/gear/ - Gear thread

File: SonyBump3_1.jpg (532KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 1500x1000px

Buy SONY

>>2957826
That Sony lens cap appears to be noisy. Must be from the new FE 50/1.8.

>>2957824
Can anyone tell me what is a good point and shoot with RAW support?

Like if it is a cheaper one that can be updated with a firmware update that would be better.

>>2957828
Ricoh GR if you don't mind having to get the dust out of it in ways that void warranty. You can get a strange cup to put over the lens though.

CHDK adds raw support, DNG format, to Canon Powershots. Not all of them though, you'll have to find one you like and see if it's on the list.

>>2957834
*The newer GR, the first GR is not great.

anyone ever just stack together lens adaptors for shits and giggles?
like Sony->nikon->canon->mft->pentax ?

Any DSLRs that does 4K 60fps yet?

Or is that purely for actual video cameras?

>>2957840
No, but I do stack my filters if needed.

>>2957841
Didn't the GH5 have that?
Also if you want top line video then get a dedicated video camera. DSLRs and MILC are actually middle ground, they can do the job more or less but specifically designed for it. They are multi purpose cameras not specific workhorses.

>>2957827

>FE 50 f1.8

Why would that cause noise?

Optically it is a great lens.

It can't focus for shit though.

If it was a shot from the 50mm it'd be laughably out of focus.

>>2957834
>>2957835

Cheers I'll have a look at them

>>2957853
It takes one Sonyfag to murder a pun.

>>2957855
>>2957834

I checked the CHDK's website and my ancient A480 is listed there, so maybe I should give it a go.

But it is bulkier than what I'm looking for - I want a slimmer model, I bought that in 2009 as a taking snapshits with friends camera.

>>2957862
You might be surprised with its performance, if you keep that ISO around 200 or so.

I want a prime for my D3400. Most people suggested me the nifty fifty but I believe it's too narrow for my needs.
I dont mind getting a manual lens with a nice bokeh maybe.

Is the pentax k70 with the 18-135mm a good first dslr?

>>2957921
Yes and it will be an excellent intermediate kit as well. Get the DA 35/2.4 prime also, dirt cheap and sharp.

Anyone know if it's possible to do duel ISO without magic lantern? Can you use two images with different ISOs and merge them together like an HDR composite?

>>2957910
well Nikon cripples the D3x00 with manual lenses. You won't get focus confirmation, and the camera will refuse to even meter. Manual-mode only with magnified live view or your unaided eye for focus, guess-and-check for exposure. Welcome to market segmentation.

If you want a normal prime you can get Nikon's own 35/1.8 (there's a full-frame version and a crop version, if I remember right) Sigma makes a 30/1.4. If you're fine with chink shit and really want to pinch pennies there's Yongnuo's 35/2.

>>2957921
Good camera, mediocre lens. The 18-135 suffers from CA and isn't really that sharp at the edges. (Center's fine though) The 16-85 is rather more expensive but a lot better optically.

File: OBAMA.jpg (789KB, 1000x1004px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 1000x1004px

just sold my bronica 6x6 kit with three lenses and a bunch of shit for USD$700 and a bottle of bourbon. the pistol grip was hard to beat and I'll miss it.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2000
Image Height	2007
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:02 14:50:50
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1004

i can't find 1:1 crop or 100% photos from Fujian 35mm f/1.7
i know some of you bought this lens, can someone give me 100% wide open and closed down samples?

>>2957974
Yet another pixel peeping gearfaggot

>>2957974
http://boingboing.net/features/fujian35mm.zip Try this, claims to be raw frames from a blackmagic cinema camera. Found on http://boingboing.net/2015/06/04/an-hour-with-the-30-fujian-35.html

File: Bokeh-Fujian-3517.jpg (219KB, 1600x1242px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1600x1242px

>>2957974
It's not a full photo but you seem to want to check technical details, here it is at f/1.7 and you can see some chromabs on the blocky thing and some hazey stuff. I don't know man I don't think these things are expensive, if you can get it you might as well. PhotoNinja could probably handle the chromabs well enough.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1242

>>2957974
http://maxotics.com/2014/06/11/sony-a6000-with-fujian-35mm-1-7-c-mount-cctv-len/ Big photos, no mention of f/stop

Also this

開放付近 (Wide open, near)
http://photozou.jp/photo/show/175340/178169246

F8あたり (F/8)
http://photozou.jp/photo/show/175340/178169259
http://photozou.jp/photo/show/175340/178169289

ちょいと離れて (And ??? away)
http://photozou.jp/photo/show/175340/178169306

同じものを11-27.5で・・・ (The same thing in the 11-27.5)
http://photozou.jp/photo/show/175340/178169322

Real hard to find anything.

>>2957985
and he's pixel peeping a shit cctv lens. what the hell does he expect?

>>2957952
The HD DA 16-85 is currently the sharpest Pentax lens in that zoom range. I've seen people professionally use it despite of the non-constant aperture.

Can someone tell me what manual focus lens in the range of 85mm to 135mm would be optically superior to the Canon EF 100mm F2 for astrophotography. Budget is around $150

>>2958080
Takumar 135mm

>>2958081
f2.5?

that would go nicely with my Takumar 200mm f4.

Newfag here trying to pick up photography to get out of the house, got a 500$ budget, so what should i get on this black friday and why?
Can't buy used cause there's no stores here and I'm 100% sure i'll get fucked if I buy from craigslist or ebay.

that's all for now, thanks

Anyone using old medium format lenses for digital fullframe cameras?

Specifically canon.

>>2958099
What do you want to photograph? It's a bit over your budget but if I was getting into it now I'd get a ricoh gr ii

>>2958099
I personally am a fan of mirrorless

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/fujifilm-x-a1-mirrorless-camera-with-16-50mm-lens-blue/2148481.p?skuId=2148481

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-alpha-a5000-mirrorless-camera-with-16-50mm-retractable-lens-black/3522002.p?skuId=3522002

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/canon-eos-m3-mirrorless-camera-with-ef-m-18-55mm-lens-black/4450006.p?skuId=4450006

>>2957824
Where do I go from an 18-55 canon kit lens (t2i) if I want to improve in image quality, but with a 500-600 dollar budget?

>>2958107
Mostly street, portraits etc. I work for a kickboxing promotion so maybe a little sports, but, I know that requires a fancy dancy camera and lens so probably not a lot of it
>>2958111
I like them too, just because they're pretty small and easy to carry. Right now the a6000 (which I love) is around 470$ish for the body on amazon, and I've heard it was around 390$ last black friday so maybe I'll get that.
if anyone has any good or bad things to say about the camera, let me know.

File: $_35.jpg (15KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x300px

Reposting from previous thread for me and another anon:
I like using vintage lenses on my G7 for video. I currently have 3 FD lenses and a normal adapter but I am thinking about gettting a focal reducer for a vintage mount.
are there mounts especially good for video? are older mounts like m42 or AI worse off than MD or FD? i own a Tokina 28mm 2.8, which i'd use as a standard video-lens with a focal reducer. i'd replace the cheap 50mm 1.8 with a 1.4.

>>2958114
i like primes

used Canon 28mm F1.8 fits your budget. 28mm is a good focal length on an APS-C

>>2958115

a6000 is a fantastic camera, and probably the best deal for mirrorless right now. It can't be beat for under $1,000.

The kit lens is rather mediocre, but you can get some pretty awesome primes for it rather cheaply.

