Any photfags here? >gear >tips

I'm an aspiring photofag. Currently saving up to by a half decent camera. Any suggestions on what a beginner should by?

>>731980616
Checking in

>>731981877
Bump same.
Only camera i have is my phone im saving for a good camera

>>731980616
I'm a pro. Are you looking for anything specific?

Professional motorsport photographer checking in.

(None of my photos are small enough resolution to post. Working on that now)

Bump, looking for a decent camera. Budget is around $1000 but I can probably go $1500 if the jump is worth it.

>>731981877
I'm a canon fag and currently have the 80D. It's probably like $1,200 now used and a perfect beginner camera. Not a full frame but will do everything you want and need. If that's still too pricy I would look at rebels.

>>731983062
What kind of photography do you do?

Sony surely is playing for keeps.

The new A9 is shaking people up. They've shown mirrorless is quite close (and will eventually surpass) the top DSLRs.

Seems pretty clear that in say 10 years, very few pros will be using DSLRs.

>>731983117

Can confirm, Eight Zero Dee is great, especially if you're looking to do a little of video as well, swivel touch focus is super nice.

>>731983265
agreed. I switched over to Sony recently.

>>731983434
>>731983265
Was shooting Canon before

>>731983204
Complete amateur, but I primarily take photos of nature and cityscapes with my phone/GoPro if that helps.

File: 20170508_211959.png (2MB, 1440x978px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x978px

1/50 5.4 I100

Canon 7d mkii, 70-200 2.8

All my gear is Canon, but none of it would remotely fit your budget.

If you have a Sams/Costco membership, pick up one of their bundles. They do a sale with a decent rebel and 2 lenses that will cover just about everything you'll need as an up and coming photographer.

>>731983584

I love how level you got the horizon!

File: 20170508_211850.png (1MB, 917x588px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 917x588px

1/320 5.6 I200

Canon 1D mkiii 400mm 2.8

File: OntarioLiquidGold.jpg (2MB, 6016x4000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 6016x4000px

Nikon fag here, prefect starting camera if you wanna go Nikon (Not really too much of a difference over to Canon) is a NikonD3200, the cheapest DSLR on the Nikon market, want to get into photography more? Just buy a higher number later

Photo taken with the old 3200

>>731983546
>>731983265
(I'm the guy that just switched to Sony)
I'd go with a Sony

>>731983678

Dutch angle. Intentional. Lrn2camera.

>>731983784

If that's intentional, I call it cheesy.

File: 20170508_211908.png (2MB, 1440x937px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x937px

>>731983763

Sony's are great cameras. Vibrance is unmatched.

Nikon is great if you like to do lots of post

Canon is best with it's focus optics (fast moving shit)

>>731983853

Cool story bro. What do you do for a living again?

I'm planning on getting a camera for making skits/other videos of some sort for youtube.
I'm not sure exactly what to get though. I also want the camera to take nice pictures, so I guess I should go with a DSLR?
I barely know anything about cameras..

>>731983967
Sony kicks ass in low-light as well

>>731984227

Go DSLR for sure so you have lens versatility. 80D would be your best bet for a Canon if you expect to do video along with stills.

>>731984271

Very true

>>731980616
>>tips
yep, go to /p/ you retarded faggot

>>731984418
>>731984271
That's why I switched. DR is amazing too, especially at high ISO

>>731984271
sony sucks. and I don't say it lightly.. i've invested a shit load of money into sony and top of the line zeiss glass..

>>731984383
Ok, I'll look into it! Thank you anon

File: 20170508_213330.png (2MB, 1128x839px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1128x839px

>>731984547

Always /b/rother

>>731984540
So have I...and I love my Sonys
Why do you say that?

File: David Hockney-esk.jpg (2MB, 6016x4000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 6016x4000px

I use Nikon but I love doing post work, most the reason I take photos

File: 20170508_213353.png (1MB, 1310x711px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1310x711px

If you do buy a DSLR, remember that the body doesn't matter all that much. Spend money on good, low aperture lenses.

>>731984810
What else do you photograph? Would be interested to see...landscape? City? Portraits?

File: 20170508_213413.png (2MB, 1359x859px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1359x859px

And remember that no camera will make you a good photographer. Only practice and learning can help that. If you shoot potato on a cheap camera, a $15k setup won't help much.

>>731985052
Just cars I guess...

>>731984540
not same fagging just elaborating on my previous post. I have a sony A7II multiple zeiss primes, and 2 master zooms.. I switched over to sony from a canon 6D.. i've been a semi professional photographer for the past 3 years before that amateur for I don't even know how long starting on a canon T2..

