/gear/ - Gear Thread

Anyone who suggests the a6000 in here for anything is a faggot.

>>3058824
Stop being a faggot please. Your tantrums won't lessen the A6000 sales.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (27KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1280x720px

>>3058824

The a6000 is a great cure for faggotry.

>>3058828

Nice image compression my man. Really reminiscent of the a6000. ;)

File: 1.png (91KB, 727x442px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 727x442px

>The Micro 4/3 version is heavier than some of the APS-C versions
Weird to see.

But basically Micro 4/3 users are screwed and are offered recycled APS-C sized lenses.

>>3058825
>>3058824
>>3058828
>>3058827
>>3058829
>>3058834
why the fuck is this camera praised so much on /p/ ive'd owned the original one and it wasn't anything spectacular.
am i missing something???

File: sony-nex-3-red-with+flash.jpg (26KB, 513x419px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 513x419px

>>3058836

The original what? NEX-3/5? They were neat, but pretty terrible cameras.

The a6000 is a $400 camera with the features of a $1000+ one. It can also adapt pretty much every lens ever made.

It is a fantastic deal and a great starter body.

>>3058836
They go for 400 dollars new if you catch a sale. Good stills quality, good video quality.
Very fast stills framerate too.
Okay AF.

>>3058842

you can't really call a discontinued 3 year old camera "new" anymore, can you?

wouldn't it be more accurate to call it "unused"? or maybe "unwanted"?

>>3058848
Delete this post

>>3058848
They just released a new graphite edition.

It's their Point&Shoot replacement entry level.

>>3058840
the original a6000, Presumably your not buying someones used pos secondhand camera a new one goes around 600 usd at this point in time and the features it had weren't anything spectacular so idk why is camera is fapped about so much, honestly i think people just fap over its tiny ass form factor

>>3058848

It is not discontinued.

It is still offered direct from Sony and still under production 8they released a new [ugly as shit]color a few months ago).

>>3058854

$598 new with kit lens.

Goes on sale every holiday, usually around $400-450.

Nothing else near the price comes close to the performance/features is the issue.

And while yes, today at $598 (or $400 on sale) isn't as much of an amazing deal as it was last year, it is still the best value on the market.

>>3058858

The D3300 blows it out of the water and costs less. ;)

>>3058872

>Lightly used

The proper phrasing is "mostly unwanted", friend.

>>3058868

The d3300 is inferior in about every way except battery life, and is roughly the same price unless you go refurb.

off to a great start in the /shill/ general

great work

>>3058885

It has better:

>image quality
>kit lens
>native lens selection
>ergonomics
>focus speed
>focus accuracy

but hey. a6000!

What is a good flash to use for my Olympus trip 35? I'd like it to be cheap and general purpose

The gx850 seems impossible to find. What are some good alternatives? Looking for something pocketable with a tilting LCD that is good for just casual shooting.

>>3058916
if a fixed lens isn't a big deal the fuji X70 is great, even if it's only barely pocketable for most people

>>3058916
Is the gx85 worth the step up in price from the 850? I'm coming from an Olympus and I think I would like the image stabilization, as well as the viewfinder.

>>3058897
Better
>iq
Nope, they're equal until iso 3200, then sony wrecks the nikon.
>kit lens
The nikon is xbokshuge and they both have shit iq
>native lens selection
Sony do a better, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 55mm, 85mm, 90mm, 24-70, 70-200, basically every lens 99% of people want, sony do better.
>ergo
Lol, If you like holding fischer price toys, that's your subjective opinion
>focus speed + accuracy
Lol, nope, d3300 is no faster and much less accurate, you can't even do intelligent af.

>>3058858

That must be why you can dig through any rpt and find so many amazing shots with a6000 in the exif!

>>3058955

Good point, you really can. It is even on that cool lens finder site.

Looking at pics lile that is what made me decide to get one.

>>3058958

Go ahead and find some in any rpt thread here on /p/. For as much as that camera is shilled around here there should be an army of talented photographers producing countless amazing photos taken with it.

>>3058959

Oh sorry, I thought you meant real photosites, not the shithole that is /p/.

No one seriously posts photos here. And of those that do, very few are any good.

>>3058960

Oh cool man

File: 1408392674322.png (76KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 625x626px

>>3058959
>talanted photographers
>amazing photos
>in an /rpt/ thread

>>3058959
Tbh, most people that regularly post photos here have much, much better gear, there's plenty of full frame sony shooters on the board, people with entry level cameras do entry level photos, which mainly just get mocked here.

Found someone selling a sigma 10-20mm 5.6 on craigslist for $190 US dollars. I've only been using a t2i for a while but I'm thinking of jumping into mirrorless for videography. Is it worth investing in good lenses for the t2i or should I just get something like a g7 with kit lens instead?

>>3058836
it's cheap and it's good.

>>3058971
G7 or G85 with kit lens.

>>3058848
>discontinued
why a6300 is so expensive then?
sony's strategy is keep making the old ones and price is lower.

>>3058897
>slightly better image quality because sony can't into image processing.

>>3058948
sony 16-50 is junk. i actually got a good copy with sharp 16mm. but another one is soft as fuck.

>$$$$ full frame lenses
stop defending this shit.

>>3058971
this guy is right
>>3058977

>>3058981
>$$$$ lenses
The 28, 50, 55 and 85 1.8 are all excellent value for money. Their pro lens prices are very much in line with the competition considering the majority are STILL on backorder. And let's not look past the fact full frame lenses hold their value amazingly, whilst crop lenses half in price as soon as they leave the shelf. If you can afford the best lenses, they will also be your cheapest lenses in the long run.

The only people that use kit lenses are clueless gwc's and those that want something compact for holidays, in this respect the Sony is probably the best kit lens.

>sony image processing
Nothing wrong with it, learn how to edit better.

File: kowa-mft-8-5mm.jpg (172KB, 800x574px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 800x574px

>>3058832
The m4/3 native lenses lineup is one of the biggest, if not the biggest of all systems, not counting using adapters for older systems. A couple of companies thinking they can successfully sell recycled APS-C lenses do not make this affirmation less true.

>>3058991
It may be big, but it's nearly all shit.
Where's your uwa options? Where's the pro lenses? Where's the super fast lenses to compensate for the tiny sensor?

Let's not forget the pixel density on m43 is obscene compared to say full frame, so for equivalent sharpness you need a lens that can resolve 400% of it's equivalent ff.

Clueless consumer trash.

>>3058992
>Where's your uwa options?
You mean ultra-wide? We have already rectilinear lenses in the 14-18 mm equivalent range, how much do you want?

>Where's the pro lenses?
Latest Olympus Pro are pretty good.

>Where's the super fast lenses to compensate for the tiny sensor?
We have a couple of f/0.95 lenses, but yes I know you will argue it is DOF equivalent to f/2.8. Still, a fast lens.

>for equivalent sharpness you need a lens that can resolve 400% of it's equivalent ff.
You know no lens can fully resolve any sensor, regardless of the size, right? But yes, you are right on that.

