/gear/ - Gear Thread

>>2962532
PURE SEX

File: United_States_Navy_SEALs_599.jpg (3MB, 1983x2800px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1983x2800px

>Implying the 645 is operator tested

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh
Photographer	Ted Banks; United States Naval Special Warfare ( SEAL )
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1983
Image Height	2800
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	400 dpi
Image Created	2012:03:01 07:19:06
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1983
Image Height	2800

>>2962532

>full camo and a ghili suit
>leaves the shiney brand label exposed

So terrible.

>>2962601
B-but why would a SEAL need a 50mm (or a macro) lens, while his buddy uses binoculars?

Too bad you can't go from binocular to 35mm with an attachment... can you?

>>2962532
OP pic made me lol. What's a goofy giant camera like that trying to do actin' all sneaky, like no one notices it and the CLACK CLACK the shutter makes.

>>2962607

It would be for scouting purposes. Take pictures of emplacements, personnel, defenses, anything else of note. They'll have a semi-underground base of operations with satellite computers where they'd upload the computers to command and they'd create 3D layouts of the area for them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHYidejT3KY

Remember Gearfags

File: IMG_8996.jpg (1MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x2448px

Source of all my pride.

>>2962627
>didn't use his 645z to shoot his owner's card.

>>2962638
shutter repair is expensive..... every shot counts

>>2962648
>Implying anyone on /p/ has outshot their shutter rating
>Implying ANY PHOTOGRAPHER has worn out their dslr shutter rating
LOL
O
L

>>2962650
Are you mentally retarded?

Actually no need to answer that, the answer is a clear fucking yes.

File: DSC05256.jpg (2MB, 1500x1019px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1019px

>>2962532
Fuck off with this pentax """"camera"""" meme shit you post in the fucking OP

I sweart to fucking god every single pentax user is the same kind of autistic fucking moron who's too fucking stupid to use a better brand like Canon

you wannabe fucking shit """Pro""" """photographers""" need to fuck off back to you're moms basement because this shit is just fucking annoying as hell

literally every camera made by Pentax is bested by at least five canons, and Pentax has never, and will never make any good lenses worth using, They're all shit, and you need to fuck off with this autistic meme camera shilling and buy a Canon you fucking moron

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	NEX-5R
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.18
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:31 01:42:16
Exposure Time	1/2500 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Brightness	3.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1019
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2962651
I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, I'm just stating the fact that nobody (even you snapshitters on /p/) has ever outshot their shutter actuation rating before buying a new toy. Prove me wrong.

>>2962650
>>Implying ANY PHOTOGRAPHER has worn out their dslr shutter rating
I bet sports photographers do.

>>2962653
idc i'm doing what makes me happy :D

>>2962653
>(even you snapshitters on /p/)
Nice projection kek

>I'm just stating the fact that nobody has ever outshot their shutter actuation rating before buying a new toy
>I haven't, therefore NOBODY IN THE WORLD has
Believe it or not, but not everyone is a gearfag like yourself.

>Prove me wrong.
How about you just use some common fucking sense? Oh wait, I apologise, I forgot common sense is a difficult thing to process for the mentally ill, so here you go: http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/

>>2962662
I guess I am projecting, but let me break it down for your retarded ass. I own multiple bodies, but each year I average about 1 thousand shots on each, give or take 1-2 hundred given the body and what I had to do that year. Now most modern digital cameras are graded with a shutter actuation count between 50K and 200K, so even if you are going full retard holding down the shutter full auto it will still take YEARS to hit your minimum graded actuation count. So unless it takes you 20 years before you upgrade, you will probably not be worried about how many photos you take and how that will affect the shutter, unless you are a retard on /p/ pretending to be someone worth a shit.

Hello /p/ this is /v/
I want to buy myself a camera buy they are crazy expensive so Ive been looking at used. Is 11.000 shutter count a lot?

>>2962668
I've taken 10k shots a year in the past. My D50 hit 40k before I sold it. It's not impossible. Granted I'm not trigger happy these years.

>>2962672
Not really, a lot of shutters are rated for 150k or more.

>>2962668
I think you believe I'm the tripfag you replied to >>2962648, I'm not. I just found your statement ignorant and completely wrong, so I figured I'd let you know how wrong you were.

>>2962672
>Is 11.000 shutter count a lot?
Nah mate

>>2962618
Right, but surely putting a telephoto in a plastic bag would be better than attempting to use a 50mm for surveillance of certain things?

Is sigma 17-50 2.8 good for landscapes and portraits on my d7100?

>>2962627
>Made in the Philippines

lol

>>2962672
That's like new.

>>2962688
Sigma vr lenses aren't entirely compatible with the d7100

You'll have a much easier time with the tamron equivalent

>>2962687

I think it would depend on functionality. The picture was taken in 1998 and depending on what missions they were doing and how long they would spend in the water a plastic bag might not have been enough, or if they had to back out and didn't have time to put things away it would be easier to have the waterproof lenses for the camera. Since the photo was in 1998 the camera is likely the 92-96 model with lenses made for it only in the sizes of 28mm, 50mm macro, 13mm fisheye and 20-35mm zoom. They had previous models but the largest lens there was only at 80mm.

Unconfirmed is that it takes GPS coords and capable of uploading them to command since it was government contracted but there isn't much on that aside from denials.

It's entirely possible that this is the best they had for what they were doing since it's easier to maneuver with under performing waterproof gear than maybe killing a lens more fit for the job but also worth a couple thousand and have the shit storm go up the chain.

Anyone with the sony 18-105/4 G PZ OSS?

Can't seem to find any other worthy opponent.

>>2962732

It is pretty sharp for a zoom, and overall a very nice lens.

It is rather large though, and has some major (though easily correctable) distortion. Power zoom is also a downside to some, but it never bothered me.

Biggest complaint would be that it is mot FE. An FE lens that size, range, and IQ would rock.

>>2962745
How is power zoom a downside? You can still zoom with the ring, no?
I do video as well so it will be a benefit for me.

But yes, I plan on upgrading to a sony fullframe in the future and it's a shame it isnt FE.

>>2962749

Some claim power zoom hurts battery life.

Plus it resets the zoom level when you put it in sleep mode.

To be hones5, all I want for FE is a Secret Handshake equivalent. It is flatout one of the best a-mount walkaround lenses. Sure, I can use the SH itself and it works fine, but the adaptwr makes it quite bulky.

Best landscape lens for a 7d?

>>2962754
Oh right, yeah I can see that issue.

Yeah the 20-130~ range is perfect. I am oogling the samyang 12/2 as well which is why I'd prefer something else to the 18-105.

How come I don't see more of the mitakon 35/0.95?

Youtube and flickr hardly has anything with it.

>>2962766
well according to the lenstip review it's pretty awful wide open. It gets somewhat better if you stop it down, but if you're going to stop it down you might as well have not bought a big expensive f/0.95 lens in the first place. I'm guessing that's why it might not be that popular.

>>2962705
>50mm macro
>government contracted
>military grade
For what? taking closeups of shrapnel?

>>2962787
It's soft wide open, yes, but it's still pretty impressive for the price.

Even has a smooth aperture ring.

Thought this lens would be far more used for video.

>>2962749
it is way clunky and less responsive compared to a regular twist-to-zoom lens.

I was looking at geting an RX10 for a travel camera some time ago, but the über-sluggish power zoom totally ruined the ergonomics of that thing for me personally.

>>2962789
Secret microfilms in every villain base.

>>2962622
So 8x10 inches is or whatever physical size is *way* more significant than the size difference between APS-C and FF, eh...?

