/gear/ - Gear Thread

First for sexy prism domes

I have a Canon 1000D

Should I upgrade to 80D?

>>2965873
Depends. It is a much better body, much more durable and sealed, better af and sensor but you will still need better lenses. You decide what you get first.

Buy a Rz67 Pro II
Or
Save that money and look towards Nikons 100th anniversary announcement? (Literally within days of my birthday).

>>2965713
>>2965848
>>2965873
>>2965897
>>2965901

Real thread here:
>>2965715

>>2965930
>this thread was created first
>hur dur here's the """"real"""" thread
Fuck off you austistic cunt

>>2965901
What do you expect from a Nikon 100th anniversary announcement?

If you need a RZ67 Pro II, buy it. But at this point I'm not sure you do.

>>2965873
80D is a decent body, and much better than the 1000D as such. For most kinds of photography it'd make a pretty big difference.

I can't however tell you if your money isn't more efficiently spent on lenses or lighting or something instead.

[Also, I personally switched to a Sony MILC. Works fine for me.]

>>2965897
Currently I own sigma 17-70 2.8-4, Tokina 11-20.

I was thinking of picking up the 50 1.8 STM and 85 1.8

>>2965934
>other thread has more posts due to actually being linked in the last thread
>op doesn't have the courtesy to delete
>calls others autistic cunts
Top /p/

Real thread here:
>>2965715

>>2965963
>being this butthurt over a thread
>taking yourself this seriously
>implying you can delete a thread after 10 minutes
Contemplate suicide, then go ahead and do it.

File: 20161115_152348.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

STOP POSTING SHIT PENTAX CAMERAS IN THE OP


REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-G900V
Camera Software	G900VVRU2DPG2
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:15 15:23:48
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	1.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	4.80 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	F16QLHF01SB

>>2966018

>>2966018
Pentax is the tradition. Lurk more newfag

>>2966018
At least it's not Sony

I'm looking to buy my first flash for my dslr (canon 70d). I'm not sure what to go for, some places are saying e-ttl is pointless and that ttl will do, other people are saying that I should go cheap for my first flash, neweer, yohewhewhew. I'll most likely be doing event photo's, wedding, wrestling, etc.

>>2966046
Yongnuo 540 IV

Should i get a manfrotto befree or is it a meme

>>2966060
Befree user here. It's good for its price and you can do a lot with it. Small but very sturdy. Head usually made in China (not a disadvantage at all as they're really good quality), the tripod itself is made in Italy.

I've been using it for more than a year and am very happy with said purchase.

>>2966060
I got a used 190XB. It is sturdy, keeps a 500mm lens steady but is quite heavy. I got it for astro and wildlife use but I still wish for a befree at times. I might get one without a head.

>>2966127
What head would you recommend to put on a befree?

>>2966060
It's a useful tripod, but the Chinese ones do the same just as well and cheaper.

>>2966170
I do not like Manfrotto's plates. Would get a Arca Swiss compatible one. That doesn't mean one made by Arca Swiss. But just one with the most common Arca Swiss plates so you can easily buy all the accessories you might want.

Posted this in the other gear thread too, since there's two threads for some reason:

Looking to replace my old 550D with something newer.

Thinking either the 760D or the 70D (can't afford the 80D).

Pros of the 760D:
>higher resolution
>lighter

Pros of the 70D:
>weather resistant (but still plastic body)
>more Fn keys
>faster boot

I mostly use it while traveling, so I'm thinking the 760D will be better due to weight. Anyone know how good the weather sealing is on the 70D?

>>2966190
The weight difference is like 200g. I'd go for the camera you consider better.

> but still plastic body
That's usually good.

>>2966192
>That's usually good.
Magnesium would be better I'd think, at least in regards to ruggedness. Do you think the 70D would hold out much better in rough conditions?

200g sounds little, but it can make a difference when you're hiking all day.

>>2966193
> Magnesium would be better I'd think, at least in regards to ruggedness.
I think plastic would be better.

> Do you think the 70D would hold out much better in rough conditions?
If the lens is sealed, it should be much safer to shoot on sand and in rain / extreme humidity or such, sure.

In most environments, you aren't going to easily break your camera environmentally either way.

> 200g sounds little, but it can make a difference when you're hiking all day.
You could save this (or more with glass included) by switching to a lot of the MILC on the market. You apparently are not doing that?

Ricoh gr2, Fuji x70, or Fuji x pro 2 for traveling?

I'll be going to Tokyo for 10 days

>>2966203
ricoh or x70

They're pretty much identical. I think the gr is a little smaller.

>>2966203
xpro 2 + 35 f/2, if you can shell for it.

add a peal deisgn slide lite, you're golden

>>2966203
Of these three, the X Pro 2, by far.

