/gear/ - Gear thread

Are Sony lenses worth the price?

>>3039296
Depends. If you want them as a can opener then no, just buy a regular old can opener.

File: hol' up.jpg (160KB, 663x477px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 663x477px

>>3039291

Stop making these before they hit the bump limit. /p/ is one of the slowest boards I visit. Even when they hit that limit it will take days for them to disappear.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:14 13:35:09
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	663
Image Height	477

>>3039291
First for Sony. Canikon cuckolds with 1990s technology BTFO

What's up with manual focus lenses on Sony a7 series? I was looking at the Loxia 35mm f/2 and saw that when you start to manually focus the viewfinder automatically magnifies to help with focusing.

My two questions are:
Can you change where in the image the magnification automatically occurs? (i.e. does it zoom in on the selected focus point?) Second in part to this, can this feature be disabled?

Does this feature only apply to the Loxia lenses or does it work with any manual focus lens? Is it only for native e-mount lenses or will adapted lenses also have this feature? I'm considering waiting for the new Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 manual focus lens since it is smaller and supposed to be cheaper with the extra stop, but will it have this auto-magnification feature? I understand this is not a deal breaker I'm just curious if all manual lenses on Sony a7x do this

daily reminder sony is shit and so are all digital cameras

What are the best value/bang for buck camera backpacks?
I know about the Lowepro flipsides, the NatGeo one that is shamelessly shilled on here and of course there are always the Amazon Essential bags and backpacks.
I'm looking for one for the upcoming spring/summer/fall trips and hikes. I also want to bring my Manfrotto 190XB tripod and not sure it fits all the cheaper backpacks.

>>3039296

no

>>3039388
Glad you are back, brother

File: Laowa15mm.jpg (101KB, 700x382px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 700x382px

Jesus, this is beautiful.
Compact F2 at 15mm.
All metal body.
Low distortion.
There is even a lever to change aperture to Smooth vs clicks.
They use the frog eye coating that repels water, from the video they made it's impossible for water to cling on to the lens surface.

>>3039354
>Second in part to this, can this feature be disabled?
Don't know about the first question, but yes.

Some of the native E-mount manuals have electronic contact that automatically engage.
Most manual lenses don't have this feature, but you can just configure one of the C buttons to engage magnification.

>>3039392
Self-cleaning glass coating is a relatively easy and widely used coating technology.

I have a lumix G7 and was wondering which is the best macro lens for m43. The 45mm has Leica written on it, does this make it better?

File: 1.jpg (92KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 853x480px

Physical lever so you don't have to remove lens to change aperture mode.
It also focuses to minimum distance 15 cm. Macro mode friendly?

>>3039401
Didn't know about that. But I'm guessing it isn't very widespread in older lenses.

>>3039296

Depends on the lens.

>>3039354

The magnification point is movable, just use the dpad. It xan also be disabled.

It eorks automatically with native manual lenses, but others require a button press.

>>3039415
There are a few native manual lenses that don't have electronic contacts.>>3039392

Bu yeah.
Zeiss
Voightlander
Tokina
All support this feature.

>>3039392
>>3039410
is there any use for a clickless aperture other than video?

>>3039420

When you need to get the exposure juuuuuuuuuust right. ;)

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-14 at 22.49.07.png (1MB, 1790x726px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1790x726px

>>3039296
Worth them pulling shit like this, not in your fucking life boyo.

>>3039420
It's also a preference thing for stills. Depends on the person.

>>3039426
That STF lens has really amazing background blurring.
https://youtu.be/yZo3SbAJbtY?t=318
It's a good lens with unique characteristics.

>hating on Sony
Are you guys poor or something lmao

>>3039410
Macro is 1:1 on that lens, which frankly is the most interesting part because you can have wide angle macro shots. Make flies look like giants.

>>3039451
Are you sure about this?

This is the newest lens in their line up. Not the old 15mm Macro for DSLR.

>>3039445
Sony is the new guy on the block who gets all of the attention from Zeiss, Voightlander, Tokina.
Samyang is also trying new things with AF lens for E-mount.

Really, there wouldn't have been any need to be mad if only Canon and Nikon had their own mirrorless Full Frame. They could get all those new lenses too.

>>3039431
Does the apodization element also improve sharpness?
Or is it just bokeh whoring?

My old Sigma 50mm produces very similar bokeh to be honest.

>>3039463
From what I can tell, the lens is very sharp in the places that are in focus.

>>3039466
Pretty much all 100mm f/2.8 (macro) lenses are also very sharp.
So it it better than the competition?

>>3039469
Depends on your purpose. I think this is a specialised lens for portraits, and it definitely needs good lighting.

File: Y3c9MTE3MCZjaD01MTM=_src_137690-P1070003.jpg (422KB, 1170x513px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1170x513px

>>3039451
>you can have wide angle macro shots. Make flies look like giants.

They also make this 24mm 2X macro just for that kind of stuff.

Interesting company indeed.

File: fujifilm_handson_09.jpg (64KB, 589x442px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 589x442px

Looking to get my first "real" camera. Budget between $600 and $1000.

After some research, I've decided to go mirrorless and I've narrowed to Sony, Fuji and Panasonic. I plan on using it for a good mix of photos and video, with the majority of the shooting handheld. As far shooting conditions go, it would be a mix of indoors and out, and I don't want be too limited insofar as the time of day I'm able to shoot.

The Panasonic G85 looks to offer the most in terms of features with both 4k and IBIS at under $1000, but the m4/3 sensor has me hesitant. Does APS-C offer a significant advantage over m4/3 in terms of low-light/high-iso performance or could it be compensated for with lower F lenses? The money I save going m4/3 will be wasted if I invest in a bunch lenses, only to sell them if I decide later down the line that I should have went with a bigger sensor.

If I go with Sony, in order to get the get the IBIS and 4k like the G85 I would need to go with the a6500 which is outside my budget. Even just to have 4k I would need to stretch my budget for the a6300, and I've heard bad things about rolling shutter and overheating. Finally, the a6000 looks to be an excellent value, but lacks 4k and other features found in more recent cameras. Sony also has a somewhat limited selection of lenses, however I expect that to change in the future as they're leading the market right now.

Then there's the Fuji X-T20. From what I've seen, the IQ is great, and it offers 4k, but lacks in terms of image stabilization with no future for upgrading to IBIS and a limited selection of OIS lenses. It also seems to be geared more towards stills than videos, but I could be wrong on that.

What are your guys' thoughts? Is APS-C noticeably better than m4/3? Is imaging stabilization important for freehand shooting?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-G85
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.1
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/5.1
ISO Speed Rating	2500
Lens Aperture	f/5.1
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	33.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto

>>3039479
>not sure if tiny camera or gigantic hands

>>3039479
Quit staring at numbers and go try them out

Anybody have any good C-mount or Micro 3/4th lenses to recommend? I'm looking for anything, cheap or expensive, mostly to know what to look out for in the future.

>>3039479
Just go and hold them and pick the one you like the most. The fandangled features aren't going to make an ounce of difference to you for the first few years.

Focus on getting good at taking photos, and then you have the right to be a gearfag.

Also yes APS-C is noticeably better than M4/3, and image stabilisation is a nice feature to have but you can live without it

>m-m-muh metal lens construction
daily reminder that aluminum is NOT an acceptable material to make the outer barrel or any of the rings on a lens from

I'm looking at you, Fuji.