Since switching to Sony I have had nothing but problems not only with the body, but customer support is a joke. I literally loved the A7 and was fully convinced it could keep up with the 6D for the first 2 months of owning it.. then the thing started overheating, it literally killed 2 batteries (not drained them) they seriously won't charge anymore contacted sony multiple times over the overheating issue got absolutely nowhere. since then I've had multiple issues with raw files not saving correctly (big green lines going through the photo) among multiple other issues. I sent the body in to sony for repair they sent me out a refurbished body almost a month and a half later (not even the same camera I sent to them for repair) it had a fram count on it of over 25,000 shots. I called and bitched because the body I sent in had about 2000 shots on it.. once again got nowhere

>>731985490
>>731984701

>>731984954

I've done nature, landscapes, and portraiture. None professionally.

I don't have any of it on my phone though, and I'm not going to post my portfolio on /b/ so some troll in the thread can order 60 pizzas for my house.

In my experience, there's not a lot of pro photographers who only shoot one thing. My main shooter at one of my tracks is a top rated wedding photog when he's not scheduled with us, while another is a lead shooter for Pirelli World Challenge.

If you can do it in one medium, it's not hard to translate to another. I'm not sure where speed panning a car going 150mph would be beneficial (sports maybe?) but the experience will carry over.

File: CB250.jpg (94KB, 838x960px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 838x960px

>>731980616

hey /b/ .....

Im doing an 8 week motorcycle trip around North america. Looking for a relatively inexpensive camera (under $250) to take pictures with. Going to be mainly photographing scenery and landscapes. I know nothing about photography ...
cheers

https://www.instagram.com/p/BRcGCMdAiDt/

>>731985490
That sucks. I switched over from a 6D and 5DIII to an A7RII and A7SII. Also picked up a few zeiss primes and master zooms. I haven't had a single issue.

>>731985490
sony customer support is shit.. what nobody will tell you is the truth about sony.. they are all about specs.. there cameras can't keep up with long term use.. yeah they sound nice on paper but after about a year of owning them sony expects you to upgrade to the next model they put out.. truth is the cameras have a shelf life of about 2 maybe 3 years before they shit out.. half of the time they don't even read the life of the shutter before something else seriously go's wrong with them.

I use a Nikon d5300 it's good

File: 20170508_215153.png (173KB, 2161x1215px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 2161x1215px

>>731984954

File: 20170508_215133.png (1MB, 2021x1207px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2021x1207px

>>731984954

This was shot with a Sam's club Canon T3

>>731985772
get an eosm with the 22mm
should be $200 or so.
very good lens. camera is rather compact but still pro quality

>>731986027
>>731986071
thing that gets me about sony is that Fuji has been killing the mirrorless market on a 16mp crop sensor for years now. Sony is putting out FF mirrorless cameras but the quality is absolute shit. they have no idea how to make a durable camera.. If I sold my sony shit I would switch to fuji but I have to much invested in glass to jump ship

File: 20170508_215222.png (445KB, 1440x2148px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 1440x2148px

>>731984954

Again, Canon T3 kit. Inthink I spent 500 for the body and 2 lenses.

>>731985587
4chan images wipe any identifiable information as they upload in the exif data.

>>731986442
very good reason not to get a kit lens. thanks for the shitty pics

>>731986605

They are screen grabs from my remote server. You cam even see the mouse pointer. In reality they're about 5-7mbs each. (/b/ only allows 2 megs.)

>>731986535
>4chan images wipe any identifiable information as they upload in the exif data.

I meant giving you my website, lol. It has all my contact info on it.

>>731986780
so? they are shitty pics period. stop posting faggot.

>>731983434
what's the battery life like?

>>731986387
Fuji uses a x trans sensor that's why they are ungue 16-24 sensor on a Fuji is more equal to a 24 ff sensor in sharpness and color rendition

>>731987111
Not great. I carry a few spares on every job.

File: not-crashing.jpg (1MB, 3024x4032px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3024x4032px

My tripod was the most expensive part 2bh...

>>731987034

Again, cool story. Seeing as how I'm paid to shoot for a living, and second in command in a relatively large photography company, your insults fall on deaf ears.

>>731987269

I love the 5d. Got the same big lens in my kit, but a 7dmii attached to it.

>>731987514
Long lens is the mkiii, other is the 5Ds - all dem tasty em pees. I still have the original 5D tho.

Bump

Nonfamous tripfag from /p/ here ama

File: Screenshot_20170508-220922.jpg (433KB, 1276x811px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 1276x811px

>>731987724

I want that 5dsr for my home kit. 51mpx?! Lawd have mercy.