>>3058992
I have seen this and similar gearfaggotry for more than a year. It looks like a very small group of people or even a single one is responsible for this kind of shitposting, it's like they are stuck in a permanent newby state, blaming gear for everything.
Photography is about the subject, the story the photo is telling, not about the technicality. This is why so many great photos are made with absolute minimal gear while a lot more boring and displeasing snapshits are made by people buying all the expensive latest, top of the shelf stuff. Blaming other people's stuff for your own inability is just stupid and shows how big of a dickhead you are. You do nothing but make a scene while showong everyone in the world how much of a talentless egoistic fuchead you are.
Look inside you for a minute and try to critique yourself, maybe you already did and did't like what you have seen, this is why you are so angry.
I hope you realize your bullshit is pretty much ignored throughout the board. Peace out.

>>3059002
And of course it is full of typos...
I fucking hate typing on mobile and I still did all that, this is how disgusted I am with your shitty shitposting.

>>3058998
>14mm
Well full frame goes down to 10mm on commonly available lenses, 14 to 10 is about the same level of difference going 50mm to 35mm!

>f2.8 is a fast lens
Not really, when on full frame you can go 3 to 4 stops faster.

>no lens can outresolve any sensor
EXACTLY, so minimise this issue by going for the most forgiving sensor, not the most demanding. By knowing your lens limits your resolution, not your mp count, you should definitely not recommend a sensor that needs a 400% sharper lens to compete in this one metric.

>>3059002
>photography is about feels, not gear
Yep, and clients nearly all 'feel' like super shallow dof works best for them. The nice thing about full frame is it can do everything, whereas m43 is stuck with meme dof and an inability to crop at all without the lens softness being an issue.

>you are ignored
Clearly, that's why most of the board uses m43, right? Nah, let's be real, the only regulars on the board that don't shoot full frame are fujicucks and third world brazilitards. And you're doing a good job of ignoring me by admitting to being tilted >>3059004

>best photos are taken with bad gear
No, ask gursky, schoeller, crewdson, ansel what gear they used.

>only one person cares about sensor size and it's implications
Then why are we all shooting ff or larger? Why do you foster so much dissonance that you reason anyone that disagrees with you is all one poster? Is it because you're upset you're poor?

Oh, and great rebuttal to objective facts within photography, I never considered that the emotional connection to my vtech webcam makes it produce better photos than my d810 and completely negates any image quality issues.

Why are poor people always so dumb?

>>3059010
Very poor bait, son.
Saged.

>>3059011
Classic rebuttal homie.

Stay mad.

>>3059011
Kek, you get rekt.
Fuck off fag

>>3059010
>f2.8 is a fast lens
>Not really, when on full frame you can go 3 to 4 stops faster.
You didn't understand me at all. It's f/2.8 in terms of DOF but it's still f/0.95 for all other purposes. If you only consider how fast it is, there is no difference.

>>3059015
Relax, man, he doesn't know the difference.

>>3059015
Lol, no, you have to take noise into account as well, m43 has 3 to 4 stops worse snr. I understood perfectly, I made the mistake of thinking you weren't a moron, so didn't spell it out for you.

>>3059017
Lol, nice samefug.

>>3059019
>You have to take SNR into account to determine how fast a lens is
Make up your fucking goddamn mind, do you want to talk about fast lenses, noisy sensors, equivalent DOF or what?

Tamron's new 70-200 or the sigma 85 for portraits and people shoots? I've been saving up some money for this and I'm not sure which one to get, or if there are better alternatives. It'll be on a crop sensor until I can save up for fool frame

>>3059022
It's a complete thing.

Smaller sensors you have to take SNR, focal length and dof into account if you want to discuss "equivalents" in lenses.

>>3059023
My 70 200 gets used almost non stop, the 85 1.4 only comes out when I NEEED 1.4, 85's look there best at around f4 anyway, nice smooth bokeh fall off.

does anyone have personal experience with Fuji X-T20?
A friend is looking into getting it.

>>3059026
Overpriced holiday point & shoot camera with a shit lens.

>>3059028
A holiday camera is exactly what he wants.

>>3059030
If he has no aspirations to ever take anything but holiday snaps for facebook it's fine, bare in mind lenses start at around $400 and they're awful quality.

>>3059025
>You don't have fast lenses
>We have these fast lenses
>Yes but they are not equivalent to my fast lenses on my system
What a retarded discussion.

>>3058981
>>3058897
The Nikon AF-S kit lens actually sucks dicks. It's ridiculously slow to focus, and noisy as all hell.

>>3059034
So you're saying m43 and full frame have equivalent noise at the same iso?

Or is this more poorfag delusions.

I see yet again, the anti full frame rebuttal is little more than "NO YOU'RE A RETARD" with absolutely nothing to defend against the comment they respond to.

Why are you so angry about being poor? no-one cares but you.

File: 1137-2953.jpg (1MB, 1440x954px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x954px

I ended up going with my gut and grabbing the 50 1.4 AF-D, and I love it. It's sharp at 1.4 and never misses focus, that was money well spent. I also got my mother a Bigma 150-500 OS for mother's day.

>>3058824

fpbp

>>3059036

This is a god damn lie. I have one, the 18-55 VR II it is probably the best kit lens ever made. It has decent focus speed but the IQ is over the top for a kit lens, the last time I shot a kit lens that good was the old Canon 28-70 from the 1980s that came bundled with the EOS 650 and 630. Our Father in Holy Saturimony lists it on his Ten Best Nikon Lenses, right up there with the Holy Grail 13mm f5.6 and 24 1.4, for the money and weight you can't beat it I still have mine after upgrading to the Df and prime lenses.

Kit lenses years ago sucked dicks, but Canikon have been stepping that shit up recently, pic related shot on my 18-55 VR II.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi

>>3059055
>This is a god damn lie.
Sucks for you we live in a time where instant evidence is plentiful and easily acquired.
https://youtu.be/us3TOIQSBIw?t=28
It sucks so hard it turns PDAF into CDAF tier performance.

>>3059060

well fuck.

The IQ is still very good and he is using Live View, I never have those problems on my D7000 using the optical finder. Those AF noises are nothing compared to some of the glass I use and any screw mount lens worth a shit will make much more noise.

Doesn't the AF-P use some weird filter size too?

>>3059036
the only answer is bentax.

>>3059092
Go home. Pentax doesn't even have an equivalent lens to AF-P.

Is eglobalcentral.eu a legitimate shop?

>>3059055
>150-500
Are you sure it won't be a bit heavy for her? Also the 150-500 is not the Bigma, the 50-500 is. 0.5kg heavier.
It is a nice lens actually, sharp in the focus but the bokeh has some double edging, nothing to worry about. Shimmering air is emphasised both by FL and the double bokeh and can smear details, but it is common telephoto problem. The OS is very nice, it can be a problem if you forget to switch it into panning mode. Pic related... when I get home. Mobile flickr is dicks.
Nice gesture though, I wish some of my family was into photo or even wildlife

File: rokinon.png (78KB, 544x313px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 544x313px

I'm trying to pick between these two Rokinon lenses. But I can't find any samples of how the 12mm renders bokeh highlights.

Is that thing even capable of making bokeh highlights at all?