Very clever. If you agree with that guy, please show me the related machinery to quickly process these 8x10 shots into a ~full resolution digital image. Or the 8x10 digital sensor with about equal pixel density to current APS-C and FF cameras.

Then we can talk about how "insignificant" the difference between APS-C and FF might be in comparison because these other formats exist.

>>2962816
But it's a side option for when you need it for video, apart from price, how is it a downside if you will make a use of it?

>>2962789
Just because its a macro lens doesn't mean it stops working as a normal 50mm, just not necessarily as good as a normal one.

>want to get into photography but have no camera
>cant buy a camera or I will be a gearfag
Life is suffering
>

>>2962700
>Sigma vr lenses aren't entirely compatible with the d7100
Defoq

Sauce?

>>2962607
>>2962705
>>2962687

Seriously?

You guys are debating this? It is obviously a photo op. They chose what looked good, not necessarily what is most useful.

>>2962756
Depends on the scene. Either an UWA prime, a wide to normal/short tele zoom or a 70-200, or all of them.

Just got back from Canada's Remembrance Day ceremony.

2x more Sony cameras than Nikon
1-1 ratio between Nikon and Fuji
No Canon camera to be seen.

Where were you when the market changed?

>>2962934
>Where were you when the market changed?
Taking an afternoon hike in the woods with my Pentax not caring about what kind of camera others use.

>>2962934
>sony
>nikon
>fuji
Casuals.

File: dgw.jpg (60KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 500x500px

Cutest DSLR :3?

File: pentaxq.jpg (45KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 540x540px

>>2962982
This one I guess.
Best girl, too

File: K-50_120color-900-90.jpg (150KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 900x506px

>>2962984
>D S L R

File: tabs_panel_forground1.png (908KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 1000x750px

Just recieved my brand new PEN F and it's glorious. Handles just like my Minolta X-300 and feels more premium than my Leica M8.
So far, so good however the menus are ginormous!

Want to sell the following, what's a good price to sell them at for craigslist?

- Canon 6D (like-new condition)
- Canon 50mm f1.4 prime (like-new0
- Battery grip (knockoff but great) (good condition)
- Lens hood (great condition)
- Canon camera bag with a few goodies (lens brush, 3 batteries, 2 battery chargers, cables).

Are you lads into teleconverters? I'm deciding between a 70-200 VR2 + TC20EIII or 80-400 AFS. The former is the more flexible combo, the latter sharper at 400 and simpler in packaging but only in good enough light. I foresee using both focal length ranges.

>>2963005
Why the fuck wouldn't you sell the hood with the lens?

>>2962991
Oh, sorry.

>>2963009
Because I am a dumbass

>>2962995
Hilarious prank they played on you by sending you the wrong Pen F bro. At least you have a picture to document it and win your eBay dispute.

Sonyfags, what are your lens setups? The fact that you can adapt pretty much anything makes it so difficult to pick from all these lenses...

Pretty noob at photo here, just got a D7000 on the cheap.

Looking for a good all-round lense, nothing too wide, nothing too tele.

Been looking at the NIkkor AFS 16-85/3,5-5,6 DX VR.

Any better alternatives? Sigma? Thoughts appreciated.

>>2963047
Get a 24-70. They're the most versatile zoom range, they're pretty sharp, and you can always count on selling them later.

Getting a DSLR with a budget of around 600-800. Pentax K-3 or used Nikon D700? K-3 sounds good because good 35mm equiv for cheap (21 3.2), small/good build, but not as good AF. D700 is huge and doesn't have a good/cheap 35mm, but better lens choice and FF/good AF. Thoughts?

>>2963050
A6000

>>2963052
not interested in anything without a mirror

>>2963050
Single focus AF is just as good as any other, even on screwdrive AF lenses. It is the tracking continuous AF that acts up in certain situations.
From those two I have a difficulty choosing, both are excellent.
Bear in mind, lenses for FF are always more expensive and the D700 is an old model. Also big and the shutter is a thunderclack.
The K-3 is smaller, lighter, excellent lenses for cheap (35/2.4, 50/1.8, the DA Limited line etc...) and soft shutter sound.

>>2963055
>>2963050
On the tracking AF, the problematic is mostly on longer lenses with slower focusing speed (screwdrive) but it can lose tracking and latch on to something else, mostly background. It is the problem of professional sports photographers and extreme in-flight bird shooters.
Mine did a pretty decent job at tracking planes, model planes both faster and slower and cars on the track. I have to mention I always avoided cases where the subject was coming towards straight or leaving, always picked a position with an angle.
Unless you do pro sports photography, both will be good choice.

>>2963049
Hella expensive tho. Twice the price of the 16-85, 4 times the price if I buy used.

Thanks for the reply anyway :)

>>2963054
Whatever you do, don't buy the 16-85 VR, though. It is not sharp and totally a rip off at $700. You're better off with the 18-105 VR, which is sharper and much cheaper.

But if you were going to spend $700, you might as well buy Sigma's 24-70/2.8 for $750.

>>2963068
Whoops, meant to reply to >>2963064

>>2963064
Why not go for the Tamron 24-70/2.8?

>>2961585
>>2961586
>>2961590
I was just about to ask about IR. Does anyone know if black plastic bags become transparent in the IR range dslrs can do or do I need a specialized camera?

>>2963082
Just get a cheap ass filter from ebay. It's just a few bucks!

File: _538402_i0.jpg (70KB, 800x602px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x602px

Best entry level mirrorless or?

>>2963091

a6000 is best entry level.

You can get it for as low as $450, and nothing below $1000 comes anywhere near its performance.

>>2963111
This, however be prepared to deal with a few hidden costs.

If you buy a kit with a lens, it doesn't come with a body cap. The charger plugs into the camera, so if you get an extra battery you will need to buy a charger. The kit lens sucks so you will soon want better glass (Nikon's 18-55s are pretty sharp so you can actually use them...). The strap is ridiculously uncomfortable.

Don't get me wrong, even after all of these downsides, it's still the best you can get, but these are often unspoken of in lieu of AF and sensor performance.

File: highres-Leica-D-LUX-Typ109-5_1437405074.jpg (2MB, 3734x2071px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3734x2071px

I want a Leica camera, but I don't want to spend thousands of dollars.

Should I get an old M3 on eBay, or should I buy a re-branded Panasonic?

I want a Leica, /p/.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-M5MarkII
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	Picasa
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3734
Image Height	2071
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2015:07:20 16:06:37
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/16.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3734
Image Height	2071
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Unique Image ID	5f19a652f286c0885f9384a669eaf1ff

ok

>>2963153
M3's can sometimes be a bit more pricy than the other film Leicas. i'd probably opt for an M6/M7.

>>2963068
>It is not sharp
Citation needed. Most people are happy with their copies. Not to mention the reviews. 16 on the wide end is nice.
> totally a rip off at $700.
True. Even used, I wouldn't buy it for anything more than $450.

>>2963047
17-55/2.8s keep going down in price.

>>2963050
K-3's modern, the D700's a legend. Only choice is a 35/2D, or maybe the Tamron 35 VC.

File: DSC_0432.jpg (442KB, 1125x1500px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 1125x1500px

>>2963161
A pristine M3 is probably worth more than a pristine M6 just because the M3 is older. But the M3 was also the most manufactured Leica, if I'm not mistaken, and slightly beaten up but totally functional ones are probably one of the cheapest Leica options besides special snowflake stuff like the CL or Bessas.