As it is we only shoot about 12mpx at the track due to the large amount of photos we take in a day. The 7D ii is a champ out there with it's focus sensor.


We may be investing in a 70-200 2.8 iii soon, as the connecting ring on our mark i is worn to hell. Canon won't repair it because it's inferior, but they'll happily work on my 400 2.8 from the same year. :/

Any recommended camera bags?

>>731987269

Mosport shooter here. Do you do aerial photography? If so, what's your main subject?

>>731988593
Think tank

>>731988593

Tarmac expeditions if you want to spend money, Amazon basics if you want a good, semi reliable pack.

Anyone here still shoot film?

When is an apsc sensor preferred over full frame?

>>731980616
cameras = dying
70-90% humans = retards = all use only smartphones for foto/video

holliday on paradise beach and retards use smartphone LOL

ja ok next week hollywood use only smartphones for movies , cnn only smartphones LOL

>>731989043
Haha wrong

>>731988962
Xtrans sensor kills ff

File: 20170508_221043.png (2MB, 1266x902px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1266x902px

>>731988900

Not viable with what I do. I like film, but digital all the way

>>731988962

When it saves you a ton of money buying a modern body.

>>731989043

Smartphones great for the convenience.

But you're limited to ~28mm (or also ~50mm if you get a two-lens model, like the iPhone 7plus).

But still, that is VERY limiting.

File: tmp_6950-yiuy2048291874.jpg (891KB, 2009x1226px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 2009x1226px

>>731988282
Why do you want the dsr? We considered it but we wouldn't want that jagged edge look.

>>731988593
I fuggen love my lowepro whatever it is 450 or something.

>>731988690
Mostly architecture but all sorts of stuff, this was for NOAA studying sediment movements

>>731988900
Lol

>>731989043
Superlol

>>731983062
You can get an old, used Pentax for under $100 on eBay, and you can get professional-quality photos out of them. It's all mechanical, no electronics at all, so they last forever. If you're comfortable setting your own ISO and fstop manually, they're amazing cameras. The real problem is finding film and developing it, but if you make your own darkroom it's not too big a problem.

>>731989378

Good advice! I thought the 5dsr was the 5ds but better.

That looks like tons of fun. What aircraft are you using? I assume some sort of 172/182?

>>731989498

Don't go backwards to film.

Just don't.

We're all done with film.

The last holdout was major motion pictures, but they are all done with film now as well.

>>731989226
Yeah I understand. Fast action photography has mostly went the way of digital for the connivence which I find reasonable. Film is mostly for calmer situations anyway unless you're shooting street.

>>731989378
>Lol
?

my pro cam have 40 billion mm :o

good cams = every better as smartphone shit , in all things

>>731989692
I have yet to see any digital camera which can compete with the crisp quality and contrast of the black and white photos I got out of my old Pentax using 100 ASA film.

>>731989877
Fuji XT2
Leica M8

>>731989877
I wouldn't have said that. Full blown digifags will be coming to shoot you down soon.

>>731989877

Does the quality hold up after being scanned?

>>731989043
>p&s cameras = dying
>70-90% humans = retards = all use only smartphones for foto/video

fixed

>>731989877

You print you own stuff, on honest-to-goodness silver halide paper, like Ilford Multigrade? That stuff has a look that's hard to beat!

File: tmp_6950-48557-24_34043114890_o[1]1537202089.jpg (486KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 1800x1200px

>>731989577
Nah you pay an extra $100 for the cam to -not- apply a softening filter at the pixel level. It's purer but you get an artifact-y serrated effect. And zoomed out it gives really funky effects on screens.

>>731990225
Why the hell would you scan it? You'd lose the benefit of analog. You might as well go digital if you're going to scan it.

>>731989877
you sound like a giant faggot with a turntable

File: 20170508_223710.png (2MB, 1293x912px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1293x912px

>>731990429

Makes sense. Thanks for the protip!

>>731990442

You're right. I suppose there is absolutely no benefit to having a digital file that you can do endless things with in editing, and share with the world.

>>731990356
I used to. I studied journalism in college about 30 years ago, and I got hooked on the 70s-era Pentax cameras they used for training. I never quite got the hang of colour processing, but black and white is easy-peasy. And, as you say, the shots are gorgeous. You just can't reproduce it digitally.

>>731990744

I grew up with a really nice darkroom in the basement of our house. I miss the magic of watching an image appear out of nowhere in the developer tray!