>>3059147
You;re gonna have to be within inches of your subject to get bokeh on the 12mm.

which one to get?
well the 21mm is almost double the FL of the 12mm. This is the same as asking should I get this 50mm or this 28mm. Only you know what you want to shoot.

>>3059154
What keeps me away from the 21mm is the (in my opinion) ugly onion rings in its bokeh.

I'm curious if the 12mm also has the onion rings, but I can't find any samples of them, leading me to think they don't appear on that lens at all.

>>3059060

That has to be live view nonsense. I used to run a D60 and didn't have problems like that.

>>3059157
>>3059060
Liveview is CDAF only. You need dual pixel sensor to have PDAF focus in liveview. That video literally proves nothing.

>>3059155
onion rings are a factor of the process to mold the aperiodic element, if it has an aperiodic element it will use the same mold making limitations as the 21mm.

File: [ReinForce] Saki - Achiga-hen ~Episode of Side-A~ Kuro's Birthday (BDRip 1920x1080 x264 FLAC).mkv_snapshot_09.32_[2016.09.04_14.15.05].png (4MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1920x1080px

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/noooo-sony-nab-gear-stolen-way-las-vegas/

>>3059163
And nothing of value was lost

>>3059163
Does this mean Sony is finished? ;_;

>>3059154
>You;re gonna have to be within inches of your subject to get bokeh on the 12mm.

With a super wide angle you often want to get very close to the subject.
Makes for more interesting compositions.

But then you generally also want to stop down to get the background at least somewhat in focus because what else is the point?

>>3059162
>aperiodic
You mean aspherical, but otherwise correct.

>>3059163
What is a nab?

>>3059171
It's people who wank to 30 thousand dollar broadcast gear.

>>3059162
Onion rings are the result of the earlier method for producing aspherical elements which was essentially turning a piece of optical glass on a small precision lathe. You are seeing the turning surfaces or facets as onion rings because the element was not perfectly shaped, more of a close enough result from spherical surfaces parts added together to give the roughly (literally) aspherical surface.
The new method uses precision molding, and various rheological finishing eliminating most of the imperfections. There are still imperfections and in extreme cases, it can still produce some degree of onion rings but not as much as earlier ones.

>>3059094
HD DA 16-85 WR, check it out familama.

I completely agree my friends

>>3059163
Eyewitnesses saw a fat bald looking guy in a hawaiian shirt driving away with the truck while manically laughing.

>>3059036
>The Nikon AF-S kit lens actually sucks dicks. It's ridiculously slow to focus, and noisy as all hell.
Yeah thats bullshit. Even though I now prefer my faster primes, the 18-55mm VR II is great for the money and I used it for quite some time without any issues. Focus speed is good and it's loud only if you record video with in-camera mic, which you shouldn't really do anyway.

Is the Sony A7 a good purchase?

I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on a Sigma DP3 Merrill. What's the tool to convert sigma raw files into .dng files?

>>3059273
You might want to check this for yourself, but I think the latest update allowed for dngs straight from camera. At least I remember reading about some new Sigma firmware update that does that, not sure if it's for the Merrill.

>>3059272
The original A7 with kit lens can be had for 1000 bucks apparently.That seems to be pretty sweet.
It's the lightest of the A7, but has some downsides compared to the newer models.

Redpill me on the 24-105 f/4 Canon L Lens. It seems to be pretty hated here, but the reviews and IQ test shots I've been seeing from it seem to be pretty positive

>>3059031
t.sonycuck

>>3059287
For a $300 kit lens it's great value.

But compared to actual L lenses it's shit.

look like sony thread again

>>3059133

She has a monopod which helps out.

How much better are expensive filters compared to the cheaper ones and should i get a filter for my canon 70-200 f2.8 and if so which one?

>>3059163

>Hey Sony, where are your new products?

>Uh....uh....o-our truck got STOLEN! Yeah! We had great stuff but it all got stolen! It definitely existed, I swear!

As a teacher I've heard far better excuses for missing homework...

>>3059315

Like a fifteen billion dollar company couldn't just fly the few products they needed literally overnight from Tokyo.

>>3059163

>The Interview - fake conflict with North Korea
>Ghostbusters - fake racism with Leslie Jones
>NAB Show - OMG, someone stole our gear!

Masters of propaganda.

>>3059324
>>3059315
Please stop bullying Sony. They had a rough week.

I bought a Instamatic 33 and a Photosport Highlite tale for £5 at a charity shop. They seem to be in working condition

Have I bought trash or will they be interesting to shoot with? Also how do I get hold of 126mm film?

File: 01 (1).jpg (75KB, 760x310px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 760x310px

Anyone tried the 15mm Irix lens? I'm thinking of getting it but have seen reports of decentering and most forum threads are super sparse. Mostly planning to use it for astro and landscape (in that order) on a pentax k3II.

talk me out of buying an a6000 body w battery for 400$

Tell me why I shouldn't buy a Sony a900 and a bunch of old Minolta lenses.

>>3059351
>>3059362

Because you're both fickle shallow idiots who are easily susceptible to marketing and persuasion.

I guess that actually means you're just righhhht for sony. ;)

>>3059163

>http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/updated-stolen-sony-truck-story/

Sony will have everything replaced by NAB, and are trying to hush up theft so as not to distract from NAB.

File: xS8fIJA.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>3059362

Old Minolta lenses are great fun, but why the a900?

File: Projecting.jpg (34KB, 490x333px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 490x333px

>>3059395

If you need a camera just buy a fucking Sony. No need to spend extra money on garbage that is inferior and outdated.

>>3059341
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kFkzA2h8sU

>>3059015
desu 0.95 on 4/3 is just a bit under f/2 in ff in terms of DoF

>>3059445
I mean, you've got a good point, but your moopco roleplay is weak.

>>3059451
There's a 3-4 stop difference, not 2.

>>3059494
>F0.95-F1.4-F2
what did he mean by this

>>3059299
in what regard?

>>3059511
It's a holiday lens
Average image quality, slow, shonky lightweight build.

>>3059516
>Average image quality
I saw some test shots and while they were certainly worse than the 24-70, especially at higher apertures (f/8 and upwards), the difference started to be minimal

>slow
It's one stop slower than the 24-70 but doesn't the build in IS allow me to shoot at least that one stop faster in shutter speed handheld when needed?

>shonky lightweight build
isn't the light weight one of it's major advantages or what do you mean by this?

>>3059518
>image quality
Some people would call a canon nifty fifty only marginally better than an otus, yet to others they are happy to pay 40 times as much for that marginal improvement. No one can answer this question for you.

>is
Is doesn't stop motion blur, only camera shake, there will still be plenty of times you'll have to go up an iso stop

>build
Being light has it's advantages, also means that there's been plenty of compromises in it's design. Again, this is your choice, do you prefer well built bmw's or floaty and fun mazdas?

File: flash.jpg (98KB, 925x900px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 925x900px

>>3059273
>What's the tool to convert sigma raw files into .dng files?
That would be the Sigma sd Quattro H.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS CORPORATION
Camera Model	E-M10MarkII
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	90 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:19 20:21:54
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	45.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	925
Image Height	900
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard

>>3059540
thanks, seems like the 24-105 is a good buy then!

