort I basically want a lot better results. [Life is too short to spend it with old slow gear and all that.]

>>3008176
Why bother with a collar? The f4 weighs fucking nothing, and most tripods should be able to hold it up fine, let alone your noodly arms.

I'm working with an $800 budget. I'm aiming for a slight upgrade from the piece of shit that came with the Nikon D5100. There's a Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8 for $280.00 I'm looking at and a Nikon AF VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D for around $500.00. The 80-400mm new goes for $700+ from Nikon (it's used) so I think I'm gonna gamble with that.

Anyone have a smaller recommendation for a smaller zoom lens? Is the Sigma a good pickup for a hobbiest photographer?

>>3008237
That's almost like a kit zoom.

I'd get the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 instead.

>>3008234
With a light body like the 760D it's gonna be very front heavy, even with a good tripod (which I don't have) it's gonna make it more difficult to make fine adjustments. Although I would agree that investing in a good tripod should be the first step.

Anyway there's no pressing matter, I'm gonna need a few months to really get into this lens, like I did with every other lens before, I'll spend at least 6 months finding its limits before spending any more money.

>>3008234
Because you can easily switch orientation and balances much better.

>>3008026
Not a scam, but good look getting those people to ship to you. They think -you- are trying to scam them.

>>3008301
In the rare case when they understand plain english

File: 101_3403.jpg (954KB, 2304x1728px) Image search: [Google]

954KB, 2304x1728px

I got my 1D mark II N from ebay in the mail today. It had just enough battery life left for me to turn it on and take a handful of photos to make sure it worked. I bought it from the seller "robert's camera".

Notes
>Camera looks better in person than in the photos they provided. It's not really "ugly", just very used.
>it's fuckin' heavy!
>there is some dirt on the mirror or sensor that will have to be cleaned

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Camera Model	KODAK Z700 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	86 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	230 dpi
Vertical Resolution	230 dpi
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	14.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2304
Image Height	1728
Exposure Index	80
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Macro

>>3008318
You could get a better camera from that money. 1DIIn is ancient.

>>3008322
I bought it because it's ancient.

I almost went ahead and bought a Nikon D1 because it's truly old. Still plan on buying one one of these days before they get too rare.

>>3008237
The sigma's good. The AF 80-400 is a turd, and a screw-driven lens so you gambled poorly. Enjoy your manual focus zoom.

I bought an old sony dslr that I'm happy with, but it uses compact flash cards. I'm noticing there are actual exposed pins, are they in any danger of getting fucked up if I'm popping the card in and out 2-3 times a day to put into a usb card reader?

>>3008333
Very much so. Be careful with CF pins.

File: lightmeter.jpg (312KB, 1000x562px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1000x562px

>>3006869
post pretty light meters

>>3008325
The 80-400 is an excellent wildlife lens, ask Ambush

>>3008237
the 80-400 from 2000 is a real turd on DX, soft as my belly. It's almost unusable at the long end. I own it and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody.

>>3008361
You own a lemon, get it fixed

>>3008369
no the performance is consistent with the tests. the newer AF-S one is a lot better. I think the reason they pushed such a shit lens is the cameras weren't that much better back then. but please continue trying to misinform anon into wasting his money.

File: HCB.jpg (258KB, 1500x291px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1500x291px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:23 22:32:47
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	34.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1500
Image Height	291
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: HCB2.jpg (248KB, 1500x474px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1500x474px

>>3008383
Don't worry. I'm not trying to be elitist or anything. I used to be overly occupied with sharpness and DxO scores.

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

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

>>3008390
I've found mine sharpness with a d700 and a 24mm2.8D at f8..I guess most of people try to find the most close to reality as possible as our eyes can see. IMO

>>3008370
I won't. I didn't know there were two versions of that lens. I own a Sigma 50-500 and though many call it a turd of a lens and soft I take great shots with it on a crop body. Could be even better on FF with the bigger pixels.
A lens being soft at the long end is pretty much given with the older designs, the subject can still come out great with the right lighting.
With that said using any screwdrive lens on a non-screwdrive body is stupid, I agree.

>>3008395
>could be even better on FF with the bigger pixels.
Or worse, because of the super soft edges.

>>3008325
>>3008361

Ok so I won't get it. I'm just shopping around. Any recommendations for something else around that price?

>>3008428
Have you thought about a fixed 300mm4 or 200-500mm5.6?

