/gear/ - Gear thread

>>2955924
>Pentax

Just buy a camera like a normal person

fuck off you autistic wannabe hipster faggots

>>2955926
The ride never ends!

>>2955924
>Pentax

Canon is better desu

>>2955930
maybe we should switch to sony in the OP? it's more triggering

File: 5920201444_1928d1a4e9.jpg (100KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 500x333px

It's a shame I am a poorfag, otherwise I would buy this only because of how cute it is.

Is there a good way to insert square format frames into an slr viewfinder?

>>2955971
>it's a shame I don't have more money so I can waste it on mindless consumerism

File: 25698.jpg (2MB, 3961x2129px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3961x2129px

>>2955975
If there are people allowed to waste money on anime figures, I should be allowed to waste my money on little cute cameras as well.

>>2955978
IF

What are some good cheap fisheye lenses that are compatible with nikon f mount?

>>2955978
we should combine these and put weeb stickers on our cameras, like /g/ does with their thinkpads

>>2955984
Any of the Samyang ones. There's a couple of focal lengths, take your pick.

>>2955984
Try the Samyang/Rokinon lenses.

File: image.jpg (11KB, 200x93px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 200x93px

Any nikcunts or canonfags have any experience with the Leitax zeiss mounts? I've been really tempted to get an old zeiss for 300-400 and then convert it but snaps i saw on flickr looks kinda desaturated idk is worth it? Should i just stick to my nikkors or sell my right kidney for a used ZF?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	200
Image Height	93

>>2956007
Just stay with Nikkors, there are plenty of excellent Nikon lenses.

Are Fuji mirrorless meme cameras? I've got a D750 with a 24-120 and a 50/1.8 and I'm considering selling them to get an XT2 and a lens. Is it really that much lighter and easier to carry around? Images coming out of them also seem to look better. Only thing keeping me is

>shit battery life
>questionable lens quality
>will I miss fullframe?
>I heard people say EVF feels awkward to use

File: 1468373737231.jpg (91KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1280x720px

>>2955971

>>2956037
Get an X-Pro 2 instead, it at least has a tunnel OVF

>>2956037
>>questionable lens quality
LOL
That's Canon, not Fuji

>>2956037
Depends what you shoot
Just keep the Nikon desu

Fuji is nice but Nikon is too, no point switching gears unless there's actually something bothering you.

>>2956055
Canon lenses > Fuji m8

>>2956037
Buying a brand new body every time something "exciting" comes out is a meme.

>>2956058
Spotted the clueless 2 year shooter with a rebel, possibly even a fool frame one

>>2956057
tru tru, thanks senpai. my nikon is a pleasure to use, its just been bothering me how hefty it is with the zoom lens on, i cant just drop it in my backpack with my books and shit without it feeling like a military pack.

prob just gonna buy a cheap point and shoot to keep in my coat pocket

>>2956043
xpro 2 is objectively worse than the xt2 in every major way

>>2956062

im a recovering gear whore ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>2956067
>xpro 2 is objectively worse than the xt2 in every major way
except viewfinder placement

>every major way
>its moderately better than the already wonderful xpro2 at high action sports
lol stop dpreviewing

What kind of rain gear would you guys suggest for a 70d canon. I saw one online that was completely water proof, but im unsure and would be too afraid to buy it and have it not work and destroy the camera. Also the one i was looking at looked like it would only fit if i used a short lens.

Id mainly just like something I can use to shoot in the rain, but if theres also something i could use to let it go fully under water that would be great as well, but if not Id mainly just like something for rain shots. Thank you

>>2956086

Any clear fitted plastic shroud should work, if you got the cash you could buy an underwater case but those generally run in the thousands

>>2956086
Also follow up question.

Any things I could use at home that could be good in the mean time to take shots out in the rain. Its looks so nice out and i want to take pics but i also dont want to damage the camera in the process

>>2956086
I used my camera with kit lens right in the middle of the rain, no problems, no short circuit, no flooded lens, no fogging. Just stop being a pussy!

>>2956105

2/10

>>2956106
>>2956105
I might have to mention it was a Pentax.

>>2956108

unless im being meme'd, dry that fucker out or you'll get some serious rust and mold after a weeks

>>2956111
Don't worry I did put it in my drybox for a day after and wiped it regularly during shooting. It was fun seeing the other photogs run away and look at me in disbelief running around and shooting.
When I got the lens off the body at home it was completely dry inside but still decided to keep it in the drybox just to be on the safe side.
I guess you canon/nikon guys don't know this feel.

>>2956116

no, no I do not know this feel.

>brought $800 waterproof action cam for vacation
>returned it to costco a week later
>"uhhh its got defective auto-focus"
>customer service guy gives me knowing sneer
>thank you costco for free rental

>>2956122
Yeah, except mine works right to this day. That rain shooting happened more than a year ago.

>>2956086
Just stick it under your rain jacket when you're not using it.

File: 35024523683506202.jpg (715KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

715KB, 1920x1280px

Need more Sony here.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6300
Camera Software	ILCE-6300 v1.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	61 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016-10-30T23:44:14+03:00
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	23/320 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	41.00 mm
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1280
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

Are there any true pocketable APS-C cameras with a viewfinder? Are any of them fixed focal legth? 35mm?

>>2956167

no.

File: 28031739394_3680868097.jpg (78KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 500x500px

>>2956161
okay

>>2956167
Buy a Ricoh GR and stick the shoe-mount finder on it? It's optical, not an EVF, if I remember, but it's a pocketable APS-C camera with a 28mm-equivalent fixed lens.

>>2956167
This is the dream I've been searching for for years but none of them exist. Closest choices are Ricoh GR + viewfinder (too wide for my taste), Sony RX100 (Worse sensor size but not bad max aperture + has electronic viewfinder built in and very versatile), LX100 (Close sensor size & great feature set but probably bigger then you want),and Sigma DP2 (Just about pocketable, great focal length, can add optical viewfinder) the DP2's perfect for my taste so it's what I chose but these are practically all the valid choices in this currently sparse market niche.

>>2956167
Yeah, RX 1 with hotshoe EVF attachment. Only that's FF.
You could get a tiny ass NEX 6 camera which is APSC but that's ILC
RX100 is tiny and has viewfinder but is only 1" sensor.
35mm is a very odd fixed focal length for APSC p&s cameras, I think your best bet would be getting a tiny ass MILC with a pancake lens

File: voigtlander-40mm-heliar-lens-review-1-1400x933.jpg (180KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1400x933px

>>2956037

If you afe worried about fullframe look at Sony a7 series.

The mark 2 line is pretty damn good and can autofocus almost any lens at native speeds.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	70 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:10 15:36:00
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	-1.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Return Not Detected
Focal Length	25.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: Sonybro.jpg (211KB, 1792x2184px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1792x2184px

>>2956161
Sonybro!

>>2956185
>>2956189
>>2956191

So in other words, no.

I have a d7200, can someone tell me why i should or should not get a d750?

>>2956208

It's sort of silly to upgrade within the same generation of cameras. You won't see a quantum leap in image quality that will justify the massive depreciation you incur by buying a new camera.

If you want a second camera, get something in a different form factor or even a different brand.

>>2956208
If you want wide angle to be very wide or you need the bigger pixel size without giving up resolution then the D750 is a valid upgrade.
If you don't actually need it then you have GAS and should be quenched by buying a new lens.

Am I missing something or is the best 24-70mm 2.8 for Nikon Nikon's newest?

>>2956208
Rent it and see how you like it.

Many places refund your rental fee when you end up buying it.

>>2956208
Far better build quality and performance in terms of stuff like processing speed and autofocus speed.

Easier to bokehwhore with.

Slightly better iq and low light.

Better ergonomics.

And that's about all I can think of.

I want to increase the macro capability.

Already have a 100mm 1:1 macro lens.

Already have a 2x teleconverter.

Already have a macro tube extension.