File: 20170508_223912.png (2MB, 1356x693px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1356x693px

1/2

File: 20170508_223507.png (2MB, 1114x861px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1114x861px

2/2

>>731987387
It doesnt make your photos less shitty.
tell us all what shitty company you work for

>>731990897
You ever tried pinhole photography? I've always wanted to, but never got around to it. And now film is so hard to come by, I probably never will.

>>731990501
Face it, analog > digital, and always will be.

>>731991067

I did exactly one (1) pinhole photo. I was only 12 years old, and didn't do it properly. The result was pretty poor. Still cool for what it was though.

Is film really hard to come by these days?

I thought you could still get it pretty easily -- maybe not at your neighborhood camera shop, but certainly from online merchants.

>>731986358
nice shot, whered you take it?

>>731991314

Red Rock Canyon west of Las Vegas.

Sony a6000 here, nice little camera. Shoots surprisingly well. Pic would be attached but files too big

>>731991067
>>731991301
Google "t-max film".

First result.

In stock.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/29139-USA/Kodak_8947947_TMY_135_36_Roll_T_Max.html

File: 20170415_101726.png (258KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 500x500px

>>731991029

So you can shitpost all over my website? Hokay.

>>731991301
Not really. Any local department store/pharmacy will usually carry some color negative 35mm that can be cross processed in black and white if you decide to pick up the chemicals.

I shoot a ton of Superia 400, great film.

File: IMG_1298.jpg (866KB, 4011x2674px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 4011x2674px

>>731980616

Go for Canon, whichever one is in your price range. They have a marginally better range of lenses then Nikon does and it will save you having to change all your gear if you actually get into photography and want to change down the track. Also learn to use it, read, watch videos, whatever. Don't shoot on auto or you might as well be using your phone.

I know I'm not going to win any awards with this one but I'm showing you to demonstrate you don't need to spend big to have a play with DSLR's.
25 sec. f/4.5 18mm iso100 -
Canon 1200D with the kit 18-55mm lens, bottom of the line Canon DSLR/lens combo for those that don't already know.

>>731991301
I don't do much online shopping. I live a life of voluntary simplicity. Other than my computer, everything I own can fit in a single backpack. I not only don't own a cellphone, I've never even used one. I can find colour film, but black and white film is just not available at all, and I suspect I wouldn't be able to find a range of ASAs to choose from.

>>731991606

It came out really nice! I love long exposure photography. I had a good gig going for a while doing light painting on cars for friends/clients.

>>731983720
That glass is fucking expensive.

>>731991661

If I went back to film, I couldn't live without real black and white film. Last stuff I did was with Kodak T-Max 100, 400, and 3200. Lovely films!

They still make the 100 and 400, but discontinued the 3200.

File: IMG_0670.jpg (1MB, 3929x2947px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3929x2947px

Any recommendations for a good point-and-shoot? My current camera legit takes worse pictures than my phone.


>pic related shot on phone

>>731991561
Also as a side note I think the whole "film vs digital" arguement is the most autistic argument in the photography world to date. If you're better with one medium than the other than shoot for christs sake and don't bitch about how "film is for hipster faggots" or "digital is killing photography as a whole."

Don't be a gearfag.

>>731991798

Indeed it is, but oh so worth it. We have 3 400mm 2.8s in our inventory. They're worth every dime if you shoot for a living. The clarity is unrivaled.

>>731991849

See

>>731983584


Buy a kit lens from a wholesale store.

>>731991886

Reply of the century.

>>731991798
See
>>731988282

It definitely merits the word "Canon" stamped on it. The lens alone is something like 17 lbs.

>>731991886
>digital is killing photography as a whole
But it is. What makes photography artistic is the limitations of the medium. The skill necessary to massage an amazing shot out of film, having to understand how colour and contrast works through the actual chemical processes is something it takes time and effort to acquire. Making duckface at a mirror with your cellphone is not art.

>>731981877
>>731982692
Get a Nikon D3400. $400 with a kit lens. Plenty to get you started. You can pick up better lenses later.


Nikon > Canon

>>731992474

And my motorsports shots aren't art? You're generalizing digital photography. Don't be a hipster. Evolve.

>>731992556

Nikon = Canon

Both have merits and flaws.

Photography is hobby for people whitout any talents. Everyone can pick up a camera and take photo.
>inb4 hurr durr you could take a photo but coudnt take a nice photo
All you need to do to take a nice photo is taking 10-15 minutes and having read fucking manual

>>731992995
see
>>731990429
ok. let me see you do that. this will be hilarious.

>>731992995

Said the person who knows nothing about photography.