I'm gonna be picking up my first mirrorless rather soon and I've decided to start with a Fuji system, but at the moment I'm really torn between either getting a used X-Pro1 or an X-T10. I don't want to drop too much money right now, perhaps later down the line when I have more disposable income I can pick up a more expensive system but right now I'm just looking for something convenient to take out and shoot that doesn't compromise on image quality.

Obviously the X-Pro1 is pretty old by digital standards and has a lot of quirks. How much have the firmware upgrades smoothed over some of the issues it had on release? The hybrid viewfinder is an enormous draw for me and there's something about the images the sensor produces that just clicks with me.

The X-T10 I'm sure will be an easier camera to work with but I'm a tad wary of the EVF and it lacks that little bit of magic I feel when looking at images produced by the X-Pro1.

I'm really quite torn so I'd like to hear some opinions.

>>2958138
The older Fuji's have major autofocus issues. Go with the T10.

Or better yet, the T2.

Hey guys, I've recently bought a Fuji Xpro2 and I've fallen quite in love with it and want to get rid of my Canon workhorse kit.

I want to buy another Fuji cam (thinking either X-E2, X-T10, X-T1, or X70)

And 2 more lenses (thinking 50-140 f2.8, 90 f2,16 f1.4), I currently have the 27mm.

I mainly shoot portraiture and weddings, what would bea good kit for me?

Thanks!

>>2958145

If you are shooting weddings autofocus is important.

You didn't list it, but the X-T2 has considerably better autofocus than the rest of the Fuji line. Definatelly worth a look at.

File: sigma.jpg (43KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x500px

>>2958118
Like the other poster said, primes are a great. But if you want a zoom lens, the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM for $500 is probably the best zoom lens for the price. I had one with my Canon 30D and it was a great combination.

>>2958172
Another XPro2 should probably also work okay enough.

>>2958118
I have a 50mm and I was considering another prime. The fact is that I am starting to shoot events and it would be nice to have a better zoom

>>2958172
>>2958174
Thanks guys but although my budget would permit getting either another Xpro2 or XT2, I'd prefer spend it on a cheaper body and more lenses.

If I had to get either of the two, I'd go for the XT2 because from what I've read, it's a different shooting type than the Xpro2 which is more like a rangefinder.

File: FE170_LtAngle.jpg (183KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1280x960px

Sup /p/, it's my first time on this board and I've only skimmed the sticky. I don't normally take pictures but on the rare occasions when I do I've had my Olympus FE-170 for the last 10 years. I think it's broken though, no matter how many times I put fresh batteries into it it dies within minutes. So I'm thinking it's time to upgrade. I don't have a lot of money so I'm mainly looking into used cameras, are there any from 2010-2012 that I could find for under $200 and wouldn't look completely terrible?

Buy a used RX100

>>2958306
What's your phone situation? The current smartphone cameras are a lot better than any 2010-2012 point and shoot camera.

>>2958287

If you are not gonna get more lenses, you don't need a second body with laughably slow autofocus.

>>2958309
>>2958287

Errr... shit, that is supposed to be:

If you are not gonna get an X-T2, get more lenses. You don't need a second body with laughably slow autofocus.

>>2958307
It looks pretty good, I'll keep an eye on it on Ebay or something.
>>2958308
I don't have a smartphone.

>>2958310
>laughably slow autofocus
That didn't sound right so I Googled it, and I can't find anyone saying the atofocus is slow. Just people saying Fuji is known for slow autofocus but the XPro2 is good.

Are you just memeing or what?

>>2958315

Xpro2 is passable, X-T2 is good.

Everything else is p.bad.

>>2958173
Is it decent? I'm afraid of just buying another kit lens.

Would I be able to hook up my phone to my dslr and use the phone simply as a larger screen?

>>2958332
If your DSLR supports it...?

I can use WLAN to tether my Sony - controls the basic settings (unfortunately not *everything* as would be kinda desirable) as well as shows the current image and sends the recorded shots to my smartphone.

Not sure if the Android app also supports wired tethering somehow. But it works with a laptop / desktop computer.

>>2958332

If you have a Canon camera and an Android phone, there's the DSLR controller app by Chainfire and it looks breddi gud.

Are variable ND filters worth it? I do mainly video.
What are good brands?

So I have a EM5ii in the mail, going to be a bit before I can get a lens. Was looking at the 12-50mm EZ , any other recommendations for $150~300 as an alternative for a first m43 lens (grey market fine)?

>>2958367
The EZ isn't bad, but Aperture is the wrong part to be stingy on for me. If you can handle a 3.5-5.6 aperture, go for it.
If you want to be bright and bokehlicious, there are other cheap options
Check the low primes from Panasonic and Olympus
The Panasonic 25mm 1.7 costs around 200 bucks and does wonders for that price.
The Olympus 25mm 1.8 can have a clickless aperture, which is nice.
The Panasonic 20mm 1.7 is known for its very versatile focal length
Consider getting and FD or MD or M42 adapter and going nuts on $40-100 lenses. Shooting manual vintage is really fun. Some Focal Reducers are also like $100, so get one of those and a few cheap lenses for it.

>>2958378
I was looking at the primes, but having a zoom is useful as well. I need a f mount adapter as I do have a few Nikon lenses. Also think I should go with a 25 over a 17?

>>2958380
If you mean 25mm or 17mm, I don't know, you decision. 17mm gives a slight "wide angle" feel, while 25mm, especially for video, where the cropfactor is a bit higher, can seem a bit further zoomed in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEEY3hiXV5Q

that looks like shit.
it's over,
nikon is finished.

>>2958364
no

Is there a guide on the wiki that explains maintaining/taking care of your gear? Didn't found anything. If nothings there, can someone link a guide for me?

>>2958475
just buy a new camera.

File: 20160109182628[1].jpg (168KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 800x533px

Will I regret buying the Sigma 30mm f/1.4?

Apparently it's not as sharp as the 35mm, but it's lighter and seems to make better sense with Canon's x1.62 crop factor.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS Kiss X7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:09 22:38:22
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	47.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2957834
>>2957835
>>2958107

Is the Ricoh GR II a meme? Or is it worth the $600 its going for now?

>>2958543
It is a good specialized street camera, especially if you like 28mm equivalent angles.

>>2958543
you could get a used mirrorless system camera for that price

check ebay and craigslist for a used ricoh gr 2, i don't think any p&s is worth 600

File: Slobruthers049.jpg (238KB, 533x800px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 533x800px

>>2958513
I like this lense on film, it's very fast and wide and sharp in the main portion of the image, then has a nice vignette towards the corners.
On digital, it's just fast. It has more distortion and CA (both types) than any 50mm on fullframe would have. Sharp enough though.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:22 15:23:21
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	533
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

File: IMG_5396.jpg (208KB, 533x800px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 533x800px

>>2958600
here's a digital shot.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	30mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2015:11:02 14:35:32
Exposure Time	1/350 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	533
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Av-Priority
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Flash
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

File: pst005.jpg (1016KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

1016KB, 1200x800px

>>2958600
And another.
>from my first set on /p/
>>2958513
I don't regret buying it. I would almost certainly have regretted buying a Canon 50/1.4, if that happens to be something else you're considering. I would almost certainly not have regretted purchasing a 35mm Art.
If the 30mm was not so unique and interesting on film, or if it just didn't cover the whole frame, like the Nikon 35/1.8 for example, I probably would have sold it at the same time I sold my 550D though.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	Digital Photo Professional
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2013:11:04 16:07:01
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1200
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Why does the x100t take such comfy looking shots?

Is it Fujis film emulation or something else?

>>2958608
I think it is the special image processing algorithm called placebo

>>2958610

Shit, you're probably right. I think I just like thinking about gear more than taking photos.