I bought this M3 for like $550 from KEH plus the lens for like $500, it had a couple of dents and scratches but it worked perfectly. The viewfinder was clean and crisp and the shutter was accurate, no problems. Then I used it for a year or so, got tired of rangefinders, and sold it back on ebay for almost exactly the same prices. Between fees and shipping charges and stuff the camera probably ended up costing me less than $100 which is easily less than what my DSLR depreciates in a year.

PS Leicas aren't that great. They're great cameras and all but there's a reason they became a toy for rich people once SLRs came out. Don't be a retard and get a rebranded Panasonic, that's stupid. At least an M3 is a legend and is the camera that actually got Leica its reputation.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	D6503
Camera Software	17.1.2.A.0.314_9_f300
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:12:18 00:23:42
Exposure Time	1/32 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	160
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.90 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1125
Image Height	1500
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2963177
I just want something that inspires me a little. I enjoy using my DSLR, but it doesn't really encourage everyday shooting. I want something that feels stylish *and* functional.

The internet has told me Leicas are the best for that

>>2963178
>The internet has told me Leicas are the best for that
The internet has lied to you. Buyers remorse is a terrible thing.

>>2963178
I mean if that's really what you want, it's a beautiful camera for sure. It's a solid beautifully crafted brass brick, even the lens is surprisingly heavy for its tiny size. It was definitely fun to just fiddle with the camera.

Focusing with a rangefinder is kind of a pain in the ass though so you'll probably just want to zone focus and guesstimate when you can, and it's a pretty clunky camera overall. Loading it is incredibly tedious. And if this is your first film camera then why not get a cheap SLR or something first to see if you even like film? Shooting and processing film is a real pain in the ass, if it's not something you enjoy then you're going to dread having to develop and scan or print.

>>2963179
You're so right about that

>>2963180
Thanks so much for an informed response

>>2963180
>Focusing with a rangefinder is kind of a pain in the ass though so you'll probably just want to zone focus and guesstimate when you can, and it's a pretty clunky camera overall. Loading it is incredibly tedious
No, you just suck at it. Practice more and it will become natural.

File: ps_3373.jpg (402KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1000x750px

Hi guys,

I've had a Canon EOS 30D for the last few years, but I had to give it back to the one who lent it to me.
Will I be okay, if I get myself a 500D or will I miss anything?

Mostly shooting stills and long exposure, so I might buy it with a bundled lens, I guess.
Aiming for roughly 300 Bucks, since my budget is kinda tight. Alternative recommendations are welcome.

(Picture is not from a 30D, but my old Powershot. This kind of photography is what I do mostly)

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon DIGITAL IXUS 80 IS
Camera Software	digiKam-4.14.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Lens Size	6.20 - 18.60 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.01
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2015:08:22 20:12:52
Exposure Time	15 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	-2 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	6.20 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Center-Weighted
ISO Speed Rating	Auto
Sharpness	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	Single
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Superfine
Self-Timer Length	1639 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
Subject Distance	2.540 m
White Balance	Cloudy
Exposure Compensation	1
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Image Number	100-3373

File: IMG_0038.jpg (384KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 1000x666px

>>2963298
The most challenging shot I took (by my standards) was getting this prick into focus, just so you know what kind of amateur I am.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 30D
Camera Software	RawTherapee
Lens Size	17.00 - 85.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware 1.0.5
Owner Name	unknown
Serial Number	1830903786
Lens Name	EF-S17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1000
Image Height	666
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2015:07:26 14:42:55
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	85.00 mm
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	AI Servo
Drive Mode	Unknown
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Unknown
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	4
Sensor ISO Speed	212
Camera Actuations	-1878917024
Color Matrix	129

>>2963298
I don't like either camera, but if you could deal with a 30D I figure you might certainly be fine with a 500D.

>>2963305
I don't think that's your fault. With a decent camera you just set to point/small area AF, aim at it, and you got the sucker in focus in under a second.

Or the branch right next to it if you aimed not THAT well for some reason, but that probably really won't matter in this case.

File: image390.jpg (84KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1000x667px

>>2963382
Thanks! I'm open for suggestions on other models, would you recommend something else for around 300 bucks?
I was choosing Canon mostly because I like the CHDK/Magic Lantern firmware extensions/modifications.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 30D
Lens Size	17.00 - 85.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware 1.0.5
Owner Name	unknown
Serial Number	1830903786
Lens Name	EF-S17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:05:23 11:39:58
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	56.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Program
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	AI Servo
Drive Mode	Unknown
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Normal
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	4
Sensor ISO Speed	212
Camera Actuations	-1877475232
Color Matrix	129

>>2963404
Pentax K-50 or K-S2 or Nikon D7000 if you don't care about video

File: 61Jbg6Av4mL._SL1000_.jpg (66KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1000x1000px

Someone stop me
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/FOTGA-Electronic-AF-Auto-Focus-Lens-Adapter-for-Canon-EOS-EF-EF-S-to-Sony-E/32323097230.html?spm=2114.30010308.3.19.3WdSl0&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_2_10091_10090_10088_10089,searchweb201603_1&btsid=fd72393c-91ce-4968-88bd-f2febef6b310

Is the AF really that painfully slow when compared to, say, the new Sony 50mm 1.8?

>>2963500
> Is the AF really that painfully slow when compared to, say, the new Sony 50mm 1.8?
Try it and tell us, you might be the first here to have both of these...

>>2963500
Can't remember the name of the other chink copy, but it was quite terrible, missing focus, trying to find it 95% of the shots.

The commlite one is much better, quite comparable to metabones.

>>2962652
>what is the pentax 67

nigger please.

>>2963500

Only the MC-11 and Metabones IV support pdaf. So it will be less than ideal.

I have a commlite one which is supposed to be a little better. It works fast outside on a sunny day, sluggish as a Fuji inside, and absolutely unusable in low light situations.

Hi guys, i was thinking about getting a film camera for shooting at night on Friends party/street with em as i'm kinda scared to bring my a6000. I would like to go for a cheap one, to have it with me everytime and treat it kinda like a "beater".
The ae1 program pleased me, can grab it at a thrift shop for 50 Bucks with a 28mm lense , would it be a good alternative ?
+ For which film should i got too shoot low light

>>2963632
And so it begins. Come to /fgt/, we'll tell you to get developing & scanning gear as well and what chemicals to use to push Tri-X to ISO 3200 like a fucking hipster. Don't worry, the grain is lovely.

>>2963634
Allright :)

>>2963500
don't do it. but it's only $35.

A Friend of Mine wants to get into Photography. I am only in this for Video so I only know about video-focussed MILCs
He wants to do artistic Photography as a hobby. One of his stated goals was "printing for Posters and such"
I took a wild guess and recommended going for second Hand ASP-C since they have the price/value ratio he needs
Also told him the basics of investing and setting up a Budget.
Excluding Brand faggotry, what are the options? I know the Canon 600/700 are probably enough for him. Don't know the lineup of Nikon Pentax and Fuji

>>2963867
He will need resolution and this means good and often expensive lenses. Did he state what kind of photography (portrait, landscape, architecture, etc.) would be the focus?
Best value is probably a second hand K-3 or a Nikon D3200 (and later models) if the budget is tight.

Do you have more information on what he wants?

He knows ABSOLUTELY 0% about Photography. Had to explain what the lenses actually do (he thought they were Just for zooming)
I don't think he wants ultrasharp HQ Images printed on 5x5 feet Posters for exhibitions. Just a hobby that he can put on the wall.
I also told him that lenses and camera should take up roughly the same amount in the budget.