>>3059553
For you maybe, personally I wouldn't touch another one with a shitty stick.

Doesn't even come close to outresolving the 5dii and its low mp sensor.

>>3059555
I'll give it a try in the store before I get it, gonna be using it with a 6D

Best beginners camera?

I don't know shit about photography but I need a new hobby.

>>3059362
because you should buy an a100 and a bunch of old Minolta lenses instead

source: did just that

>>3059560
Any entry and mid-range DSLR
Read Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson, watch tutorials about exposure triangle, watch tutorials on processing and shoot in RAW.
Also have fun.

Bodies to look into:
Nikon D3300, used D7000
Pentax K-70, K-S2, used K-3 or K-3II
Canon 700D, 760D, used 60D or 70D

>>3059560
Sony mirrorless,
The evf makes learning exposure a breeze because you get a large wysiwyg display instead of a pokey little window.

Also it's much smaller so you will take it more places and it looks less autistic than a dslr.

Best image quality and features in its price range, because sony make the sensors that everyone but canon use, they can sell their products cheaper.

The short flange distance means you can very cheaply adapt any lens from any camera to use on it.

There is an anti sony squad on the board so expect retaliation to this post, but it will go no further than
>hurrrrrr sony
>native lenses are marginally more expensive (but better quality)
>short battery life

Whilst sony has the above pros, and there model range is the most varied with the most room for upgrade,they also offer ibis, decent 4k recording, the largest 3rd party support of any system ever and a professional support option that offers instant repair exchanges and free lens rentals for only $100 a year.

>>3059572
>Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson

While that book is certainly good, it completely leaves out the issue of diffraction so that's something that should always be considered with it

>>3059576
...and the resident troll has arrived

>>3059581
And the resident anti sony salty sourpuss has arrived.

Yet again you forgot to rebutte or debate.

>>3059576
>Also it's much smaller so you will take it more places and it looks less autistic than a dslr.
>caring how you look like when shooting pictures

spotted the autist

>>3059412
It's cheap and beautiful. If I can't get one for a decent price though, should I consider the a99?

>>3059560

It's me again, with a question.

Whats different between a mirrorless and a regular camera

>>3059627
the mirror

>>3059187
I saw Ken Wheeler in a camera store in KY today. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn't want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything.

He said, "Oh, like you're doing now?"
I was taken aback, and all I could say was "Huh?" but he kept cutting me off and going "huh? huh? huh?" and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw Ken trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen fridge magnets in his hands without paying.
The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like "Sir, you need to pay for those first." At first he kept pretending to be a neoplatonist and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter.

When she took one of the magnets and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually "to prevent any dialectric interference from the circuit of light," and then turned around and winked at me. I don't even think that's a sound theory. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her with loud indian and ancient greek words.

File: Sony-a9-camera.jpg (73KB, 626x594px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 626x594px

Sony a9 was just announced. Why is it a9 instead of a7?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	626
Image Height	594

File: Untitled.png (21KB, 844x170px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 844x170px

What a sudden change of opinion, Mir Smith

>>3059668
Also while I was reading the specs I heard a distant "FROOSH" sound, which I assume came from Japan when everyone at Canon and Nikon collectively shit their pants.

File: img538ac45c24023_l.jpg (121KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1000x666px

>>3059668

Because they are following the 3/5/7/9 naming scheme that has been around since like the 80s.

>>3059676
Yeah but what's the logic behind it?

>>3059668
>Why is it a9 instead of a7?
A9 = Bleeding Edge advanced sensors. All the large and weighty features some pros demand.
A7 = Lighter, cheaper, slightly less features, still kickass image sensors.

>>3059680
So it would be safe to assume that a7 series and s9 series will be pushed more apart in the future?

>>3059679

>3
Bare bones cameras.

>5
Beginner/Enthusiest

>7
Prosumer

>9
Professional

Occasionally they add zeros, and rarely you get something that falls in between the numbers.

>>3059682
They will co-exist if that's what you mean.

It will be possible to cram in features into the A9 which might be beyond the goal of the A7.

>>3059679
Nothing. This particular camera is a9 instead of a7 because it's an entirely different tier

Given the differences in price and performance, it would also have made sense for Sony to consider the a7 and a7r/s as separate products and call the a7 the a5, but keep the a7s and a7r as a7s and a7r. But they decided to call all of them a7
Maybe because they'd already called the a7 the a7 and didn't wanna call the r/s models a9 because they didn't want the eventual pro body to go into double digit model numbers
Maybe because the system was still new and they felt that keeping the number the same would make the camera range seem less confusing to consumers
Maybe it doesn't fucking matter

>>3059680
>Bleeding Edge
You don't know what that term means

>>3059684
I meant that a7 will be more in line with 6D, D610, D750, K-1, etc. in the future and a9 will be the professional series.

>>3059688
Maybe you should relax a bit.

File: 1.png (9KB, 758x273px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 758x273px

I told you it was 24MP, but you wouldn't listen to me.
Everybody was wagging their tales to the SAR 20MP claim.

The 24MP was an existing design they had ready for the A99ii.
They actually had multiple image sensor options to choose from for the A99ii.

>>3059362
>A900
mfw my local pawnbroker was selling one for 250€

File: 1492434422469.png (282KB, 578x572px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 578x572px

>>3059668
>>3059676
My dick, my dick, my fucking dick.

>>3059668
A mirrorless A-mount camera would be cool, though. But $4500, my dick doesn't hurt anymore. I just hope it drive the price down on the a7ii/a7rii.

>>3059705
>a7rii
2200 USD new. It's not bad at all for what the sensor actually is, BSI at Full Frame.

>>3059705
It probably will eventually.

I've got the opportunity to trade a 256GB SSD I have sitting around (~100 CAD value) for a well-used but working Canon 5D (first gen, 2005). I have a 70D already, just want to play with fool frame. I don't have high expectations, but do have some lenses for FF that will work. Worth it?

File: DSC_0093.jpg (847KB, 2502x1930px) Image search: [Google]

847KB, 2502x1930px

Thinking about switching to Sony, how much do you guys think I can get for my current gear?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	D5803
Camera Software	Windows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:09 00:22:19
Exposure Time	1/32 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	125
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.60 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3840
Image Height	2160
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3059747

Not enough to purchase an equivalent setup, which means that you'll get worse photos just by being a fickle fucktard.

File: 8722540588_46a5509fbb_o.jpg (4MB, 4368x2912px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4368x2912px

>>3059725
A 5D is worth about 350 American dollaroos so you end up winning even if you hate it.

It's a swell camera. The white balance is a bit off and it's not the fastest anymore but people back then had no problems with it.

Image quality is more then enough for the internet, just remember to keep the ISO down.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Scott Scheetz
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017-04-19T17:49:05+02:00
Exposure Time	1/2000 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	85.00 mm
Image Width	4368
Image Height	2912
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3059747
The amount of plastic in this image hurts me.

>>3059748

I know I won't get an equivalent setup. I'm willing to spend more than I will get for my current gear of course.