Fuck

>>2958610
>I think it is the special image processing algorithm called placebo
dem self-confirming bias tones...

>>2958610
>>2958618

Thanks for setting me straight, anons. Trying to decide if I should sell my d7100 for an x100t/ricoh.

>>2958117
>>2958117
Noone on this?
Christmas is coming up, and my Parents loved the idea of me shooting their 123 party (they turned 63 and 60 this year, so they are 123 years in sum) with their old lenses.
Shooting vintage is a ton of fun.

>>2958621
once you ditch the mirror you have way more lens adaptability options and maybe people will think you're hot if they see you holding it

>>2958625
The Ricoh isn't a MILC

>>2958627
oh x100t isn't a system camera either? wow

>>2958621
don't sell it

>>2958631
My brain went retarded and I thought he was talking of the Ricoh RX100, which doesn't exist.

File: ricohmilc.jpg (204KB, 867x1191px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 867x1191px

>>2958627
Yes it is.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:04 08:39:52
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-4.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	867
Image Height	1191
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2958634
It is a point-and-shoot with a prime lens.

>>2958634
who would consider selling their full blown dslr for this

who

>>2958641
Someone who only uses a single focal length and likes to carry the whole thing in his pocket. And occasionally disassemble to clean the dust.

>>2958641
>implying anyone even uses focal lengths that aren't 28mm, 21mm and macro
M8, it's a DSLR for the real world.
Sorry you're stuck in the 60s with your legacy film system.
>>2958636
>M-irrorless
check
>I-nterchangeable L-ense
check
>C-amera
check
It's a MILC bb

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-03 at 6.47.57 PM.png (112KB, 609x614px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 609x614px

>>2958625

Not sure if bait or not

>>2958625
>>2958627
>>2958631
>>2958634
>>2958636

Not sure what the fuss is about. Or am I retarded for "downgrading" to a mostly fixed lens system without looking at mirrorless. I'm lost.

File: post-29481-Ryan-from-The-Office-agrees-gi-1MNe.gif (5MB, 600x336px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 600x336px

>>2958642

This is more or less it. Looking for a good balance between iq/pocketability

>>2958645
>Interchangeable Lense
The lens is fixed.
It is not a MILC, deal with it.

>>2958648
Panasonic GM1 + Pancake lenses is also an option

>>2958624
Go for it then?

>>2958117
> are older mounts like m42 or AI worse off than MD or FD?
Generally speaking: The older, the worse your glass and coating gets, sure.

That said, isn't this what you'd be shooting vintage (or alternatively, modern low-end glass) for? That old mucky vignetting, discoloration, odd bokeh, and so on?

>>2958679
Bright lenses with solid builds, proper focussing rings (not that fly-by-wire crap) for very little money
Also, you can't get vignetting on MFT cameras unless you go C-mount

I want a pretty cheap 35mm point and shoot. I wish I could get a GR1 because I love my GR, but I'd rather spend less than $100 or maybe like $200.

I want a prime lens, something reasonably good but it doesn't have to be super sharp or fast or anything. I really like 28mm and irrationally hate 35mm which makes things difficult. Autofocus is preferred, but I can deal with manual focus or even scale focusing if I have to. Small enough to fit in a jacket pocket.

Any suggestions? I've been checking local thrift stores and haven't found anything worth a shit, KEH doesn't have many compacts usually although they do have a Nikon L35AF right now which I'm considering. I really hate ebay but I'll probably have to resort to that.

>>2958040
Is it really sharper than the 16-50 f/2.8?

>>2958173
>>2958319
I just ordered one. According to dxomark it's the sharpest stabilized zoom for canon aps-c.

>>2958770
I was happy with the Sigma on my 6mpix pentacks K100, but on my 16mp K5 it often left me lacking in terms of results :/

Might be that I've dinged my copy too hard one too many times somewhere along the way tho...

Guys my hands gets shaky during cold temperature, I tried increase the iso and I don't like to carry around a tri or monopod is there other way to have a stabilize shot? My camera's Sony Cybershot if anyone's wondering

>>2958778
- Different camera with in-body or in-lens stabilization.

Or camera that has better light gathering ability / lens or resolution (and then software noise filtering) so you can crank up shutter speed while getting the same image quality in the end.

(Variant that requires less effort when shooting.)

- External stabilization, be it just mass impairing relative inertness to the setup, a stand, or a powered gimbal. (Variant that requires more effort when shooting.)

>>2958795
Lastly:
- Gloves -maybe with heat pads inside- as well as any other necessary clothing so your hands don't get shaky?

File: Sigma-18-35mm-F1.8-DC-HSM-len-8[1].jpg (376KB, 1600x1291px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 1600x1291px

Will I look stupid using this lens

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-30
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	Picasa
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3214
Image Height	2593
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	314 dpi
Vertical Resolution	314 dpi
Image Created	2013:04:18 16:20:27
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1291
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Unique Image ID	3b0ca31769e0af0899162fae297d1014

>>2958808
Wat? No.

I do dislike your camera, but looks aren't the problem. And having a good lens like that does make it better as a setup anyhow.

>>2958809
its huge though

File: Chris-Gampat-The-Phoblographer-Sigma-18-35mm-f1.8-product-photos-1-of-7ISO-2001-60-sec-at-f-5.0[1].jpg (380KB, 2000x1329px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 2000x1329px

>>2958809
good lord

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	NEX-6
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:07:13 12:04:29
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Brightness	-3.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: Sigma-Ultra-Telephoto-Zoom-Lens-1.jpg (198KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 960x640px

>>2958811
It's only a bit wider than your camera body. Basically like just about any telephoto lens or whatever. Nothing special at all.

Still, if you see an issue with you actually using that lens because of its size, maybe you'd be better off with a different lens. Or mounting it on a MILC to compensate.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1200
Image Height	800
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:06:25 08:50:03
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	960
Image Height	640

>>2958814
*compensate for some of the volunme. Maybe not what you want, now that I think about it again. [Ah well, just use a camera bag / backpack like just about anyone with one or multiple big-ish lenses.]

>>2958770
Awesome. I hope you like it. While quality control with Sigma is better than it has been, there is still a chance of getting a dud, so don't be afraid to send it back if it appears overly soft or not able to focus correctly, especially since the Canon T2i doesn't have microadjust.

>>2958758
My blunt plastic scissors I had when I was a wee lad was sharper than the DA 16-50/2.8. A baseball bat is sharper than the 16-50/2.8. Not to mention the SDM drive dies regularly in that lens the replaced ones too, some people converted it to screwdrive but I don't know if it worth the hassle for that bad optics.
If you want a fast normal zoom you are better off with a used Tamron 17-50/2.8 or the Sigma equivalent.
If you don't mind the half to 1 stop less light then the 16-85 will deliver you corner to corner sub-pixel sharpness.

>>2958889
>converted to screw drive

That sounds neat as fuck.

Not necesarily from a usability standpoint, but from an I had no clue that was possible one.

>>2958920
It is possible on older SDM lenses where you also have screwdrive. It is simply a firmware update/mild hack.
Not possible on some lenses like the DA* 60-250 though. Some claim to have done it but it was either too destructive or didn't work half the time.

File: Bildschirmfoto-2016-11-02-um-06.14.52-700x323.png (124KB, 700x323px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 700x323px

>>2957824

>$2000
>it is cheaper to get a full frame camera and two lenses

Who would ever consider this?

File: s02TfG39de5gu9g9n4a.jpg (811KB, 600x1864px) Image search: [Google]

811KB, 600x1864px

>>2958955

While great compared to other m43 cameras, the iso performace is still subpar.