Is the K-3 II body with BG-5 battery grip (both new) for $850 a good deal, or should I wait to see if better holiday deals come through? Does it ever go on sale?

>>2966211
Seems okay enough to me.

> should I wait to see if better holiday deals come through?
For what reasons would holidays result in good deals? What you get is ridiculous advertisement in this important selling period.

> Does it ever go on sale?
Magic 8-ball says maybe.

>>2966211
The only things that get decent deals during the holidays (and nigga friday) are cheap shit point and shoots that rather get rated up before the holiday period to drop back to their still overpriced rates. Don't ever care about holiday deals, grab the shit you want and have fun.
Time is money and you will be already familiar using it for the holidays.

>>2966170
Something with an RC2 plate, like the 494RC2 or 496 with RC2 plate
It won't fold so neatly with it but it is a sturdy head that is no hassle to use (friction adjustment knob)
The 498RC2 has a panorama knob too but it is quite big. Still worth to check out. Try to buy used.

Guys, is there any legit cheap internet camera stores in europe?

>>2966240
>cheap
Use your phone

>>2966190
Doesn't the 70D have better buffer/framerate/AF system/dual pixel AF in LV? Also the 70D has an awfully loud shutter. The last time I heard something that distinctive was using a Nikon F4.

>>2966263
Nikons are way louder, Sony sounds like the shutter is actuated by a loud hydraulic servo. I once heard a Nikon DSLR fire away at a street festival on the other side of the street some 100m down with a thick crowd in the street.
Canons actually have nice shutter sounds but if you want quiet and nice shutter you need to try a Pentax. My K-3 is smooth as butter, not even birds notice it. The focus confirm chirp on low setting disturbs them more.

>>2966269
> Sony sounds like the shutter is actuated by a loud hydraulic servo.
The current MILC (as opposed to SLT) cameras (RX100 V, A6300, A6500, A7R II...) have a *completely* silent shutter mode, too.

It doesn't get more silent than that for human ears, because you hear nothing.

File: mamiyarb67pros.jpg (266KB, 800x668px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 800x668px

Is there any german anon here? I'll be in Berlin and I want to buy a Mamiya RB67 and some pb film, I want to know whats the bests stores for analog kamera.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 50D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 6.0 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2010:09:28 11:48:50
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	60.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	668
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2966269
>hearing anything 100m away through a thick crowd
You only get paid to shill if its believable.
>Canons actually have nice shutter sounds
Not the 70D or the 5D3.
>leaving the focus confirmation beep on
That's for mirrorless users.

>>2966287
It has a characteristic sound. I wasn't listening for it I just picked it up, it was very different from the street noise. Then I went across and looked for a stall to buy drinks and saw the girl with the Nikon. I guess she didn't care about the looks of my camera ;_;
Also I keep the confirm chirp on the lowest setting and switch it off when going after wildlife.

>>2965713
I want to shoot video for a family vacation. whats the advantage a camcorder has over a point and shoot like a rx100?

File: Nikon_D5300_0.jpg (35KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 300x300px

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Nikon-D5300-vs-Nikon-D3300
Why are camera companies such Jews? I'm trying to find a decently priced first camera with non gimmicky features so I compare the D3300 to the D5300 and they're the same camera except one had a screen that can move, time lapse recording, and af bracketing. Those three things bump up the price considerably. It's kinda disheartening to have to have to pay 200 bucks more for cheap features. I want something that's good for landscape/city photography and has high resolution. Is the D5300 any good?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: ti010729_xpro1bl.jpg (98KB, 600x474px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 600x474px

>>2965713
I have $3500 to spend on gear (body, lenses, etc) and am soon traveling.

What is the best image quality I can afford while still being somewhat portable?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	600
Image Height	474

Need help spending money.

I currently own a canon 600d with Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 / Canon 50mm f1.8 + Kit Lenses

Trying to work out if i should get a (probably sigma) 17-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 24-70 f2.8 since i have a wide already. Thoughts?

>>2965713
>GOES IN HERE!
>Don't open new threads for gear-related issues.
>No pointless (brand) arguments and dickwaving allowed!
>I repeat, ANYTHING GEAR RELATED
>You have been warned!

What mental illness do you have that produces autistic fagposting like this?

Anyways, real thread is here:

>>2965715
>>2965715
>>2965715

>>2966708
autism lol

>>2966694
Very likely a Sony mirrorless camera with high-end glass.

But perhaps you shouldn't ignore "very good" image quality either. Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic and others can do that on their MILC.

>>2966694
As you post a Fuji picture:
Fujifilm X-T2
Fujifilm XF 14mm f/2.8 R
Fujifilm XF 35mm f/2 R WR
Fujifilm 60mm f/2.4 XF Macro
Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

Bag etc on top.