>>2962545
Weird, can't tell where's the cut to cgi. Hair, head and hands are rendered?

>>2963873
>second hand K-3 or a Nikon D3200
These cameras are miles apart lol, both in price and user level. The K-50 would be far more ideal for anons mate

>>2963873
>He needs Resolution
>Recommends a 14MP camera
>Confused_nigger.jpeg

>>2963877
Then any decent second hand DSLR will do.
D3200 is relatively cheap and there are enough second hand lenses that will do the job.
The Pentax K-S1 could be easy enough for him as well. The kit lenses are not bad.
A good book on top would help. Ansel Adams' "The camera" comes to my mind or any beginner-oriented book by Andreas Feininger.

>>2963882
Both cameras have 24Mp sensors.

Learn to reas numbers.

>>2963881
K-3 and D3200 describe both ends of the price range. The K-50 has lower resolution if this could be important...

>>2963867
Sony A6000 might be one of the best options.

Fairly inexpensive and not weak in any particular way (especially not for its price).

And it has lots of good primes, a handful of which are inexpensive, too.

Any users of the sigma 30/1.4 ?

It's so damn cheap for what it is.

>>2963632
>'m kinda scared to bring my a6000
Obviously you should bring your a6000 instead of being scared. Or better yet a A7S II.

'cmon, it's only a few hundred bucks at risk... you're risking a far bigger medical bill by just leaving the house for that party.

Plus shooting, developing, scanning film will cost you more really quickly. Never mind more of your time.

>>2963914
There are two of these, though I guess both are good.

I'm likely getting myself the DC DN contemporary soon.

>>2963917
Woops, forgot to mention that, it's the dc dn contemporary yes.

What does the contemporary part of it mean though..?

>>2963919
Sigma wanted brand lines (Art, Sports, Contemporary) for marketing reasons.

But they really don't make that much sense [go check on Sigma's own websites around the world; see if you can understand anything from their description... heh].

I personally would explain them like this:
"Art" - Focus on optical quality. Rather heavy lenses, but intended to be and mostly succeeding in being quite excellent.

"Contemporary" - Some compromises toward weight/size. Less glass elements.

"Sports" - "Art", but in the telephoto range. Possibly because sport / wildlife / journalistic photographers don't want to be "artists"?

>>2963924
Oh right..

I figured it was some fancy naming for them refurbishing lenses.

>>2963927
Nah. Just somewhat confusing branding.

Well, at least all the lenses from this "global vision" age -since they started using the art/sports/contemporary labels- are pretty much all quite good for their price.

>>2963632
I got a nex-c3 for $30 with no battery or lens, which was fine as it uses the same battery and lenses as all other sony mirrorless.

Much better option for a beater.

>>2963938

I use a red NEX-3 with the 16mm for snapshits.

Wonderful little camera, even if it is getting a little long in the tooth.

>>2963917
Out of luck I found a video showing the absolutely terrible manual focus of the lens.

It's all electronic, you can turn the ring completely around without the focus changing more than 2cm.

That's a dealbreaker for me. Damn shame.

>>2963958
> It's all electronic
As it is for most E-mount AF lenses? Usually no problem.

> you can turn the ring completely around without the focus changing more than 2cm
This sounds like a defect. Certainly the lens does not have the most precise MF controls around, but it shouldn't slip like that.

>>2963967
It's been reported by several users, but it seems to be a quite common defect. So it's best to buy it from a store from which you can return to get a proper one. I planned on getting on used..

>>2963973
> seems to be a quite common defect
Maybe. Hard to tell with the internet. But I guess it won't hurt to act as if it was one.

File: 25444_D700_front.png (196KB, 700x595px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 700x595px

Any chance Nikon does the same thing they did back in 2008 and put the D5 sensor in a smaller body?

>>2962653
My 1000D is rated for about 50,000 shutter actuations.
Which is kinda hard to reach with 1.5 fps burst rate.

>>2963991
Certainly possible... but who knows if they're actually going to do it?


If you want a company that *is* doing such things, get a Sony.

File: tmp_14284-IMG_20161113_1231101099628965.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

my ever growing lens collection and the camera i mount them to. just started so i dont have much to say about any of their IQ

[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	128
F-Number	f/2.4

>>2963913
I Made Bad experiences with Sony, especially in the ergonomic area

>want to check some specs on cnet.com
>chrome gives me a privacy error
>NET::ERR_CERTIFICATE_TRANSPARENCY_REQUIRED

What?
Does anyone know about this?

>>2962532
so I was thinking about getting a nikon d3300 is this a good starter dslr camera? also is it okay to buy refirbished?

>>2964034
Yes and yes, although there are better value options for a starter camera

How much of a bad idea is it to mount medium format lenses on an apsc sensor?

>>2964058
You'd get long focal length lenses that are very large 4u. That's about it.

>>2964067
You mean that there's some kind of zoom factor involved?

Or just that medium format lenses have to have long focal length due to the mf size?

Since the a6300 has a write speed around 35mb/s, do I really need cards with U3 speed and all that jazz?

>>2964080
No, you just want one with a write speed of around 35MB/s.

You can use a microSD in a SD adapter with that speed, for all the camera cares.

>>2964080
>35 MB/s
Holy fucking kek that's slow. Maybe Sony should invest some money in a faster data offloading process instead of just throwing money at onboard memory for buffer. IR says it takes 36 seconds to clear 44 JPEGs and 15 seconds to clear 24 RAWs.

Does the a6300 still lock up the entire camera while writing to buffer? God-camera my ass.

File: top fucking kek.jpg (83KB, 701x467px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 701x467px

>>2964108
>writing to card*

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>2964108
>Does the a6300 still lock up the entire camera while writing to buffer?
I'm pretty sure most cameras do that.

>>2964101
>>2964108
I saw some guy doing tests, getting a very consistent read of around 32-35mb/s. But of course sony themselves recommend the 100mb/s write cards.

>>2964010
CNet, or rather CNet's CA, isn't on top of their game.

Brief background, if you're not familiar: Ever since Ed Snowden, there's been a big push to make sure more web traffic is encrypted so that three-letter agencies will have a hard(er) time snooping on it. If you've ever seen a website that starts with https:// instead of http://, that's what it is, it means the connection is encrypted. The way the sausage gets made is pretty fiendishly complicated, but it starts with an organization going to a company called a Certificate Authority (CA), verifying that they are who they say they are and control the website in question, and the CA issuing them a cryptographic certificate. Browsers, when establishing an encrypted connection, use that certificate to prove that the server they're talking to really is the one it's supposed to be, and not some other machine controlled by Russian hackers or the NSA.

Recently there's been some scandals in the IT security world. CAs were caught issuing certificates to people that shouldn't have had them. Browsers could just stop accepting certificates from those CAs, but that's rather difficult, since a lot of CAs are rather "too big to fail" - users would complain that a lot of websites stopped working. So now we have a certificate transparency initiative. Basically it means CAs have to start providing an unforgeable cryptographic record of every certificate they issue, which allows anyone to verify what certificates have been issued, which are valid, etc. Cnet's CA is apparently not doing this, and Google is apparently moving ahead with enforcing this requirement in a new version of Chrome. (Google, Mozilla, etc usually declare several months ahead of time when they're going to start failing connections if you don't get with the program, and then follow through if you don't have your act together)

tldr: It's to pressure websites into adopting better security practices, by giving surfers an error message if they don't.