What else could I buy to further increase the magnification?

What about those macro filters, or even telephoto filters. Would they work or are they just garbage?

Hi,

Two questions:

Looking for a good vintage or new but not too expensive lens (sony e-mount) that's good for full body portraits for a crop sensor camera (1.5 crop factor), I'm thinking anything 18mm-28mm, just something that will get a full figure nicely framed, maybe 1.4 or 2.8 on the low end of the f-stop. any ideas?

Also got a takumar lens that is yellow and saw online you can use an ikea jansjo led lamp to remove the yellow. Has anyone used this method successfully to de-yellow a lens before?

Thanks

>>2956282
Well if all those put together don't get you as close as you wanna go, you're low on options. Yes, you can get add-on close-up filters (if you get one, look for an apochromatic one. you get what you pay for here) or you could try fucking around with a reversed lens. For which you'll need a reversing ring and a different lens, since the shorter the focal length the greater the optical power and the more magnification you can get by reversing it. You can combine these with your tubes and converter in various ways, or maybe get a bellows. But really you're getting to the point where you should be thinking about getting a nice microscope and some way to bolt your camera to it.

>>2956283
You need UV light to de-yellow an old lens. That means sunlight or some lamp that is specially designed to emit UV. (germicidal lamps can work for this, they're essentially fluorescent tubes without the UV-blocking phosphors and protective coating) If you decide to leave it in the sun try to do it through an open window, window glass blocks a lot of UV. It'll work regardless through a window, it just takes a lot longer.

for your portraits, maybe Sigma's 30/1.4? idk if Sony makes anything natively, ask someone else that knows their lineup.

>>2956282
Literally time for a Nikon Micro-Pen0r
>>2956226
>Far better build quality and performance in terms of stuff like processing speed and autofocus speed.
EXPEED is the same generation, Metering system is higher specced and brings group AF, mechanical build quality similar.

>Better ergonomics.
But it's literally the same prosumer ergonomic, and the disgusting new narrow deep grip.

>>2956290
Thanks, I'll look into the Sigma.

>>2956282
Get the MP-E 65mm? Or a higher resolution camera. Or a microscope with photo camera hookup.

> What about those macro filters, or even telephoto filters. Would they work or are they just garbage?
They do work fine (as the other anon said, get the apochromatic ones - Marumi DHG is what I'd recommedn). But they are not really something I thought I wanted want to use in combination with a macro lens.

They're more useful to use another lens AS a macro lens of sorts.

I'm looking to buy my first dslr and found a Nikon D5200 with the 18-55mm lens kit for 480 CAD (like 360 USD). Does anyone have any experience with this camera and could offer their insight as to whether this (or something else) is a good entry level deal?

>>2956356
D5x00s are just D3x00s with some tinsel added. It's a market-segmentation thing, Nikon knows plenty of people think "Oh, I'll buy one model up from the very cheapest". D7x00s are where you start getting a proper camera. If that's too expensive, get a Pentax K-30/50/S2

File: s-l1600.jpg (123KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1600x1200px

>>2956282
At some point your focal point will be ridiculously close to, or inside your lens, so there are limiuts to what you can do with all of the things mentioned by you & >>2956290
Maybe try something like this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RMS-Thread-for-Microscope-objective-to-M42-x1mm-Converter-Cone-Adapter-/321900619124?hash=item4af2c5a574:g:slEAAOSwoBtW53uY

>>2956356
I don't really like the camera or the lens much, but I'm sure it'd work.

Personally I'd get an A6000 or something, though the suggestions by the other anon in >>2956359 are also good.

File: first-olympus-e-m1-mark-ii-rumors.jpg (96KB, 800x640px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 800x640px

http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-e-m1ii-price-info-in-japan-leaked-and-its-expensive/

>235,440 yen
>235,440 yen
>235,440 yen

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	640

>>2956443
So it is 1/4 more expensive than the already often complained about A6500...? Ouch.

>>2956443
Usually lower in the states right?

Even so, I can't see it going below $2k.

It is outrageous though. You could get an a7ii and a few ridiculously overpriced FE lenses for the price of that thing.

>>2956478
Show me where you can get an a7ii and at least 3 overpriced lenses for $2000.

>>2955934
>>2955926
Lurk more you fucking newcunts

>>2956167
Fuji X100 series

>>2956486

It costs $2,250 though?

A7II is commonly on sale for $1,500. Even if you buy it full price ($1,800) you can get damn close.

Get the 28mm for $450 and the 50mm for $150 and you have three when combined with the kit.

>>2955924
Asked this in the last thread but no answer.

Anyone have an opinion either way between the Canon 24-70 f2.8 or the Tamron 24-70 f2.8?

Ignore budget for the moment, have heard arguments for both

File: 321524501251096.jpg (353KB, 1555x1037px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1555x1037px

Best MILC in the world.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6300
Camera Software	ILCE-6300 v1.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	73 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016-10-31T11:52:26+03:00
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	-2.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	49.00 mm
Image Width	1555
Image Height	1037
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2956510

>lenscap shot

What's next? A picture of your feet?

Also, the a6300 is no longer the greatest MILC, it is the a6500 now.

Used A6300 are still only around 10% cheaper than new price. Release A6500 already.

>>2956512
>>2956510

Sony shills taking pictures of lens caps and arguing about gear. Literally the cancer of the photographic community.

File: 14777475703081.jpg (299KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 2000x1333px

>>2956512
Nope, just another lenscap.

File: IMG_20160731_135247.jpg (4MB, 4640x3480px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4640x3480px

Kind of a new person to /p/ here. I know nothing about digital cameras and would like to buy one mainly for when I travel. I feel like a camera is the next progression after my shitty rootytooty point-and-shooty OP3 phone camera.

I have shot before, two years of manual B&W photos (Yoshica FX-2) for class a couple years ago, so don't worry about explaining the entire camera to me. Im just a noob to what the main differences between manual and automatic are.

Sorry for the large pic, but related from one of my trips. Decent quality photos of my traveling are the only thing that makes me feel warm inside.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OnePlus
Camera Model	ONEPLUS A3000
Camera Software	OnePlus3-user 6.0.1 MMB29M 3 dev-keys
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	25 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:31 13:52:47
Exposure Time	1/17 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	2500
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	3 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.26 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4640
Image Height	3480
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto

>>2956572
>feel like a camera is the next progression after my shitty rootytooty point-and-shooty OP3 phone camera.
Basically yes.

> Im just a noob to what the main differences between manual and automatic are.
Automatic: Camera picks settings to achieve proper exposure - usually with preference on not raising ISO beyond a certain point if not necessary..

Manual: You pick settings.

> would like to buy one mainly for when I travel
Most cameras that people actually use (up to common FF setups at least) is portable enough for travel on foot.

It will kinda depend on your budget, desired lenses, and how much you actually want to carry.

File: _DSF4544.jpg (187KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1000x667px

i switched to the Fujifilm X-T10 a while ago but i dont like the ergonomics and i realised i need a more durable camera with better video capabilities.
Right now i have an eye on the EOS 7D with the 24 - 105 L lens. Do you guys think its a good idea?
i mean the Canon is allmost 8 year old now...
How will the imagequality, iso-performance and autofocus compare?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T10
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:15 18:00:39
Exposure Time	1/2400 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	9.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2956574
I would think my limit for a camera body would be around 2k.
Maybe just two lenses, cost not included. I only used a 35mm lens so probably one of those, second I'm uncertain of at this time.

>>2956577
When I say 2k I'm basing off the time bombs on Ebay. I see recent Canon EOS 5Ds that usually go for more on there.

>>2956576
> How will the imagequality, iso-performance and autofocus compare?
Everything worse than even the not too fantastic X-T10.

But I think you might not want to use AF for video anyhow, it doesn't look pleasant with the vast majority of cameras.

>>2956577
That's a pretty decent budget. But not very specific about everything.