File: 1470963968415.jpg (27KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x300px

>https://petapixel.com/2017/03/11/olympus-officially-pulled-plug-four-thirds-lenses/

So what does this mean for the prices of 4/3 lenses and bodies?

>>3039550
As if they weren't already rock bottom? Lenses like the 150/2 aren't going anywhere, their
value has been guaranteed by the EM1.

>>3039301
for the years I've been here new threads were always started at 3 hunnid, get over it

>>3039508

>aluminum lenses

I bet they are all going to have shit resale value in a few years.

>>3039570

At least you've been consistently retarded.

File: 14017878046_02164429d8_b.jpg (230KB, 1024x746px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1024x746px

>>3039479

>Is imaging stabilization important for freehand shooting?

IS and OSS are rather important if you intend to shoot handheld, especially in dark areas or inside.

>Does APS-C offer a significant advantage over m4/3 in terms of low-light/high-iso performance or could it be compensated for with lower F lenses?

Yes, significant advantage. No, it can't really be compensated for with lower F lenses. Plus you'd get super shallow depth of field and worse performance with a lower F lens, which isn't always desirable.

Also, take a look at the a6300 too, it has 4k support, and has been under $1000 lately. Lacks IBIS, but most Sony lenses have OSS at least.

Honestly, of the choices you listed, the a6500 is the best. You can go with some of the smaller FF lenses and upgrade to a FF body in the future too.

Also keep in mind, that if compact size isn't super important, you can adapt and autofocus pretty much any modern lens with the a6500. For that matter, manual focus lenses are fun as hell too.

>>3039643

300 is the bump limit, though. Why are you retards such prisses about meaningless shit?

File: [HorribleSubs] Hibike! Euphonium S2 - 01 [720p].mkv_snapshot_32.03_[2016.10.06_06.53.21].jpg (164KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1280x720px

>bokah
why gaijins are so stupid?

>>3039649

It is 310, newfag.

>>3039651

>in class
>learning japanese
>talking about pictures
>say how nice the boke is in some cute girls picture
>say bokki instead of boke
>spaghetti everywhere

>>3039409
>Also, where the fuck did you find an X-T10 for $500?

I wish I could get either for that price. For some reason A6000 kit is still sold for €650, and due to discontinuation X-T10 price has dropped to the same level.

>>3039661

How much does just the a6000 body go for there?

You can find a grey market kit lens for like $100.

>>3039463
>apd sharpness
Nope

But it's an incredibly sharp lens

>my sigma 50mm
Nope

It changes the bokeh from having hard edges to having graduated edges, only stf lenses can do this.

>>3039469
>better than the competition

It has no competition, unless you count the soft as fuck non variable fuji 56mm.

>>3039661
I've seen a7ii's go for under 700, then you get full frame and ibis.

>>3039296
Depends if you want the best of the best and are prepared to pay a little extra for the priviledge.

File: EF 70 200mm f 4L IS USM Hero.jpg (67KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1200x1200px

Is the canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM weather proof?

>>3039479
If 4K video is a deal breaker for you, you cannot be helped. Kill yourself my man.

>>3039714

I wonder if he even has a 4k screen.

Most people don't

>>3039700
>How much does just the a6000 body go for there?

Finland 580€

>>3039708
The a7 body only still goes for 999€ over here.

>>3039714
>>3039728
>doesn't understand what 4k is for

>>3039714
>>3039728
>implying downsampling 4k to 1080p will not be better than almost every 1080p consumer camera
>implying psuedo 4:4:4 downsampled from 420 4k is not good
>implying my xiaomeme 4k phone will not produce more detail downsampled, it will just have no borkeh.

After two years of only having two primes for my D7100 (a pretty shitty 28mm 2.8 prime and a 50mm E series prime with no AF) I finally got myself a zoom. Specifically, a distinguishably shitty 35-70mm 3.3-4.5 AF zoom from at least 20 years ago. But, as shitty as it is, I'm actually having fun. I know that nothing will be particularly sharp or that colours and contrast would be particularly nice (not that it matters much when you shoot in RAW and can modify shit to your autism's delight), so I just focus exclusively on taking pictures. 100% composition.
I actually really like this range so I want to get the much-revered 35-70mm 2.8 lens some day, as well as the 35mm DX, but for now I'll keep using this piece of shit lens and have some fun with it. At least it's aesthetic.

>>3039744
>>3039753

>implying it makes a difference for your snapshit videos

Besides, most 1080p on a camera is already a downsample.

>>3039463
bokeh whoring.
and less light.

>>3039760
yes, a shitty downsample out of a pixel binned line skipping image.
if your 4k is pixel binned, it will still look better.
check canon eos m5.

File: camdecision.png (29KB, 694x361px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 694x361px

I'm looking to buy a new camera. I don't really care which one, I just want a used camera that is a good value. I've been using http://cameradecision.com/ as a reference. Are their ratings and reviews accurate, or do they exchange favourable reviews in exchange for advertising funds?

>>3039792

Their top lists seem ti disregard price. Plus their 1v1 comparisons are sometimes off.

>good value

a6000

File: thatadapter.jpg (89KB, 275x353px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 275x353px

How much would you guys pay for working olympus OM10 without the adapter?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	2942
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2011:09:26 16:21:14
Exposure Time	0.8 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	275
Image Height	353
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3039807
tree fiddy

Just went and changed to bbf and I'm practicing with it, but I noticed I had on a setting that made my pictures look 'vivid' so I changed it to standard. Do you guys know what it was doing to my pictures?

>>3039813
Are you talking about the colour presets? If so, it just made the colours and possibly the contrast stronger.

>>3039792
It's dumb. Decide what you want from a camera.

First, OVF or EVF?
An OVF is the traditional SLR experience, which is effectively just a fancy window, great for saving battery.
And EVF is what you will find in mirrorless and Sony bodies, an electronic screen that shows an exact preview of your image as you change the exposure triangle.

Personally I think an EVF makes the learning curve MUCH easier.

So that narrows us down to Fuji and Sony pretty much, Fuji is pretty dead in the water right now and there's very little in the way of an upgrade path or 3rd party support, however an xe1 is very affordable for an EVF adorned camera.

In camp Sony you have everything from the nex 3 (has no viewfinder, only rear screen, come up crazy cheap sometimes, mine was 20 quid) all the way up to the about to be announced $4000+ a9. Because Sony release new models more regularly than other brands, their old models drop in value much quicker, they also provide the sensor to everyone but Canon so are usually cheapest for their specs in the first place. There's no real duffers except the very early under 16mp nex 3's. The a7 represents insane value for money second hand with regards to raw image quality. nex6, nex 7, a6000, a6300, a6500 are also worth a look.

>>3039759
Is the Nkkor 28mm 2.8 D af not worth its cost?

>>3039849
I've read that the D is an improved optical formula and quite good, but what I have is the non-D version which is different.

File: 5d.jpg (91KB, 680x467px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 680x467px

I can get a 5D classic for $200. I'm worried that it's pointless to get a full frame that's so old. Will it be better than my Nikon D5100 or should I not bother?

>>3039858
Just do it

>>3039798
>>3039817

Yeah, thanks guys. I agree, and have been focusing on A6000, A6500, a7, but haven't found any great deals yet. There was an A6500 listed for ~$650 but someone else beat me to it.