>>2964070
Medium format essentially has a crop factor of less than one, compared to the 35mm format. Your APS-C camera has a 1.5x crop. 6x7 medium format has about a 0.5x crop - a 100mm lens on 6x7 has the same ("normal") field-of-view that a 50mm lens has on full frame, which is the same as a 30mm lens has on APS-C.

So it's the same crop factor you're already familiar with, just in reverse. But that means the second statement is correct, medium format lenses are almost all going to have focal lengths in the telephoto range on a crop-sensor camera. It'd be pretty silly to buy medium-format glass just to adapt it to a DSLR. But if you already have the MF glass for whatever reason, yes, you can get adapters to put many MF lenses on common SLR and mirrorless mounts.

I'm looking for a not so expensive camera for underwater photography

Gonna go diving for the first time in 2 months and I would like to take some shots underwater. I was thinking of getting a casing at first, but the only digital camera I have is a Ricoh GR II and I don't necessarily want to risk taking that underwater

What are some cameras you would recommend in the sub $300 range for that purpose?

>>2964124
The only really beneficial reason why you would put MF lenses on crop or FF bodies is so you can use them with tilt shift adapters.

>>2964116
not who you replied to, but that was very interesting

>>2962654
Of course they have you berk.

>>2962668
So you're assuming everyone is the same?

What about sports journos? They take thousands of images a day. I reckon they could easily wear out a shutter in 3 years.

>>2964126
And telephoto tilt-shift lenses aren't very useful.

Anyone know how to fix a toilet? The flush is fucked

Hi guys,
I'm just a noob and I'm looking for my first camera.
I'm thinking about nikon d90, but I'd like to know your opinions. Like if there is a better camera at this price range (ca $200 for body)?

>>2964070
The latter.
>>2964124
Making it more complicated than it needs to be. Fact of the matter is that you're sticking a 180mm focal length lens on a 1.5x crop body, giving you 270mm 35mm equiv.. Nevermind what the 180mm lens worked out to in 35mm equiv on its native system.

>>2964125
Olympus

>>2964191
Take a picture of the tank's insides and post it

>>2964108
The A6500 has faster writes and AFAIK no longer locks up.

> God-camera my ass.
Who said the A6300 was a "god camera"?

It's just great for its price, but obviously there are better cameras. Even the A6500 still costs less than 1/3 of Canon / Nikon's FF high end.

>>2964125
Some sports camera. Perhaps Xiaomi's Yi 4k or something like that.

Are there any sites or stores that allow you to purchase glass and pay in payments? I guess I could take out a loan at a bank or something but I'm a student and cant afford a new lens now and my concert stuff is kinda taking off now. Any advice? I only have a 50 and an 8mm fish. Need something that can fill out that gap

Thoughts on glass for APS-C for Sony?

There are some interesting native E-mount choices such as Sigma's and Samyang's lenses.

But I also shoot film with Nikon bodies so it would be useful to adapt Nikon glass and kind of buy it once and use it twice.

Good or bad idea?

>>2964345
Very interested to hear this as well. Nikon smart adapters exist now but I have no idea if it's any good. And the worst part is I can't trust anyone anywhere because everyone is either a "it just werks" mirrorless fanboy or an slr fanboy categorically denying the ability of mirrorless cameras to ever replace a dslr

>>2962532
Any ideas for used DSLRs under $300 that can do the following?

>16MP or above
>The ability to swap lenses
>Does not need to be able to use the LCD as the viewfinder, but would be a plus
>Good low light performance
>Can shoot 1080p30 video
>Does not need a built-in flash
>Don't care for WiFi
>absolutely does not need to be the newest thing

The $300 limit is just because I would like to focus on getting used/older cameras instead of blowing my money on something I might not use enough to justify $500+ price tag.

>>2964376
>>2964345

They kinda work.

Only with lenses that have an internal focus motors (with one gimmicky but neat as fuck exception).

And only on new e-mount bodies that support pdaf (a6300, a6500, a7ii, a7rii). Also, the adapter itself must also support pdaf.

And a lot of older/cheaper adapters don't support pdaf, or OIS, or even firmware updates. So you can't just buy the cheapest and expect a good time. Some adapters also don't open the aperture wide open to focus, which can hurt focus speef when stepped down.

Depending on the adapter they can cause occasional crashes and increased battery drain.

You get about 95% of native e-mount focus speed and accuracy on about 85% of lenses. Usually just weird stuff like tilt shift and macro wont work properly, but every now and then you will find a simple prime that doesn't work. Look at compatibility lists before you buy.

Overall, I think they are an absolute god send for a hobbyist with old lenses. Well worth the purchase price.

For someone who makes their living on photohraphy where their paycheck/life depends on quick, accurate focus everytime single shot no exceptions, I think a native body would be a better choice.

I have used 5 different adapters (though not Nikon) so I can probably answer any other questions you have.

>>2964382
A D3200 can do all that.
https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-d3200-black-digital-camera-body-24-2-m-p.html

Boom. Not sure if a K30/K50's video is any decent, and none in stock at Keh.


>>2964345
Nikon's a fucking crap shoot when it comes to AF. MF lenses are fine on any ol' adapter.

>APS-C E-mount lenses
top kek

>is there any manufacturer with both APS-C and FF sensors in their lineup that has a decent APS-C lineup /and/ FF lineup?
>no.

inb4 PIDF, your film era shit does not count towards the FF line up any more than Nikon's does.

>>2964216
D90 for $200's pretty good. You might be able to find a well used D300 for about the same.

I am think about buying a new a7mk2, not sure when the new one will come.I want a updated a7mk2,which could be pricier but still cheaper than a7rmk2 I think.Any Idea?

>>2964401

a7iii is rumored to be next new body.

Spring 2017 is whateveryone keeps saying.

Sony has been full of surprises lately. No one had any clue about the a6500 til the week it was announced.

>>2964004
>100/2
>mounted on a dumb adapter
oh baby, do you at least have an EF body to help you control the aperture or do you just shoot wide open?

>>2964444

Gotta shoot wide open for that dank Bokeh.

Otherwise the instagram filters wont look as good.

Hi, noob here. I was thinking of getting a canon 1200d, thoughts? What are some other decent cameras in that price range or maybe even a little higher?

>>2964466
Sony A6000, Pentax K-50 / Nikon D7000, Nikon D3300. Better in left-to-right order

Not really happy with Canon's cameras that are worse than the 6D or 80D.

>>2964111
If there is enough room in the buffer DSLRs just keep shooting. My K-3 only locks up if the buffer is full but it writes more than 2 or 3 RAWs per second. And the buffer fills up after 12-16 burst shots depending on the card speed.
Sony is a shit.

Does a Sony DSC - HX 60 worth buying?

>>2964345
> Good or bad idea?
Well, MF adapters cost almost nothing and AF adapters not that much. You could just try if it works with your existing Nikon glass.

Personally I wouldn't care much though, I'd stick with the native E-mount glass which usually has much better weight/size vs performance. [Arguably, I can't even imagine doing anything particularly serious with my film cameras anymore at this point... so it is perhaps kinda obvious that I'd not be worried about getting new high-end lenses on them.]

>>2964489
It's a point & shoot superzoom camera.

If you want point & shoot superzoom photos, it could work for you. Solves the problem of having to walk to your subject with your smartphone, I guess.

Not really a good camera to me, I'd go with a MILC or DSLR in almost all instances even if it's for hobby use.

>>2964485
Your K-3 writes ~1.25 RAW shots per second according to:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-k-3-review/performance.html

Also has +- the same buffer size. The only thing that seems better is that the software lets the camera shoot again once there is enough space, a feature that unfortunately only is in the A6500... though who knows, maybe it gets ported as a firmware fix.