>>3059751

That's one of the reasons I want to sell it

>>3059750
I definitely plan to get it and take a few shots at least. White balance can be corrected if I shoot RAW, right? That's what I do with my 70D.

I'm not sure if it has had the mirror fix done, and Canon has stopped servicing these models. Is there any way to fix it if the mirror breaks? I am comfortable working on my own electronics...

>>3059752

Sony has just as much plastic in their line-up, my dude. Build quality is not one of their strong suits.

If you're willing to spend more, just buy a second body and keep the setup you've got. You won't get enough to get even a remotely similar setup. I'm talking 600 bucks for the entire kit if you're lucky.

>>3059751
Plastic takes just as good images as metal

>>3059683
they even did that with their slt line tho it was double digits there.
you had
a 35 , 37
a 57 , 58
a 77 , 77ii
a99, 99ii
all vaguely falling in the scheme anon described here

>>3059761

Was thinking about getting a a6500, which in my eyes has a far better build quality.
I'd be totally fine with 500€ for my current gear, actually was expecting less.

>>3059747
New gear won't help you becoming a better photographer.
You already have everything you need for awesome photos. The important bit in photography is being there to make the photo itself.

>>3059785

Cool man, go sell your shit. Nothing about the a6500 will help you take better photos. You've got a bad case of GAS (gear acquisition syndrome), and the only cure is to go take a walk with your camera.

You buy the A6500 now, you'll be looking at the A7r2 in six months, then the A9 after that, then Nikon after that, then back to Canon, all the while making very little personal progress in your photography.

>>3059752
>That's one of the reasons I want to sell it
Good.
>>3059772
Just doesn't feel as nice.
>>3059756
My friend fixed it himself with superglue, he still uses that camera occasionally.
You don't have to pull it apart.

>>3059747
rough estimate that you couldve done yourself but:
600d + 18-55 : 250
battery grip : 20
50 1.8 : 80
70 300 : 160
11 16 : 300
430 ex 2: 90
622c : 50
all in all you could maybe try to sell the whole package for 1 grand.
and i dont know sony prices but if youre not going full frame 1k should get you a good package to start with.

>>3059797
1000 might be a bit optimistic

>>3059747
What are your reasons to change in the first place ?
What do you mainly shoot?
Which of the lenses you own do you actually use ?

>>3059786
>>3059789

>New gear won't help you becoming a better photographer.

Why are you faggots assuming that's the sole reason I want to upgrade?
After about 70k shutter releases on the 600d I feel like it exceeded my performance expectations, recently I shoot and film a lot in low light situations.

>>3059797

Well that's way more than I expected. I will check ebay then.

>>3059805

>What are your reasons to change in the first place?
The shitty low light performance. I'm looking for a camera that will last me some years in photography but also filming.

>What do you mainly shoot?
Mostly street, architecture, portraits & landscape.

>Which of the lenses you own do you actually use?
Most used was definetely the 50mm for street and portrait, followed by the 11-16mm for architecture and landscape.

>>3059811
>Why are you faggots assuming that's the sole reason I want to upgrade?

Because some shitty little rabble faggot talking about how much he wants to switch to sony is basically the poster child of this board.

>>3059811
>check ebay
basically what i did. if youre lucky you'lll get more if not a bit less. it were conservative estimates tho.

i understand your reasons to change and wouldnt label them as pure gearfaggotry.
why do you want to switch to sony tho? is it the size?
i would say, sell everything but the 1116 and the 50 (maybe keep the flash if you're using it for portrait work) , get an 80D and save yourself the hassle of a system change.

>>3059824
This, voice of reason

>>3059627
dslrs have a mirror that reflects the image in the lens to the viewfinder, mirrorless doesnt, so they use electronic viewfinders. Mirrorless are generally smaller because they dont have the mirror mechanism.

I'd like a digital compact camera with manual controls
I'm used to a 5d3 for digital and a contax T for film
what is my best option in your opinion?

>>3059999
how compact exactly?
fuji x70 if you can live with the fixed focal length

>>3060005
That and Ricoh GR. Also X100T or F

is the 80d a good upgrade from the t3i?

>>3060177
yes. nothing better for APS-C

Get fucked dslr fags. Enjoy your shitty outdated garbage tech

>muh mirror muhfucka

>>3060181
Is there a good canon full frame that isn't super expensive? I feel like the ones near the 80d price point arent as good as the 80d

>>3060188
No. Unless you have a ton of money to also spend on glass, don't bother with FF.

>>3060183
Stop false-flagging you fucking retard.

>>3060194
i already have the 70-200m f2.8 and i'd like to get the 24-70 f2.8 at some point but for now ill probably settle for the 24mm 2.8.

>>3060200
newest version with IS? you're still probably better off sticking with APS-C for Canon since 80D actually improved a lot in terms of sensor crap and other shit. all you're missing with FF is better relative noise perf, but the 80D has better DR than 6D at base ISO. Not worth getting any Canon FF less than 6D/5Dm3 either ways.

>>3060203
yeah the is II version. Thanks for the info sounds like ill get the 80d. Had a few people tell me to get a sony or a nikon and use an adapter but that doesnt seem right to me.

>>3060207
People that say Nikon are downright retarded since adapters do jack shit there. Sony cameras do work to a certain extent with Canon lenses but there's still issues and you'd also need something on the level of an A6300 or A7II at the very least to get somewhat usable AF.

>>3059576
How much do you get paid to shill? Like literally shoulds like an ad.

Really newfag question.

Whats the difference between SDXC and SDHC? I know that SDXC goes higher, but if I could get a 64GB of either with similar speeds which would be more preferable?

I'm using an older T3i as well so I don't think it could take advantage of any modern write speed.

File: Screenshot 2017-04-19 at 10.23.12 PM.png (156KB, 1338x569px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1338x569px

>>3060224
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital

I'm looking for a decent fast standard zoom to replace the kit lens on my A6000 with that won't cost an arm and a leg, and I'm looking at the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 Canon mount with the MC11 adapter, but is there anything else I should look at?

>>3059761
Lol, spot the dude that's maybe held a nex 5.

The a7 range are metal inside and out, extremely well built and feel 10 times denser than any other body on the market except leica. They have about 25% less volume than a fuji xpro 2, but weigh 25% more.

>>3059785
If you're doing video, the a6500 makes sense, if not the a7ii is the better body for stills, in low light it's not even a contest.

>>3059816
>people with entry level cameras want to upgrade to something sony mirror less now they know what they're doing.

Why are you so angry? Why'd you go ad hom? Lol, you're a triggered little homo, I bet you can't afford sony.

>>3060188
The sony a7rii/a7ii and adapter

>>3060194
Full frame gets you a stop better low light performance, 130% sharper photos using the same lens, lenses that won't drop in value now crop is falling away, dat bokeh which clients crave and the knowledge that you're using the best tool for the job.

>>3060221
If my personal experience comes across like an advert, that's all down to the product, I've shot on nikon and bentax systems previously and the Sony blows them away.

>>3060306
Nothing will be cheaper, but the a6000 only has cdaf so adapted af performance sucks nuts, you need an a6300/a7ii or later to use af adapters with any real success.