Maybe a A6000-A6500, perhaps with a 12mm Samyang f/2 and 30mm Sigma f/1.8 or such?

Or some Olympus E-M5 II?

Or the RX100 V if you prefer a premium compact? (I don't, but some people wouldn't bring their bigger cameras and lenses if they only had these).

>>2956494

Lmao

>>2956583
I like the Olympus E-M5 II there, but maybe I'm just bias and like the typical SLR styles.

Sorry, like I said I'm uncertain of the digital aspects of cameras.
If it helps I'd still like to shoot in manual mode, since I wont feel too terrible taking pictures like with the feeling of possibly wasting film. I'm not sure if auto-focus scales with quality in general but if there's something with good specs and shitty AF that's alright by me.
The Swivel LCDs or even high end LCD screens aren't an issue for me, though I suppose with Mirrorless you'll have those.
I can also raise the budget to 3k store price rather than eBay pricing if that helps.
I can also lug some weight if need be. I wouldn't worry about my arms getting tired and wanting to rest between every five shots, so compact or small lenses only isn't a requirement. Though I don't want to carry any observatory scopes with tripods of their own either.

If you have any other questions to narrow things feel free to ask.

>>2956596
>I like the Olympus E-M5 II there, but maybe I'm just bias and like the typical SLR styles.
Should be a decent enough camera either way.

> Sorry, like I said I'm uncertain of the digital aspects of cameras.
Feel free to ask some detials if you need to.

> If it helps I'd still like to shoot in manual mode
Can be done on all the cameras /p/ is likely to suggest.

> I'm not sure if auto-focus scales with quality in general
Within a brands' lineup, the AF system often -but not always- gets better the more you pay. Between brands, it's not quite that.

Anyhow, the AF on all of these cameras I mentioned is good to great. The A6300/A6500 can quite reliably track birds in flight with hundreds of PDAF points, and their CDAF is quite powerful too. The other cameras will do fine for just about everything other than flying birds.

The sensors are also all on the high end for their respective sensor sizes.

You could query https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/ to see some sample photos. Also allows you to check how the lenses I mentioned look like.

> I can also raise the budget to 3k store price rather than eBay pricing if that helps.
Doesn't seem necessary just yet, unless you want some very expensive glass?

>>2956608

Sorry for the delay, at work.

I think the only question I have at the time is if lenses of one brand work with another. Would a Canon Lens work with a Nikon or Sony? I would imagine it would. I never ran into any issues trading lenses with anyone in my class if someone had wanted to use a smaller one or I wanted to try a macro shot.

Also, what puts Leica at such a high price point when they seem similar to other cameras?

bought for 270€ a new pentax k50 with a smc da 18-135mm
gonna get a 35/50/55mm prime but can't seem to decide which

>>2956656
Do you want a standard 50mm focal length equivalent on crop? Then get the 35mm.

Do you want a great focal length for portraits on crop? Then get the 50/55mm.

>>2956656
Get the DA 35/2.4, it is a little plastic magic. Also get the DA 50/1.8, it is a little plastic portrait magic. You can get both for 150€ total.
I tend to use the 35/2.4 far more often though, very nice for generic walkaround and full body portraits.

Canon 80d or Sony A6500?

I like doing landscapes and street photography. I'm going into nightclub photography soon.

I already own a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 and Tokina 11-20 f2.8 , both for Canon. Could I adapt them to the Sony and would the AF be useable?

>>2956678
Since you are doing landscapes, the DR at base ISO is your main problem. Not to mention weather sealing which is not the forté of Sony.
I say keep with the Canon, get the 80D and a good tripod.
For street you don't need sports action AF just the regular one that is reliable. The A6500 is a video oriented camera so it will mostly frustrate you shooting stills. Plus you will need a pricy smart adapter to properly use your existing lens on the Sony.
So far the 80D wins on numerous points, but buy the one you like to use the most.

>>2956676
Also to chime in if you can get a cheap 35mm 2.8 macro smc or hd (smc is usually cheaper) you won't be disappointed

>>2956676
there are some cheaper and also older 50/1.7 or 1.4, the DA 50/1.8 performs better?

>>2956682
Yep, the DA 35/2.8 Macro is pretty much one of the best lens on Pentax. Crazy sharp, dreamy falloff, creamy bokeh, everything you want in a lens.

>>2956683
The DA 50/1.8 is the same optically as the 50/1.7 but with AF and modern coating. No need to hunt for a good condition M or A 50/1.7

>>2956679
right thank you, already got the tripod down.
I actually havn't been able to find anything about the weather sealing on the 80d though

Just stuff like
>weather-resistant gaskets and seals
No clue if it can actually hold up in rain

>>2956676
From your experience, how are the results with the 35/2.4 under lower light?

>>2956688
Yeah, that's it, it means it will not crash right away from a few drops of rain. You might want to use sealed lenses for fully weather sealed kit, but a piece of plastic foil fastened with a couple rubberbands will do the trick (Tesco, Aldi, generic local grocery store plastic bag)

>>2956692
It is a super sharp lens, the low light performance is more dependent on what body you are using it on. The K-50 has the same magical DR sensor that is in the K-5/K-5II series so it will perform without doubt.

>>2956694
thanks for the replies mate.

>>2956653
> if lenses of one brand work with another
They don't work directly with other mounts. But you can buy and use adapters.

If you operate the adapted lenses fully manually, you can *generally* adapt lenses from cameras with longer flange focal lengths. That makes a lot of DSLR and vintage lenses useable on most MILC and even other DSLR with shorter flange focal length. But you won't be using any electronics on the lens at all, or at least can't make your camera control stabilization and/or AF on the lens.

If you require full functionality with such electronic control, Sony's E-mount is usually the only one that supports that, and it's a relatively new thing that it can be done at all.

An incomplete listing of what adapters you can get is here:
http://briansmith.com/gear/sony-lens-adapters/

> Also, what puts Leica at such a high price point when they seem similar to other cameras?
Just because of muh luxury brand.

But they're not even entirely similar to other brands, most of them have noticeable drawbacks vs. even some a lot cheaper competition.

>>2956712

Thanks for the help. I'll see if I feel like saving any money and try going the adapter > vintage lens route. I can't imagine there would be much difference aside from high speed subjects being a bit more troublesome to deal with.

>>2956678
A6500 will have IBIS, which will help greatly in low light with lenses that don't have a stabilizer on their own, and better MF assist functionality. Which helps with using those nice inexpensive MF primes, if you want to do that, but also quite often lenses in general.

Also, faster burst rates. Can be really quite useful with group shots, you might very well use that in a night club.

> Could I adapt them to the Sony and would the AF be useable?
I recall they work great on the Sigma MC-11 or Metabones, but I guess you want to check yourself.

>>2956679
>the DR at base ISO is your main problem.
The A6300 had *better* DR at base ISOthan the 80D, did the A6500 get worse?

> The A6500 is a video oriented camera so it will mostly frustrate you shooting stills.
Huh? No, it is still set up as a photo camera with (fairly comprehensive) video functionality?

> Plus you will need a pricy smart adapter to properly use your existing lens on the Sony.
Yup, but on the other hand his Tokina could then use IBIS and be stabilized.

>>2956714
> I can't imagine there would be much difference aside from high speed subjects
Not quite. While vintage glass can be very cheap, it almost always a lot less sharp than good modern glass is.

Plus it usually has more vignetting, flaring, CA and such - and you usually don't have a convenient lens correction profile for the lens in your RAW editor already, so it is comparatively more annoying. Maybe one is out there somewhere, maybe you'd have to make it yourself...

>>2956725
>on the other hand his Tokina could then use IBIS and be stabilized
Why would you need stabilizing on a tripod? Did you read his primary uses? Landscape first and street. Maybe if you start actually taking photos you wouldn't say such stupid things.