>>2962532
Guys i just got a canon t5i and a 50mm 1.8
what do you think about it? it was a gift tho

>>2964511
Don't very much like Canon low-end cameras (80D and better is okay), they're intentionally annoying in just about every regard.

But no doubt it can take some nice photos if you try, so it's surely a nice gift?

So I've been thinking about getting into photography and buying a used camera for cheap. I can pick between a Nikon D3100, Canon EOS 1000D and a Canon EOS 450D. Out of these which one would be the best choice and why?

>want to expand ND/etc filters
>remember there's a special holder and filters you slide right in
>think it'd be the cheapest and best option for me
>check them out online

Holy fuck what the fuck are these things made out of, diamonds?!

It's like 120usd a fucking slider.

Is there some other brand that doesn't jew their prices?

>>2964508
Writing speed depends on the card speed. So far the better card I used the better write speed it produced.
Seems like Sony went ass backwards cheap on the design here.

>>2963148
also the fact that the lens ecosystem is terrible and it's a nightmare to use

>>2964542
And the Handling....

Nikon 35mm or 50mm 1.8G? Payday is coming and i want a decent prime lense

>>2964549
If shooting aps-c, 35mm is your full frame 50mm equivalent. 50mm on aps-c will give you a focal length around 80mm, which is a nice for portraits.

So basically 35mm is you want a standard focal length, 50mm if you want a portrait lens.

File: canon-eos-1300d-18-55mm-is-ii-lens.jpg (203KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1500x1500px

I want to get an entry level DSLR.

The canon 1300d is sold with the either the 18-55mm III Lens or the more expensive 18-55mm IS II Lens.

What is the difference between these two lenses, is the difference significant, and which lens would you personally recommend?

>>2964220
any specific olympus?
>>2964252
are they good for stills? I don't really need video desu

Do you guys know of any digital compacts with a fixed ~50mm prime?

>>2964444
i bought the lens cheap (like $130) with non working af. i do astro, so mf is what i use anyway. i use a few step-down adapters on the front to act sort if as an aperture

>>2964540
The better card on your K-3 seems to have about the same "ass backwards cheap" speeds as a A6000.

And the A6500 is no longer ass backwards cheap in this regard, and even features a far larger 107 RAW image buffer than the K-3 (II)'s still ass backwards cheap 22 RAW images, so I guess they should have made you happy...?

[Probably not though, wrong brand for you after all.]

>>2964444
and also, i do have a 20D, 30D, and XSi. Ill probably try to fix the AF (bad USM)

>>2964613
Nah. I think pretty much everyone will do ~35mm equivalents, too many people couldn't work well with a 50mm.

Stick a 50mm on a MILC or DSLR and use that.

Looking for a way to mount a flashlight on a hotshoe. When looking on amazon or ebay all i can find are umbrella + flash holder or multi-flashmounts for setting up half a dozen flashes up.
BTW: I want to use it for video

>>2964619
Woops, actually SIgma had one (DP2M) that comes close.

I don't think I can recommend it, but maybe if you REALLY just want this.. it might be for you.

>>2964620
Generic clamp mount. Or duct tape.

You probably won't get very even or very controllable light with these though. Should usually be far better to just buy a LED panel or something.

Been shooting with a M8 for a while, planning to upgrade to M9 or M240 - should I wait for the M10 announcement for prices to drop further?

>>2964623
>>2964623
I am looking for a lot of different lighting solutions.
I have 2 Neweer 160 LED lights but they are HUEG and heavy.
I was considering a smaller more portable option. I mainly do reality-centered shooting, so documentaries and reports with on-the-spot footage, sometimes an interview or two.
The LumeCube looked good, but its BT-gimmicky-ness and price scared me off.
I even considered putting it on my Zoom H1 with a 1/4" screw, since I use the recorder as a normal mic as well.The point-shaped lightsource wouldnt bother me. I would probably use a cut open pingpong ball or similar as a diffuser. I even considered turning a pingpong ball into a lightsource with a bought superbright LED but I don't know how to solder.
I dont want to record in the absolute dark, but something that completements environmental lights if need be.

File: Z_canon_sl1_1b.jpg (112KB, 1024x791px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1024x791px

>>2962982
Canon Rebel SL1 & 40mm f/2.8 STM

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1024
Image Height	791

File: yn5018caef.jpg (263KB, 756x738px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 756x738px

Is the Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 legit?

It's only $50, is it too good to be true?

>>2964656
Oh god that's tiny. Can you even mount all lenses on that?
Is this for a reason? did they develop it for something specific?

>>2964659
a used canon nifty fifty is gonna cost you 10-20$ more

>>2964455
dont really care for bokeh when im doing astro...

>>2964659
Sure? But it's not a particularly good 50mm f/1.8 and IIRC a bit noisy in operation. Still, it will do some jobs.

File: Canon-EF-S-10-18mm-f-4.5-5.6-IS-STM-Lens.jpg (35KB, 400x299px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 400x299px

I have an f/4.5 lens but my camera won't let me drop it lower than f/5. Why would that be?

>>2964691
It's a variable aperture f/4.5-5.6 zoom lens.

Maybe you are simply trying to shoot at a focal length where f/5 is the maximum?

>>2964693
Ah, success! Thank you. I'm a noob.

>>2964694
No problem. I think most of us had this moment at some point...

>>2964621
Well actually I have a dp3m and a 28mm equiv compact, wanted to get something for the in between focal length, and preferrably not another sigma, they're barely pocketable any way.

>>2964629
Anyone? does anyone know a good DIY blueprint?

Anyone else here very impatiently observing Laowa and Meike?
I am really starting to like modern primes.
Especially meike's approach, which seems to be "vintage designs for modern mounts"

For lack of a post-processing thread I'll ask here:
What's the difference between base curve and tone curve and which one should I use when?
Should I disable automatic basecurving for my RAW-files in darktable? I dont like what ti does to deep blues and purples.

A6500 with the 18-50 OR A6300 with the 28-70?

>>2964624
A6500. Maybe get a Sigma 60mm f/2.8
until you can afford the other glass.

is that okay to get a sony lens via amazon without warranty?

>>2964800
Depends on how valuable you guesstimate that warranty to be.

But generally speaking: Why not.

>>2964800
Sure.

Lenses generally last way longer than their warranty period.
And even without warranty you can usually still get them fixed for a reasonable fee.

>>2964539
Probably not, because you see with cameras, any idiot will buy a $1000 camera over a $700 simply because the price tag. There is no competition in this market. They can charge whatever they want and retards will buy it, and claim the specific metal doesn't warm the photo or whatever bullshit reason they wanna spout.

>>2962654
i fix cameras for a living and see shutter counts of over 200K daily. I saw 750K once

>>2963091
I got an X-M1 for $140. Only came with a battery. I got a genuine charger off ebay for $25 shipped

>>2963111
i think my fuji at 1/3 the cost has better low low light performance

>>2962654

I blew the shutter on both my Rebel and 1st 5d, and fixed the Rebel one by myself.

I'm a newbie upgrading from a superzoom to my first DSLR. Budget: under $1k.

Here's the twist: I really only care about astrophotography, including long exposure, multi-exposure, and time lapse both through standard lenses and telescopes. Sometimes I will do normal photography with it, but that isn't the main reason I want a DSLR.

What would be a good intro camera for this? I was thinking the D7200, which I can get refurb for 850 with a pair of kit lenses, or something much cheaper like a D3300. There seem to be good D5300 deals coming up too. Nikon seems to be the best brand in my price range for astro. Thoughts?