YMMV

File: 1457156963608.jpg (146KB, 500x370px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 500x370px

>>2966708
>>2965930
>>2965963
How mad are you right now? HAHAHAHAHA

>What mental illness do you have that produces autistic fagposting like this?
Coming from the whiny cunt who is gueniuinly upset over a gear thread. Oh the irony

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016-03-24T18:23:42+10:00
Image Width	500
Image Height	370

File: s-l1600-(1).jpg (785KB, 1000x1474px) Image search: [Google]

785KB, 1000x1474px

Does anyone know what mount this is?

Lens is an Osawa 60-300mm f5.6 if that somehow helps. Sorry for the shit photos, these are the best that the seller posted.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016-11-18T17:06:27+10:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1474

>>2967084
Mamiya perhaps? Ne

>>2965713
https://youtu.be/SASYABAPE50

>real estate photography with a drone
wat.
wait wat.

>>2967086
Yes I think you're right, cheers!

>>2967094
No problem.

>>2967087
> real estate photography with a drone
Makes sense to me for the exterior and the surrounding property. Should be looking best from a few meters above the ground, and this is easier than bringing a long camera boom.


I guess you could also use drones as an alternative to a stabilizer or slider for video inside if you do video. Not that this one is perfectly easy with most of these drones just yet.

File: static1.squarespace.com.jpg (21KB, 750x442px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 750x442px

Fuji 35mm f/2 vs 35mm f/1.4

Does the extra stop of light worth throwing a couple of hundred eurobucks ?

I read every tests online, but I can't decide myself.

What does /p/ think about it ?

>>2967188

Doesn't the 1.4 have terribly slow autofocus?

File: fplfbf300.jpg (14KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 450x450px

>>2965713
Novice here, can someone recommend me a decent/cheap power pack for this thing?

>>2967188

If price is not an issue, it comes down to

>faster AF
>compactness
>WR

vs.

>extra stop

>>2967194
I heard so. But how slow ?

>>2967197
That's pretty much it.
Still can't decide.

>>2967216

I personally went with f/2 due WR and price.

>>2967188

>one more stop
BUT
>unusable autofocus
>terrible wide open anyway so you have to step down
>way more expensive.

Kind of an easy answer

>>2967221
I know that a lens is barely usable at their widest aperture. Does that mean the 35mm f/2 is better at f/2 than the other one at the same f/2

>>2967218
Do you regret your choice? Did you feel the need of the extra stop of light / deep of field?

>>2967262
> I know that a lens is barely usable at their widest aperture.
Not in general.

There are quite a few recent lenses that are really good at their widest aperture, too.

>>2967262

No regrets, and no needs. If you are concerned about sharpness check this out http://www.fujivsfuji.com/35mm-f1pt4-vs-35mm-f2-wr/

>>2965713
Hey, /p/. I was pretty dead set on buying a Nimon d7100 until i read about an issue with banding. I've heard several different sides and I'm curious if anyone here has any experience with the 7100/7200. Is it really an issue if the photo is properly exposed? Is the 7200 really worth the extra cash?

>>2967303
> Is the 7200 really worth the extra cash?
I answered almost the same question in >>2966712

Banding wasn't part of the issues that bothered me.

File: url.jpg (8KB, 301x167px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 301x167px

I have finally saved enough funds to afford an A7II and Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8. Before I make the purchase, I'm checking all possible options to make sure I don't blow $2700 on shit.

The first thing I want to know is if the autofocus on the A7II is any good. I've heard mixed reviews online, some say it's excellent, others say it's absolute utter trash.

Second, I'm looking at a setup with the a6500 and 3 lenses for around the same cost. Would it be a better option to get the a6500 or the A7II. How do they compare without taking sensor size into consideration.

One of the major reasons I'm looking at upgrading from my a6000 to full frame is because I want the shallower depth of field (portraits) and better low light performance. I'm also looking at it for my manual 35mm lenses with the 5-axis and no crop factor.

Thanks!

>>2967361
>The first thing I want to know is if the autofocus on the A7II is any good. I've heard mixed reviews online, some say it's excellent, others say it's absolute utter trash.
It's in between.

Definitely workable by current generation standards, but certainly not beating the AF on a 1D X or D5. Also worse than the AF on the new A6500, for that matter.

> Would it be a better option to get the a6500 or the A7II. How do they compare
A6500 will get you faster AF & faster bursts into a bigger buffer.

A7 II should get you better low light and less diffraction issues.

There are more differences, that might matter, but do a hands-on testing if this doesn't settle it.

> I want the shallower depth of field (portraits)
The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 isn't shallow enough?