I'd also consider a Samsung NX1 or Leica SL, but only if the seller didn't know what he was doing and listed it at a crazy low price.

I can spend $500 or I can spend $2k, just as long as I can resell it a couple years down the road and not lose too much.

>>3039863
>as long as I can resell it a couple years down the road and not lose too much.

That isn't how cameras work.

>>3039863
Bodies are gonna shed money, lenses retain their value.

I doubt the original a7 will drop too much over the next 2 years though as it will still represent the most affordable full frame option. might lose $300 off a $600 second hand unit in 24 months.

File: P9840208_converted.jpg (54KB, 589x442px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 589x442px

Im in the market for a new body, i feel if i make the initial investment and get a body past my current skill level to grow into. I am not a professional, i barely consider myself an amateur. Looking at the D500, it covers all the bases ill ever need but just wondering if there are better alternatives or if full frame should be worth looking into. I shoot mostly landscapes, cars (some moving) and was thinking over time to get into wedding photography/ engagement photo's and what not. This is going to be my investment for the next decade or so. are there other options to conscider at this price range? I am camera illeterate but it seems this is a well liked camera by others Thanks PFA

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-GH4
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
ISO Speed Rating	2500
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual

>>3039867
Sony a6500 or A7R

File: IMG_20170315_110947.jpg (263KB, 1280x718px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1280x718px

This is the only camera I own after selling all my gear. How does this make you feel /p/?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	LG-H901
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.8 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:15 11:13:54
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length	4.42 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3039868
Battery life steered me away from mirrorless. I currently shoot with an A3000 I've had for years and it let me down a couple times on big shooting days

>>3039813
>vivid

Probably just bumps up the color saturation for the out of camera jpegs.

>>3039878
>Battery life steered me away from mirrorless

Ever since I moved from film to digital in 2002 I've had at least two, if not three batteries on me for any shoot. There are trade offs to any system. If the decreased size isn't worth having to carry extra batteries, that's fine. But it shouldn't be a deal breaker.

>>3039887
It's not a deal breaker. Seems I'll have to put more thought into this. Thanks for your help

what's the consensus on the sigma quattro? I could get one cheapish

>>3039814
>>3039880

Yeah when editing I always have to desaturate everything so this is probably the case. I'll go shooting and test it tonight

>>3039867
A7ii makes most sense, ff gives twice as good lowlight performance and sharper images and a larger viewfinder. The ibis and evf make it pretty much idiot proof and a great learning tool.

D500 is a specialist body for sports and birds.

>>3039888

I shoot about 500 shots a day on average and end up with 30% left on my a7ii.

Take two batteries with you and you will be fine.

>>3039906
>I shoot about 500 shots a day on average
god damn dude

>>3039909

That sounds misleading. I mean when I go out to shoot (twice a month or so) I shoot 500.

I don't shoot 500 a day.

>>3039154 →
sigma 19mm f2.8 with rear baffle removed.
you'll get around 21mm out of it.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/westgate24/13979928649/in/photostream/

>>3039867
Get a D750 or a Sony A7II. The D500 really isn't the best option for that kind of usage.

File: s-l1600[1].jpg (264KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1600x1200px

Is my listing a fair price for what is offered?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lot-of-2-Canon-DSLR-and-SLR-cameras-EOS-1D-Mark-II-and-Rebel-S-II-Lenses-/232272288879?

$350 for a 1D mark II and a Rebel S II with two lenses included.

>>3040091
you know the rabal and the 35-80 aren't worth anything right?

Beginner here. I see everyone calling rebels "rabals". So rebels are bad? I was thinking about getting a t5i as my first real camera. Should I steer away?
I'll just be taking pictures of everything as a hobby. Probably bird pictures and animals.

>>3040107
Conservative Ebay sold prices say they are worth $30 and $50. Several auctions went for more.

>>3040113
t3i and t5i are often referenced as the best beginner DSLRs.

Anyone here use the Ricoh GR? I'm interested in it, my only worry is that I live in a really sunny area and that I wont be able to see the screen outside. Is it bright enough?

Looking to buy a new lens but I'm unsure on what to get. I have a 7d along a 24mm pancake and the nifty fifty

I shoot concert but not huge arenas so I'm looking to go wide and Im not willing to spend more than 1200 US.

I'm thinking either the 17-40mm f4
or the 16-35mm f2.8

Can anyone make some recommendations please?

>>3040135
Nah senpai, they're objectively the worst dslrs on the market, image quality and feature are miles behind pentax, nikon and sony.

>>3040113
low end canon is way better than low end nikon because they don't gimp them as much and their lenses are half the price
assuming you're not autistic they are also superior to sony cameras

>>3040304
Canon are way, way behind the competition when it comes to sensor performance and their ergonomics are straight from fischer price, not to mention dat build quality.

And no, they can't afford to gimp them, the nikons are only gimped as far as not having a screw drive af motor, which is understandable as nikon no longer make screw drive lenses and it would add a lot of cost.

And low end canon lenses suck dick, by FAR the worst lenses on the market if you don't go for a modern L. Their nifty fifty is an unfunny joke.

How is APS-C compared to M43 in low light?

>>3040316
Much better. The bigger the sensor, the more light that's gathered, the cleaner the images.

Also, large sensors are less demanding on lenses so you also get sharper images.

>>3040324
It is not the sensor size, it is the size of the individual photosites, you goddamn idiot!

>>3040316
Sony/Nikon/Pentax APS-C is slightly better.
Cannon APS-C is slightly worse.

Apart from sensor size it also depends on production techniques.
For example I think most m43 sensors are backside illuminated whereas most APS-C aren't yet.

>>3040325
wrong

>>3040325
Lol, no.
If you're viewing at 100% crop then yes, larger sites are more accurate. But you view images at a standard viewing size. Take the 12mp a7s and 48mp a7r, the r, when resampled will be using the average of every 4 pixels to every one of the s, the downsample method is more accurate.

Photography is gathering light, the more light you can gather at once, the cleaner the images.

>>3040153
No screen is bright enough for full sun.

But you could buy an optical viewfinder.
Or maybe some kind of hood for the screen - or just use your hand.

>>3040327
>>3040326
Uneducated scum

>>3040369
lol, are you mad at being proven wrong little guy?

>>3040376
You can't prove anything without proof.

>>3040326
>For example I think most m43 sensors are backside illuminated
Completely wrong.

There exist 1 BSI FF sensor (Sony's).
There exist 1 BSI APS-C sensor (samsung's).
There exists a ton of 1 inch sensors with BSI.
There exist a ton of smartphone sensors with BSI.

M43 is screwed and will most likely never get that technology.

I need a $25 thing on Amazon before they'll mail me a tiny little screw 'add-on' that I can't seem to find anywhere else, any little camera related gear you lot can think of that you really value?

Thinking I'll buy a spare air rocket and some microfibers

Can't think of anything else.

>>3040413
Hand-made leather neck strap
Hand-made leather lens caps
Lenspen set is always handy

>>3040414
The neckstrap I understand but man most of the leather lens caps I see out in the wild are pretty gaudy.

Lenspen set is a great suggestion though added to cart.

>>3040413

Sensor swabs.

One of those mini tripods.

Lenspens/blowers/microfibers.