>>3008348
The *AFS* 80-400 is an excellent lens. I've used one myself.

The AF 80-400 is a turd.

>>3008428
Sigma 17-50/2.8 or Nikon 16-85 for standard DX zoom, Tokina 11-16/2.8 for wide zoom, Nikon AFS 70-300 VR for telephoto zoom, all under $500 used.

>>3008430

No I haven't but will add that to my list. Thank you!

>>3008452

Very helpful. Thanks.

What's a decent, affordable flash that can swivel (for light bouncing) and can preferably be used as a slave? The proprietary Nikon ones are all crazy overpriced.

So far I'm looking at maybe a Speedlite JY-620 Viltrox but the controls seem really limited

>>3008237

Why are you comparing a 17-50 to a 80-400?

What exactly are you looking for in a lens? What kind of shooting do you plan on doing?

Can't believe nobody has asked you this yet... it matters before anyone can make a proper recommendation.

>>3008489
Yongnuo (mainly recommending the manual ones for this brand - 660 or 560 III/IV + TX).

Or Godox (better for a TTL system).

>>3008507
Godox Thinklite TT600 for US$80 or Yongnuo YN560IV for $90?? TTL MIGHT be useful

>>3008509
These prices are higher than they should be.

The YN560IV is ~$65 the newer/better YN660 is only ~$75, and that old Godox also is like ~$55 (I'd recommend the V860II or TT685II, myself).

Maybe grab them off eBay, Aliexpress or a Hong Kong reseller rather than wherever you're looking at +1 reseller inflated prices right now.

>>3008511
Yeah, I'm in New Zealand, everything is more expensive here. Those are the cheapest prices I could find

>>3008511
If it was a question which to pick:

I'd prefer the YN660 for mostly static use (products, portraits with model, random tourist attractions...), 'cause it's the most powerful, despite also being a bit bigger.

And the Godox V860II or TT685II for walkaround shooting and not so static subjects (events, kids & pets in general, easy tourist snapshots with no preparation...) - TTL is just easier.

>>3008512
Yea, but you can import directly from China?

I think it's even closer to you than me, but it doesn't really matter, they ship just about everywhere.

>>3008515 (cont'd)
Yup, checked on the cheapest item (Godox TT600 from one of the sellers on Ali).

NZ gets the same prices and faster shipping. So unless your import duties are horrid or you can't wait ~2 weeks, you can probably save that 20-40% markup and/or get the better models.

>>3008519
Awesome, thanks. Ordered a YN660, saved about 40 bucks overall

>>3008540
Glad to have helped.

BTW, make sure you watch how exactly you close the battery door. Seems like that can break more easily than average due to how that pretty thin... catch? grove? on the side that holds the pins can break off.

[Well, maybe I gotta thank a Chinese engineer for designing the easily replaceable and pretty cheap door to break rather than something else - but still, I guess it's something to mildly be careful about.]

>>3008414
Or not being a pussy faggot dxo fetishist and getting satisfaction from the captured shot, not from the resolution score of your gear.

>>3008624
Are you stupid or is your hobby strawmanning everyone you talk to?

>>3008167
post some snaps

File: IMGP7080.jpg (118KB, 1000x854px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1000x854px

I bought pentax-m 50mm f/1.7 lens and I got this UV filter with it. It was in old plastic made-in-japan box and I would like to know if it's good stuff or something generic not worth putting on the lens. On the uv filter is inscribed: S.L 37 UV 49mm

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-50
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.16
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:24 20:34:50
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	854
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>3008946
Figures it's okay for that lens.

If you're not shooting film you probably don't need it anyhow.

File: IMG_2684-2.jpg (459KB, 1000x735px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 1000x735px

>>3008942
Alright, I'll post some from yesterday, and also today, it snowed a bit in between.
1/6

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	121.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

File: IMG_2691-1.jpg (232KB, 1000x804px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1000x804px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	155.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

File: IMG_2712.jpg (219KB, 1000x543px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1000x543px

3/6

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	192.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

File: IMG_2751-1.jpg (706KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

706KB, 1000x667px

4/6

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/640 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

File: IMG_2757-1.jpg (509KB, 646x1000px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 646x1000px

5/6

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

File: IMG_2770-1.jpg (283KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 667x1000px

6/6
They really are snaps though, sure I try to get some kind of composition, or at least shoot straight, but without even looking for anything interresting.