>>3060320
you can go to a sony store and hold any sony camera you like.

i, for one, would like a fool frame sensor on a nex 5t body.

>>3060352

Best would be a QX1 body, with full frame sensor, and RX100 style pop up viewfinder.

>>3059668

Jesus Christ this thing is a monster.

They solved almost every complaint about the a9 series.

They are even stepping up their warranty service in the states.

They are viciously going for Nikon's number 2 spot.

Need a cheap tripod for traveling that's available on amazon, it should be leightweight and fit into a normal backpack. Any recommendations?

I have seen cameras of the same model but with different "body kits" that make them look old school.

What are those body kits called, can you buy them and use them on your existing camera or do you have to buy a new camera with its own hipster body kit, and why do people use them other than the cool factor. I'm talking about the a6000 specifically.

Yeah I'm new to this and have no idea what's going on.

>>3060442
No, this does not exist.

Are you thinking of fuji cameras? They're styled like hipster trash and use the same sony sensor as found in the a6000. And a couple of people have retrofitted sony innards in old cameras, these are passion projects though.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (362KB, 3000x1687px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 3000x1687px

>>3060442
What are you on about?

The a6000 is available in all black and in black with silver accents. The latter looks like a hipster camera. That's called "color variations" and is largely only found in entry-level cameras

Pic related is a nikon d3300 in pink

>>3060414
Manfrotto Befree. But keep in mind less weight means less stability and you should order it in advance to see if it even fits your needs

>>3060005
>how compact
ideally the same size as, smaller or not much bigger than a contax t (98x67x32cm)
small enough that I can keep it in a coat pocket or a very small case I can attach to a backpack shoulder strap or a belt or something like that
I was using an old sunglasses case for the contax
>fuji x70
I am turned off by the lens bump/size
>fixed focal length
yes there would be no problem with that if it means getting better IQ and/or portability
>>3060008
>gr
I'm really very afraid a new one will come out, with a better sensor and all, and I'll have to sell this one for relatively little money to get the other
>x100
I tried one and that's too big for what I have in mind
thanks for the help for now

>>3060469
>I'm really very afraid a new one will come out, with a better sensor and all, and I'll have to sell this one for relatively little money to get the other
>have to sell

why would you have to sell your camera just because a new one comes out? If the GR is good enough for you (which it is for me), there is no need to upgrade just because a new version comes out

>>3060445
>>3060447

Thanks gentlemen, it is simply color variation with a leather handle strapped onto it.

File: Supersampling.png (13KB, 512x276px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 512x276px

I've always wondered if forcing a lower resolution than the sensor's native one enhance the picture in any way? Kinda like supersampling works in computer graphics?

This is on a Nikon 5xxx if that matters...

>>3060491
The only thing your Nikon will do is cropping the image, not resample it.

You could technically build a camera that resample its images automatically, but usually this is just more battery consumption, so they leave it to you to decide in post process instead.

>>3060377
It does look great but the game isn't over for Nikon yet. Thom Hogan wrote a pretty good analysis of the situation.

>>3060445
Sonyfags and their delusion. Sony cameras are literally the gear for manchildren

File: Bayer_filter_all.png (8KB, 210x144px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 210x144px

>>3060491
It does.

For starters the "native" pixels on a Bayer sensor like yours have just one color value of their own, the other two are interpolated from adjacent pixels.

You need to reduce resolution by 50% in both directions (ie: 1/4th the original megapixels) just to get a red, green and blue sample for each pixel. (note: this will actually give you 1 red, 1 blue and 2 greens)

Older cameras usually also have an AA filter, which blurs the image a bit to reduce moire.
Those cameras benefit even more from down-sampling.

I think down-sampling can also reduce moire, but this might require some special processing (I'm not sure).

>>3060559
You're misunderstanding. He wants to do it in-camera, so the RAW files are smaller.

>>3060562
Is that even possible on a D5xxx?

I assumed in post of course.

>>3060473
because I might always use one or two more stops of DR, or one or two less stops of noise
I wouldn't "have to" sell my old camera, but I'd want to get the newer version unless it was a really costly upgrade

File: 1274580648482.gif (332KB, 440x330px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 440x330px

>>3060532
I think Thom is actually panicking. He already resorted to technical fallacies like claiming the new A9 is a slowing down compared to the previous CDAF method in previous A7 cameras.

It looks like a 110% overdrive damage control.

>>3060491
Why don't you just shoot at small/medium image size settings and compare for yourself?

>>3060595
To me it looks like everyone else is panicking and Thom is trying to be somewhat reasonable.

Nonetheless the a9 is in a way revolutionary and Nikon and Canon have to react fast.

Are Fujifilm X100S still a good camera? I'm a bit of a poorfag and I could settle for the Sony A600 instead.

>>3060682
yes

File: .png (26KB, 742x185px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 742x185px

>>3060678
>reasonable
he's going full pants on head retarded

File: .png (27KB, 734x176px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 734x176px

>>3060678
dude's off his rocker at this point

>>3060678
>>3060796
>>3060797
storm in a teacup

>>3060796
Hehe. That's beautiful.

But this just means he recognize Sony as a real threat to Nikon now.
He has realised the two have overlapping target audiences: high-end sensor enthusiasts.

>>3060796
>>3060797
Nice out of context quotes you have there. It would be a shame, if someone actually read the article.

File: .png (33KB, 857x193px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 857x193px

>>3060805
Yeah he spouts off the spec sheet for half of the article, complains about focusing for 1/4, and complains about footnotes for the last 1/4. And have fun with his retarded analogies otherwise.

>>3060808
I see that you don't read his articles regularly.

>>3060532

Not over, but Nikon is certainly facing competition outside of Canon for the first time since the 80s.

Plus that article is laughably bad like the other anons said.

>>3060810
No I don't follow any shill news on a daily basis. Something wrong with that?

>>3060816
So what exactly makes it bad?

>>3060824
Thom isn't a Nikon shill. He shoots Nikon and most of the time criticizes Nikon heavily.

I've been using an Olympus SH-2 for photographing nature stuff, mostly small animals like insects. It takes surprisingly good shots of small things without using macro. It broke, plus it keeps getting debris inside of it, I think due to lack of weather sealing. Any recommendation for a similar camera? Small and fast to pull out, the further zoom the better.

File: CANON ELPH 180.jpg (59KB, 675x450px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 675x450px

Repost from another thread because I'm retarded:

What's the cheapest, best compact/pocket camera? Pic related budget and style type

>>3060895
Probably one of the earlier generation RX100.
The sensor is small, but the lens is extremely good.

>>3060896
Here where I live those kind of cameras are around $1k

I was thinking about something around $200 or even less

>>3060899
That's the 5th generation. The first few generations are pretty cheap on ebay.

Canon's versions are G9X and G7X.

My only digital is a D3000 and to be honest is more than enough for me.
That said, I'm starting to dislike not being able to remote control the flash (SB 600), and that it has no AF-drive, so the 50 (1.8 AF-D) that I have that I use with a film camera goes unused with the digital one, other than for macro with extension tubes.