>>3040413
The sensor loupe set and sensor pen, never pay to have your sensor cleaned, I use mine about 10 times a year and it's been invaluable.

>>3040326
>m43 are now made by sony
>it's not bsi because they don't want them to out perform their own apsc
>sony apsc is still not bsi because they don't want it to out perform their full frame line.

>>3039869
It's a neat little camera
You could go for a kind of Moriyama style

Guys, I am debating between the Canon 135mm vs. the Rokinon 135mm f2

Is the Canon's chromatic aberration really that bad/is the sharpness really not that great? Or can I live without that stuff?

The Rokinon is cheaper of course but I am hesitant on doing manual focusing since at that length and at a small enough aperture I don't think I will be as accurate and wasting shoots cuz I went the cheaper route will probably be disappointing.

>>3040444
>Is the Canon's chromatic aberration really that bad/is the sharpness really not that great?
Nothing to worry about, if anything becomes visible it is easily dealt with in post. Only charts and specs sheet fetishists find the CA and sharpness bad. It certainly performs very well even on the small pixel APS-C, so there is nothing to worry about.
It might induce purple fringing on non-Canon sensors though, but that is not the lens' problem.

>>3040446

I appreciate the feedback. I am not really into getting too deep into sheet details (especially since when the hell will I ever focus in the corner of an image?).

I guess the real question is if the cheaper price is worth the manual focusing for anyone with that experience.

I might just buy a 135mm used and play around with it, return it if I dislike the experience. But any opinions before I potentially waste my time would be appreciated.

>>3040316
The older 16/20mp ones are about on the same level as the entry-level Canons, the quality really takes a hit when you go over iso 1600. The new 20mp ones (GH5 and E-M1II) are somewhat better and they're only like half a stop behind Sony and Nikon APS-C cameras.

>>3040440

Sony makes a FF bsi sensor.

How would an aps-c bsi sensor outperform it?

File: Fuji-X-E1-vs-X-E2.jpg (49KB, 650x247px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 650x247px

What am I missing out on by opting for the less expensive X-E1 over its successor?

I mostly shoot stationary objects. I don't plan on doing sports or wildlife. I don't mind taking a bit of time to set up my shots with the manual focus

>>3040642
Weather sealing and better AF.

>>3039291
Is there a smart adapter for using a sony lens on a m43 camera?

>>3039471
move along shill

>>3040646
>weather sealing
idiot

File: ynvwy.jpg (34KB, 786x438px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 786x438px

>people won't shut up about the fuji x-t2
>it doesn't even have a 70-200mm
>"professional"

>>3040741
>50-140/2.8
>???

>>3040741
>people won't shut up about the sony a7rii
>it doesn't even have two card slots
>"professional"

I can play too

>>3040743
Not him but 1 card slot seems to be good enough for BBC
https://youtu.be/7t5l7sjcjHU?t=273

Apparently they started upgrading their gear to better sensors lately.

File: IMG_1393.jpg (27KB, 441x333px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 441x333px

>>3040741

Literally shits all over every other 70-200 on the market, especially sonys meme g master which is confirmed for being a total POS

>b-buh muh f-f/4

[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	441
Image Height	333
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3040747

>ppfpfpfpff muh BBC

As a disposable toy capturing b-roll then yeah sure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni6ZuEvz17w

what the actual fuck

>>3039479
thinking you need 4k is asinine.

you don't have a good enough computer or enough hard drive space to properly use it, and recording in it just to be compressed to some 7 or 8 bit bullshit because its on a platform not designed for video.

that whole meme about how the 5d mk ii was the tits because the office was shot on it fails to mention they ran the video files uncompressed(or less) through entirely different hardware.

>>3039858
eh, you'll have to buy new lenses, i'd stick to nikon unless you only have a few. the old 5d can be a bit noisy and its pretty slow, but you can get decent images out of it. Honestly tho i'd save a little longer and get something a bit nicer, I think the $200 could go to something more cost effective.

don't be trapped by the full frame meme, i have both a 5 mk ii and a 7d and the 7d is much more effective at getting images, its just the 5d has theoretically better image quality, which doesn't matter if your shits out of focus or whatnot in the first place.

>>3040324
>>3040327
>what is intensity

>>3040765

>a total POS

The fucked up lensrentals review? That was a fucking joke.

Everything else says it has prime level sharpness.

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

X-mount doesn't have anything that comes close.

>>3040135
They're only mentioned because they are readily available pretty much anywhere for pennies. Good cameras they are not, especially the older kit lenses suck ass. Of course talent, vision and understanding is much more important in photography.

>>3040048
Aahhhahhahahha no.

>>3040747
Probably hooked up to an external recorder, I'm guessing. Doesn't take much more space to hook up an Atomos or something.

I have a 240v strobe. What is the worst thatd happen if I plugged it into 100-110v source? Since it is lower Im guessing it shouldnt blow up or blow the fuse.

theres a chance it may be dual voltage like most modern devices since they make them in both voltages they may just label them differently.

>>3040765
G master is top tier over everything else, unfortunately top tier in price too.

So why do people think that the 7D Mk II isnt better than the 5D MkIII? (aside from the full frame meme)

>>3040803
same reasons people would prefer the 7d over mkii, the full frame naturally will give you better images but the 7d benefits from much faster autofocus, faster shutter, and build quality. Its essentially a trade off between image quality or speed/autofocus, or alternatively how good the photos your camera takes can be vs how good your camera is at actually getting the shot.

low-light is always a factor in the comparison but 7d handles high iso pretty well, especially the mkii and flashes really aren't that expensive.

File: hahah.png (725KB, 1748x1396px) Image search: [Google]

725KB, 1748x1396px

who else is stocking up on mju iis to sell for $500 each?

>>3040468
only for a7r2.

>>3040743
>not having a chinese assistant following you around to make backups

>>3040853

Their newest and latest FF model, yes.

Rumored to be in the a7iii and a9 too.

>>3040793
>what is intensity
In photography, light intensity is indicated through the t value, which is the measured as opposed to calculated f value.

So let's put an f1.4 lens on your m43 and my ff, as the light intensity will be the same, and my sensor is 4 times the size, you get 4 times as much noise and 4 times more apparent lens softness.

Just ordered the sigma 135. Red ring fags on suicide watch

>>3039869
i feel sad for you -_-

>>3039869

what cameras/gear did you sell?

>>3040767
Not an argument bro.

It's the perfect tool for them, despite the limitations you insist against. And it probably won't be surpassed until someone makes some crazy 8K video sensor with BSI.
And even then, it's questionable whether that will even result in better night time footage.

File: 8820b6e492743395f0e4334517aa77c0.png (400KB, 547x302px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 547x302px

How bout that Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art.

I'm one of those that enjoy shooting most things at tele ranges, so this is a very nice surprise.
I was about to get samyangs 135mm.

I bet the price is gonna be like 2grand though.

>>3040977
Dumb.

Why do you need a 135 that fast? The dof looks fucking baller at about f5.6 on 135 on ff. at 4 metres at 1.8, you're looking at 5cm depth that's sharp, to get a full head (average depth about 20cm) fully in focus you need to be 8-9m or more away.

If they went f2.8 it would be half the size/weight, half the cost, twice as fast to focus and just as usable.

>>3040997
>If they went f2.8 it would be half the size/weight, half the cost, twice as fast to focus and just as usable.

But wider apertures are a bigger selling point.