As soon as the roads are clear I'll drive to a nearest city and give it a try on the streets.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 760D
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto

http://photorumors.com/2017/01/24/first-picture-of-the-pentax-kp-dslr-camera-leaked-online/

>They made retro styling work the absolute madmen

>>3009029
Does this mean I'll be able to pick up a K-3 II for cheap soon?

>>3008994
Judging by these low res exports it's not a bad lens but I wouldn't call it superb. I've seen much better IQ from other f/4 lenses and my Tamron 70-200/2.8 is much better stopped down to f/4.
Try using it at f/5.6 and only go wide open when absolutely necessary. Portraits should be fine wide open.
Light build and portability with WR is quite the plus though with the 760D it will no be a sealed system. Get an 80D or 70D later on so you can smug shoot your way through rainy events. It is fun especially if the only cover is further away and wherever you go you will be in the others frame.

>>3009029
I for one welcome our new Pentax K-/p/ overlord

>>3009035
Considering the price I paid, I don't mind not having the sharpest glass, it's more than enough for an amateur like myself. I'm not a pro, nor a pixel peeper, even if I crop I never get even close to 1:1.

These shots are definitely not a testament to this lens either, I still have to learn how to handle it properly, but I already noticed some pretty bad chromatic aberations at f/4, I will indeed have to avoid going wide open.

Had I paid full price for it, I guess I would be a bit disapointed

>>3009047

Nikon is kill

>>3006996
D3400 kit from best buy

Konica hexanon ar 50/1.4 with adaper and uv filter for 60usd?

I have no 50 below 2.0.

>https://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sony-FE-70-200mm-f-2.8-GM-OSS-lens-review

G Master finally tested by someone competent.

selling a canon ef 28mm, 1.8 on ebay rn.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/252736076461?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

ive seen these going for like $400 so maybe you get a nice cheap, almost new lens???

Anyone selling an fuji x100?

File: Clc01_rUkAACkV0.jpg (79KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 960x960px

>>3009160

>sharper than most primes
>5th sharpest e-mount lens tested

God damn.

And we all knew the lens rental review was just to garner page views. No one actually rook it seriously bwyond shit posting.

Now that others have reviewed it, it wont be long before they come out and correct it.

4hcong

I have found a Sigma APO EX DC OS DSM 50-150 f/2.8 for $650 AUD, in VGC. This would be perfect for Gym Work and Helicopter photography (Yes, quite broad)

Now I know that Sigma motors arent very good from what I heard, how ever the closest L series Lens in price is a 70-200 F/4L at $70 more.

I currently have a EX DC HSM 30mm F/1.4 which operates perfectly except for autofocus during recording (Given it is an older lens and discontinued)

Gimme advice in other words.

File: a6vt5i.jpg (101KB, 1339x753px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1339x753px

sony a6000 or canon t5i for narrative film

Adobe Raw has started applying some sort of grade to my raw Sony files upon import. It's dropping the exposure and adding saturation, basically undoing the raw format. Anyone here know how to fix it, or why it's happening?

>>3009291

I have been having the same issue, have you looked through the settings or import library for any auto presets?

>>3009298
I'm not terribly experienced with where that would be located, but the few settings menus I've browsed and altered didn't seem to effect the import.

File: yaschica.jpg (4MB, 3168x4752px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3168x4752px

>>3006869
going to load this up with some ilfold b&w 100

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T1i
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:24 22:56:02
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	-1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3168
Image Height	4752
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3009290
A6000.

Not that it's an ideal camera for flim, but if you want to film this cheaply, it's a good choice.

New Thread
>>3009349
>>3009349
>>3009349

>>3009350
Bump limit is at 310 replies you idiot

>>3009364
Yeah no shit, I read it wrong. My bad but I can't delete either posts now so just ignore

>>3009371
Yeah, will do but the sonyshill is in butt overdrive since the K-/p/ announcement.
Damn, Pentax is beating Nikon in it's own game, I'm not used to such entertainment

>>3007609
>along with the kit lens.
the only flaw in your speech
D3300/5300 kit lenses are trash.

>>3009490
Most kit lenses are trash, especially the superzoom ones, but Nikons latest 18-55 is one of the better ones. Even Pentax outdid themselves with the new collapsible 18-50 WR kit lens. As far as kit lenses go, might I add.
If you can however you are always better off with buying body only, the primes and telezoom I mentioned earlier and a good standard zoom. Pentax has the DA 16-85 WR or the 16-45 if you can find a good one used, I'm not that familiar with Nikon though.