>>2956694
>The K-50 has the same magical sensor
It's really just the same 16mp sensor that can be found on D7000/Coolpix A etc. The high ISO "advantage" is only due to non-defeatable RAW NR system when shooting ISO 1600+, similar to the system that Fuji uses.

>>2956736
And this is why the D7000 is still regarded as one of the best Nikon crop DSLRs. it was a beast in its day and still performs well (actually better than any recent Canon, but that is not really Nikon exclusive)

File: S6500FD_3q.jpg (202KB, 1400x1391px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1400x1391px

I'm looking to get into photography and I want to get a decent starter camera. There is a Fujifilm Finepix S6000fd for sale from the pawn shop in my hometown for $80 CAD (and I can probably knock $20-30 off that). I did some preliminary research and I like the fact that this camera has an optical viewfinder and a CCD image sensor, even though it is 10 years old the image quality looks really nice, the colours and overall balance are a lot better than what my phone can possibly manage.

Is it a good buy, /gear/? If not, what are other low priced cameras with CCD sensors? I don't have a lot of money now and I'd like to take a stab at this hobby before putting down some serious cash.

>>2956725
>Not quite. While vintage glass can be very cheap, it almost always a lot less sharp than good modern glass is.

Oh, I guess maybe I should just grab a new lens to go with whatever body and try a similar cheap-o lens to see the difference then. Or if I can find my Yashica grab the lenses from that and purchase an adapter.

Another question since I can't find an answer, what's the difference between Mirrorless and DSLR? Is there a difference aside from weight and size, because those are the only answers I can really find on it.

>>2956747
Don't listen to the retarded Sonyfag mindset.
There are lots of excellent and sharp old lenses in M42, K-mount, FD, F and other various mounts.
Check out the Pentax Forums lens database and MFforums to get an idea how they perform. Dissing them as useless because "old" is stupid and retarded.

>>2956747
>what's the difference between Mirrorless and DSLR?

I dunno, the lack of mirror on mirrorless?

>>2956741
I had this exact camera, was mediocre but I quickly moved up from it, for that price range you could get nicer cameras.
Look at the Canon Powershot G series

>>2956756
That's what I meant as part of size and weight. Most places say that's really the only difference, no mirror and gears to take up space.

>>2956751
Do you have any other brand that would be decent aside from the Sony's he posted? If it helps my other posts about what I was looking for/were okay with were:

>>2956572
>>2956596

>>2956769
So as I take you want to take photos during travel. You have two options here, go with small easy to carry camera with some compromise or go with a smaller crop body DSLR or a decent mirrorless.
The smaller option goes for compact point and shoots like the RX100, LX100, X100T, X70 and the likes. Of course we don't take into account the cheap low end compacts. Also there are the MFT cameras like the EM5 MkII, EM10 Mk.
The bigger option is a crop DSLR like a Nikon D5500, D7100, pentax K-S2, K-70 or K-3, Canon 760D, 70D or 80D.
The rest can be decided which one you like, which you can afford with decent lenses and so on.
For me the DSLR never held me back, not really an issue to carry it around especially if you only take a couple lenses with you, a normal prime and a wide to normal zoom. You will bound to get a separate bag for the camera, no matter what you choose.
Also mind that mirrorless cameras rely on electric viewfinders which use battery power so they usually take less shots on a single charge than a DSLR with optical viewfinder. A DSLR only takes the most juice when it exposes, in the mean time is mostly inactive with the occasional metering.
Usually it takes a beginner a few weeks of research to get the exact setup he wants, it took me a month to actually narrow down the candidates on the one I chose. So take your time, do your research and later you will be able to enjoy it the most.
Also buy used from trustworthy retailers to lower costs and stretch your budget for better lenses.

For a direct recommendation:
Pentax K-70 or K-S2 with kit zoom and DA 35/2.4
Nikon D7000 or D7100 with kit zoom and 35/1.8G
Also look at the Olympus cameras, I don't really know much about the lenses to recommend one.

>>2956767
What about something like a G10 or G11?

They are a lot more expensive (ie Triple the cost) but they seem to have good reviews online.

>>2956780

I really like the Nikon D7100. I might look into that more and compare it with some other cameras. One that comes up similar is the Canon EOS 5D3 which is better in low light and has more focus points (mainly going to shoot manual so not so important.)

Would there be a reason aside from price to choose that Canon over the Nikon or does that really just enter the personal preference range? I figure since the Nikon has a lower price it would be better for buying lenses since I wouldn't be dropping so much on the body itself.

I really like using Vintage lenses on my G7 for Video and was considering getting a speedbooster for full Manual lenses.
I so far have 3 FD lenses and one AIS (but that one's a pice of shit that I barely use)
What mount would you recommended getting a speedbooster for? Where do I get best selection of lenses for Video for?
BTW, i'd buy one of those cheaper ones for 150€ rather than the overpriced metabones stuff

File: DSLR vs mirrorless.jpg (161KB, 500x423px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 500x423px

>>2956769
>Most places say that's really the only difference

There's stuff working through the mirror mechanism - separate phase-detection AF sensor, separate metering sensor - that mirrorless cameras also lack.

Other than that, it's the same main sensors/same processors/same screens etc.

>>2956804
Alright, that makes sense. Thanks to all of you so far for helping a digital scrub out.

File: flash.jpg (88KB, 600x1038px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 600x1038px

Based god Kenneth brings the bantz again.

>Likewise, the flash will only fire in the mechanical shutter mode. If you're in the electronic shutter mode the camera will never tell you why it refuses to let you set the flash to ON. Like a woman, it expects you to know what you're doing wrong with no explanation

Been shooting on canon for years. Actually have a 7D. Only have two lenses left now (sigma 30 and sigma 70-200 2.8).

Wanna go full frame, wondering if going nikon (d610) is worth the trouble...doubt it but still asking.

I shoot and film mostly nature stills and wildlife (no need for fast focusing).

>>2956793
>Canon EOS 5D3 which is better in low light
It is not. If you want low light, Canon is not for you.

>>2956822
Pentax K-1 worth a check, pixel shift and low light is something you want for nature stills.

Best camera for travel pictures? Phone photos just don't cut it anymore.

Looking for something that's not too expensive and still takes good pictures.

>>2956823
Oh. I'll take your word for it. I'm mainly going off specs and website comparisons right now. I've never ventured into five digit iso, and only know how film reflects. I may pick up a D7100 then with some lenses and see how that plays out. Worse comes to worse I'll eBay it and gather a bit of cash back for something else. If anything the experience with digital will be worth whatever loss I incure.

>>2956826
I asked that this morning. Follow my questions and the responses here.

>>2956572

>>2956828
Thanks friend. Should've read the thread first.

>>2956830
No worries. When there are a lot of posts I'm tempted to do the same. Figured I'd try to help since /p/ has been helpful to me today.

If you don't know anything about camera use in general find a quick guide to figure out what means what so you have a general idea what to look for.

On a 30000 to 70000 japanese yen budget (roughly 300 to 700 USD I believe) what is a good camera for someone that knows absolutely nothing about DSLR cameras, is a Nikon D3300 with a 18-55 VR II a good place to start?
Also, any recommendations on books ?

>>2956825
tempting but here it's about $700 more than the 6d/d610...

>>2956835
Yes, it will be good for start but you will grow out of it quickly. If you can't get a used D7000 then a used K-50 or K-S2 would be a better option. Both have cheap and excellent standard primes (35mm/1.8G and 35mm/2.4 DA)

>>2956507
bump halp pls

>>2956507
>>2956843

I don't have the Tamron 24-70, but I do have their 15-30 and I am very impressed by the build quality.
Tamron also offers very good warranty.

Rent them both if you want to compare them.

>>2956843
Canon is sealed, Tamron has onion bokeh.

>>2956847
Is onion bokeh good?

>>2956840
Thanks for the reply! I will get a D3300 because I have no idea about photographing. I just saw a video about the D7000 and it's too complex for a beginner like me. If I get the hang of it I'll update for a D7000.
Anyway, thank again.