>>2958955
It needed to be 1.6k max.
Theres a lot of people defending it as it does have a ton of features that blow a lot of the competition out of the water, but 2k is still too much for body only

>>2958955
People who invested in m43 tele lenses?
It is a very good lightweight wildlife system with a 300mm prime.

>>2958955
I had an E-M1 for a few months and it is truly an excellent camera in a whole lot of ways. You're right that $2000 is pretty steep when you're getting image quality a decent step below a D610 or A7 or whatever. On the other hand $2000 is pretty cheap for a rock solid weather proof little brick that shoots a million frames per second and competes with something like a D5 in that respect. It really handles and feels like something """professional""".

It's not a bad camera and not necessarily unfairly priced, it just has a very specific set of qualities that really only appeal to a very small number of people. It wasn't really the camera for me, as much as I liked it.

>>2958967
One of the biggest gripes about it is that at Photokina a rep said it'd only cost a bit more than the EM1 did at launch, instead its like 1.5x~ more.

>>2958306
get a Samsung WB250F - should be under $100 easily on ebay and it pretty good with a few manual control options

>>2958955
$2000 and the focusing system still falls short of Canon's DPAF.

In this video it's set to C-AF with a centered focus point. It literally cannot focus on a backlit subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDAGnmg0JQQ

I also saw a video testing the face-tracking and it kept blurring whenever the woman moved back and forward, like it was taking too long to recognize the movement.

Olympus must be retarded when it comes to developing proper autofocusing systems. Even the Pen-F had an abysmal hit rate.

>>2958955
Yea, that price is too high.

Sony's A6500 is pushing it already at $1400, and it is a better camera...

>>2958967
>>2958955
What's really dumb is that they marketed this thing as a video machine yet didn't include any sort of log profile.

In terms of image quality it seems like a miniscule step up from their previous line of bodies.

>>2958961
> a ton of features that blow a lot of the competition out of the water
Like what? I only saw that it has a somewhat high burst rate (and just 20MP resolution to make that one easier).

Is there anything else that is particularly unique?

File: Olympus-PEN-F-opener-4594[1].jpg (162KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1200x800px

>>2958972
Shitty selection of lenses. M43 at least has a ton of fast primes at compact sizes.

>>2958974
Only pro-capture. I think the real appeal is that it ticks so many different boxes.

>Best IBIS on the market
>Super fast burst
>Articulating screen
>4k Video including Cinema Standard
>Both mic and headphone jack
>Comprehensive lens selection
>Great battery life for mirrorless
>Reliable weather sealing
>PDAF/CDAF focusing system
>Lightweight body
>EVF w/ fast refresh rate
>Touch screen

And so on.

It's a great "all-rounder."

>>2958976
Doesn't really seem to be much more than on the E-mount at this point.

And while many are smaller, the vast majority of primes are also less sharp. Doesn't really seem like a good idea to spend $2k on the body alone for that...

>>2958971
that image stabilization though
literally doesn't look handheld at all.

Canon t2i for 450 CAD a good deal?

>>2958985
Same as on various Sony s(but more nervous AF on the Oly and it also doesn't seem to catch vibrations quite as well?), Pentax, various lenses with OIS...

>>2958976
>Shitty
People rave about m43 lens quality

>>2958981
Did they actually seal the camera this time, or is this a sony-meme-tier "weather resistant" thing?

Asking because the "weather sealing" in my bro's original Olympus e-m5 is a joke compared to any of the Pentax or the Canikon pro bodies.

>>2959008
I think he meant the *E-mount's selection of lenses*.

Which also isn't correct if you ask me, but that's probably what anon meant.

>>2959011
How's the Oly a joke? I've seen those things survive shit that goes past weather sealing

>>2959008
sry I meant that Sony has a shit selection. M43 has a godly selection desu. The sharpness to cost ratio almost makes up for the smaller sensor.

>>2959011
What was wrong with it? I know a lot of EM1 owners use their cameras in harsh conditions.

>>2959016
Did they survive fine sand or salt water or getting wet and exposed to freezing temperatures?

'cause the meme-tier (actually pretty well-sealed now) Sony also will easily survive some rain and a drop, but that's probably not why you *need* weather sealing proper.

>>2959011
>sony-meme-tier "weather resistant" thing?

Sony hasn't even bothered to release a weather resistant camera.

The a7 was supposed to be, but they pulled it before launch.

>>2959019
>Sony has a shit selection. M43 has a godly selection
I think we're now at the point where B&H and many others are actually selling more E-mount than MFT lenses.

And the MFT lenses are smaller, but worse, so whether they're "better' kinda depends on how much you put the size difference over the often quite considerable resolving power difference.

>>2959021
Look up the videos on YouTube. They submerge them, blast them with hoses, and even play in the snow with them.

>>2959015
>decide to get into videography/video-journalism and get a DLSR/M
>check different systems
>Nikon goes right out the window
>look at Canon for price and Magic Lantern
>hear about the SEVERAL 18-55mm 2.8 OSS constant-aperture parfocal lenses and the 18-35mm 1.8 constant aperture parfocal
>look at Panasonic for cheap 4k and adaptability/size
>it has the 12-35mm 2.8, OSS constant aperture and parfocal
>look at sony for 4k and adaptability/size
>no such lenses
>no second selector wheel
>shitty screens

Sony is missing some key features that puts off a lot of the people it tries to attract with other features

>>2959028
I also saw most of that done to Sony cameras? Pretty sure they also completely submerged some cameras to show they work if you dry them off and all that.

But they still wouldn't take too well to fine sand and salt water or water inside that then freezes.

>>2959015
E-mount APS-C runs into the same problem as Canikon: you don't have a selection of fast, compact, sharp primes from ultra wide to 35mm. There isn't even a constant f2.8 zoom for aps-c yet. I'm not a pixel peeper but it's especially frustrating when the lens you want doesn't even exist. Even worse, the rangerfinder-style body makes FE or adapted glass feel unbalanced.

I also think, in terms of image quality, the E-mount lens selection leaves something to be desired compared to Fuji/M43.

File: TS560x560[1].jpg (112KB, 540x560px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 540x560px

>>2959031
Sony cameras physically lack weather sealing. It's all plastic seals, no rubber. Screw exposed on the bottom. No gaskets on their $2000 glass.

File: sony-a6300-sigma-18-35-ultimate-combo-1-3[1].jpg (218KB, 1468x980px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1468x980px

>>2959027
Which e-mount lenses are selling the most?

>MFT lenses are smaller, but worse
There's no Sony zoom that offers the speed and sharpness of the Olympus 12-40mm. It has corner to corner sharpness @ 12mm wide open.

There are also MFT lenses that do not exist on the E-mount (in terms of focal length equivalence.)

File: full frame tears.jpg (217KB, 800x655px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 800x655px

>>2959011
If it's the same build quality as the E-M1 mk I then it's 100% legit up to the same standard as a single digit Nikon or Canon 1D or whatever.

>>2959038
>speed and sharpness of the Olympus 12-40mm

Sony 24-70mm f 2.8 does.

Never gonna get a modern full frame with the weird 24-80mm range.

>>2959032
> you don't have a selection of fast, compact, sharp primes from ultra wide to 35mm
I do on the E-mount, but don't on MFT.

Probably because I feel I can easily carry slightly bigger lenses, but don't want to deal with the lower resolving power of MFT glass on MFT bodies.

Seems to be the other way around for you.

> I also think, in terms of image quality, the E-mount lens selection leaves something to be desired compared to Fuji/M43.
Nah. The MFT camera + lens combos are resolving quite significantly worse than even Sony APS-C, also due to lens quality differences. (Same for Fuji, but it's harder to show.)