Anyway, was thinking of getting a D90, it has a motor and flash commander, and they go for cheap (like 200 eurobucks).
That said the D7000 is only (usually if well priced) 100 euros more, and I get metering with AI glass (but I don't have any AI/-S), better video (but I don't shoot videos), etc.
But then again, I'm happy with the D3000 IQ, noise, etc. I'd just love to get af motor and more overall control of shit I want to do.

Budget is whatever, but I don't want system-change-tier budgets, and since I like my D3000 I'd just rather spend something reasonable and low while not losing any sort of practical features.

>>3060899
Possibly the Canon S90/100/110. Not as good as the RX100, but still a capable camera and much smaller, too.

>>3059341
I have the 11. Well it's pretty fucking wide but I can't find anything to shoot with that shit on. And f4 is quite annoying, I think you will be better off. Yea but just be aware that it's really fucking wide and you will have a hard time looking for a suitable subject.

>>3060945
D7000 or D7100 both will be huge improvements. D7100 has a better sensor though, great values

>>3059747
Lol kys

File: 71H9XbRZmlL._SL1000_.jpg (151KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1000x1000px

On a strict budget but I want to upgrade from my shitty point-and-shoot.

Somebody suggested the Canon t3i. I found one on Amazon for $230.

Is this correct? Seems really cheap.

https://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital-18-55mm-discontinued-manufacturer/dp/B004J3V90Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1492761597&sr=1-1&keywords=Canon%2Bt3i&th=1

>>3058821
one pentax
two pentaxes
several pentai

>>3061025
"several pentaxen"

>>3060976
D7000 has the better sensor, one stop more DR. The D7100 has more megapixels but with the smaller pixel size, it loses that 1 stop DR. That means you can extract less color information without noise.
You can pretty much push exposure almost 5 stops on the D7000 and almost 4 stops on the D7100 without running into serious noise issues.
The same sensors are in the Pentax K-5/50 series and the K-3 series.

>>3061025
Japanese doesnt have singular and plural

one pentax
two pentax
several pentax

Well fuck. My Sigma 28 1.8 AF quit infinity focusing, then quit focusing all together. It will cost more to fix than to buy another.......wut 28 1.8 is good? Or is there another 24 or something I need to watch for?

No 28 1.4, I'm not paying collectors tax.

>>3061088
I have an eos mount sigma 28 1.8 for sale if you want.

>>3061087
They also have a shitty phonetic alphabet. Pentakkusu.

>>3061088
You're a massive faggot and you deserve sadness.
I thought you'd joined the upper echelons of society now that you're a fucking truck driver, why can't you afford the Nikkor 28/1.4? It's only ever going to appreciate in value, provided you can avoid smashing it on the ground like a fucking mongloid.
That said, sigma now makes a 24/1.4 for $1000 brand new, so there's that.
Or they make the 30/1.4 for $500 brand new.
Or Nikon make the 28/1.8 for like $600.

>>3061093

I can afford the 28 1.4 but paying that much money for an extra 1/3 stop is stupid.

thanks though, i haven't been up to snuff on fast ultrawide primes in the 28 and 24mm range.

Why does this concave red soft-release button I bought offa ebay feel so good? Or, alternatively, why does my x-pro2's button feel so crummy without it?

Best 3.20€ I ever sent to stinky chinky, by the way.

>>3061065
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7100-versus-Nikon-D7000___865_680
DxO begs to differ.

>>3060971
Isn't the ELPH 180 better than the S90? Relatively

>>3061095
f/1.8 to f/1.4 is 1 stop

>>3061233
2/3 actually. f/2 to f/1.4 would be 1 stop.

>>3061152
>unironically quotes DXO
You know what? Please post the photos those magical fairy measurements are based upon.

>>3061095
>28mm
>UWA
Start with 21mm and go lower, then you can talk about UWA. 24mm is still "just" wide angle. Borderline, but not wide enough for proper UWA.

>>3061247
How about DPReview? Do you trust them?
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/14
What source claims that D7000 would have better dynamic range than D7100?

>>3061261
I know my K-3 sensor has less DR than my friends K-50. The sensors are the same as in the D7100 and D7000.
We shot the same event, similar lenses and the same shitty light. He had better results from the same exposure just because he could push it more without serious noise issues, I either had to add grain or switch it to b&w as well just to hide the noise.
Event was in a poorly lit church, no flash allowed.
Lenses used: DA 35/2.4 and FA 35/2

You can try and google as many specs and charts as you want, I know the actual real life difference, and the 16MP sensor in the D7000 is much better than the 24MP one in the D7100. Again same sensors in the Nikon and Pentax, all made by Toshiba.

>>3061278
What's typically refered to as sensor performance also depends on other factors such as processing. Unless Pentax uses same everything, the results aren't fully comparable with Nikon. Also dymamic range is not only about lightening shadows but darkening highlights too.

My father has D7000 and I have D7100, so I'm not relying only on websites but thought that they would be a more neutral source than "I just know these things."

And if you would have looked at the DxO measurements, you would have seen that the K-30 does indeed have slightly more dynamic range than K-3 for most of the ISO range but the opposite is true for Nikon. And this is when you view the pictures on a screen.

>>3061312
>>3061278
And meant to write K-50 instead of K-30.

>>3061278
One more thing. Noise and dynamic range aren't the same.

>>3061318
It is all about extracting information. The more dynamic range you have, the more information you can get in the same exposure. When you hit the limits the noise (photonic, heat and readout) becomes visible without any more information getting extracted.

>>3061323
http://info.adimec.com/blogposts/bid/102325/Dynamic-Range-DNR-and-Signal-to-Noise-Ratio-SNR-for-CCD-and-CMOS-image-sensors

>>3061315
I believe the K-50 and K-30 have the same sensor, anyways, just different styling and firmware

>>3061233
>>3061242

Paying 10 times more money for one extra or 2/3 extra stop is stupid

Apparently it's worth fixing I should have paid a lot more for it so i'll send it off and my 28 2.8 will hold me over

>>3061411
>Paying 10 times more money for
a rare and beautiful piece of photographic history that you can actually also use on your film cameras is not stupid.
You are stupid, Sugar.

File: f5814.jpg (110KB, 864x742px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 864x742px

Trying to use this on my D810 but the aperture ring wont move. Works fine on my film cameras, but on the 810 it's pretty much stuck.

>>3061452
You've got a pre-AI lens there, you'll have to shave down the back of the aperture ring in certain spots or have it professionally converted. There are some DIY tutorials out there if you're handy.

I'd refrain from trying to use it on the 810 as-is since it can damage the mount until it's modified.

>>3061452

it's pre-AI. only nikon digi that can use that is the Df. non-AI lenses can be used on Nikon cameras with a flippable AI tab like on the Df and the FE, so you will either need to convert that lens to AI or buy a Df

>>3061455

Do not shave the back of it down, have it professionally converted. The 810 is a nice camera, you don't NEED to have a Df to use that lens its much cheaper to convert it to AI most reputable camera shops will do it for cheap or you can buy a kit online for probably as much

File: 1306631899454.jpg (34KB, 752x701px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 752x701px

>>3061455
>since it can damage the mount
Why is this even allowed to happen. What the fuck, who is the clown responsible for designing a mount that can be destroyed by older lenses for said mount?