File: 24-70II Onion Ring 100.jpg (171KB, 1001x667px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1001x667px

>>2956852
Okay, I fucked up, both the Canon and Tamron has onion bokeh.
Not exactly aesthetically pleasing

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Camera Software	Digital Photo Professional
Photographer	Lin Liang
Lens Size	24.00 - 70.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.2.3
Lens Name	EF24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2013:12:20 23:00:32
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1001
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Av-Priority
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Normal
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	224
Color Matrix	33

>>2956854
Get the 35/1.8G for it, it will be your best investment in lenses.

>>2956856
This is one reason I never bothered with a 24-70 and just got a 50 instead.

Why do people still buy canon

>>2956835

I assume you are in Japan since your budget is yen?

Go to Yodobashi camera and ask around, then look whatever they recommend up on kakaku and buy it dirt cheap.

>>2956835
Try Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. It is a good book for starters.
Also shoot in RAW and use the Shutter and Aperture priority often. For processing RAWs get Lightroom, it is easy to torrent it from the internet.

>>2956858
Noted!

>>2956871
Yes, will live there for a year, moving in a week. Thanks for the store tips. I hope they speak english.

>>2956876
Downloaded, thank you!

>>2956877
>I hope they speak english.
Prepare to get kicked out of most stores, gaijin.

>>2956878
I am only half-gaijin, and I can mumble basic japanese, I am fiiine.

>>2956887
Tell that to the yakuza eyeing you from the other side of the counter.

File: ApocalypseNow6_099Pyxurz[1].jpg (176KB, 1600x805px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1600x805px

I'm just starting out and starting to buy gear.

But so far I've been buying and researching various compacts and mirror-less systems.

I'd rather walk around with four okay cameras slung around my neck with different lenses than walk around with a big dslr and a bag of lenses and have to change and fiddle with lens caps on the go. Plus I think it looks cool, pic related.

Am I crazy for wanting to do this? I'm mainly interested in street photography and architecture.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	805

File: hadley_small.jpg (21KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x500px

Why shouldn't I buy a Billingham? Sure most other bags are half the cost, but they also look like they're made to carry an assortment of calculators, yu-gi-oh cards, and piss bottles.

I used to hate camera bags, but now that I shoot medium format I need a bag since I carry both the MF camera+film and a digital. Anyone used a Billingham and had a bad experience? Any alternatives?

File: img_main01.jpg (56KB, 596x320px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 596x320px

About to buy a Fujifilm X--E2s.

I've been looking at a few different lenses to buy for it such as:
>Ziess Touit 32mm 1.8, which is a bit pricey for me

and the

>Mitakon FreeWalker 24mm 1.7, that's more in my price range.

Orignally I was just going to get one prime lens but now I'm going on a surprise trip to Rio so I thought I may want something a bit more versatile like the 18-55 kit lens.

Tl;dr Convince me to buy either one prime lens or buy the kit lens. Trying to keep the total price of body and lens under 1k.

>>2956893
I really like my lowpro passport bag but they look like shit now, also still kinda looks like a diaper bag but fuck it's better then most. Easily carries my tlr + meter + 2lenses + batteries + slr + film.
have also travelled considerably with it and never had any quality issues

>>2956895
If you want versatility get the zoom if you want quality get the prime.

>>2956897
Which prime lens would you choose? Do you know of other zoom lenses that are affordable but comparable to the Fuji?

>>2956899
Sorry never had a fuji camera besides my x10 and that got nixed last week. Best bet is to check Sigma, Tokina, Rokinon/samyang ect. or try look on the used market. As far as lenses go you usually do get what you pay for, keep that in mind.
No clue xmount zooms either sorry.

>>2956900
No problem man thanks for the help.

I found the zeiss lens used for 350 so I may just do that.

>>2956893
Are you a cock sucking faggot that loves nothing more than taking a 9 inch dick up the ass while simultaneously giving another man a rusty trombone?

Are you proud to be a faggot and aren't afraid of showing it to the world by carrying around a purse?

If so, buy a Billingam.

>>2956728
> Why would you need stabilizing on a tripod?
> on a tripod
> IBIS
IBIS means in-body image stabilization - it's not a tripod brand.

It mainly helps with handheld shots. It will help with handheld anything, including landscapes and street.

>>2956747
Sure, try it. Besides, there are a bunch of new lenses between $150-350 that are really quite good.

> Or if I can find my Yashica grab the lenses from that and purchase an adapter.
A MF adapter from China is only like $5-10 for most systems, so that's certainly something you should try.

> what's the difference between Mirrorless and DSLR? Is there a difference aside from weight and size
There are a bunch of consequences from not having a mirror. It's primarily used for PDAF and the optical viewfinder on a DSLR.

Sony and Samsung not too long ago managed to get PDAF on sensor (as sensor manufacturers - other camera brands have that too now), and it's basically as good as the DSLRs. Because they do not have to flap a mirror down to measure, PDAF also works during video and fast burst rates (DSLR tend to revert to the slower CDAF for video).

You usually also have an EVF instead of an OVF. Which has advantages in display capabilities, but also draws more power so batteries tend to last quite a bit shorter on a MILC.

Plus the shorter flange focal distance that allows adapting more lenses and more compact format, and obviously that you can't get the mirror dirty or break it or wear it out - one less part to worry about.

>>2956751
> Dissing them as useless because "old" is stupid and retarded.
I said there were pretty important downsides and that they're not "equivalent" in all ways.

And yea, the downsides in sharpness and all that are there. You'll almost not find a vintage lens that does more than 10MP usable on that 24MP sensor.

Didn't say they were useless though, that's all your imagination. It just depends on your use case.

>>2956741
CCD isn't better anymore than CMOS.

> the colours and overall balance are a lot better than what my phone can possibly manage
Even a Chinese cheap new ($120-170) smartphone can do better than that Fuji, colors and resolution-wise. I figure you just got a really bad phone camera?

Either way, my enthusiasm for that Fuji is very low. But I don't really know what else you could get for around 80 CAD. Maybe a Yicam?

>>2956891
I find that odd because a DSLR or MILC with one good zoom lens probably will do better in pretty much all situations.

And nobody says you can't use 2+ DSLR / MILC if you want to shoot with primes but can't be arsed to swap them occasionally. You certainly also aren't forced to put lens caps on, having a hood together with the hard front glass on typical lenses is generally safe enough.

On the other hand, if compacts or even sports cameras work for you, why not...?

>>2956895
XF 18-55 + XC 50-230 to capture a wide range of your vacation snap shits at a breddy gud quality. Shouldn't be much more than $1000.

>>2956893
At those kind of prices, I'd rather go find any other bag of the appropriate dimensions and pad it myself. But if that's not possible, then there's other ready made options that'll fit your MF setup.

>>2956891
You'll look like a nut job, you'll have a big investment in camera bodies, you usually don't need more than two lenses. Also they invented zooms at some point, and they got gud at some other point.

>using lens caps while shooting
I only use rear caps.

>thinking you'll ever look as good as a war photographer with 4 Fs slung around
There is a fault with your thinking.

>>2956811
Ken going through relationship issues in his growing family?

What is an inexpensive film camera on the more compact side. I have film cameras but they are a bit bulky, I want something I can more easily get candid photos with. Needs to be 35mm,

>>2956877
>Yes, will live there for a year, moving in a week. Thanks for the store tips. I hope they speak english.

If it is a Yodobashi Camera. they will have English speaking staff.

I'd recommend you take a look at mirrorless Camera's too. Most are out your budget, but they have DSLR level image quality in a much more compact setup.

>>2956891
Shooting multiple cameras like that is, in a way, just as much of a pain-in-the-ass as swapping lenses on a DSLR.

Just buy two mirrorless cameras and a handful of lenses, such as few primes, and a zoom lens or two. I love primes as much as the next person, but zooms are indispensable in certain situations.