> There isn't even a constant f2.8 zoom for aps-c yet.
That's a downside if you usually want to use zooms, but you can get FF lenses like that that work just fine - even with a focal reducer if you want to get more light. [That then certainly won't be a compact setup, but it will be very capable.]

On the other hand, I'm not aware of a constant aperture ~f/2 MFT lens (for aperture equivalence).

>>2959032
>the same problem as Canikon: you don't have a selection of fast, compact, sharp primes from ultra wide to 35mm.
>ULTRAWIDE

Does m43 even have a single 10mm equivalent? 12mm?

>>2959048
yes
http://four-thirds.org/en/microft/lense.html

>>2959047
>this entire post
>literally just "MY SYSTEM ISN'T BAD, YOUR SYSTEM IS BAD!"

I almost forgot i was in the /gear/ thread

>>2959051

Widest there is 14mm equivalent.

>>2959048
On the other hand, long-focal lengths are easier to achieve. You can have 200-600mm lenses with proper apertures in a much smaller form than on FF or ASP-C
And if you want, you can use C-Mount lenses to get like 3mm lenses on there, a 6-7mm equivalent

>>2959053
It was the *preceding* post that claimed everything was worse on Sony's APS-C.

I essentially say it's a size vs resolving power trade-off, and that I don't actually have a problem with the size involved in either case...

File: sony-a6500-coming[1].jpg (40KB, 970x545px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 970x545px

>>2959042
>Sony 24-70mm f 2.8
>36-105mm equivalent focal range that looks like pic related

Sony needs a 16-55 f2.8... there's not much else to say. It's a hole in their lens lineup.

>>2959047
The A6X00 series, in terms of ergonomics, works much better with smaller lenses. If you're going to be carrying all that FF glass, why not just get a A7 series camera?

> everything was worse on Sony's APS-C.
I claimed that the lens lineup sucks, and it does.

Guys, after a bunch of advice from you and everyone else on the internet, I bought a Sony A6000 that was on sale and stopped borrowing my brother's Nikon D5300.

The interface and controls feel like they've been designed by drunk programmers. I knew it was bad, but this is a special kind of bad. Will I ever get used to it or should I just return it?

>>2959179
Return it, get a Fuji

>>2959179
Sony doesn't have a Second selector/thumb wheel
It's not going to get mich better.
Factor in that using the EVF will press your nose against the Touchscreen and fuck everything up.
EVERY other MILC Brand is better.

>>2959200
>>Factor in that using the EVF will press your nose against the Touchscreen and fuck everything up.
don't most cameras with touchscreens let you turn off the touch functionality for exactly this reason?

>>2959201
Samsung has a camera with a curved screen so you have room for your nose

>>2959200
>touch screen
This camera doesn't have one.

>>2959183
What about video? And is what about the fact that it doesn't work well with Adobe software?

>>2959206
If you want decent Video and a good Interface/controls you have to get a Canon and put magiclantern on it or Go for Panasonic.

>>2959179

The interface has actually been completely redesigned for the new cameras. Rumor has it older models will get the redesign too, but the a6000 is so old it is unlikely.

File: GEDC0036.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

so /p/ i'm actually kinda new to this board and i'm an aspiring photographer. I want a camera that's overall good at shooting videos and photos, I plan on filming my skateboarding, maybe a few vlogs here and there, and take good pictures, maybe even make some cash taking photos pf people. but i'm still not sure what camera i should get, i used to be bent on geting a rebel t3i, thought it looked cool but never really looked at specs, then I saw a t5i in action really liked the image quality, but didn't look too great for videos. So I've been looking into getting an a6000, because it seems to be the best option. any ideas? I currently have a GE x500, was a gift from a friend, great pics, low quality video but i still like it, audio is bad though.

>Pic related: recent picture with the GE

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	GENERAL IMAGING CO.
Camera Model	X500
Camera Software	Version 1.03
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2011:02:02 10:00:03
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/3.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/3.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Auto
Focal Length	11.20 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up

>>2959233
> a6000
> old

>>2957824
I really want to see an image shot with that.

>>2959245

It's sensor is two generations old.

File: Gunstock2.jpg (42KB, 452x348px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 452x348px

Found one of these Bolex gunstocks at a garage sale

Not much of a photography guy but thought it was neat.
Anyone interested in these?
Not sure where else to post it.

File: pxw-fs7mkii-cvs-1024x935.jpg (85KB, 1024x935px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1024x935px

>new e-mount body announced

Kinda neat. Wish we would get the a7iii already though.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Pixelmator 3.5.1
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:04 11:11:64
Comment	Screenshot
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1466
Image Height	1338

>>2959316

What's the deal with Vivitar and Goja selling lens caps? They seem pretty cheap so are they really shit? Looking for some decent ND lenses.

File: tmp_21143-IMG_20161105_0001081099628965.jpg (797KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 3264x2448px

can someone recommend me a manual focus prime lens that is in the 21mm-35mm range and f2 or faster. trying to keep it under $100usd or $150 tops

[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	1/60 sec
ISO Speed Rating	111
F-Number	f/2.4

>>2959327
Kaxinda or Meike 35mm 1.7, look on eBay or similar

>>2959233
>>2959216
I've just spent a few more hours playing with it. While the interface and controls are certainly not as polished like Canikons, I could use the camera comfortably.

I certainly wouldn't recommend it as someone's first camera, though.

>>2958099
Just buy from ebay. They have overwhelming buyer protections. So much so that you are likelier to get fucked selling on ebay not buying. You honestly don't even save that much on ebay anymore because everyone knows it's just like Amazon.

Craigslist -- imo it's very personal. Hard to fuck people over when they're right in your face. Just don't buy something that's too good to be true and if it seems weird don't do it. The worst I've experienced is people trying hard to hustle.

>>2959339

It takes a while to get used to.

Once you have all your custom keys set and know the menu it is a joy to use.

>>2959200
>Sony doesn't have a Second selector/thumb wheel
It does.

> Factor in that using the EVF will press your nose against the Touchscreen and fuck everything up.
With no touch screen, that is fucking hard to do. Plus using the EVF will turn the screen off automatically anyhow.

>>2959179
> The interface and controls feel like they've been designed by drunk programmers.
So is Nikon's. You're only accustomed to one and not the other.

>>2959367
Meanwhile I picked up a Pentax in the shop and could use it right away.

I've been looking into getting a cheap-ish DSLR for quite a while now, but always end up giving up when I start looking way to much into specs, prices and differences, so much so that I just ended up getting a phone with a decent camera (LG G4), which I like, but is also limiting, since I really wanna try different lenses and focal lengths.

Long story short, can I get anything decent for about $500? I'm willing to get a used one if necessary, but I'm not from the US, so prices are higher. Looking at DPReview's buying guide and my local ebay-like shop, the ones that fit into that budget seem to be a used Rebel T6, or a new T5/T5i, or a D3300, which is right about what I want to pay, but it seems a bit outdated and lacks a few useful features.

Sorry about asking a question that you guys probably get all the time, but I'd really appreciate some recommendations on the models I mentioned or similar stuff.

is there a great lens for canon that can be used for portraits? Im looking into 85mm f1.8 but im not convinced it has the best sharpness to it. Any advice?

>>2959375
And I could do the same with Sony no problem.

It's really rather simple, the wheels control the main settings relevant to the current mode on the mode selection wheel and the fn menu has most of the rest you actually often want to change (if it doesn't, you can change settings what is in the fn menu). And the menu has the remaining settings including the uncommon ones.