Lens manufacturers push for as wide as they can go when it comes to aperture. Even if they are useless wide open.

>>3040997
Yeah it's "gimmicky" with such a fast lens at that focal length, but it's what some want.

I can justify the price.

>>3041002
So you're happy spending twice as much for a lens twice as heavy and large as it needs to be, when there's already fast 135 options?

I get large apertures are in this season, but there's such a lack of moderately fast, compact lenses.

>>3041004
I have no issues with size or weight.

Are you going to take selfies or something?

>>3040997
>>If they went f2.8 it would be half the size/weight, half the cost, twice as fast to focus and just as usable.
if they went 2.8 nobody would buy it, they'd just use a 70-200.

>>3041038
>>3041002
>>3040977

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1321304&gclid=CNGLyu3n3dICFUeHswodZ7gFfw&Q=&ap=y&m=Y&c3api=1876%2C52934714882%2C&is=REG&A=details

Slightly more expensive than Canon's L.

>>3041042
Considering the AF seems to be pretty darn good, it's a fair price.

Better come for sony e.

>>3041045

Looks like you need an adapter for Sony E.

>>3041045

Just use the Sigma mount with MC-11.

Native AF speeds.

Nikon d7200: My first DLSR camera, because im not a typical /p/ jobless, fag; although most you guys will know a little more than me :P

>>3041045
>Better come for sony e.

They just announced they'd be making native lenses last year. The rumor is they'll have some ready by the end of this year. But I'd guess they won't come until 2018. Supposedly their new
smart mount adapter works a lot better than the previous generation.

>>3041058
>Supposedly their new smart mount adapter
Did they release a new revision of MC-11?

Does it feature rubber gasket like the Metabones?

>>3041045
Sigma are making completely new designs for FE mount to take advantage of the shorter flange, don't expect announcements until about this time next year, they released the mc-11 as a perfectly viable stop gap solution.

Hmm. Just got an XPro2 and 35mm F2 and the autofocus is quite disappointing compared with both the X100T and the PEN F. Any settings to improve this? What's pre-focus?

>>3041138
Did you update to the most recent firmware? I just went out and shot with that setup yesterday and had no problems with my af

>>3041075
>yfw it's just readily canon ef dslr lenses with built in adapter

>>3041138
Update fampai, same issue with my XT10, quick update and you'll be laughing.

File: 1486583365799.jpg (268KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1500x1000px

>>3041196
>>3041164
Oh Damn! That's more like it!
What a fantastic camera.
Have you guys tested the weather sealing? I'm taking it to Hong Kong and there's going to be monsoons.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 60D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Photographer	Jannis Remm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3961
Image Height	2641
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2014:03:27 02:37:26
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	320
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: gh5.jpg (342KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 3840x2160px

2017 trying to decide on a camera for video when all you hear is '4k isnt really needed' and all you read is 'this ones the best for video because it has 4k!!'
jesus. lets say i WONT need 4k. Whats the best camera for video then? does anything change?

>>3041313
Don't be retarded and buy a non-4k video camera in 2017, that was okay 5 years ago but not now. 4k-capable is automatically better than non-4k-capable for less-than-4k platforms as well.

It allows zooming and cropping instead of stuck with fixed framing and the processing software can compress the 4k footage down to look better at 1080p than if you used a 1080p-only camera.
The second you specify non-4k then you're not looking for "the best" or even good.

Used NEX 3 + Pentax 50mm 1.7 or XE-1/2 with 35mm f/2?

Shooting mostly stills. Don't care about sports

>>3041347
>processing software can compress the 4k footage down to look better at 1080p than if you used a 1080p-only camera.

This is true.

Also because the Bayer filter means a "1080p" camera only has 980x540 red and blue pixels.
You need a 4K camera to capture perfect 1080p RGB pixels.

File: cameras.jpg (155KB, 704x904px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 704x904px

hellow /p/

poorfag here, I want to buy mu first mirrorless camera. which would be a better option? the NX300 or the a5100.

I want to learn to shoot, so the cheaper, the better. thanks for your comments

>>3041362
>NX300

Dead system.

>>3041365
I know is a dead system... but, for a amateur who will get more money in 1 or 1.5 years, would be good for learning??

>>3041194
>like their dn range
Amirite?

>>3041376
Second hand nex 6 and 7 are still very decent performers if you want an evf and the sony ecosystem is decent and growing by the day.

File: 1100_IMGP1516_1.jpg (187KB, 900x634px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 900x634px

I'm looking for something a little more compact than my DSLR, but would like to continue using my legacy lenses.

I'm stuck between Sony and Fuji. I was planning on buying either a used A6000 or X-E2.

Any opinions?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX Corporation
Camera Model	PENTAX K10D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2009:03:20 00:48:06
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	900
Image Height	634
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>3041362
nex 7

>>3041348

Completely difgerent focal lengths.

Why not compare something similar?

>>3041376

An a6000. Only a fraction more, and it wont need to be replaced in a year.

>>3041387

Sony is the way to go when it comes to adapting lenses. Better bodies, better support.

>>3041402
Which features do Sony cameras have over Fuji ones that make them better for adapting lenses?

I DO plan on delving into each choices' lens ecosystem eventually. The adapted lenses will be more of a placeholder until I can save up money

Camera/Lens recommendation for food photography? I want to make a cookbook.

I will be doing overhead shots of cookware/pots as well as shallower angles of finished dishes. I don't want to have to climb up high to take overhead shots.

I assume I'll need two different lenses for the situations. I've got a little over a grand to spend. I'd rather buy used stuff. I might spend a little more, I just came across a small windfall.

>>3041414
sorry to not validate your gear acquisition addiction, but camera/lens doesn't matter. use your phone for its deep depth of field. invest in lighting, not camera and lens.

>>3041415
For lighting I was just going to use a window and some boards. I was going to use some jointed wood for surfaces to take photos on.

>>3041415

the camera doesn't matter so much, but the lens and tripod do. you'll want a macro lens, 40mm if you have crop, 55-60mm if you don't. you'll want a good tripod and a boom arm that will allow you to get overhead shots. you want a cable release for ease of use.

does your kitchen face east or north? if not, you'll need to buy artificial lights. if it does, then you're lucky and you can just get by with a silver reflector.

>>3041419
My kitchen currently faces east. I have a good window in it, and I've got double windows in my office I can use if I need to. I plan to make a couple of food blogs/recipe books so I want professional looking photos. I'm really not happy with the quality of my phone.

I don't own any equipment whatsoever. I'd like to take macro shots plus shots of the whole table at times. For a beginner, do you think I should go with a cropped camera or not? I've seen many bodies support wireless remotes so that will be useful.

>>3041424

a crop camera will be more within your budget and give you more wiggle room for lenses, tripods, a flash if you want. A nikon D7000 or D7100 will be more than enough for your needs and will set you back around $400-$600. That leaves you another $200 for a lens and $100-200 for a tripod. plan on another $100 for accessories and you're right on budget.

hell, you could probably get it done on a $300 nikon d3300 if you take your time. a nicer camera just makes things faster and easier, not necessarily better.

File: 55.jpg (88KB, 720x633px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 720x633px

>>3041413
>Which features do Sony cameras have over Fuji ones that make them better for adapting lenses?

Actual autofocus support for third party lenses such as Canon, Nikon, Minolta, and Leica.