I make plenty of money off my "hobby." Go be a faggot somewhere else.

>>731992995
>Composition

>>731992165
Thanks for that.

>>731992474
When you pull a digital image into a dark room whenever you shoot in a RAW file you make similar adjustments as you would in a darkroom as film. Sure, you don't get the same satisfaction as actually seeing what type of images you captured after the fact but nevertheless you got a great shot. Digital is more about the computerized connivence while film is more about the organic process.

>>731992644
This kinda. I've shot a decent bit of action of some brainless 800 ASA film and had gotten some good results.

>>731992995
Fantastic bait, friendo.

>>731992644
hes baiting you. that argument is retarded "limit of medium" fuck off. dealing with a limit cleverly is one thing, but the less limits the more insane room you have to create unhindered. i dont buy that argument for a second.

File: IMG_0988.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>731992070
Thanks. Just looking for something affordable that isn't a complete potato.

>>731992474
Even on film, duckface selfies wouldn't be art. Also, just because your shooting on digital doesn't mean that the other aspects of photography (shot alignment, lighting, focus, etc.) don't still apply. But if you want to shoot on film, that's your choice and I'm not going to slam you for it.

>>731992644
Digital photography has a place. It's a simple and easy way of recording what your eye sees. Film doesn't work the way the eye does, so you need to have a completely unintuitive understanding of the differences between what you see through your viewfinder, and what will appear on the film. I'd argue that digital photography is artisinal, like stonemasonry or baking, while film photography is more akin to oil painting and is artistic rather than artisinal. I'm not shitting on digital, just pointing out that it's not the same thing as film photography.

>>731990950
>>731990997
do they have to poop after crashing? like when you drink coffee?

How yo earn money as a photographer?

>>731983204
OP does mainly creepshots of his mom and dickpic his sends to his imaginary kawaii pillow waifu

Concert photografag here. Canon T5. Have the standard 18-55 mm that came with it, 35 mm f/1.8 and a 100-300 mm f/4.

>>731993141
what gigs do you do?

>>731993470

Lol I'm willing to bet they do it when they hit the concrete.

>>731993280
*grainless, shit I am tired.

>>731993479

Git gud
???
Profit!!

>>731993665

I'm the motorsport photographer posting all the random car pics in this thread.

File: 20170508_230504.png (161KB, 624x480px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 624x480px

>>731992995

I mean if it's that easy

>>731993628

Good setup. Do you just run a solo operation or are you contracted by a larger group?

>>731994102
Work with a partner, not paid yet. Still getting our name out there to hopefully pick up some sponsorship. Cliche to say, but the experience is rewarding enough just by itself.

How do you sell yourself as a photographer? I often go out to public events and have my albums shared, get hundreds of likes and stuff. Just add a link with a site offering my services?

File: triggered.gif (133KB, 311x366px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 311x366px

>>731987034

>>731994313
Marketing. It's hard to let your work speak for itself in an age where EVERYONE is a photographer. Find a niche that sets yourself apart. Website, social media, business cards, networking.

>>731992995
Umm... Everyone can pick up a paint brush too, but that doesn't make them Picasso.

Reading a manual tells you how to operate a device. Using your eyes and your brain tell you how to take a good photo. The manual doesn't tell you what to take a photo of (your mom), what lighting to use (little as possible), how to compose the shot (zoom lens, shooting through the bars), etc...

>>731993439

While I get whay you're saying, what I do is art as well. It takes the same skills to capture the image correctly. My movements have to be surgical to capture a fast moving object at 1/30th, and I don't want to burn through film with a pile of bad shots. I can just erase and repeat.

>>731994308

I was in the same boat and lucked into what I was doing. Owner took one look at my portfolio and put me straight to work.

Keep grinding. Persistence and practice will always pay off.

>>731994313
you need to decide who your market is and then do >>731994512 to go after those people.

speak to the people you want to sell to, not to everyone out there. grandma doesnt give a fuck about your warplane pics, and Billy Bud doesnt care about your pretty nature sunride. so dont market those pics to those people.

also, be the best. that helps too

>>731994512
Too bad my niche is small time garage bands then, no money there. I was thinking of going really broad instead. Like architecture, but also pics for selling stuff or even tinder pictures. Maybe weddings if I git gud enough to ever justify a full frame. I like being a photographer in social settings tho, capturing those moments that only last a couple seconds is like cumming.

>>731994676
Yeah. I'm fine with working another job in order to fund what I'm doing now. The good thing with concert photography is that most of the time I don't have to pay for a ticket which saves a ton in ticket costing.