Not the greatest, but still so simple Sony can even use this on their P&S cameras for plebs.

>>2959384
Zeiss Otus if you want the extreme.

Sigma's 50mm Art and 85mm f/1.4 and the Canon 135mm L and many others might also apply.

>>2959380
Pentax K-S2 or K-50

>>2959388
Unfortunately I can't find either of those anywhere where I live. Anything that isn't Sony, Nikon or Canon might as well not exist. I fucked up by not buying one when I went to the US.

>>2959394
Try ebay like every normal person.

>>2959380
A6000.

>>2959397
I don't want to import it. My country has high taxes for expensive stuff, and it also takes ages to arrive and get through customs.

>>2959399
I looked into this one, but didn't mention it because even used ones are almost twice as expensive as the ones in my previous post.

>>2959405
stop living in south america.

>>2959405
> I looked into this one, but didn't mention it because even used ones are almost twice as expensive as the ones in my previous post.
So it's no longer near $500 where you live?

Or do you just prefer to deal with a low end Canon / Nikon body (they're quite deliberately annoying) so you can get more lenses?

So I have

20mm 2.8
35mm 1.8
50mm 1.8
85mm 1.8
70-300mm 4.5-5.6

I can't make my mind up between a 24-70mm 2.8 or a 70-200mm 2.8.

After a few years of shooting primes, I'm just over it...at the same time, a faster Tele would see a lot of use. Either option is "right", just for different things I want to do.

What would you do?

>>2959406
I wish it was that easy.

>>2959408
Yeah, it's a lot more than $500. A direct conversion would put it over $800.

The ones closest to what I'm looking to pay are the D3300 and the D5300, with a used D5500 coming close, but I'm not sure how good those are and if they're worth the asking price.

>>2959410
focus on getting better at shooting subjects now

>>2959416
Suicide, I hear, is an effective treatment for your condition.

>>2959411
They're essentially the same camera, actually. The D5x00 just has a few bells and whistles on it - swivel screen, more scene modes, etc. The stuff that matters, like legacy-lens compatibility, dual control wheels, a good viewfinder, etc, is missing from both of them.

How much would a D7000 go for?

>>2959410
I had a not-dissimilar set of lenses and got a 24-70/2.8. For me it was easy though, because I find myself in (or near) that range far more often than I want telephoto. And it's a good lens to leave on your camera when you're going somewhere and don't know ahead of time which exact focal lengths you want.

Now I usually go out with my 24-70 and one or two primes depending on what I think I might want beyond that. Samyang 14/2.8 if I think I'll go wider, 50/1.4 if it's dark and the extra two stops might get used, etc.

>>2959410

>a few lenses that are most likely at least passing quality that cover the 24-70mm range
>one lens in the 70-200mm range that is of questionable quality

Answer seems clear to me.

>>2959421
If I went with the 24-70, it would primarily live on my camera, but there's a lot of times that I've needed a faster (and frankly better) tele and have either foregone opportunities to shoot or just had too slow of a lens to get the shot I wanted. That's what's making it a frustrating choice for me...it's really convenience versus expanded capability. I will eventually get both, but the next will likely be around a year or so later because I'm budgeting for a couple of trips this spring.

>>2959422
Damn good point

>>2959421
>How much would a D7000 go for?
A heavily used D7000 body is about the same price as a barely used D5500 with lens, which is slightly more expensive than a brand new D3300.

If I got something similar in price as the D3300, it would be much easier to get more lenses, something I'm not really sure I can do with the more expensive ones.

>>2959429
Updating this a bit, I can maybe justify the D7000, since I found some new bodies for prices similar to a D3300 with lens, however how much can I expect to pay for some 'basic' versatile lenses? I mainly plan on taking indoor and macro pictures, as well as some general city, landscape and portraits. No sports or anything like that.

>>2959384
85 1.8 has incredible sharpness, maybe the 100 2.0 is a tad better

File: 27042667652_f7fc878304_k.jpg (1MB, 2048x1538px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1538px

Brother got an A7 so he gave me his a6000 with kit lens and a Rokinon 12mm.

Sigma 30mm looks nice especially for low light, but not sure if it's really worth the money.

Thoughts?

>>2959470

Sigma lenses are great little budget lenses.

The native lenses are of course better, but considerably more expensivr.

>>2959473

Yeah, it's always been just a hobby I'd like to take up, and I'm not exactly willing to drop a grand on some zeiss shit.

Going to Japan early next year, so I need to start shooting to get used to it all. Photos look fine from the few I've taken, but there's smudges at F16 and down. Must be some dirt caught on the sensor just not sure what to buy to clean it

>>2959470
> Sigma 30mm looks nice especially for low light, but not sure if it's really worth the money.
Either of the 30mm Sigmas for the system is very good for its price, even considering lenses across systems.

I'd definitely get the f/1.8 though.

>>2959473
>The native lenses are of course better, but considerably more expensivr.
The two Sigma 30mm are native? You probably mean Sony-branded, but that's really quite irrelevant.

And the Sigma 30mm f/1.8 is really more or less as good as it gets on this camera.

(Okay, adapted Otus' and native GM primes might do a little better yet, but I don't think anon is interested in them).

>>2959477
>>2959480

>1.8

Is there one I don't know about? I know there's a 2.8 and a 1.4

>>2959482
My mistake, it's a f/1.4.

>>2959483

Cool, just wanted to make sure.

I do like the Rokinon 12mm for now. Especially since I'd like to get more experience with manual focus. For such a wide angle it actually has a pretty close minimum focus distance.

>>2959475

There is no need to spend a grand, the APS-C primes for Sony are relatively cheap. The 50mm and 35mm primes are $250 and $370 respectively. They both have OSS (optical steady shot, which is image stabilization) a very nice thing to have. Image quality is better, but not really noticable unless you are a pixel peeper.


As for a dirty sensor, there are sensor cleaning swabs on amazon, should show up with first search.

>>2959487

The only sony 35mms in that range are alpha mount, though

>>2959488
>https://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/B009Z3PBAC/

I assume it is priced similar wherever you are

>>2959491

It's about $100 more expensive from regular Amazon. Is it really $100 better than the Sigma 30mm?

>>2959487

Image quality is very noticeably better on the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 than on the Sony 35mm f/1.8:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-E-35mm-F18-on-Sony-A6000-versus-Sigma-30mm-F28-DN-A-Sony-E-on-Sony-A6000-versus-Sigma-30mm-F14-DC-DN-C-Sony-E-on-Sony-A6000__1083_942_1102_942_1692_942
(Also included the Sigma Art f/2.8.)

But sure, no OSS on the Sigmas. And centered PDAF only on the f/2.8.

>>2959492

If you are shooting lots of low light the OSS is very useful.

Otherwise don't bother.

>>2959470

Don't fall for the 35 meme. Just spend the extra money and go for the Sony 28/2

>>2959496

>no OSS

lmao at your life

>>2958808
I'd be happy to use that lens. I feel like a pervert whenever I get my 135mm out but I got used to using it fast. This thing looks fine.
Looks a little like a kit lens but not according to the numbers.

>>2959243
SOny cameras ALWAYS look good on paper, that's their selling strategy.
The handling is generally horrible and they dont stay true on their "weather sealing" claims. Also, the A6000 has notoriously bad moire and jello on videos.
Consider getting a Canon and load magiclantern on it. It adds a lot of the software functionalities required for good video-shooting.

File: QD7_9465.jpg (816KB, 665x1000px) Image search: [Google]

816KB, 665x1000px

>>2957824

Hi /p/, got a stupid question for you since I can't wrap my head around it.