File: lense.png (6KB, 419x249px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 419x249px

4u

Anyone got any idea of a halfway decent MFT wide angle lens?

>>2957061
Samyang 12mm f/2.

>>2957063
Cheers bud.

>>2956893
Billingham is class, anon.

They last well too.

>>2956891
Carrying multiple cameras on your neck for street photography is kinda retarded. One of the points of street is to be inconspicuous.

>>2957070
This. Just put on a standard or wide prime and go out on the street. You don't need more cameras or more lenses to do it.

>>2957063

>24mm equivalent

Not very wide though.

>>2957091
Well, you could get that upcoming Laowa 7,5mm f/2.0.

Most other wide lenses around that FL for MFT aren't very rectilinear (most are fisheyes) or sharp.

>>2957091
24mm EQ is plenty wide. He didn't say anything about ultrawide or fisheye.

Found a used Olympus Pen S with the 30mm f/2.8. Would it be a good purchase or should I be looking at other half-frame models?

File: SonyBump.jpg (667KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

667KB, 1000x1500px

**SONYBUMP**

Posting this in here just cause it doesn't deserve its own thread.

>why no proper instax wide camera?
Does Fuji and other manufacturers feel there's no market and the r&d isn't worth designing an instant camera?

>>2957162
>fuji instax wide 210 and 300
Or do you not consider these """"proper"""" instax cameras?

Are there any cheap (below $300) 85-135mm macro lenses for a canon

File: opplanet-trijicon-tenebraex-killflash-anti-reflection-device-opplanet-trijicon-rx30-rfx-main.jpg (7KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 200x200px

I know on rifle scopes and stuff they make kill flashes to prevent light from reflecting off the scope lens. Do they make similar things for camera lenses or does a lenshood just do the same thing?

>>2957162
But Fuji has an instant camera system with a few cameras?

Personally I'm not a fan of it, they cost quite a lot per shot (not as bad as Polaroid was, but still...) and the images aren't that great.

I prefer the Canon Selphy. Cheaper & better images.

>>2957166
Buddy if you want to go cheap you can get what's basically a magnifying glass that screws on to your 85-135mm lens. It works best with lenses that have a softer circle of confusion rather than onion circles due to the edge chromabs, but the higher the price the lower the chromabs tend to be.

Pick up an Altura wide-angle "conversion lens" (screws onto a lens like a filter) that comes with a detachable close-up filter section and try that out if you have a lens with a soft circle of confusion, it's like $10 so it's a fun toy if it doesn't solve your problem.

>>2957170
https://www.amazon.com/Carson-FlashShield-Anti-Reflective-Device-BX-42/dp/B00CN9MLXA

This isn't specifically for cameras, but it clips on to 32mm to 43mm objective lens diameters. Having a hard time describing it to Google it, but a similar construction is used for flashes and it's referred to as a honeycomb grid and you may be able to get one of the circle shaped options and apply it to a hood.

A lens hood does the same general thing, but a normal lens hood would have a wider angle available for errant light to enter from, whereas a grid of these smaller tubes cuts down on that angle a lot.

Expect less light to enter your camera.

>>2957182
> but the higher the price the lower the chromabs tend to be
The (~$100 or a bit less) Marumi DHG are really pretty good. I'm not aware of any better close-up filter lenses.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/marumi/pool/

>>2957165
Have you used either extensively? I can honestly say they don't hold up very well to my expectations (I know this is all subjective and my standards ect.) for what they are. This is on a totally different level but they could design interchangeable leaf shutter lenses and a basic body, something to have more control and focal choices.

>>2957188
I'm hollering about these mushroom photos, this doesn't seem bad at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRleYv49blw

yongnuo L lens when?

>>2956895
>Ziess Touit 32mm 1.8
just get a fooji lens.
if you want zeiss get suny.

>>2957193
Yep, they're good.

Since they exist in a lot of sizes and you can pick one, I'd suggest you buy them for your largest lens (or at least the largest one that is in your travel kit), and use filter thread size converters so you can theoretically use them on all your lenses.

>>2956895
Don't get the X-E2s anon, get the A3. Better in almost every way. 24mpx with the new sensor and no X-shit.

>>2957200
If he gets a Sony APS-C instead of a Fuji MFT, I'd suggest to start with Sigma's 30mm f/1.8.

Sure, the Loxia 21mm or such is cool, but Sigma gave the APS-C E-mount yet another very cool and pretty inexpensive lens, so why not save your money (unless you go for a FF camera now or later)...

>>2957204
1.4
yea, if going sony and zeiss, the 24 1.8 is a better choice.

>>2957206
> 1.4
Right. My bad.

I have a 50mm prime.

Is there any point in getting something like an 18-35, or should I go for something like a 24-85? Mainly in to landscapes and architecture.

On a D750.

File: question.jpg (19KB, 296x320px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 296x320px

What's a good exposure meter app for android?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Miyomo
Image-Specific Properties:

>>2957155
> pictures of fucking lens caps

S O N Y B O Y Z

>>2957232
You aren't going to need an 85 for landscapes, unless you see something you want to zoom in on. Go for wide with 18-35 and carry your 50 with you if you worry. You can just crop the 50's output down to 85 or so with these modern cameras, especially if you take the time to superresolution from a handheld burst of photos.

>>2957232
/tilt/
S
H
I
F
T

The 24-85 G VR is pretty cheap and pretty good, useful for everything. The 18-35 AF-S is breddy gud and your go-to wide angle. Do you find the 50 too tight, just a little tight, or too wide? That will tell you what you need to know.

>>2957248
Yeah, I knew I wouldn't need the 85 for landscapes, but my thinking was that it's a bit *too* limiting having just 18-35. I thought going as far as 85 was more for architecture, but like you said, I might be able to crop my 50 anyway.

>>2957250
I find the 50mm too tight. I was in London taking a picture of St. Pauls and had to walk back what felt like a mile to get the whole thing in frame. I know there's nothing wrong with walking around to get a shot, but it would have been nice to get it in up close without walking back for ages and ending up with a bunch of tourists in the shot.

I've never even given tilt shift a thought, I have to say.

>>2957232
I'd get a wide prime / short zoom myself, something in the range of like 10 to 24mm.

Hey Ive been lurking sometime and I am ready to start taking photos.
Ive coma arcross this guy who is selling a Samsung WB100 and I want to know if is worth it for my first camera.

Also if not what are the best options for a begginer like me?

>>2957281
Get a cheap used DSLR like a Nikon D3200, D3300, Pentax K-50 or Canon 1200D
These would be a far better starting camera than that piece of shit bridge camera.

I want to shoot infrared but with a filter not modified sensor..
is there a good alternative to Hoya IR filters ?
maybe a cheap but good one ?
what should i know about IR photography
iam shooting with the xpro1

>>2957287
What about the lenses anon?

>>2957295
Well, obviously you should get them with kit lenses. Kit lens should be enough for some time for a newbie.

Want to buy a Ricoh GR and the price just dropped by $100. Is the drop permanent or should I buy now before I can talk myself out of buying it? Could it drop more for Black Friday/CM?

Also, are extended warranties recommended for the GR considering the dust/lens issues?

I'm having a weird problem with my less than a month old X-Pro 2 and a 32mm f/2 lens. Namely, the lens seems not to be making proper contact with the body, or vice versa. This appears as the camera becoming nonresponsive and flickering the viewfinder on and off rapidly, as well as setting the OVF to wide angle mode. It's fixed by wiggling the lens back and forth a little bit.

My question is: will Fujifilm's service unfuck this, or will they just hold on to it for two weeks and say it's been fixed while doing absolutely fucking nothing? How boned am I?

I'm a bit randy for touch screens on cameras.

Anyone that has one? What's your thoughts?

>>2957342
I don't think anyone else has that fetish.

>>2957342
Every time I used the viewfinder I changed ISO or exp. comp. with my nose. I sold that fucking useless shit and got a proper camera with regular screen. Never going back.