>>731994512

This guy knows.

General photographers will fade into obscurity in the veginning. Do something that sets you apart, whether that's the subject you shoot, the style in which you shoot it, or something silly like what you wear to a general event you're covering.

My first camera bag was a spiky blue shell from MarioKart, and that got me tons of business.

Nobody needed to know my name. "Photographer? Go ask that guy with the spiky backpack."

File: 20170505_193410.jpg (2MB, 2576x1932px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2576x1932px

>>731980616
Anyone here still use film cameras?

>>731994887

That's what I was doing. Pizza delivery during the week, photoshoots all weekend.

You got this figured out. :)

>>731994981
thanks for the tips

>>731994784

>also, be the best. that helps too

1000% accurate. Be a master of your trade.

File: 20170508_223306.png (2MB, 1327x777px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1327x777px

>>731995154

Always. :)

File: cameras.jpg (326KB, 1600x1137px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1600x1137px

>>731995063
I use both

>>731995366
That's cool, how old is that camera? Why kind of film does it use?

>>731980616
Nikon D90 with some macro lens and a Canon S95 for practicity.
Tips: learn to move, don't buy zoom lens, play with light a lot and triple check your F

File: IMG_8800-4.jpg (2MB, 4830x3220px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4830x3220px

Canon T4i, 50mm 1.8

>>731995610
About 50 years, and 120 film. Really nice TLR series by Mamiya that have lenses that can be traded out.

>>731980616
>>731996055
Also spend more on your lens than on your dslr

>>731995198
Just to expound on this briefly, there are a lot of "photographers" out there who simply have the means to buy expensive equipment and pull the trigger a bunch of times and call it photography. My Canon T5 is an 18MP camera and with my 35 mm f/1.8 lens, which body and lens altogether cost me about $300 used, my work competes with those who have spent several thousand on their equipment, just because of what and how I shoot.

Tl;dr you can be the master of your trade without having state of the art camera equipment.

>>731983584
how do you get your moving objects so sharp? every time I try something like this it looks not even close to yours

>>731996233

I got where I am with a Rebel T3 kit from Sam's Club. Just because I have big guns now doesn't mean I don't understand/appreciate a low cost setup. I completely agree with you.

>>731996055

Also this. Only buy prime lenses unless you have you have a variable zoom.

>>731996429

Lots and lots of practice. Start at 1/250 and get your muscle memory up to par. From there, just keep going a step down until you can't improve anymore.

In a weekend I'll easily shoot 10,000 images, which helps greatly with becoming an effective speed-panner.

Rotate with your hips, keep your arms, head, and eyes still. When you're watching something move past you when not shooting, practice moving your head and torso, and not your eyes, to focus on the object.

Photography takes no real skill apart from learning to use the camera. All you need is to study the manual and learn when to use X aperture settings, or X exposure settings. And that's if you're using the manual mode, which is only for people that like to experiment with different settings and think that they are somehow artists, because they can make some cool effects with high exposure and lights.

I had two photography classes in school. One was the classic dark room stuff, and the other one was digital photography and retouching. The dark room course was removed from the program the next year, because it was too expensive... the acids, solutions and the paper simply cost too much, and they had to be ordered from a single place, because it's not very common anymore.

Anyways, we were also told how to take good photos, and it was basically to respect the rule of the thirds... and learn some key numbers like f1/8 or 400 iso max for no grain. That's it. And guess what? The teacher was a professional and famous photographer in the country.

I know pleny of people that are charging for photographing weddings or businesses and other events... and they told me that they are always using the auto settings, and the only thing they have to do, is to respect the rule of the thirds because it adds dynamism to the pics.

You guys can lie to your clients and rip them off with your high prices... but remember that you're nothing more than a specific kind of artist....

A SCAM artist.

Hopefully, some naive anons that were looking to hire a "professional photographer" for some event, will avoid getting scammed, and instead give the job to a friend or a relative with an iphone.

>>731996951

Nice b8 m8, I r8 8/8

>>731996951

I'd love to see what you've personally shot.

>>731983741
Eh, I'd recommend the D5500. That's what I started with.

Also a Nikon fan. We're few and far between.

>>731996951
>Photography takes no real skill apart from using the camera

That's like saying driving takes no real skill apart from turning on the ignition and pressing on the gas pedal.

Anybody can get a camera and hurr durr around pressing the shutter trigger. A true photographer is one that has a vision of what they want to shoot before they take the shot.

>>731995610
Also here's a video using/explaining a newer yet similar model if you are interested.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dxoM6EAPR5Y

>>731997411

Absolutely on-point.