>>2967372
One of the bigger reasons for me upgrading to FF is that I shoot a lot of vintage glass and no longer want to deal with a crop factor. I also shot with the 55 f/1.8 and absolutely fell in love with it.

Do you think the autofocus is good enough for portrait and street photography as well as general family type shit. I don't shoot any fast subjects and only used the burst on my a6000 once in the year I've owned it.

>>2967380
> One of the bigger reasons for me upgrading to FF is that I shoot a lot of vintage glass and no longer want to deal with a crop factor. I also shot with the 55 f/1.8 and absolutely fell in love with it.
A focal reducer might work too, but I figure just going FF is certainly the easier/better option then - yep.

> Do you think the autofocus is good enough for portrait and street photography as well as general family type shit.
That should be basically no problem at all. The AF isn't bad at all.

It's just not bloody amazing, but it's still better than what most of /p/ -never mind most people shooting street and family type shit- uses.

>>2967384
Thanks for your help. It looks like I'm going to stay on my path of the A7II and Zeiss 55mm f/1.8.

As to the focal reducer suggestion, I tried one of the zhongi lens turbos, utter trash. I don't want to shell out the 400 bucks for a metabones.

>>2967385
No problem. It's one of the best lenses on a good body that apparently has to do a fairly easy job.

I think it will work with comfort and ease.

Got a TTL strobe already? Unlike the A6k you're migrating from, this one doesn't have a built-in flash.

I'm pretty new to photography, took a college course on it and was wondering what would be a good starting camera? I'm mostly going to use it for gatherings and when I go hiking, if that helps.

>>2967390
>hiking
Definitely rugged body, either the pricy 70D/80D Canon or D7100/D7200 Nikon
Or on the budget K-S2/K-70/K-3/K-3II Pentax

>>2967390
A6000. There are better APS-C and MFT, but the A6000 has a good price.

Never needed it more rugged even in the mountains, but the light weight and solid performance helps.

>>2967398
I bet you don't even go outside when it is raining

File: 1446827436051.gif (630KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

630KB, 500x281px

I don't think you guys realize this, but the real thread is over here >>2965715

I understand you made a big mistake, but it's okay

Real thread here!
>>2965715

>mfw you all posted here instead of the real thread

File: logo-large.png (3KB, 284x115px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 284x115px

>>2967402

>>2967386
I've never really messed around with flash. It's something I've wanted to mess with but for the most part I've just shot stuff with natural lighting or continuous.

>>2967399
The device you want to use in rain or snow is called an umbrella. Or some improvised "rain roof" using your rain coat.

It's not even to protect the camera even when switching lenses, or keep your hands dry - which you also might want to do regardless.

It's to hopefully not have all that rain / snow pass directly in front of your lens or land on the front element of your lens.

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

78KB, 500x500px

>>2967416
Well it is pretty obvious you don't want to use a Sony in the rain or put something wet near the viewfinder, like your eyes.
*cough* *cough*

>>2967415
Strobes are very powerful and comparatively inexpensive tools for at least portraits and family shots and the like.

I very frequently use portable models for that. And even having one-two EV extra leeway wouldn't change me doing so. [I've also used the A6000's built-in flash quite a lot once I realized that you can bounce it off walls, but it did in many situations not have quite enough power].

Not that I'd recommend the Sony portable strobes, they're too expensive for no good reason.

But getting a Godox TTL or even just a slightly less convenient manual Yongnuo won't cost you much if you decide you want to do that,

>>2967416
the manufacturers need to quit being cheap jews and weather seal everything already

>>2966708
>>2965930
>>2965963
>>2967402
This is the saddest thing I've seen on /p/ in a while. Anon is legitimately ass pained over a gear thread. I don't know whether to laugh at your autistic anger issues, or feel sorry for you and anyone that knows you in real life.

>>2967451
It is already done, see Pentax entry bodies.

File: bawoo2016s.jpg (346KB, 900x1404px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 900x1404px

Can anyone suggest a couple lenses for me?

I have a D3200 which I use primarily for taking shots of plastic models, usually but not always from a tripod with a remote. My current lenses are a NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G and the kit lens.

I'd like to be able to shoot in slightly lower light for things like kits with LED, and I'm curious what focal lengths would have what effects on kits. I'm pretty flexible in my shooting distance requirements. Obviously I would like to make the kits appear larger than they are, sometimes depth of field is a problem for me.