Both bodies have proper focus highlighting and focus magnification, so it matters less on purely manual lenses.

> DO plan on delving into each choices' lens ecosystem eventually. The adapted lenses will be more of a placeholder until I can save up money

Overall, the Sony lenses are better, but the Fuji lenses are more compact. Sony also includes OSS in almost all of their lenses. Combine that with a body with an awesome sensor and IBIS like the a6500 and you have some awesome low light capabilities.

Sony also has been focusing on full frame lenses lately, which, while still usable on a crop camera, can be rather large. Pic related, their awesome 55mm lens on a crop body.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5DS R
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:12:14 20:37:02
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/16.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	83.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	720
Image Height	633
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3039291
for manually adjusting White Balance on your digital camera:

"certified neutral" WhiBal card (~$20) or 18% gray card (~$4)

or does it not even matter?

>>3041415
sorry to invalidate your retard syndrome, but camera/lens always matters for quality

They typed "for a cookbook" that means they don't need some community college dropout's iphone "photography"

>>3041435
If autofocus is unimportant to me, does it just come down to low light performance? Does Sony outclass Fuji that heavily in that area?

>>3041469

They're the same. Fuji might even be a little better due to the baked-in noise reduction.

>>3041435
>no oss
>$9001
just get the e 50 1.8 oss.

File: images (1).jpg (17KB, 469x314px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 469x314px

>>3041469

Sensors perform pretty much equally. It all comes down more to the individual lens really.

Fuji raws look better by default because they have noise reduction already applied (though it is easy to apply to the Sony's), plus they fudge their iso numbers.

The ibis does make quite a difference though, but that is only their super expensive top models like a7ii, a7rii and a6500.

>>3041469
If af is of no concern just get a 2nd hand a7, the full frame sensor dicks all over anything fuji have for low light and Sony's evf are much nicer to use.

If you do go down the fuji route, bare in mind the raw files won't be fully compatible with any image editing software and high iso files will look they're covered in tiny worms if you try to use adobe or similar. Silkypix is the only compatible software and it's a joke.

>>3041508
There's irident tho, and it's coming to windows very soon and as a lr plugin as well. It does make a difference.

>>3041512
Why go with a company that trusts you so little they force you to use the in camera jpeg engine and pre applies nr to your raw files. Fuji are the apple of the camera world.

i it worth getting the minolta x-700 if i already have an XG-M?

>>3041508
>>3041512
>>3041516
Doesn't Capture One work fantastically with Fuji?

Side question: is there a difference in image quality between the Pentax-M 35mm f/2.0 and Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7?

I had a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D once, and found the field of view cumbersome for quite a few things

>>3041530
>capture one and fuji
Nooopppe

>35 vs 50
They're completely different focal lengths for a start you fucking goober.

>>3041362
>>3041365
Samsung bodies and lenses are dirt cheap. If you're just a hobbyist, Samsung might save you money.

>>3041471
No 50ish Sony FE lens has OSS

>>3041549
who needs oss when you have ibis?

>>3041549
I think he is talking about APS-C lens.

That one does have OSS.

I'm looking for the absolutely usable cheapest backup P&S that i can bring onto the street and don't cry that much if it gets broken, stolen, damaged, etc.
my requeriments are:
I need it to fit comfortably on a jeans or shirt pocket
Aperture priority mode + Ev compensation
if it uses AA batteries, better but not absolutely neccesary
could be a zoom or prime lens, i would like to see both options
less than 200$, the cheapest the better

What do you guys thing, a 35mm 1.8g DX or 35-70mm 2.8D for my D7100? For general usage. Both lenses are very well regarded but the 35-70 2.8D has a push zoom, and my past usage of push zooms was really awkward.

>>3041600
Also on the table is the 40mm 2.8g macro DX, since I like shooting the various snails and other small animals around here. However, I know that macro is usually used with far longer lenses, so I don't know how useful this lens would actually be for macro, and whether this function is worth losing the aperture speed.

>>3041583
Canon S100

Purchasing my first lens that isn't cheap. I plan on getting the 18-35 f1.8 from sigma because I love my 35mm prime on the dx sensor, but sometimes I wish I could go wider. Just kinda want confirmation that this is a good idea

>>3041642
Why not the Tamron 15-30 instead?

>>3041642
it's not a great lens and you need the sigma dock if you want the af to be remotely accurate.
and it's useless if you ever upgrade to full frame.

Ask yourself if you need it to be that fast when you're going so wide, it's not like you're gonna get usable bokeh, the dof is already a metre deep 2m away at 18mm f1.8.

Get a 16-35(or similar) f2.8 or f4 if you want wideangle, get a 24-70 f2.8 if you want a better normal lens, you may be surprised how good a decent 24-70 looks, even next to your 35mm prime.

>>3041642
I'd suggest an actual wide angle lens, e.g. tokina 12-28 or 11-16 or 12-24. I had the 12-24 on nikon and it was TITS. Once you go wide, you never look composition the same way again. Buy used if you can.

Sigma 18-35 1.8 is optically fantastic and the dock allows perfect alignment, but I find the field of view quite limiting (except perhaps on video work).>>3041646

>>3041642
have sigma 18-35, absolutely love it. I bought the dock to make it better than a canon in every single way and with how overpriced canon are, sigma+dock is less expensive even if buying only one single lens.

If you buy a few that work with the dock eventually, it's even better.

I have never felt like 18mm was too narrow, some people are just addicted to fucking hideously ugly wide-angle shots with massive distortion like anything at 12mm or wider.

>>3041648
I plan on getting a faster standard zoom lens eventually, but currently the sigma fits what I'm looking for. I'll probably get either the tamron 17-50 or sigma equivalen because they're priced pretty well nowadays. Don't plan on upgrading to ff though :/

>>3041656
I haven't gotten the chance to shoot wider than 18mm so I don't know if I want/need wider, I'll see if I know anyone who will let me borrow a lens that's wider.

>>3041694
I was also considering getting the 50-100 for some amateur portraits, so I'll get the dock

x-t20 y/n
if not what get

>>3041703
a6300
>>3041702
>shoot wider than 18mm so I don't know if I want/need wider
You will

t. shooting at 16 a lot on my 16-85 VR

>>3041583
Find a Powershot that has CHDK support and the lens you want.

>>3041709
>2mm difference
>essential
Why are wide angle fags so stupid?

>>3041733
You're an idiot.

>>3041733

How else are you gonna make every pic look like a Terry Gilliam movie?!

>>3041646
Seconding this.

What is /p/'s meme starting camera?

Like /g/'s install gentoo/thinkpad/casio f91-w
or /n/'s 90s Rigid MTB with Slacks
or /fit/'s SS + GOMAD

What is /p/'s starting camera meme?

>>3041856
Bentax K-50 :DD

File: uu0cap1pi2gy.jpg (83KB, 847x847px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 847x847px

>>3041856
pentax k1000, canon ae-1, nikon f3

>>3041868

fuck off >>>/r/eddit

Recently started shooting full frame and want to invest in the best glass possible.

I've had my eye on the 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED, and saw there's also the 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Lens. Since the 16-35 is an N lens, will it really give me that much better performance, or is the difference between the two not that noticeable?

I'm doing my own research and looking at reviews and stats, but I like coming here to hear opinions from those that may have used either lens themselves.