As a gearhead, this is a perfect example.

>>731996767
thanks allot. I will keep practicing

>>731986358
Painted Hills! i miss Oregon

>>731981877
>>731982420
>>731983062


have canon and can attest to Nikon>canon

much less noise in lower lighting

if you are willing to shell out the money, get one with a full frame sensor, you will really appreciate the investment in the long run

as far as film goes, its cool to have around but i think its much easier to learn manual photography on a DSLR because you can know when you fuck up immediately versus not knowing until you process the film

$500-$800 seems like a really good sweetspot for entry level DSLR bodies but the lens is just as important as the body

Buying a used camera should not be out of the question either most people take great care of expensive things like these. just pay attention to the shutter count (sub 10,000, the lower the better).

>>731983265
Sony have great mirrorless cameras, you plan on doing video primarily this is the way to go

File: image.jpg (227KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 750x1334px

Try analog Photography, way much better

>>731998504

>sub 10,000

Our backup 1D mkii n has just under 3,200,000 shutter count.

My main 1D mkiii that I use has about 1,750,000

I have old gear...

>>731999149

Post your best picture

>>731981877
I paid around $500 for my Nikon d3300 with a case and an 18-55 lens, and another hundred or so for a 70-300 lens.
It's nothing super special, but I'm very happy with it.

>>731999149
>So if I'm in Africa

You don't have to be in an exotic place in order to "make good photography"

>Lightroom corrections

If you have to rely on Lightroom in order to make your pictures good then you owe your famous photography teacher a fucking refund.

>>731999699

>then you owe your "famous" photography teacher a fucking refund.

>>731999149
Composition+light ever heard of it?
You're the kind of guy who believes craftsman=artist, right?

>>731980616
Steve?

File: crazy cartoon.png (39KB, 547x397px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 547x397px

>>732000258

Eh! Steve!

File: 1dii1.jpg (185KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1536x1024px

>>731980616
yes

File: 1dii2.jpg (187KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1536x1024px

>>732000643

>>732000643

Real talk: Do you do Canon repairs? I have a 70-200 2.8 that needs a new coupler and connecting pads and a 1.4x that shoots way too soft.

File: cfcfcf.jpg (234KB, 720x640px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 720x640px

>>732000707

>>732000643

Now that I ask that, it's kinda impossible to get contact info without all the 13 year olds shooting you to hell.. dammit.

Canon won't repair my lens because it's "outdated."

Being a photographer is like being a snake oil salesman.

Honest people with dignity just don't do that.

I could be making a living by selling placebo pills to terminal cancer or AIDS patients, but I would be ashamed of myself. Same with charging people for pressing a button.

File: shutter1.jpg (182KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1536x1024px

>>732000870
>Do you do Canon repairs?
yes

>needs a new coupler
you mean mount? Easy as fuck repair

>and connecting pads
what happened to them?

>a 1.4x that shoots way too soft.
i would just make sure all the lens elements and everything is tight. Not much to calibrate on those. Something must be bent or loose

>>732000950

Semi-famous YouTube vlogger Casey Neistat had a Canon lens that Canon refused to repair, because it was "beyond its service life".

He bitched and moaned about it on Twitter, and Sony paid attention and sent him several bodies (a7r ii, a7s ii, among others) and a bunch of lenses.

Must be nice.

File: DSC_0061_364.jpg (1MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2000px

I have a Nikon D5500 it just fit within my price range and I didn't know if I should prfer either Canon or Nikon.
I don't really understand photography yet I just wanted a hobby and it seemed nice enough even if it was expensive just to get started in.
I don't even know how to take a decent picture without using the auto setting yet.

File: ap03.jpg (226KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 640x640px

>>732000950
Send it to an independent repair place. Get an estimate

>>732001161

The pads are worn through. We're shooting heavy every weekend, and these lenses have been with the company for a decade. I get error 01 for bad lens connection. The copper is basically non-existent where the pads touch the camera body.

I look into getting everything tightened on the 1.4.

>>732001275

I am. Canon repaired our 500 f4 last week but wouldn't touch the 70-200. There's a guy we use out in Arizona.

>>732001275

Also, you know the market nowadays. We can barely find a decent repair shop near us in SoCal. It's all movie industry out here, so we're treated like peasants, even if we are a half million dollar company.

Our last good local repair guy shuttered his doors 2 years ago.

>>732001116
You are truly retarded if you associate photography with terminal cancer.