>>2964875
Pentax has astrotracer, which uses a GPS receiver in the camera and the sensor-shift stabilization to mimic the effect of an equatorial mount. It's not magic, but it does work, you can expect sharp stars with 60-second exposures at 300mm-equivalent. I know the K-3 II (and K-1, which is out of your budget) have this built in. The K-50 needs a GPS addon. I think the K-3 I and K-70 need it too.

If you do decide to go Nikon, the D5x00 is essentially the same camera as the D3x00, only with a swivel screen (touch in the 5500) and more scene modes. The D7x00 is the first level where Nikon deigns to give you a proper camera, with a prism viewfinder, dual control dials, legacy lens compatibility, etc.

You can get T adapters to any SLR mount, so both can be put on any telescope with enough back focus for an SLR.

>>2964863
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/988ae6b8-9a65-4a86-84fd-f1a12b8a9a62

>>2964887
Interesting, thanks for the heads up; I will look into the astrotracer thing now. Does the K-3 II go on sale / have decent refurb options, or is it always about the same price?

>>2964895
well it was just released a few months ago, so there's probably not much of a used market for it yet. The little GPS dongle for the older cameras shouldn't be that hard to find used though. It's called O-GPS1 and goes in the camera's hot shoe.

File: 1111.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

no comment

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Camera Model	KODAK Z1275 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	480 dpi
Vertical Resolution	480 dpi
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.1
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	7.54 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	0
Image Height	0
Exposure Index	100
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2964897
Alright, thanks for the advice! Its a hard call between the K-3II and a cheaper refurb D7200.

does IBIS help a lot? I own 2 manual lens and thinking of buying a body with IBIS.

>>2964846

You would be wrong.

The a6000 has a considerably better sensor capable of much higher iso.

That is still a pretty nice deal though.

File: IMG_4347.jpg (569KB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 4032x3024px

What is the most effective way to get more DR out of my Mavica?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone SE
Camera Software	10.1.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:14 19:41:35
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	32
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	4.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: IMG_4348.jpg (650KB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 4032x3024px

And a better way to get files off without having to plug in my usb floppy drive?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone SE
Camera Software	10.1.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:14 19:41:57
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	2.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2964954
A real Mavica :O

Can you exposure bracket for HDR to get some more stops? Do you have an ND filter you can physically wave in front of the lens during a burst? Under expose and burst to average out the noise in the shadows?

Can you quickly go from a normal shot to a shot with the flash, like a second or two? Maybe you could mask the flash shot into the shadows of the normal shot.

File: japan4.jpg (129KB, 906x646px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 906x646px

>>2964955

Nikon confirmed for.laying off 10% of Japanese work force

Wont be long before Sony buys them now.

What do you think Sony will do with F-mount once they take over?

>>2964963
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/rumor-versus-speculation.html

But just to entertain the idea from a gearfag's point of view...
>NEF is made standard, fuck ARW
>Sony immediately benefits from Nikon software backend for sensor data handling
>Sony's shitty subject tracking algorithms are replaced with Nikon 3D Tracking algorithms and Color Matrix Meter algorithms, giving dependable subject tracking combined with Sony's great face tracking
>SLT is reborn. Nikon AF module with Nikon subject tracking with Sony's IBIS and OSPDAF
>Some wacky lens designs come out as the unholy fruit of Nikon and Minolta engineers getting it on in the backroom, and they will be wonderful.
>Sony makes cameras sexy again, Nikon marketing and management has zero part to play here

As for the mounts... that's tricky. A-mount is kill, F-mount a best. There's no way you can adapt F to A, there's 1 mm to play with physically, and the screw drives and pins are in different locations. F-mount is the stronger mount though, so frankly, they'd be better off just killing A-mount despite some of the very nice lenses available for it.

For camera geeks, it'd be a marriage made in heaven. Sony's a marketing company, Minolta's an engineering company, and Nikon's an engineering company.

>>2964968
I just realized I'm reading DSLR fanfics.

Time to stay away from this board for a while.

>>2964968
This post gave me cancer

How far will Sony shilling go on this board? Sony fucks up everything they try, if they actually did buy Nikon, I would bet my life that they would discontinue new F-mount cameras and lenses and keep trying to sell their garbage A and E mount.

Not to mention
>Sony makes cameras sexy again
What would ever make you believe that? All Sony cameras are either hideously flat bricks, or plastic chink trash.

/p/ redpill me on the x pro 2

I'm looking to drop some coin on a new system before I travel to Asia in a month and this camera is intriguing me.

Are lens turbo's / speedbooster's worth it?

Have an X-Pro2, few lenses and one is a 50mm f1.2 AI-S I kept after switching from Nikon. Think it's worth it to grab a lens turbo for it if it's my only Nikon lens? Or better off just waiting and putting that money towards the 33mm f1 whenever it comes out?

I have a basically new(less 2000 times shutter)T6i which I want to sell for new A7mk3 or a9 shit.I also have a 50mm/f1.6 and a 28mm/f1.8.Where should I sell them?I don't want to deal with ebay shit.Is camera shopa good place?I may go to New York next month,is there any good place for recommendation?Thx in advance.

>>2965006
sorry for error,it's actually a 50/1.4

I want to buy a budget 4k camera, right now I'm deciding between the Lumix G85 and the G7, the GH4 is too expensive. Are the kit lenses included in the first 2 any good? Or should I just get the body and another lenses?, I will use the camera for car videos on YouTube, will complement with Gopro hero 5.

>>2965021
G85, no question about it

>>2965021
Fuck the Kit lenses.
The G85 has IBIS, so Just get a few cheap primes and maybe the Olympus EZ 12-40 3.5.
Maybe thing about the 12-60 2.8-4.0

>>2964875
12mm Samyang f/2 lens on a A6000 or something like that.

http://www.lonelyspeck.com/rokinon-12mm-f2-0-ncs-cs-review/

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

>>2964954
>>2964955
I think in either case the best option is just to replace the camera with something modern.

>>2965006
> I don't want to deal with ebay
Nobody really wants to, but that's where the buyers are.

Well, you can still try Keh or something.

Hey, I want to start shooting from the hip but my lens is very heavy (Sigma 35mm ART) so the position will always be a bit declined (sorry if this isn't the correct word, English isn't my first language). I want to know if there's any kind of strap or accessorie that will help to keep the lens stabilized. The body I'm using is the D750. Thanks

File: ner.jpg (63KB, 628x538px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 628x538px

>>2965137
Mount a neckstrap like this?

Has anyone tried Yongnuo's 35mm F2?
For Nikon it's so much cheaper than the Nikons version.
I heard the autofocus is noice and slow but any other bad parts, how it the picture quality?

https://youtu.be/KoOO6Oxjdw0?t=1200

>>2965166
it's a knockoff of the Canon lens that it looks exactly like. Everything I've heard is that the Yongnuos perform similarly to their Canon counterparts, but flare somewhat more easily.

I can't seem to get into zoom-lenses, how do I learn to prefer them over primes?

I'm aiming to have a 12mm, 35, 85 and 135mm prime setup.
But it's gonna be real heavy to carry with me.

>>2965219
> I can't seem to get into zoom-lenses, how do I learn to prefer them over primes?
There are a few zooms that come somewhat close to primes at least on one end or in the middle of the range.

Sigma's 18-35 and 24-35mm, the high-end Canon/Nikon/Sony 70-200 f/2.8... stuff like that.