I'd also like a better lens for shooting stuff like family events etc., so any recommendations for a replacement for the shitty kit lens would be awesome too.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	858
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	60 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:19 20:00:38
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	40.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	900
Image Height	1404
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: Final 3.jpg (283KB, 900x1264px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 900x1264px

>>2967881


Also for really shiny metallic or candy paint finishes like this where I need the front lit, would some sort of diffuser or something be useful? I normally use a lightbox with bulbs on the sides but sometimes I need to move one in front and then I get big reflections.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	858
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	60 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:06 12:43:45
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	40.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	900
Image Height	1264
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2967881
>I'd like to be able to shoot in slightly lower light for things like kits with LED
Longer exposure time?
> I'm curious what focal lengths would have what effects on kits
The same as portrait length lenses have on the human face: telephoto compression.
> Obviously I would like to make the kits appear larger than they are
Your pic seems to do that just fine. What you need is something for a sense of scale. Or maybe shooting from a lower angle with a wide angle lens.
>sometimes depth of field is a problem for me.
Small aperture, longer exposure time. Also focus stack.
>I'd also like a better lens for shooting stuff like family events etc.
Nothing wrong with the 40mm for that, just hit the focus limiter. A speedlight is also very useful, bounced off walls and such, plenty of use for your kits, and negates the speed limitations of your kit lens when shooting in low light (eg. indoors). Pick up a 35 1.8 DX because family events usually means low light in doors.

>>2967884

I probably just need to make sure to tripod every shot then because the longer exposure times are part of my problem now

Thanks for the tip about focus stacking, I think I could do that pretty easily with these and I've never tried it before.

Is there a good guide somewhere on this kind of shooting, or macro in general? I'm still trying to learn more about setting up the camera and lighting.

>>2967884

What speedlight do you suggest? They seem to be priced all over the place.

>>2967889
Yongnuo 560 IV or 568 EX

>>2967889
Not same anon, but I can warmly recommend the Yongnuo 660 (560 III and IV would also work okay, but I don't think it's worth pinching pennies that hard) with a 560 TX controller.

Nice to work with, inexpensive, lots of light output.

Order them from China over Aliexpress or something if they're not cheap or available where you live.

You could also get (Yongnuo or Godox?) TTL enabled strobes if you plan to do some run & gun usage, but you really don't need TTL for your models, and even HSS is usually useless.

>>2967891
> Yongnuo 560 IV
The Yongnuo 660 are out.

AFAIK no more overheating on lots of subsequent 1/1 shots, more total light output, narrower zoom, (again) improved controls, slightly better battery compartment door, and I think some more stuff.

They currently cost like $5-10 more a piece than the 560 IV. I'd say that's pretty much always worth it when you don't mind their bigger size (which in this usage, you probably should not?).

>>2967891
>>2967894

What is the controller used for? Would I basically just angle it up at 45 degrees into the light box? I'm not super familiar with flashes at all so I appreciate all the help with this.

>>2967898
strobist.blogspot.com Everything you should know about using speedlights.

TTL a gud for family events, but if you're only using it for your kit models, then an all manual flash is ok. Personally, I'd take the TTL model just for the all around capability. It's worth the money, because fucking around with flash exposures when moving around is a pain in the ass.

>>2967899

Cool thanks again

>>2967898
> What is the controller used for?
So you can trigger 2-3 of them from multiple directions. Even with one you often want off-camera flash so the light isn't full frontal.

> Would I basically just angle it up at 45 degrees into the light box?
How would you do that without also hitting the figure at the top? Unless your light box is huge, perhaps, or so diffuse that an initial narrow beam hitting it will scatter massively inside anyhow somehow...

It usually is better to just make the figure stand free on a table or something and shoot full power at a ceiling in a white enough room. THAT will act as a big enough "light box". Even if you don't get very much control with this technique.

Okay you could go halfway and use a big diffuser (certainly one wider than the figure) on a full frontal shot and let a light box further bounce the light, but even that isn't as good as just using multiple lights.

File: Origin WIP 5.jpg (536KB, 1728x1116px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1728x1116px

>>2967903

>How would you do that without also hitting the figure at the top?

That's what I was wondering, usually I do just have a light on either side of the light box towards the front and then place the kit in the middle, but sometimes things can get weird with shadows from arms or weapons etc. so I may just need to get a light for the top or maybe bounce light off something like a curved posterboard.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	858
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	60 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:02 16:52:07
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	40.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1728
Image Height	1116
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2967913
I guess if you've got time and motivation to be creative with reflectors and diffusers, you might be able to do just about everything with a single strong light...?

I am definitely not *that* patient. Plus I can't leave my "studio" set up in one location. Would cost me too much time to go down that route with all the additional setup / tear down time.

So I basically just threw some 2-3 waifu's worth of money at the problem to get 3 strobes. Problem solved. (2 of them do fine in most instances, you could go for that if the same solution is tempting to you - not like it costs you more to get the third one from China later).

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-19 at 3.39.56 PM.png (248KB, 1360x1061px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1360x1061px

Convince me not to purchase.