File: lelel.jpg (19KB, 600x451px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 600x451px

>>732001116

You mad

File: ap01.jpg (248KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 720x720px

>>732001356
FYI error 01 is usually a bad aperture. But yes worn contacts will gave that error as well. All in all though mount/contacts is an incredibly easy repair. aperture however is an incredibly involved repair

>>732001683

Good info. Thanks!

File: cfpin1.jpg (181KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1536x1024px

>>732001567
Well dont just look local. Mail it wherever you have to to get fixed.

>>732001683

I'm certain it's the contacts, as I can disconnect/reconnect and it will work fine for a while. Plus, you can see that they are physically worn out.

>>732001836
I mean, thats what we're doing now with our Arizona contact. We try to keep it as local as possible to reduce downtime. Some weekends we'll have 8 sets of cameras going in 4 locations, and it's rare for us to have an empty weekend.

File: 100_0898.jpg (352KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 2048x1536px

>>732001840
The hardest thing about changing the contacts is each pin has a wire soldered to it. So you will have to solder each wire to the new one. If youre good at soldering its not a problem.

Yea https://youtu.be/f_2XRZTuf0Y

File: 1451285888734.jpg (530KB, 1500x999px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 1500x999px

>>731980616
4chan has a photography board. You'll find all you need to know there

/p/

File: 2.png (1MB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x750px

I don't think spending hundreds of dollars on equipment is necessary to learn the craft.

>>731983117
>80D
What are you, a fucking faggot?

The 5D should be your minimum, you fucking shit-tier faggots. Get some REAL gear.

>>731983265
Also a good choice.

>>731983584
>7D
>half-size sensor
>zoom lens
Yeah no, fuck off.

File: 100_0896.jpg (402KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1536x2048px

>>732003198
Word, you can get original 5D now for like $200

>>732003198
Your amateur is showing. Return when you've worked in old media you arrogant upstart.

t. I get paid from U.K TV licenses

File: IMG_6767.jpg (932KB, 3264x4096px) Image search: [Google]

932KB, 3264x4096px

Pack film is best film

>>732003198
>5D should be your minimum

fuck yeah 5D is awesome

www.ebay.com/itm/172661201503

olympus pen f for digital. 17mm and 25mm oly primes. mainly konica hexar af for film. i always keep a secondary film camera. will switch between canonet ql17 giii, original oly pen f, canon av-1 and canon p.

File: Canonet-QL17-G-III.jpg (129KB, 1024x679px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1024x679px

>>732004181
>canonet ql17 giii

That was the very first camera I ever had. Parents bought one for me when I was 11. Loved that thing!

Small business owner here.

I have a pretty cool Hostel here in my city and a few months ago, I decided to hire a professional photographer. I just needed someone to take pictures of the rooms, kitchen, bathrooms, etc. so I found a young photographer. He charged me £8 700 for two, yes TWO, hours of work! He just went in the whole hostel and took pictures without even taking his time...

When I showed the resulting pictures to my younger sister (she is the website graphic designer and had to put the pics on the site) she just couldn't believe that I had paid almost 9000 pounds for that! So I asked her, what do you mean? She then took her iphone 6s and took the EXACT same pictures as the so-called "photographer". Her pictures where actually even BETTER and still in resolution.

I had my lesson.

Don't waste your money on these stealers. It's 2017, everyone has a phone and everyone posts pics on social media, so they know how it works... and they can do it for free.

Good luck!

>>732004443
Dank copypasta

So glad you could come over from /p/ and vent your frustrations on how everyone else's photo look bad but yours

>>732004789
Lol? Thanks for proving my point, and the point of the other guy a few posts up, who called you guys scammers.

I came here to give my experience with amateur/professional photographers, not to generalize... but now that I saw how quickly you went on the defensive and called my post a copy-pasta, I think that I'll start doing it, and calling out every single photographer, honest or not.

Cunt.

>>732005726
This is the best bait I've seen in a while but if you're actually being serious than its nobody's fault but your own for paying £9000 for a bunch of snapshits. Too add to this fact, you're a total autist for thinking photography as a whole is a scandalous job when more serious photographers actually devote their time and effort into making their work better for the client versus just setting a DSLR to auto and snapping away.

Again, gr8 b8, but photography is less of a scam than its ever been.

>>732006272
Sure.

It's my fault for being manipulated by a scammer... the scammer did nothing wrong, right?

It's like raping a drunk girl... and then for your defense say that she's just autistic for drinking to much. Like raping her is NOT your fault....

Strong con artist logic.

Keep doing your shitty job, but I swear to god that I'll shove your gay ass camera up your ass when I see another scammer offering me his photography services.