>>3007581
Get an old 7d/70d or something, buy a few good lenses, get a 10-30/10-20, 28/28mm prime, 35mm prime, 50mm prime, 18-200, and a 70-300. If you're only beginning that's like all you will ever need for a year or two. Go then get a good sturdy tripod. Having all these in the bag allow for any set or shot. Wide angle. Portrait. Wildlife (kinda, at a high aperture).

That's what I'd do atleast if you're new to it.

>>3008318
how does that baby feel? I almost bought one from a local seller but he didn't have the charger and I said fuck it for the moment. been wanting an older 1d for a budget sports setup

>>3007542

50mm 1.8 Series E

Hey guys, I bought an X-Pro2 and love it and have now sold my Canon gear to fund a full Fuji kit.
I have enough cash to get an X-T2 as a second cam and some lenses but I don't think I need it. I'm actually thinking of either getting an X-T1 or an X-T20 when it comes out. The thing is, I really do want a weatherproof camera. As it happens, my X-Pro2 alone has been through a temperature variance of -20 to 45 degrees centigrade in the last 2 months alone. As well as being heavily snowed and rained on, and being in 90% humidity.
I don't know if an X-T20 would be able to handle it.
Should I get an X-T1 or X-T20?

File: msj1g0.jpg (55KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 800x532px

>>3008342

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3S
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 10.0 Windows
Photographer	JLO
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	1018
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	70 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2012:05:06 21:10:11
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	2500
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	532
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: DSC_0197.jpg (3MB, 6000x4000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6000x4000px

Is it worth it to buy a used Nikon D5200 with an accompanying 50mm f1.4 samyang lens?

Mine was stolen last year, and i really liked my 50mm nikon lens with it..

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D5200
Camera Software	iPhoto 9.6.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:04:02 12:13:06
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Flash
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
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

>>3011364
Bit of a pain to use MF lenses on a camera with just that unreliable green dot for focus assist.

I think you'll be better off with a 50mm that has a focusing motor. Or a camera that can focus peak / has a focusing screen for MF.

>>3011387

>Focus peaking


I am unfamiliar to that, i just googled it and it seems very reliable for manual focus. I was quite used to the lens i had and i enjoyed practicing to get the focus right.

thanks for the little tip, i'll go and find more things to consider

>>3009291
It's lightroom changing your profile. To fix this:
1. Import any photo
2. Press reset to make sure you're not applying any other settings
3. Scroll down to profiles where it says process version and all that stuff
4. Change from adobe standard to whatever profile you shoot in your camera
5. In one of the tabs on your top bar next to file and all that stuff there will be a button to set that as default
6. All photos imported by that camera will now have that profile.

>>3011427
Not that reliable, the sensitivity is much wider than the dof on faster lenses. It starts to show edges when it is still oof. It is a great help though, much better than the DSLR focusing screens

>>3011462
Not really? It shows edges when its above the threshold for detecting them which the nice engineers usually set to something that is actually quite sharp.

And 'the' sharpest place is somewhere in the middle of the indicated places.

YMMV if you work with the hack-ish magic lantern focus peaking, I guess, but even that does fairly well.

>>3011650

focus peaking is a meme, lad.

File: olympus-pen-ee-3-35mm-half-frame-film-camera-473-94d7445694f8f422b66da66798f9b435[1].jpg (24KB, 400x266px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 400x266px

What's the best half frame/single frame camera, image quality:price?
Has to have a viewfinder.
Not fussed about auto/priority/manual, most are fixed lens auto anyway, right?

Looking for a film camera for snapshits at parties.

>>3011848
Fujica Drive

>>3011650
focus peaking is rather a meme. >>3011664 is right

anyway, question;
hi anons, femanons, others.

I need suggestions; I have a 5d2, and despite the excellent build and performance, I can't always rely on it when im /innawoods/. I need suggestions here for another camera. I need it to use CF cards and the LPE6 battery so i dont have to buy a new set of storage/power. I need to be really cheap, under $1000 (AUD). I have considered the 5Dc, taking into account the different battery, 12MP is plenty, I shot D700 before this, bought 5D2 for the massive low light improvements and magic lantern.

>>3011855
>5dii
>doesn't work in foliage

The fuck wrong wit u anon?