Going for a travel soon and I want to be able to take good pictures, I'm already going to take a film camera with me but I also want something more immediate for less serious stuff or just for seeing results right away.

My two ideas were the Nikon J5 with a 18mm 1.8 (or other brand equivalences if they are better, I don't care) or just buying a new smartphone like the Iphone 7 plus.

I know both of those are not perfect solutions but a DSLR it's just too heavy and requires too much space, I want something that can fit in my pocket.

The phone sounds like a better investment but the camera is obviously better in terms of quality, whats your opinion about it?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D700
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	668
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:15 00:19:36
Exposure Time	1/2000 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Fine Weather
Flash	No Flash
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2957824
Just bought a 5diii, probably being retarded here but when I've used 7dii's I've had the image quality set at standard RAW, which is 20mp. That gives me around 1000 shots with a 32gb SD.

On the 5Diii its a 22mp RAW, which gives me 300 on the same card?! Setting it down to the 10mp or 5mp RAW formats still doesnt get above 700 shots on a card.

Is that right, and if so why?

>>2959522
>going into the deadest MILC system ever
WHY?
Just grab a Canon M5 if necessary.
Or a cheap ass Fuji or a Sony A6000. OR ANYTHING else. There are many similar-priced cameras with more lens-support.
Hell, at that pricepoint you could consider getting a MFT camera.
Also, get an adapter for your Film-Camera Lenses so you can use the same lenses. Unless you absolutely need Autofocussing.

>>2959530

Thank you for the advice man.

The fact is that those cameras are really high in price and I don't feel like spending 1500 euros for a digital camera since I don't like them that much.

The J5 could cost me 500 or less if I find a used one in an auction and the price of the new phone is more justified because I can do almost everything on it.

The autofocus is not an issue, my lens of choice is an old Nikon series E 50mm 1.8 and I love this little fucker.

>>2959522
>Going for a travel soon and I want to be able to take good pictures

Neat, where to?

>I'm already going to take a film camera with me

Which camera? This could have a BIG effect on what mirrorless you buy.

>My two ideas were the Nikon J5 or a new smartphone. I know both of those are not perfect solutions but a DSLR it's just too heavy and requires too much space, I want something that can fit in my pocket.

J5 is still a little awkward for the pocket. Plus it has a terribly small sensor, it is little more than a point and shoot.

>The phone sounds like a better investment but the camera is obviously better in terms of quality, whats your opinion about it?

Depending on the phone and where you go, you could get a sim card there and actually use it with data which would be very nice.

A good solid camera would probably be a better choice though

>>2959541

Thank you, haven't been on /p/ for a while and I'm always glad to come back talking to guys like you.

The travel would be in Australia and hopefully even Canada.

I know is not the best but I use a small Nikon EM with the standard old Nikkor series E 50mm 1.8, love the style of the camera itself and it's simplicity.

The phone it's going to be an Iphone, I don't like Android and the choice of the double camera of the 7 plus looks not that bad.

>>2959522
How about a used Sony rx100 (whatever version you like except I)?

>>2959540
Amazon prices
>Nikon J5 with 10-30mm: $495
>Sony A6000 with 16-50mm: $628
>Panasonic GF7 with 12-32mm: $449
>Panasonic GM5 (seriously small, pocketable with a pancake lens) with 12-32mm: $599

Once you buy the J5 you'll have a seriously weak camera with almost no lenses or third company support.

"Back button focusing."

I keep people saying its the new coming of the christ..

But I don't seem to understand what the issue is.

Is it just opening up the possibility to continuous-focusing to recompose a shot after focusing?

Because having the AF on the shutterbutton you can't recompose while using continous focus.

>>2959544
>The travel would be in Australia and hopefully even Canada.

Neat, I have never been to either. Would really like to see Australia since it is so close.

>I know is not the best but I use a small Nikon EM with the standard old Nikkor series E 50mm 1.8, love the style of the camera itself and it's simplicity.

My old man has a Nikkon. N2000 or something like that I wanna say. He has an old screw driven 50mm for it and it is fantastic.

The reason I asked is because many olde lenses can autofocus on a mirrorless body. Screw driven Nikon lenses aren't one of them (well, you can with one particular setup, but it is not ideal and way out of your budget).

>The phone it's going to be an Iphone, I don't like Android and the choice of the double camera of the 7 plus looks not that bad.

It is a solid choice. No idea about sim cards in either of those countries, but just make sure your iPhone is not carrier or region locked or anything.

If you were gonna go with an actual camera, I'd recommend the a6000. It comes with a collapsible pancake soon which is pretty small. Not the greatest lens out there, but it makes for a good everyday carry lens. If you wanna go smaller, there is a pancake 20mm which is pretty solid too.

>>2959547
Not really a gear question but whatever.

In a lot of situations its great. An example:

>sports photography
>can set focus point and not worry about it changing when taking an actual shot

>landscape
>want to compose an image so an object in the foreground is in one corner of the shot
>can focus on that, and then line up the shot and not lose the focus

Obviously there are situations its not desirable, but it is genuinely a world changer for some styles of photography.

Hey guys, quick question, what camera would you recommend for a beginner?

>>2959554
Your butt

>>2959554
As good a MILC or DSLR as you can / want to afford.

[If you could afford a high-end model that'd be easier to operate than a low end one... and there isn't THAT much to learn anyhow.]

>>2959384
>Im looking into 85mm f1.8 but im not convinced it has the best sharpness to it
It's acceptably sharp for most people, and probably sharp enough for someone who can't use an apostrophe.
Sigma's 85 isn't too bad but doesn't beat the Zeiss choices, even compared to the C/Y's imo.

The 135L and the 100/2 are also great choices if you must go Canon.
However, no-one else asked you or mentioned the 70-200 2.8, which is also a solid workhorse depending on what type of portraits you're doing. While a prime maybe better in a specific situation, the versatility and longer FL overall can work just as well in others.

That said, you posted a vague fucking question, you probably don't deserve an answer at all. You've gotten three, how lucky.

>>2959554
Something like sony nex 5 or 7, get it used, buy old cheap manual lenses.

Now you got everything to explore photography and your needs with, cheaply.

>>2959554
>what camera would you recommend for a beginner
Leica M (Typ 240).

>>2959557
Thanks

>>2959524
bump

>>2959243
The A6500 and A7[S/R] II should be quite a lot better. Get one of these.

If it's a question of your budget, maybe get a Panasonic instead...?

>>2959561
Yep.

But if you instead have a budget and interest in some specific kind of photography, maybe we can give suggestions.

File: gorillapod-slr-zoom-legs-only.jpg (54KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 750x750px

Thoughts on these things?
Have always seen them but never bought one. Looks like a good idea though.

Any reason not to grab one?

>>2959554
How much money have you got? Point and shoot or DSLR or what?
Easy option would be a $400 DSLR body and grab some cheap lenses, then get a feel for what you need next.

>>2959574
I had one until it got chewed up by my dog.

I had no use for it for my camera, but it was quite useful for my flash.
Attaching it to a tree or whatever works good.

>>2959574
Never found them useful. They don't really do anything well enough for me to bother.

I'll either bring an actual travel tripod / monopod, or just lean against something if I even need to bother (stabilization isn't bad these days, eh).

Even for sports cameras, a strap with a velcro is more versatile and more rigid if you don't have a proper mount for whatever you're doing right now.

>>2959577
I'm real just travelling and shooting so I was thinking more for sitting on uneven ground or attaching to railing.
Maybe it's just a fancy looking solution to a simple problem. I guess 99% of the time an everyday tripod would do the job.