>>2967936
I wonder if it'd be cheaper to adapt old TS lenses than to spend $2000 on a modern one. Or find some sort of bellow attachment.

File: moar_tiltshift.jpg (71KB, 500x334px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 500x334px

>>2967936
You can get moar tilt shifting.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7S
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 8.8 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:04:04 21:07:49
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Brightness	-3.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2967945
You have to wonder at what point do you just end up putting the sensor outside the image circle.

File: maximum_tiltshift.jpg (107KB, 810x1200px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 810x1200px

>>2967950
The manufacturer of this thing says on the description of at least the V2 that the sensor is still fully covered even at maximum shift.

Maybe the image circle also is projected more beyond the sensor's boundaries though...?

Still need to use one of these at some point - for now, I only remembered that these adapters (and this one specifically) exist.

Any Leica shooters around? I was thinking about switching from my M8 to a M9 or M240. Does the M9 still have the most value when on a budget? M9s go for around 2k here, while M240s are around 3,4k used.

>>2967965
It's probably time to jump ship rather than get the retarded expensive butterfly that is the M9.

Brand loyalty should have limits...

>>2967969
I like the rangefinder experience, so this is the only choice I have. Don't get me started on Sony.

>>2967936
>tfw OP samefaggoting just trying to bump his shitty thread

Original thread here

>>2965715
>>2965715

>>2967972
If the novelty of the "rangefinder experience" is worth both the rage-inducingly sparse settings (despite the automatics not being able to handle their shit well at all) and otherwise old and weak technology *plus* the steep price...well, enjoy it, I guess.

I have a F90X, 50mm Zeiss Planar, 19-35mm Tokina, 28-70 2.8 Sigma, 80-200 2.8 Nikon and a Plustek Scanner which gets me 24mpx usable scans. I want another body, would you get a F3 or a D3/700?

>>2968037
D700. Or if you like VR and other modern features, F100.

35mm or 50mm for first prime?

>>2968049
on crop? 35

on film/ff? 50

How good/bad is the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8. Does it compare with a normal 50mm 1.8?

>>2968083
Far better than the average nifty fifty on account of its sharpness.

It's probably the best 50mm, because unlike the Otus and Sigma Art (the two lenses that are ~equally sharp), it is actually very light in weight.

And unlike the Otus, it has AF.

>>2968098
Would I notice the difference between it and normal 50mm?

>>2968111
On a FF Sony, sure very much:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-FE-50mm-F18-on-Sony-A7R-versus-Sony-FE-Carl-Zeiss-Sonnar-T-STAR-55mm-F18-on-Sony-A7R-versus-Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Loxia-50mm-F2-Sony-FE-on-Sony-A7R__1701_917_1252_917_1400_917

Also have a look at the detailed measurements.

On an APS-C Sony maybe also a little, but the 60mm Sigma should quite possibly be preferred there.

>>2968113
I'm not only referring to specs, I mean in terms as a "normal" lens. Will the extra 5mm make a big difference or is it going to be negligible?

>>2968121
Ah the difference in focal length is really quite negligible.

Pretty much no photographer will ever look for a 50mm lens to augment their 55mm or the other way around, just because of focal length.

12 and 17mm focal length are very different, but 50 and 55mm? Nah.

>>2967980
Who hurt you?

File: 1.png (31KB, 547x409px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 547x409px

>>2967398
I'm seriously tempted to go for this. The price seems like it's a throwaway camera they just want to get rid of at all cost.
But all the reviewers I've read are literally masturbating over it.

I'll also need some lenses, but this is another headache about investing in full frame lens or APS-C lens.
If I want small and light I will probably need to stick to APS-C.
Currently eyeing the Rokinon 12mm F2 which reviewers are also wanking over, and it seems decently priced.

Nevermind.
>>2968202

The Rokinon lens doesn't even have autofocus. No wonder it was so cheap.

File: 1.png (6KB, 510x145px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 510x145px

Do you guys think this is a good deal?
Apparently I can save some 60% of the price if I bundle it with the A6000.

>>2968214
>>2968202

God damn that is an awesome price.

I might get one myself. Where is that?

>>2968216
It's a black friday sale on multiple websites. but Adorama has some extra freebies.

Any idea on the 55-210mm lens though?
I'm seriously wondering if I should grab it.

>>2968214
>>2968202
that looks pretty good, if youre getting the 55-210, why not get the 16-50?

its a cool lens, I got one because i wanted atleast one native lens along with all my canon glass for my 6300

>>2968218
>why not get the 16-50?
It's inside a separate bundle, which costs more.

And I read more reviewers praise the Rokinon 12mm over the kit lens. But the Rokinon doesn't have manual focus. So I've taken a few steps back for now and reconsidering my options.