>>2957345
>>2957353
It feels like such a big leap in camera technology imo.

But I didn't think of the nose getting in the way, luckily I don't have a big one.

I'd be just as happy if I could connect my phone and focus with the phone(via touch) as well.

I have no idea if that's a standard for most new cameras today.

>>2957358
It's called Wi-Fi tethering. Most modern cameras can do that, either through the built-in Wi-Fi or with an accessory/Wi-Fi SD-card

>>2957363
Clever girls. Thanks, now I know what to look for!

Canon 400m image stabilised WHEN?

>>2957373
Now. Adapt it on a Sony with IBIS.

File: betterphotothanyoulltakewithagr.jpg (174KB, 500x446px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 500x446px

>>2957334

Extended warranties are trash. Pic related.

Nikonfag here. Never actually used a VR lens before.

I have read that the VR system makes enough noise when it is working to be picked up by the internal mic in videos.

Just how noticeable is it? What does it sound like?

This is a surprisingly hard thing to find a clear demonstration of on youtube.

>>2957413
It's a faint grinding noise with the occasional more loud knocks of the correction element hitting the limits and rapidly resetting. The easy solution is using a separate mic.

>>2957403

Any truth to this or is it shitposting?

>>2957418

Is it loud enough to be noticable if you are filming something relatively loud? Like, say, a jet taking off or a fright train passing? Because that's honestly what I plan to use it for.

>>2957423
It will sound like something moving around in your ears, no matter how loud the environment is. Just get a separate mic. Unless you don't have a mic input. Then you are fucked.

I want to make my own filters by buying shitty glass on aliexpress and then placing it in filter rings.

I've been looking around, and it seems spare rings are called filter mounts? What I see with that search term doesn't look right. Can someone direct me to a place where I can buy filter glass enclosures of some kind, please.

>>2957439
Buy a cheap ass set of shitty filters and break out the plastic

Or just go with a square/rectangle holder and call it a day.

>>2957442
Eh, I'm looking at trying IR and UV filters that are 10 times cheaper or more than European/American made ones. Half the American ones are probably made with the same Chinese glass anyways.

I have some 120 IR film and I want to try 850nm cutoff filters because I like the look of others' results. With the UV I have an old EL-Nikkor lens that I can jury rig for use on my RB67 and Nikon, and most film is sensitive to UV.

>>2957445
>>2957442
>Or just go with a square/rectangle holder and call it a day.

Sorry, I meant to explain after that, that because of the intended uses, I need to make sure there are no leaks. I feel like square filters won't work in that case.

>>2957447
You can easily make gaskets that prevent this...it'd be far easier than getting one snugly into a circular holder. Just do testing on like a digital body to confirm.

>>2956798
bumping your question because I have a similar one. Just got a G7 for relatively cheap and want to use my set of minolta MD lenses on it. I got a MD to EF adapter coming from amazon and my plan is to use it with a MFT to EF speedbooster.
Will mostly be using it for video so the speedbooster will bring my fov out to super 35mm.
any reason why this combo wouldn't work?

>>2957450
I don't have an full spectrum enabled digital body.

>>2957460
You can do a bit of near-IR without removing the IR cut filter. just use an IR filter.
680nm filters are more deep red-IR, anything above 720nm is not visual by the human eye.
I'd say try to experiment with several kinds of filters, I have a 680nm and a 720nm square filters for Cokin A.
Expect to use extreme long exposures, several minutes at a time so a tripod and a remote is essential, and a still scenery.

>>2957420
It's true for electronics in general.

If the extra money was for a lifetime warranty with no time limitations, then it might be a better proposition, especially for something like a lens that remains useful for a decade or more so long as it functions. But as it is you're spending a lot of extra money on the bet that your gadget has a good chance of failing past the regular warranty period (usually a year) but within the extended warranty period that you're buying (often three years) Usually if you get a defective copy it'll fail within the standard warranty period. If it doesn't, it's probably got a long life ahead of it, if it's not mistreated.

There's a reason that manufacturers and retailers love extended warranties and push them hard - statistically they're almost pure profit. The chance that you'll come out ahead financially on the deal is very small.

>>2957342
My OMD EM10 has one. I've used it maybe twice, it's just not that useful.

>>2957342
I use mine to set focus points whenever I have to hold the camera really high or low. When I can use the viewfinder the dpad is usually more convenient. It's also useful for panning around when viewing a picture zoomed in. Sometimes I do use it for the on screen menus when there is a grid of options instead of a list, which is easier to scroll through with the dpad. That's about it.

Facetouching the screen isn't a problem if it has a decent face detector to autodisable the screen, unlike >>2957353's camera.

Can anyone share their experiences using old lenses for astro? Basically just need fast lenses with minimal CA and astigmatism. Long focus throws are a definite plus. Dont really mind distortion.

File: IMG_20161101_202222.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>2957483
forgot picture

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Nexus 5
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Image Height	2448
Image Width	3264
Focal Length	3.97 mm
Flash	Flash
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
ISO Speed Rating	248
F-Number	f/2.4

File: Catalina single frame.jpg (349KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1000x665px

>>2957483
I used an old Sigma 400mm manual focus lens for astro. Teles are heavy and older constructions are even heavier so you will need a decent sturdy tripod.
Pic related was made with said lens on a shitty cheap-ass plastic mount tripod.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	600 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:12:29 13:29:26
Exposure Time	40 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	400.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

File: 1477952173680.jpg (1MB, 2400x3600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x3600px

>>2955924
what kinda camera is she using ?

it looks almost mf

>>2957483
You'll have a hard time of it.

If you want to do landscape astro, old wide-angles are slower than modern ones and markedly inferior, especially away from the center. And of course they become much less wide-angle if you put them on a crop sensor. Don't expect coma and astigmatism to be well-corrected.

If you want to do deep-sky, you have the problem that old telephotos from the time before ED glass tend to suffer from chromatic aberration, and it gets worse as the focal length gets longer. They also were often not at their best wide open. You also have much more precise focusing needs. Stars will show longitudinal chromabs ("bokeh fringing") at anything other than bang-on perfect infinity focus, and it's not uncommon for the infinity stop to be just short of that. Result, greenish-purple stars. You'd never see it in ordinary daytime photography, the effect is too small, but stars are about the most severe optical test you can put a lens to.

Some of this can, of course, be helped by stopping down. But you obviously want to do as little of that as possible, since you're limited by how dim things are. If you have specific lenses you're interested in, try searching for them on Astrobin to get an idea what you can expect from them, best-case. (people on Astrobin don't always give the complete settings used, but if you see any diffraction spikes, you know the lens was stopped down)

>>2957492
It's a Fujifilm MF camera. You can see that it's 645 format

>>2957497
Bullshit, the GFX is not out yet

File: $_3.jpg (19KB, 499x334px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 499x334px

>>2957497
>Fujifilm MF camera.
>>2957498

he means this camera u dingus

>>2957499
That's a disposable kodak

>>2957493
>astrobin
awesome, thank you

File: Ballrail.jpg (2MB, 1500x2100px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x2100px

Hey, im going to college and those fags want me 2 buy a macbook pro. DO I HAVE TO SPEND 3 GRAND ON THOSE PIECES OF OVERPRICED GARBAGE? Can I just buy a capable laptop like a Zenbook?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Photographer	unknown
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:03 17:44:36
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/13.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/13.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1500
Image Height	2100
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>buy apsc lens
>buy 1.4x teleconverter
>shoot it on full frame sensor
i'm a genius.

>>2957510
just do it you wont regret it

>>2957525
do what

>>2957510
they probably want you to use mac software
you can accomplish this via "hackintosh"
just find well supported laptops for hackintosh and pick one

>>2957527
cool thanks for the idea

>>2957510
A lenovo would be better than an Asus.
XPS 13 is dank af too.