Someone suggested I pick up a cheap macro lens for doing DSLR scans. Can someone recommend me an appropriate lens? I've only got a zoom lens that came with the camera.

What else do I need?

>>3041985
I just use the ebay $5 macro tubes attatched to a 50mm on a apsc bentax for my scans, works great

I'm looking at a Sekonic 558. Not sure if it's worth going for the 758 instead. My father gave me his old 778, and I'm thinking of selling it to buy a 558. Can't understand why the 558 is selling for just as much as a 778. In fact, I saw a 758 in well-used cosmetic condition go for less than some of these 778's are listed for on the bay. What gives?

>>3039713
Yeah, it's got rubber gaskets on the mounting face, and the buttons are all weather sealed. Doesn't count for shit if you've got anything less than a Canon XXD, because they bodies aren't weather sealed.

>>3041984
"N" refers to nano crystal coating, haven't you wathced digitalrev? It supposedly helps to prevent flaring. I'd say the vr makes more of a difference between these two.

>>3042041

I know what the N refers to, what I wanted to know was if the nano crystals in there would give it an out of this world quality in comparison to the 18-35G.

VR - I can do without if the non-RV lens turns out to be better overall. Would be nice to have the VR there, but I can always work around it if I don't have it.

From what I've read so far the 18-35 seems to be sharper even wide open and not causing as much distortion as the 16-35 when shooting at the lowest focal length.

>>3042046
Depends how much flare you expect to get. The more advanced coatings of newer lenses can be expected to give better contrast. Nothing wrong with the 18-35G though, because it's bloody sharp and cheaper too. The 16-35 is a different class of lens in other respects though.

>>3041985
Literally any ~50mm macro from the film era. They're all sharp enough, and designed to have a flat field curvature. Pick one for your system, or adaptable to your system.

>>3041856
a6000

How much of a step up is the A7s III/A7r III going to be etc over the IIs? (still using original A7s).

>>3042071
This big |<---------------------------->|

>>3042070

>16-35 is a different class of lens in other respects though

Such as?

(Not being a smartass, genuinely curious in what you mean by this)

>>3042081
Build quality, weather sealing, autofocus motor, internal zoom. It's just that little bit nicer. Might not make a difference at all to you though.

>>3042084

Gotcha. I figured (and sort of expected) all those things to be better considering the price and the fact that it's an N lens.

I can appreciate all those things, but when it all boils down, I would want the lens that provides the better image quality. Ultimately, I'd want to be able to keep this lens for a good while and get a lot of use out of it, so durability is another factor to consider.

>>3041986
Bad advice, a cheap macro lens is far more preferable due to it's edge to edge sharpness and lack of distortion.

>>3041985
Another option is macro bellows and an enlarger lens.

You need a sheet of opal acrylic, an even white light source (flash, phone/tablet screen), a way of keeping the film flat (anti reflective picture glazing is the correct kind of glass, normal glass will leave newton rings), and some sort of shroud to keep out stray light, get creative with a pringles tube.

The more time you spend creating a sturdy rig, the better and faster your results will be.

>>3042071
There isnt going to be an a7siii, but possible features in 3rd gen include, global electronic shutter, unlimited burst, dual card slots, faster af (sony af speed is directly linked to processing power), new file format because raw is too restrictive, xqd card slots.

>>3042071

a7siii isnt for awhile.

a7iii and a9 are rumored this year.

a7iii is expected to be a incremental update.

a9 is supposed to be sony's first professional full frame mirrorless body. Dual card slots, joystick controls, unlimited burst, etc.

File: IMG_7775a.jpg (299KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1500x1000px

tfw babby's first fast tele

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D Mark II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:19 21:25:50
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3041856
Sony A6000
Sony A7
Nikon D3300
All things Pentacks

>>3042071
>>3042098
>>3042113
From what I can stitch together from the rumours, Sony seems to have aimed for 3 Backside Illumination designs.

24MP with BSI
42MP with BSI
70+MP with BSI

The 70+ is a more unsubstantial rumour. But the 24 and 42 sensors are completely ready designs here and now.

>>3042205
Well I hope either the 42mp is an improvement in low light and/or DR over the A7r II and likewise for the 24mp vs the A7s II otherwise not much point?

>>3042210
>the 42mp is an improvement in low light and/or DR over the A7r II
But how? It's the same sensor.

>and likewise for the 24mp vs the A7s II
The 24 BSI is an upgrade for the 24MP in A7ii.
It has nothing to do with the S series sensor.

>>3042212
>same sensor
Ree

other anon said 24mp is replacing A7s series.

>>3042214
>other anon said 24mp is replacing A7s series.
I don't think he said this. He probably meant the A7s sensor isn't being replace soon.

>>3042218
sorry read it online and it stuck in my head
http://www.sonyrumors.co/rumors-sony-a7-iii-will-replace-both-a7ii-and-a7s-ii-a9-will-replace-a7r-ii/

File: 61nyP4qjSuL._SL1000_.jpg (110KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1000x1000px

sup /p/.

I'm new to photography and recent purchased a D3300. I'm looking for a lens with better zoom for birdin' n shiet.

Currently looking at this one:

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Certified-Refurbished/dp/B00R1MXPFW/ref=sr_1_5?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1489938125&sr=1-5&keywords=nikon+d3300+lens

Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks dudes

>>3042232
It might be right, or it might not be.

There is still a good possibility the A7Sii will coexist with the rest and not be replaced just yet.

>>3041858
It is the K-70 now. Also excellent studio and macro camera due to pixel shift

>>3042243

It's good for the price.

>>3042243

Biggest issue with that lens is slow auto focus.
Which will make it quite hard to shoot flying birds.

Also consider the second hand market.
Nice thing is you can buy a lens and then resell it for about the same money.
Way too much money is wasted on brand new lenses that lose 1/3rd their value just from opening the box.

>>3042244
I think it will all depend on the video scaling technique.

Up to now Sony uses line skipping to reduce a high megapixel sensors to 4K video. (except on the S, where no scaling is needed)
Meaning a large portion of the pixels aren't being used, which reduces low light performance.
If instead they average out 2 pixels you can expect similar low light video performance from the new 24MP sensor - in fact it might even be better.

And if it's better in low light then why continue the 12MP sensor?

File: 2111332649.png (127KB, 353x300px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 353x300px

I just got a Nikon D3200 with a AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm lens
We had the same setup in school, but is it really good for beginners?

>>3042333
Yes. Go out and shoot, later on, get a used AF-S 35/1.8G.
Did I mention going out and shooting? Do that.

Is Nikon ever going to make something that can match 5DSR?

How much would a Pentax K30 with all the accesories and stuff plus a 70-200mm 4.5 lens, pentax 50mm 1.7 and a sigma 28mm 2.8 go for? I checked on completed listings on ebay but they are mostly selling with the standard lens while I only have manual ones. I was thinking of throwing the ME Super which came in with the 50mm too.

>>3042389
The latest canon bodies are trash

>>3042484
No it's not. And Canon is working on 250 MP sensor right now.

>>3042477
I would personally go for a used K-S2, just saying.

>>3042489
I'm not buying anything, I was asking how much I would get if I sold the lot, my bad for not being clearer in my post I guess.