I meant to say the Rokinon doesn't have auto focus.

>>2968217

The 55-210 is supposed to be pretty damn good. Not going to compete with a G Master or L lens, but good for everyday use.

The 16-50 isn't nearly as good, but it is a decent walk around lens. Since you are getting just the body, it might be worth looking at an 18-55 on ebay. Much better lens, though slightly larger.

>>2968221

Rokinon is great for star/architecture where autofocus isn't really needed.

SUpposedly they are launching some autofocus ones next year.

>>2968223
I think I should get the 55-210 as my first lens then since it's so damn cheap.

Me thinks it's going to be hard as fuck to use a 55-210mm when I'm indoor.

But I guess I always have my smartphone for that.

File: 1.png (103KB, 879x1183px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 879x1183px

I'm gonna do it lads. Wish me luck.

Hopefully there won't pop up an even better Black Friday deal which screw me over.

>>2968205
>>The Rokinon lens doesn't even have autofocus. No wonder it was so cheap.
It basically doesn't need AF when infinity starts a like 2 meters away or so and you have focus peaking anyhow.

It's a great little lens and you probably DO want it.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/samyang_12mm_f2/pool/

>>2968217
> Any idea on the 55-210mm lens though?
That's the better one of the two kit lenses.

Oh, it isn't the greatest such lens ever, but kinda just fine overall. Also one of the popular E-mount lenses to use close-up filter lenses with:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3672705

>>2968250
Thanks Anon. I'm starting out without the Rokinon and see how ell I'm going to fare with just 1 lens. If I feel I'm going to need it later I'll definitely grab it.

>>2968127
>the difference in focal length is really quite negligible.

Also
1. The focal length is often rounded, so a "50mm" lens might be actually something like 51.77mm.
2. It's measured at infinity, focusing closer can change the focal length slightly, and in different ways depending on which elements move and how.

Looking for a new 50mm, Summicron type 4 (tabbed) or Planar?

>>2968251
Sure.

Well, my first impulse for "just one lens" would probably be the 30mm Sigma Contemporary or 28mm f/2. 50mm-ish equivalent works good in a lot of situations.

But a 12mm f/2 should augment something like that very well.

File: reb.jpg (2MB, 1516x1000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1516x1000px

Anybody know a good, reasonably compact stabiliser for a DSLR for video recording? I really want to get some decent panning shots for my YouTube channel but I have crazy shaky hands. I have a fluid head tripod but it's too big to fit in my bag.

Pic related, previous subject.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 600D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3000
Image Height	1688
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:20 16:14:54
Exposure Time	1/1600 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	60.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1516
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2968389
Just put on the neckstrap and pull it out. The tension will stabilize your camera.
see: https://wistia.com/blog/stabilizing-handheld-video

>>2968389
Perhaps a Steadicam? Together with a decent on-lens or in-body stabilization it can do quite okay.

File: HTB1XC0TFVXXXXaTXXXXq6xXFXXXE.jpg?width=650&height=500&hash=b66b2c80e321c5199bfddad88445332e&size=158695.jpg (155KB, 650x500px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 650x500px

Are these things ever useful?

I was thinking of maybe putting one on my hotshoe.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	650
Image Height	500
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2012:06:19 15:13:56
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	650
Image Height	500

>>2968467
I've used one like... twice on a tripod that didn't have spirit levels and with a camera that ALSO didn't have an electronic level AND with my smartphone not at hand.

Kinda big for many pockets on a camera bag for not being particularly important. This one here might be a sufficient solution... not that you couldn't get both, they're like $1 each on ali or whatever chinese store.

>>2968424

I'll give that a shot!

>>2968426

Yeah I was looking at a Glidecam or something, it's so I can take nice panning shots when I review bikes, so ideally something that will fit in a reasonably small rucksack that I can wear whilst on the bike.

Thoughts about older mirrorless cameras like the Pen E-P, Sony Nex and Canon Eos M series?

Just bought a Pen E-P3 with kit lens for 100€ since my Ricoh GRD 2 stopped working and it's actually really nice, compact and I kinda like the art filters on it.

>>2968530

Low light performance on the older m43 can be pretty bad.

Some of the older NEX are still viable, but lack some of the usability updates more modern devices have. Also, while still not great, the old Sony jpeg engine was atrocious so you have to shoot raw.

Same here:
A friend of mine got around 1000€,
he wants to film some stuff. Mostly events with a lot of people and some vlogs. I told him to buy an Nikon D5500 or Canon EOS 700D and a Zoom H2N + some gear. Your thougts on this? Other camera? Which lense? Kit?
Thank you!

>>2968530
>Thoughts about older mirrorless cameras like the Pen E-P, Sony Nex and Canon Eos M series?
They suck for most purposes.