>>3011664
I can accurately focus at f1.4 without focus mag using peaking, you just have to know how to use it. Not everything that sparkles is in focus

>>3011862
tell of your experience with it? Others experiences would be good to assure the build and that it can last in harsh conditions

>>3011864
>last in harsh conditions

Your camera is not a hemaphiliac aids baby. If you don't drop it or submerge it, it will be fine.

Is the Canon 5D Mark I good for street shooting?

I could get one for $300 locally.

>>3011868
Forget the gear faggotry. All nice gear does is make life easier but it is not essential to getting good shots. For street, something discreet. Having said that, the 5D is a decent bit of kit but discreet, it isn't.

>>3011865
so i dont need a cover or something in snow or anything?

does anybody know if the Nikon F5 body has AF fine-tune?
about to buy a third party lens that i hear might have some AF problems... don't want to work with a dedicated lens calibrator if I can avoid it

>>3011868
If you want to take shots of people without them reacting to the camera, then no, 5D is a bad idea since it's big, it's loud and you have to hold it up to your eye to shoot.

Get a mirrorless camera with a tilting screen instead.

>>3012133
I have a F5, and I know it has no such thing. It's also noted in Uncle Ken's documentation as a downside of that particular body.

Is nikon d3400 a good choice for a beginner? How long I can probably go with her without having to invest in another camera? What are the downsides compared to better cameras from nikon?

>>3011868
I got one for the same price last week. It's pretty nice. Camera-wise, it's still very much a viable camera, especially with good glass.

>>3012137
If this is a major concern for you just get the mirrorless

>>3012142
Right. No issue, just another $60 if necessary.. the camera store by me might even let me use their calibrator for free.
Thanks, friend

Anyone remember that brand that had the cheap-ish 70/80-200mm lens? I swear it wasn't typically sold for more than $300...

>>3012118
Nope, be wary of rain, cos it's wet and in the air, apart from that your camera will be fine.

>>3012157
No, it's shit, has no screw drive focus motor, so you're stuck with only the most expensive lenses. A 2nd hand d7100 is a better choice for lifespan, it will last you until you want to pay for full frame, might be a week, might be 5 years.

For a beginner though, you would be a thousand times better off with a sony mirrorless, an evf (electronic viewfinder) has many benefits; it's much larger than any crop optical viewfinder, you get a wysiwyg preview of your image as you change settings as opposed to just looking through a window and relying on metering, it has focus peaking and focus mag which are fantastic for making old cheap manual focus lenses much more usable (you can put ANY lens on sony mirrorless cameras using a $10 adapter), it will give you a clear preview even in a very dark room. There's also the matter of price/performance, because every mfg but canon buy all their parts from Sony, Sony can do it all cheaper. Not to mention the cameras are much smaller and more aesthetic, so you won't look like an autist with it hanging round your neck and you'll be more tempted to take it out with you.

When it comes down to image quality, there is almost nothing in it, sonys 24mp sensor is in pretty much every crop body.

>>3012162
A decent hardware calibration tool is designed to be left on your desk so it can take readings for the light in the room and adjust your screen on the fly. They have a long lifespan and aren't expensive.

>>3012342
The guy from nikon D3400 here. Thanks for your answer. Where I live, Sony mirrorless camera are as expensive as a nikon D3400. They are still worth it (they are a bit hard to find too)? Also, here I can buy a Canon Rebel T5 for half the price of a sony mirrorless (A5000), wouldn't that be a better deal?

>>3012382
Get a D3300, it is as good as anything else for starting out. Get an AF-S 35/1.8G for it and you are set to explore the world.
Later on you can upgrade to a D7200 if you feel the need.
D3400 is a D3300 without some useful features and some added not very useful features. As an alternative if you feel you are going to stay in the hobby, get a used D7000. Get the pro body features, Nikons best sensor ever and the same AF plus the screwdrive AF so you can use older cheaper lenses

>>3012382

a5000 should be $200. Still not worth it at that price.

a6000 at around $450 with kit lens is worth considering.

>>3012385
Thanks, this looks like a solid advice. I really appreciate it.

>>3006941
I have the Minolta 50mm 1:1.7 for my X-300. and it's really nice although mine is a little aged and loose.