>>3042491
Oh okay. Around $250 for the body only.
The 70-200/4.5 I know nothing about, sounds like a typical 80s film trash lens. $20
Pentax 50/1.7 is sought after a lot, $50.
Sigma 28/2.8 is a generic trashy film lens, $30.

>>3042494
Thanks, bought the K30 and lenses for a low price so I'll guess I'll make a small profit it on it

>>3042501
You could've done the same ebay search though. So fuck your lazy ass. Just saying.

>>3042333
Yes it actually has rather excellent image quality, just learn to use it.

>>3042098
>anti reflective picture glazing is the correct kind of glass

Okay, this is starting to sound not as inexpensive as I'd hoped.

I have an enlarger lens already, but it's a much older lens. Would a modern enlarger lens do? All I've got in that department are an old Tominon 75mm and a EL-Nikkor 80mm (chrome bottom).

I have an A6000 that has cracked the shits, with various issues. At times when turned on it'll display just a black image with the normal OSD/info over top, with menus etc working fine. Won't take a picture or let you change aperture. Sit it down and pick it up at a random time later and the thing works absolutely perfectly fine, making it a bitch to diagnose because if I send it to Sony, I know they'll turn it on, catch it at a good time & mark it as fine, then send it back and charge me for the effort. Lately it seems to not retract the lens when turned off too (16-50 OSS)

What do? It's very close to ending up in the bin, written off as a complete loss.

>>3039562
Hopefully the lenses dropping price, up here in Canada at least used Oly e-5s still go for 900 to even over 1000 dollars, for a camera that's 7 years old

>>3042487
Considering no lens out resolves their existing sensor, why would you do this?
And why would you want raws that are over half a gigabyte each to have zero extra actual resolution? Maybe canon should concentrate on improving shadow recovery, colour depth and dynamic range to at least what sony could do 5 years ago first.

If it's true, it's testament to how out of touch canon are.

>>3042612
A small piece of picture glazing glass won't be much, my local shop gave me a square for free.

I'm not too familiar with enlarger lenses, but they'll do fine to start with, your rig just might be quite large due to the long focal length.

>>3042621
Just warranty it, and keep doing so until it's fixed.

>>3042660
Im sure thats entirely untrue, I got in excess of 150mp on CMS20 and an FD 28mm/2.8 confirmed on microscope.

If they can make a lens back then that does it, then modern good lenses should also be good.

I wouldnt look forward to those file sizes though.

>>3042669
Prove it, also

>film

Also, learn to read an mtf graph.

>>3042671
>mtf graph
how to spot a sonycuck

>>3042688
>how to spot someone that doesn't understand optics

>>3042660
>Just warranty it, and keep doing so until it's fixed.

I would, if it was still in warranty. Sadly not though, and the base service fee to send it in is $90 plus postage costs even if no issue is found. On a body I paid $400 for, doesn't seem worth the risk. Tempted to just stick with my 6D without backup.

>>3042621
>At times when turned on it'll display just a black image with the normal OSD/info over top, with menus etc working fine.


Take off the lens cap.

In all seriousness I'd call Sony and ask what they can do. You might get someone nice on the phone who promises a replacement.

If not, the a6000 is only $400, not an expensive device. If you liked it enough, replace it with something better.

I'd wait until Sony's upcoming announcement before buying something though. Might be able to find a7 or a7ii real cheap after it.

Just bought a canon 50 1.8 stm. How did I do?

>>3042708
You managed to spend your money. Good job.

>>3042708
Really should have sprung for the 1.4, the AF on the 1.8 is super sluggish.

>>3042708
Good lens that should belong in every person's bag (so long as they don't have something that succeeds it like a 1.4/1.2 or ART). Great focal length on FF.

>>3042714
That being said I got a 1.8 first myself, shot for about 6 months with it before deciding I really needed to upgrade.

>>3042708
It's the worst image quality nifty fifty on the market, the yongnuo clone is better.

>>3042714
The AF on the STM version is good, go eat a dick. The 1.4 is CA galore anyways.

>>3042717
Noticeable on anything but large prints though?

>>3042730
Your wallet
Af speed is also better.
So, cheaper, faster, sharper - im not sure theres any other metrics left.

>>3042730
It's not noticeable on large prints if you choose the paper well.

>>3042660
>local shop
As in window shop or photo shop?

>>3042737
Did you mean: Windows store?

>>3042737
From a framers, so, neither?

>>3042671
It doesnt need proving by me, Zeiss did far more than what I could do with my equipment.

CMS20 is well known for this, high effiency (loss between of lens resolving power is low), excessive contrast, and excessive resolving power.

Not that I recommend using it for pictorial purposes, but it is great for messing around and curiosity.

>>3042671
Also mtf graph is irrelevant.

You make a curved line chart that gets closer together and smaller, each represents a set number of lines over a certain distance, you measure that certain distance on the film (or sensor) and that tells you line pairs per mm, which is the resolving power, you can convert that in minimum mp needed in order to represent it.

mtf has jack shit to do with it.

Mtf charts are also severely limited by the medium they are tested on.

There was a big list of publish Russian optics mtf charts, but of course they are rubbish because they were tested on shitty soviet film that appears to have a really low maximum resolving power, also mtf charts are published at set frequencies or lp/mm, typically low.

250mp is unnecessary but it pushes forward sensor technology, innovation, and more options for consumers.

>>3042822
>Mtf charts are also severely limited by the medium they are tested on.

No, they are measurements that take both the lens and sensor into account, and are set to show you at what point the lens loses critical sharpness. If the $4k otus can't outresolve a d800, why would you want an even greater MP count.

Less burst, less photos, slower to save, slower to process, less accurate, more losses due to pixel pitch gap and for zero benefit.

GG

>>3042830
>>3042822

Just for the record, that 250MP sensor is not designed for consumer cameras, it is for special and very specific applications in material sciences and astronomical uses (probably military as well, but this is like saying water is probably wet)
So don't get hopes up for massive many pixel lens aberrations and minutes worth of image loading times during processing. It is not made for handheld every day photography applications.

>>3042830
No they fucking dont. The MTF charts published start at 10 lp/mm with the highest being 40 lp/mm. The highest being less than 6mp equivalent in full frame.

This does not tell you resolving power.

Zeiss already managed to put down 400 lp/mm onto the total system resolving power on a film (CMS20), with the Biogon 25/2.8.

https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/cln_archiv/cln24_en_web.pdf

This is the same lame argument since forever
>muh lenses cant resolve more than 12mp ff
>muh lenses cant resolve 15mp
>muh lenses cant resolve 18mp
>muh lenses cant resolve 24mp
>muh lenses cant resolve 37mp
>muh lenses cant resolve 42mp

250mp in 35mm format (if it is indeed that size) is about 270 lp/mm

The D800 is about 100 lp/mm iirc, closer to 90 lp/mm in reality because of some issues.

>muh otus cant resolve more than 90 lp/mm
Yes it bloody well can. Many regular lenses can in fact.

Even my pos Jupiter on a Kiev body hit 90 lp/mm. (If I use something regular with low limits and plenty of loss like FP4+ its only going to hit 40 lp/mm or less).

New Thread

>>3042868
>>3042868
>>3042868

>>3042856
I agree, my cheap ass Pentacon 135mm at f/4 can out resolve my 24MP APS-C.
My new crappy Sigma "ART" (more like FART) cannot. Fuck this gay ass consumerist world wasting energy, resources and good glass on such shitty products!