> I'm aiming to have a 12mm, 35, 85 and 135mm prime setup. But it's gonna be real heavy to carry with me.
You could do 12 (Samyang f/2.0, 245g) / 30 (Sigma f/1.4, 265g) / 60 (Sigma f/2.8, 140g) / 90 (Samyang f/1.4, 570g) on a Sony APS-C. Wouldn't even cost that much.

There are lighter / faster and pricier alternatives to some of these, too.


Also I could probably go under 3.5kg on really good FF primes as long as we can pick the focal lengths a few mm different if necessary. But it'd be pricey.

>>2965245
Hmm, yeah the 70-200 is actually a good range.

I am getting the samyang 12/2 and the sigma 30/1.4.
Canons 70-200/2.8 is actually pretty cheap these days, used!

Sounds like a great combo now that I think of it.

>>2965245
Possible FF set:
Laowa 12mm f/2.8, 609g
[Zeiss 21mm f/2.8, 394g]
Sony Zeiss 35mm f/1.4, 630g
Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, 281g
Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8, 475g

135mm has AFAIK no native lenses except zooms. Maybe a Minolta Minolta 135mm (various models from ~360g - 520g) or a M.Zuiko at ~300g?

Pricey, but basically all very good primes, and it seems I actually even overestimated their weight. ~2.5kg or even a bit closer to 2kg is quite feasible. FF zooms won't actually be much lighter than that.

>>2965254
Sure - why not have some primes and then a zoom for the telephoto range? Should be fine.

>>2965262
Ah yea, a Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 would be only 120g.

And I guess the Samyang 12mm f/2.8 stereographic fisheye is also a little lighter at 525g.

Basically, lighter weights are almost more easily possible with primes. Plus there is certainly a chance that you might decide that you don't need to carry a 135mm or something (at least I personally often do that, I don't usually feel any urge to have both a 85mm and 135mm with me).

File: 18-55.jpg (24KB, 323x268px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 323x268px

>>2964659
How would this lens compare to a 18-55mm kit lens? Think the optics would be better?

>>2965276
Uh, this *is* a 18-55mm kit lens.

So obviously it's exactly like one.

>>2965278
Wat? I mean how does the Yongnuo perform optically versus a 18-55mm kit lens.

>>2964998
It's better than the past x-series cameras. It has an annoying as fuck ISO dial. It's got a decent body weight which helps when using adapted lenses or heavier native primes.
Watch for the weather sealing. It's rated as splash resistance but the battery door is it's weak point (it was and is on mine). Battery life is also pretty poor compared to other X series cameras.

Overall I'd rate it a solid 6.5/10. If you need faster AF and don't need the hybrid viewfinder, buy an XT-2 or something else.

>>2965281
You may want to phrase your question appropriately in future.

The 50 1.8's okay. Loud, AF is okay, better IQ than the last Canon 50. It won't work on your EF film bodies though, which isn't a concern for you.

>>2965281
Heh, I somehow missed the referenced post.

f/1.8 seems soft as fuck, and the AF seems problematic. But it looks very noticeably better than some 18-55mm on 50mm, as long as you use f/4 or f/5.6 or something.

Hi guys my goddam wife wants a good camera for Christmas because she is studying abroad. I told her to take my DSLR but apparently it's "too bulky" for her tiny fucking hands. What's a good cheap entry level ILC with slim lens?

>>2965434
Lumix GM5 + 20mm pancake?

>>2965434
Xiaomi M1
A6000

>>2965435
>>2965444
Cheaper! Are Olympus PEN E-PL3 any good?

>>2965447
Or the Lumix GF3

>>2965447
Even cheaper?

Well, I don't actually had a hands-on with the E-PL3. But judging by how the flickr for the camera looks, I'd already very much dislike it.
And that's before I get to be critical about how it handles, which is when I really start to strongly dislike most entry-level cameras.

Are you sure your wife will see it differently?

>>2965444
Fucking Xiaomi chink shills

>>2965470
Please take maximum offense over your delusions.

>>2965434
Just buy her a Fuji X20, something tells me she doesn't actually want to fuck around with switching lenses.

>>2965474
Maybe you're right. It just hurts me inside to consider a camera without changeable lenses.

>>2965476
Get her an RX-100 III or an LX-100

>>2965478
You're buggin, expensive as fuck.

>>2965482
Sell some of your least used lenses

>>2965484
No.

>>2965474
The Fuji XQ2 looks to be newer and better at the same prices. I'm going to choose between that and the Olympus. Can the Fuji really compare to m4/3 sensors?

selling a Nikon mount Sigma 35mm ART F/1.4 lens in good condition. email for details.

>>2965482
> expensive as fuck
Not even 800 dollars.

Are you in serious financial trouble or something? 'cause otherwise, it'll be hard to justify being that cheap in a marriage.

>>2965496

>financial trouble

He just doesnt want to spend $600 if he doesnt have to you fucking rich boi. close the mac book youre posting with that mom and dad bought you and go play in traffic

>>2965492
Why are you such a dick to your better half?

>>2965283
Why wont the Yongnuo work with a film body?

>>2965283
>>2965554
Yeah, why not? My crop Sigma Art lense works on my film bodies.

>>2965557
>lense
>plural
>used as singular
There is a special kind of hell for your types.

File: videomicro[1].jpg (65KB, 1000x668px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1000x668px

im looking for a mic for my DSLR and i was wondering if anyone has any experience with the Rode video micro.
I know its a trusted brand and its only about $60.
though they do have the Video Mic GO which is just $30 more.
is there a big difference between the two?

im mainly looking for a decent mic to film local bands at bars, parties, general city night life stuff, etc.
no intention of trying to make this look super professional though. just more of a small hobby thing.

>>2965601
A Takstar would be ~$30/50 depending on model.

Figures it'd be good for what you're describing.

>>2965447
Just get her a fucking Fuji X10, X20, or Sony RX100 at this point.

>>2965554
Because old film cameras require a larger amount of voltage to trigger the flash; generally around 200 volts, if I'm correct.

>>2962532

Should i go for an Oly OM-D E-M5 or a fuji x-m1?

>>2965608
They're discussing a lens, by the way. Also, flashes don't take a trigger voltage from the body; rather, the body connects wires provided by the flash to trigger it. See: the PC connector. (you fucking retard.)

>>2965607
I'm going with the Olympus mirrorless. Problem is it doesn't have built-in flash. Anyone know a cheap ass piece of shit external flash (also small)?

Does seem like a good package for a K3-II?

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MECEPOS/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=

Do need a tripod and maybe case, but bit worried that I'll just regret not getting a used body for 700ish if it's all complete filler-tier

>>2965626
Cheap tripods are pretty worthless. They aren't durable, they aren't stable, and if you use it much at all you'll have to wind up getting a proper one (which will be at least $100-$150). The only worthwhile stuff is the memory card and the battery. But its not worth paying $100 for those. The cleaning kit stuff is nice if its thrown in for free (which you do find fairly often), but not if you have to pay more than a few dollars for it. The card reader is something you probably already have, the software bundle is cheap shovelware, the case and bracket are cheap and easily purchased for peanuts elsewhere if you want them.

The K3-II is a nice camera, but save a hundred bucks and get the no-bundle body-only deal. You ain't getting your money's worth with the bundle. (Of course you aren't, otherwise why else would every camera place be so eager to sell those accessory packs to you?)

>>2965563
you're types*

>>2965493
sent ;)

>>2965626
It's all cheap chinese shit that's used as filler material. You're better off piecing it together yourself.