File: File_000 (1).jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

I've always played with the idea of getting a nice camera someday.
Well, I acquired these nikon lenses(and film camera) for absolutely free today and was wondering if you guys have any advice for a camera to pair them with. I'm guessing I'd have to pair them with another nikon?
Cost isn't a huge factor, but I'm hoping for a good bang for my buck camera. 5-8mp is enough for me. I'm less concerned with megapixels and more concerned with how well it captures detail across the whole picture. I just don't want lower than 5mp, if that's even an option.
I'll (mostly) be using it to take completely still indoor pictures of items with a tripod from about a meter or two away max, then fixing colors in gimpshop. I'm not completely dumb when it comes to photography, but the cameras I've been using up till now leave a lot to be desired.

>>3012695
Yeah, a Nikon camera will be best. You could use a mirrorless camera, but then you'd be focusing manually, you might as well get a Nikon SLR.

There's no point in aiming for such low resolution though. There's many more benefits of modern sensors than just more megapickles - better dynamic range, better colors, much lower noise, higher sensitivity, etc.

Those are G lenses (they have a focus motor in the lens) which means they'll work on an entry-level DSLR. Note that they're fairly slow, but if you're on a tripod with a stationary subject, that's not a big deal. You also won't really have anything wide-angle, which you may or may not care about.

Your best cheapest option is probably a used D3300.

>>3012695
Yea, the primary way would be to use them on a Nikon, though a recent-ish Sony should also work.

> more concerned with how well it captures detail across the whole picture
That is related to how good your lenses are and how many MP you have on your sensor, though.

You can try these - but if you want really even images at various apertures, you might need better lenses than these. Cheapest will usually be some primes.

>>3012700
>There's no point in aiming for such low resolution though
I'm not aiming for it, just don't want to pay a lot for more for it if it doesn't feel like I gain any actual picture quality(see response below yours). I'd take higher MP all day if the camera actually makes it look good. The camera you recommended is roughly what I thought I might be spending.
And I don't think my angle doesn't need to be all that wide for what I do.
>>3012703
>That is related to how good your lenses are and how many MP you have on your sensor, though.
Maybe I don't have a deep understanding of what megapixels actually means, but these 12-16mp pictures my current camera and iphone take should be 5mp for how little detail they actually pick up. I need to shrink it closer to 5 just to make it look ok.
>want really even images at various apertures, you might need better lenses than these
Well, considering they cost me nothing, they'll be a good starter set and they seem to sell for a fair amount on ebay if I get rid of them.

>>3012703
Another thing to consider is that anything near "a meter away max" will be problematic with that 70-300. It's not a macro lens or focusing very close like some other lenses; I think it focuses from like 1.1m onward?

This can be manipulated with an achromat close-up filter lens.

OTOH if you were going for a "nice" camera, maybe it's precisely the lens that you might want to replace with, say, a macro lens.

>>3012708
>a meter away max" will be problematic with that 70-300
Yeah, I figured I'd be using the smaller one, and shouldn't need a lens for insane close-ups, although I'd probably use it far more than my 70-300.
It says clearly on the lenses which distances they're made for. The smaller ones says roughly 1ft and up and will see the most indoor use, and the larger one says 5ft and up.
But I will be taking outdoor pictures(and some possible video) at longer distances than that. So even the larger one will get some use.

>>3012707
>Maybe I don't have a deep understanding of what megapixels actually means, but these 12-16mp pictures my current camera and iphone take should be 5mp for how little detail they actually pick up. I need to shrink it closer to 5 just to make it look ok.
I think you understand it okay.

But these again aren't the sharpest lenses. If you got a old 12MP camera you'd be about in the same place where you have a ~5MP usable photo, again.

> Well, considering they cost me nothing, they'll be a good starter set and they seem to sell for a fair amount on ebay if I get rid of them.
I guess. Figures you want to at least try them first.

>>3012713
The main thing for me is that these pictures, even if I do have to take them at 5-8mp for a usable photo, will look considerably better than what I'm currently working with.
My current camera does "ok" in high dynamic mode with absolutely 0 motion for a second or two as it's taken. But I just want something where I don't feel like I need to take 10 pics, then sort for the best one capturing the details I want in the way I want. At least not at the same level.

File: ms.jpg (159KB, 1000x937px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1000x937px

>>3012715
>The main thing for me is that these pictures, even if I do have to take them at 5-8mp for a usable photo, will look considerably better than what I'm currently working with.
I'm not sure you'd get that if you used these more modest lenses with, say, an old 12MP DSLR.