>>2959574
https://www.manfrotto.us/manfrotto-mp3-bk-pocket-support-large-black

Get this instead. Nice and compact and always attached.

>>2959580
> I'm real just travelling and shooting so I was thinking more for sitting on uneven ground or attaching to railing.
I learned that virtually anything you could attach this thing to, you could just as well lean the camera against and shoot okay.

An everyday tripod handles *more* situations well where you can't use that thing, and is more comfortable for prolonged shooting too (although obviously more effort to carry around).

By the way, like the other anon, I'm actually using small mini tripod devices as a mount for portable strobes, but it's the kind with rigid legs rather than segmented ones.

>>2959574
Get an uberpod. It has a velcrostraß and lasts for more than 20 years

>>2959586
Can't really see anything on it.

>>2959582
I have something very similar. And I use it when I take shots of stuff on my desk or when there's a bench or table nearby.

>>2959577
>a strap with a velcro is more versatile and more rigid
What are you talking about here? Do you have kind of image or tutorial to explain how you use velcro over a tripod? I've never seen it done.


I saw someone using the Gorillapod at the beach today which is what made me think about getting one. The sun was setting and I wanted to try doing a long exposure and I had a railing at the top of the beach or lots of rocks down lower. By the time I had the camera balanced on the railing at the right angle the sky was way darker than I'd hoped (still a nice purple though).
The bloke with the gorilla was certainly in a better situation that I and I was about to come home and order one but I thought maybe there was a better option for that situation.
I could have set up a tripod behind the railing I used but that means carrying a tripod when I travel.
On the other hand, I saw a video of someone using the Gorilla and while they didn't mention it, the camera seemed to visibly shake when he took the shot (but with a 2 second timer, that'd presumably be un-noticeable.

>>2959547
It's for srs bsnss pros, not casual snapshitters. Also, the ability to go between what is effectively AF-S and AF-C on a single button, no menus or switches to fuss around with. Tap once for AF-S, hold for AF-C, simple as that.

It's not as effective for mirrorless users, since all mirrorless cameras currently use CDAF as a final check step in the AF algorithm, making AF-C slow and indecisive. I find it's easier to keep AF-S linked to shutter button, mash it all the way down, and hope the shutter lag's short enough to not matter.

>>2959596
>What are you talking about here? Do you have kind of image or tutorial to explain how you use velcro over a tripod? I've never seen it done.
Even for sports cameras (GoPro, Yicam, SjCam, ...) I'd rather use a mount with a velcro strap than the gorilla pod.

I don't use velcro over a tripod.

> I could have set up a tripod behind the railing I used but that means carrying a tripod when I travel.
Yep? But at least it is useful in quite a lot of situations, which I simply did not find to be the case with a Gorillapod.

Any recommendations for an astrophotography, but also scenery? Is that even possible? I have a $600 budget. Maybe a hundred or two in either direction. New to this hobby.

>>2959605
> mirrorless [...] AF-C slow and indecisive
It's time for this again, apparently:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G98HfUIY9D8

There are very few cameras that can actually beat this by any margin.

And in corners and like half the frame, "indecisive" AF would be an improvement over downright absent AF for most of the remaining DSLR that can actually compete with that.

File: IMG_20161011_012749223.jpg (3MB, 2340x4160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2340x4160px

>>2959596
This is how I often use the Ultrapod. I STRAP it to my monopod and attach some light to it. Now imagine doing that with a railing or a lamppost or something like that

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Motorola
Camera Model	Moto G (4)
Camera Software	athene-user 6.0.1 MPJ24.139-63 64 release-keys
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:11 01:27:50
Exposure Time	1/17 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	1250
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	Unknown
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Average
Flash	Flash, Auto
Focal Length	3.64 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2340
Image Height	4160
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft
Geodetic Survey Data	WGS-84

>>2959614
The 12mm Samyang f/2 is a good lens for that.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/samyang_12mm_f2/pool/

Ya, I think you mostly want a good wide-angle lens on a decent enough body. Probably on a tripod.

>>2959624
So any body? Like a K-S2?

>>2959626
Any reasonably recent body that can take one of the best suited wide-angle lenses. Of which I'd personally particularly recommend the 12mm Samyang f/2. (Exists for Canon M, Fujifilm X, Samsung NX, Sony E, MFT).

If you think a certain Pentax wide-angle lens fits you better (or you are going to adapt it TO Pentax), then it's perhaps the K-2 that you might want as a body...?

The point would be I'd go backwards from the nicest, sharpest wide/ultrawide lenses up to maybe $300-400 and see what body you could get to stick them on, not the other way around.

>>2959630
I get what you're saying. It looks like my question showed my inexperience but I'm glad I asked it. So any relatively newish DSLR will take the telephotography pictures, but the lens is where I need to focus my attention.

>>2959630
and thank you for your advice

>>2957845
> any relatively newish DSLR will take the telephotography pictures
I'm not saying all of them will be equally good for this, but it's still more important to have a good wide angle lens than what MILC/DSLR you use exactly.

Also, telephotography would be the narrow field of view "zoomed in" look of lenses with a long focal length (anything up to telescopes). I was suggesting a sharp wide angle lens for very wide landscape / starry sky views.

>>2959635
No problem.

>>2959632
The only reason to specifically go for Pentax with that lens is the astrotracer function, but you already said you would go after starscape/astro and landscape. I tried it and it was okay but you have to take at least two separate images, one for the clear sky with no starstreaks and one exposed for the landscape/foreground. The astrotracer makes stars sharp but blurs the foreground as the sensor is moved so you need the clean foreground shot to do a composite photo.
Another option would be the K-70 specifically for landscape with the pixel shift function, if your budget allows.

I'm considering getting an Olympus PEN-F to replace my X100T so I Can have a bit more versatility in focal lengths.
Are there any glaring flaws in the PEN F? Is the OM-D EM5 a better deal? I do value tothe compactness.
Is micro four thirds okay for street photography and general walkaround cameras?

>>2959805
Why would you pay more for a camera with less utility than the EM5II? The Pen-F is, at best, an expensive side grade to the EM5II.

>>2959815
To be honest, it's mainly the size an the looks. Is there anything glaring because I am so much of a fag I will buy a camera based on looks...
How are the Olympus 17mm and 25mm primes?

What's the next step up from a T3i kit lens? I've had my fun practicing on it, but I'm ready to take more macro shots

>>2959828
Get a fast 35mm or close to it prime.
A cheap Sigma 30 EX non-Art will do.

>>2959831
Thanks my man!

>>2959826
Pen-f isn't weather sealed and it has a viewfinder in a weird position if you shoot with your left eye. There's also the price.

I wanna get the EM5II at some point, but the pen-f is tempting.

I have the 17mm f2.8 pancake, it's good. Most m43 lens are.

File: Rollei_35_S.jpg (157KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1024x768px

Anybody used a Rollei 35? It looks like a neat little compact, and there's a whole bunch for between $100 and $200. I think I can deal with it being scale focus and kind of clunky in exchange for it being jacket pocket sized.

I'm not particularly concerned about whether it's made in Germany or Singapore and it seems like the difference between the Tessar and Sonnar versions is pretty small. Anything I should watch out for other than the usual old camera stuff like fungus and rotten seals and inaccurate slow shutter speeds? It uses a mercury battery but just for the meter, so I'm probably not even going to bother using a battery.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX Corporation
Camera Model	PENTAX Optio S40
Camera Software	Optio S40 Ver 1.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	88 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2006:06:29 18:42:24
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/4.4
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	14.60 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1024
Image Height	768
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Macro