>>2956899
The new 23 F2 is very nice

>>2957529
but the best Zen book gets that sexy 3.7ghz vs 3.5ghz in the XPS 15

>>2957534
lower mhz is better

>>2956895

Save up and go X-T2 unless you want terrible autofocus.

>>2957510
Just buy an 1080p 15" Inspiron with an SSD, none of that hybrid HDD bullshit, an external HDD and you are set. You can run Adobe CC, it will be quick, last long on a single battery and you will be able to do your notes, homework and photo editing. Not to mention it will be much cheaper than the macbook.
Maybe buy a cheap used Dell Pro display for photo editing and watching Netflix.

>>2957538
Zenbook Pro has 2133 and so does the XPS

>>2957540
Gotta use it to edit videos and render them so it has 2 be pretty fast.

>>2957510

For uni I went with a Surface Pro.

Found refurb older model for dirt cheap ($450) and it worked great.

Ran everything I needed it too, and handwritten notes in OneNote were awesome.

>>2957493
As for CA, couldnt I just use Red, Green, and Blue filters, and shoot (and focus) each color separately? Seems pretty trivial if stacking was going to happen anyway. Then I could focus on finding lenses with low coma and astigmatism

>>2957526
suicide

>>2957534
OK and?

>>2957510
TFW the Zenbook says it can run a i-7 at 3.6ghz but intel says that a i-7 can only run at 3.5ghz kkk
Mac get 3.1 normal but 3.5 boost and costs 3 grand but I could get a alien ware for less price and get 3.5 with a gtx 1070 and 512 ssd

>>2957557
doesnt matter now

If i was 2 buy a mac I might aswell buy an alien ware gaming computer https://gyazo.com/2c6b0f76272dfcb9a770d6d3012ac4d2
VS
AlienWare
https://gyazo.com/0f740a3083814694c1f4da4c4d1c1e46

>>2956944
>Why would you need stabilizing on a tripod?
>> on a tripod
>> IBIS
>IBIS means in-body image stabilization - it's not a tripod brand.
>It mainly helps with handheld shots. It will help with handheld anything, including landscapes and street

You literally have no fucking clue what you're talking about. He said that because you never use stabilization on tripods because if there's no tripod detection or it falls to detect you're shooting from a tripod, stabilization systems more often than not go into a feedback loop that makes images worse.

Please trip so we can filter you.

>>2957558
>what is overclocking
man youre a fuckup

>>2957568
The whole idiotic complaint about "feedback loops" you're expecting would be simply solved by turning IBIS off or changing settings if they happened. But they're not gonna happen to begin with.

In your words:
>You literally have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

>>2957558
sooo you literally understand fuck all about computers. Got it.

>>2957576
Or different CPU models, not all are just higher clocked ones.

And measuring performance in ghz on it's own is like estimating engine power output based on RPM. Doesn't usually work too well unless you know more details about the engine.

>>2957610
Notice how I said not to use stabilization and not "never use lenses or bodies that can stabilize on a tripod"? That sort of requires, you know, turning the fucking stabilization off you retard.

>not going to happen to begin with
Sure thing buddy.

Are you actually clinically retarded by the way? I don't like punching that far down.

I mean, thinking someone else thought IBIS was a tripod brand...

>>2957625
> I mean, thinking someone else thought IBIS was a tripod brand...
Otherwise >>2956728 would actually have said something like that you'd never use IBIS for street and landscapes because you will always use a tripod.

Even if you intentionally ignore night clubs, that's so incredibly retarded that I *hope* he thought IBIS was a tripod brand.

> Notice how I said not to use stabilization and not "never use lenses or bodies that can stabilize on a tripod"?
I apparently misread that detail. Doesn't change anything in my response though.

You likely won't even have any feedback loops. But if it *somehow* did, you'd just turn IBIS off then.

Shit, even if it literally always needed to be turned off on a tripod, it'd easily be worth doing that to *not* have to use a tripod for the vast majority of your landscape, street and night club shots, which is exactly what that 3-4 stops equivalent IBIS that even works on fast/inexpensive manual primes will give you.

>>2957651
>Otherwise >>2956728 # would actually have said something like that you'd never use IBIS for street and landscapes because you will always use a tripod.

Your mind is a weird, twisted place anon. Here's a bit of advice, walk away. You've shown your retardation to such an extent that there's no recovery (it's like you haven't even thought about this for long enough to wonder why you CAN turn it off).

No one will be the wiser.

Or, adopt a trip so you can get filtered.

>>2957658
> Your mind is a weird, twisted place anon.
Probably factually accurate. But very utterly irrelevant.

You can't dodge the problem of your "feedback loops" not really being there, or fix any of the other nonsense with personal attacks.

>>2957664
>not really being there
HAHAHA. You're going to hinge your argument on that?

You earned it:
wew, lad.

>>2957665
>>2957664

>Arguing on an African tribal chant posting site over not knowing IBIS
Calm down guys, we're all friends here.

>>2957665
*Your* claim hinges on this nonsense feedback loop existing.


I say that even if it did, it'd be utterly trivial to deal with by just turning IBIS off.

And I also say that the issue of using a tripod for street / landscape / nightclub will rarely matter, he'd have IBIS after all, and that will be usually just more practical and faster than using a tripod.

>>2957673
Damn you're thick.

>>2955934
show me a canon that gives you the same build quality and performance as a pentax in the same class.

>>2957499
Thinking to get one after i sold my rollei sl66....idk how good these are but the fuji design though + fuji lens

>>2957673
How much training do they give you Sony shills?

Or are you like a false flag Pentax user?

File: firmlygraspit.jpg (150KB, 1181x735px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1181x735px

Okay so does anyone here shoot with any of the Sony a6xxx a5xxx etc APS-C sensor cameras and uses a somewhat okay'ish Focal reducer which offers AF and that isn't a Metabones...


Realising I just want some sweet bokeh to fool losers into buying my portraits of them... does anyone here shoot with a focal reducer and say a 50mm 1.8 or an 85mm 1.8 / 1.4 Cause of that extra stop of light the turbo does???

Also, those Viltrox adapters... does anyone have huge issues with the AF or have other recommendations?

Really I can't be fucked buying a Full Frame right now and would rather spend a quarter that on some adapter.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: 25_dollar_bokeh_3.jpg (200KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1000x667px

>>2957734
Can't help you with the adapter. But you could some serious bokehs from China for cheap, though mostly on less sharp lenses.

Pic related.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:02 11:54:50
Exposure Time	1/1500 sec
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	5.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2957734

The only adapters I am aware of that support pdaf are the Metabones IV and the Sigma MC-11, and for APS-C bodies those only work with the a6300 and a6500. You will get roughly native e-mount autofocus speeds.

If you are using something other than the a6300/a6500 it does not matter what adapter you get because they will all be equally shitty. Close to native but still short in well lit situations, and a total crap shoot when in the dark.

>Lens adapters cost as much as the lenses

for fucksakes, /p/

Thoughts on using ebay to buy relatively expensive lenses used? Any personal experiences? What's the best deal you've gotten?

>>2957734
>fotga adapter
you're wasting money.
for af adapter get sigma, metabones or techart.
the only cheap focal reducer that is not junk is zhongyi len turbo ii but no af.

>>2957753
You can buy native lenses too.

>>2957755

I have had better experiences with e-bay than with Keh.

File: choose.jpg (94KB, 1223x793px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1223x793px

Buying my first digital camera after finally killing my inherited film DSLR.

What should I be choosing between the SOny a6000 and Olympus OM-D M10 II? The sony camera seems to be awash with auto focussing advantages and has a slightly bigger sensor but no image stabilisation, which the olympus has. Is it worth the extra money for the olympus so I dont have to worry about sorting through lenses for ones with stabilisation?

>>2957769
*SLR

>>2957769

IBIS is inferior to OSS, but better than nothing. As long as you keep shutter speed up you shouldn't have any issues.

IBIS should probably not be the deciding factor.