You already had a modest lens on the smartphone, but it had a newer though smaller sensor. The net result would be fairly comparable. Even then, your smartphone actually might still be capable of shooting at a faster pace and things like that.

The main advantage I could see for an *old* DSLR on a tripod is that it probably would be easier to trigger a bigger on-camera or off-camera flash...

> But I just want something where I don't feel like I need to take 10 pics, then sort for the best one capturing the details I want in the way I want. At least not at the same level.
Then I'd probably to start with just a somewhat recent modern APS-C. D3300, D5500, even D7200. Something like that? Such a new-ish camera with a newer, better sensor will generally be 24MP.

[Plus maybe still use an extra flash, but you can get that later.]

With that, you'd fairly clearly have a better sensor and body to work with...

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

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

>>3012729
The used d3300 cameras with body only seem to be at the price-point I was hoping for. It has 24mp, but I don't really plan on needing it to take such huge pictures since I'll mostly be sharing them on 4chan anyway.
Extra flash is something I'm interested in too because of the indoor factor.
So you'd feel pretty good about a d3300 then? It'd treat me pretty well? So far, that's what I've landed on getting based on this thread.

>>3006869
I have been thinking about getting into photography and now that i have some extra cash I was wondering which camera is the best option?
ive been looking into DSLRS from what i have read they are the best option for that price range but im not really sure about very many other options.

>>3012741
> Extra flash is something I'm interested in too because of the indoor factor.
I'd generally recommend ordering them straight from China for cost reasons.

Something is available at $25, but for shooting on that tripod, I'd mainly recommend one of the powerful ~$70 YN660. Very nice output, and has basically everything you might want. [Judged by standards of portable flashes running on AA, of course.]

If you walk around and want automatic adjustment, they also got TTL flashes.

>So you'd feel pretty good about a d3300 then?
I think it'd be a good improvement over a smartphone and sounds viable for what you described.

Myself, I'd probably not pick anything worse than a D7200. But I'm kinda already in this hobby and I don't do that much else that is expensive. Spending a few hundred on a body every handful of years doesn't really feel like a problem. [If anything, it got cheaper since I no longer shoot film.]

I don't think most people are "ready" for this right away, even if like you they already shot from tripods though. And the D3300 will work better than what you had before, so I guess it's no annoyance starting with that.

>>3012751
> I was wondering which camera is the best option?
Depends on what kinds of photography you want to do. And what lenses you get will also matter a whole lot on IL cameras.

> from what i have read they are the best option for that price range
MILC can be an equal or cheaper alternative. It just depends partly on what lenses you want to use, partly on what you want from the camera body.

Maybe start with what you want to shoot most often?

>>3012754
I was planning on mostly shooting landscapes, I am going to Peru this summer and think it would be pretty cool to bring a good camera along with me to shoot Machu Picchu and the Inca trail if that gives any idea?

>>3012770
One of the lenses I'd suggest to bring for that is a wide angle lens.

Something like a Samyang 12mm:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=13719

There is also the (slightly but not much worse) 14mm if you want a DSLR:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=13227

If you have a bit more money to spend, perhaps a Tamron 15-30mm on a Canon/Nikon/Sony FF camera:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=13609

Then add a nice ~35-50mm equivalent prime or kit lens, or a 24-70mm f/2.8 or something for a bit more "normal" shots, and maybe a flash and you're probably quite fine for the trip already.

Let's start eliminating, is a FF camera possible? Might be >=$1.5k for the body and then $500-2k or so per lens. And a bit of weight to carry. But extremely beautiful photos.

>>3012784
something tells me the dude who's just getting into this doesn't want to drop 5 grand on top of international travel costs.

>>3012788
I don't make such assertions when dude can afford international travel.

I'm just asking whether a middle class affordable mid-range FF is a possibility. It's probably on the upper end of discretionary expenses to squish in a year. But if it's not an option we can discuss the many other variants with some compromises.

>>3012791
PS: Renting the camera's also an option.

Have that very nice camera for what's a big trip, then hand it off since you're not going to need it once your holidays are over. Something like that.

File: IMG_5353.jpg (30KB, 313x470px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 313x470px

Is a Yashica A a good camera?
I've been looking to give medium format film photography a try.
Is it a good deal for $120?

[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	313
Image Height	470
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3013411
its standard price you pay for it

>>3013425
Is it any better than the famous Yashica Mat 124g?