>>3061455
>You've got a pre-AI lens there, you'll have to shave down the back of the aperture ring in certain spots or have it professionally converted. There are some DIY tutorials out there if you're handy.

Gotcha.

>I'd refrain from trying to use it on the 810 as-is since it can damage the mount until it's modified.

I only mounted it on there twice and took some shots, think it should be okay.

>>3061457

I actually mounted the lens on my FE and the aperture ring wasn't moving on there either.

>>3061458

I probably won't do either. I use the lens exclusively on my F Photomic and will keep it on there.

But I'll keep the conversion in mind if I see a good deal for a non-AI lens in the future.

The camera on my phone sucks but I want to get a nice camera other than film, would a first gen Ricoh be a good choice? I love how the b&w looks but how is color photography and low light? There's a first gen for 110 dollars on Craigslist in mint condition, is it worth picking up or should I talked the seller down? Thanks.

>>3061467

The tab on your FE flips up to allow the use of those lenses.

All I know is that I was recommended a Panasonic Lumix G7 and I love it.

What are some budget bags for DSLR's? Preferably with straps that can hold a tripod.

>>3061704
Amazon Essentials bags are a good start or a knockoff NatGeo Walkabout bag but I would rather recommend a Lowepro Flipside 400 AW.

File: 24mm.png (763KB, 1213x1007px) Image search: [Google]

763KB, 1213x1007px

should i get the Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Lens?

>>3061937
Yes.
Unless you would need a telephoto, in which case, no.

>>3061938
ive already got the L series 70-200 so im good for telephoto, just dont really have the money to get an l series wide angle but want a decent one (all i have wider than 50mm is the 18-55 kit lens)

Has anyone here used an Epson v600 to scan negs before? I'm looking for something cheap so I can scan a bunch of 120 rolls and save money in the long run.

Whats a good camera backpack? My current bag doesn't fit my telephoto

>>3061952
Lowepro Flipside

I like taking Macro shots, but I only have the kit lens for my a6000 so far.

Do you think it's worth getting the SEL30M35, or is getting macro extension tubes + a high-perfomance lens like a Sigma prime a better option?

>>3061955
Get a proper macro lens, something with a lbig enough working distance, like the Tamron 90/2.8 or Sigma 105/2.8. The Tamron has an old manual focus Adaptall 2 version.
Don't mind the AF, at big enough macro ratios (1:2 and bigger) you won't need it, it will only control the macro ratio. Focus by moving the camera itself, easier on a tripod with a macro rail.

>>3061953
300 or 400?

>>3061994
It would be better to know what gear you want to pack.
I have the 400 which is big enough for most stuff, fits the Sigma 50-500 and the body with a larger size standard zoom barely in the center, rest is in the side compartments. It can fit the Sigma 150-500 or 150-600 with the body in the center and other lenses at the side.

>>3061961
So basically, some vintage-ish lens + adapter?

>>3062022
Yes. A proper macro lens is corrected for field curvature at very close focus distances.

Sony can't stop memeing the size and weight advantages of mirrorless cameras, but as soon as you put even an f/4 lens on it that shit is gone. Any chance the future will see a high IQ slow normal zoom to preserve that?

>>3062081
Pentax K-1 with the kit lens. That is a slow zoom and is just as big as a Sony with an f/4 zoom.

I want to get my first lens for my APS-C Canon T3 (other than the standard kit lens). Should I get the 24mm EF-S f2.8 or the 50mm SMT f1.8?

Mainly for street - people on street use

>>3062103
>>3062081
Also the size is not due to the mirrorless design but the FF sensor. If you want something to cover the FF sensor you have to design bigger lenses. You can't see the difference because Sony doesn't make any lenses for APS-C only, but look at the Pentax Limited primes, the FA Limiteds are FF and nothing special in size from similar primes, but the DA Limiteds are so small, most of them are actually pancake size.
The zooms are again different, but there are still some size difference between FF and crop lenses.
Your best bet would be buying an adapter and use either Leica primes or Canon zooms.
If you want a more compact system, go for MFT or get an entry level Pentax and a handful of Limited primes.

>>3062111
50mm on crop is a portrait lens, I would go for a 24mm first and see if you want tighter angles.

whats a comfortable, good looking strap that attaches to a cameras tripod mount (or an alternative quick remove system)?

>>3062135
Peak Design Slide

>>3062143
why would i get one like that instead of one that just attaches to the tripod mount like a black rapid?

Any good sub-200 cameras that are better than what I can take with my phone?

Phone in question is a Oneplus One.

>>3062155
Because the Peak Design attaches through two flexible anchors on a large area arca swiss mount instead of a single small brittle die-cast lug that breaks for no reason.

>>3062280
No. Double that budget and get a used entry DSLR like a Nikon D3300 or Pentax K-S2

File: 1492587238898.jpg (37KB, 975x600px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 975x600px

good morning
I am a total noob when it comes to cameras but I wanted to buy myself one that can make good photos but also videos with 60fps.
Can you guys recommend me a good beginner friendly camera?

I suggest the cannon t5i rebel its a good beginner camera then when you get better its still beasty boss 10/10

>>3062333
Panasonic G7, G80/85 or GH5, depending on your budget.

>>3062364
New thread

>>3062337
a6500

>>3062325
it seems annoying to have the little anchors on the camera.

File: A6000white.png (110KB, 700x312px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 700x312px

>>3060447
>doesn't know about silver and white a6000

>>3060899
>$200
xiaomi mi5 with lineage os

>>3060899
https://www.amazon.com/Sony-NEX5K-Digital-Camera-Interchangeable/dp/B003MPSHP0/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1492975497&sr=1-1&refinements=p_36%3A1253506011%2Cp_89%3ASony

>>3060682
usability and software will seem pretty hesitant and not that responsive vs new cameras. Lens and image quality is sharp if not that wide open though.

File: 134289407.WyH7E3Uw.jpg (48KB, 800x613px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 800x613px

is this a good m42 lens? it was very cheap. i am new to photography stuff. i have a "zenith e"

Ricoh GR (1st edition with apsc) has 7000 shutter actuations. How bad is that? 7000 should mean it's pretty new right?

File: 18121464_1147760182002506_5290801583797302819_o.jpg (142KB, 1280x961px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1280x961px

Someone can find which camera+lens it is ?

>>3061942
Go at least for a 750/800
Or DSLR scan

>>3063961
one of the Pentax m42 cameras, probably a Spotmatic, and probably a 100 2.5 given the short distance of the subject.

>>3064153
Thank you !

>>3060473
>Ricoh
don't you miss the viewfinder? Is the screen visible in the sun? I am thinking of dumping all my shit in the lake a get a pocket friendly GR. I am tired of fucking carrying stuff around.

I'm torn between GR and X70 but i've heard GR is sharper.

Also is the GR a good camera for some interesting landscape/urbanscape shots? or is that too stupid a question since it has a 28mm

Thanks

>>3065220
You'll find that even portraits are landscapes at 28mm (eqv).

Is the nikon coolpix p900 just a meme?