Pretty much always go with a new MILC unless it's a snapshot camera for someone who you suspect won't take many photos anyhow.

File: bh.jpg (113KB, 640x439px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 640x439px

Has any european ordered anything from B&H, did you had to pay taxes?

>>2968564
Taxes depends on the your country and what you order.

What did you plan to get from them?

>>2968481
>>2968467

Your evf/lcd doesn't have leveling lines?

>>2968714
Just one lens.

File: Screenshot_20161121-122616.png (480KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 1080x1920px

For all Euro/p/eans, the 80D is currently on sale. You also get 90 Euro cashback (or 135 Euro coupon for other Canon products), so it's essentially 800 Euros.

>>2968808
UK prices are great for companies that haven't covered the falling pound. Got the XT10 with the 16-50 yesterday for 500 pounds before the 80 pound cashback

File: Products_Mini_Camera_Flash_TT350S_01.jpg (98KB, 790x709px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 790x709px

New (smaller) Godox TTL flash for Sony's cameras.

Shame they didn't use a LiPo battery rather than the 2xAA - looks good to me otherwise.

>>2968820
How much does it cost?

>>2968821
Haven't seen it listed anywhere yet, so I don't know

My guess is that this should be somewhat cheaper than the bigger TT685S, which is already a pretty inexpensive device (saw it for like $105-110 on eBay/Ali before).

Anyone here that owns canons 100-400 ii, or the sigma/tamron 150-600?

The 1m focus distance of the canon is really tempting, but the others have better range.

File: Intro-001.jpg (66KB, 520x465px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 520x465px

Guys, I'm owner of pic related and have the kit 18-55 lens and a Sigma 10-20. Both employ screw drive AF. I've been happy so far. However, today I was in a store and handled nikons entry-level d3300 with a kit lens and the AF speed and accuracy just blew me away. If I get a a lens for the Pentax that's not screw drive, like for example the 18-70 or the 18-135, will it perform similar to the nikon? Any Pentax fags with said lenses that can give some input?

File: fprrr2ts.jpg (20KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 450x450px

Is there a reason why the camera makers don't simply integrate these HSS flash controllers into the camera body itself?

I'm almost certain they would take up way less space when integrated properly, insted having them hang over the hotshoe.

>>2968837
Probably not much. I think your body's AF that sucks.

K-3 or later were pretty good, though AFAIK also not like the better Nikon / Sony / Canon AF it might be a considerable upgrade.

>>2968858
Some (Canon for example) do but even they don't publish a standard and then you also don't want to use it 'cause its expensive, or annoying to control without further buttons.

But pretty much all of the wireless protocols are proprietary anyhow.

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-m3-body-refurbished-camera

>$298
buy buy buy

>>2968884
Didn't Canon recently kill their EOS-M series?
Or was that Nikon?

>>2968837
I have a HSM lens, AF is very fast and accurate.
Don't worry, screwdrive AF usually slower than in-lens drives. I would stay away from the 17-70/4 though, it is a POS lens. I'd go for at least a Tamron 17-50 or the new HD 16-85.

>>2968886
Canon just released the M5. Nikon killed the 1 series

Looking for a meme 4/3 portrait lens.

I can't quite decide between the olympus 45mm 1:1.8 or the panasonic 25 mm/F1.7. I've heard 50mm is good for portraits, but with the crop factor the oly is 90mm and the panasonic is 50mm. I'll be using it for street portraits, so the longer might be better cause I'm autistic, but also for family and friends so I don't wanna be on the other side of the room to take pictures. I also want dat bokeh, but there are no fast zooms at that price point I can find.

>>2968906
50mm is good for portraits in:
FF full body portraits
APS-C crop upper body and head&shoulders portrait
MFT crop upper body and headshoulders but from a bigger distance.
If you want full body portraits get the 25mm too.

>>2968906
50mm equivalent is too short for head and shoulders portraits but it'll probably be better if you want to include full body and a bit of the person's surroundings for street type stuff. 90mm equivalent is ok for head and shoulders and will work very well for full length stuff too but you'll have less surroundings and less depth of field. m43 is not for bokeh whoring though, you still aren't going to have a whole lot of that.

If you really do insist on bokeh whoring then you'll probably want the Olympus 75mm or some sort of adapted lens from a full frame system since it'll be easy to find an 85mm or 105mm or whatever lens meant for full frame. Those will all be very awkwardly long focal lengths on m43 though. You're not just going to be on the other side of the room, you'll be out the door probably.

The Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is a nice lens, plasticky and sort of cheap but not flimsy and the optical quality is pretty excellent. The 75mm is more expensive but it's supposedly incredibly good, I haven't used it myself though.

>>2968889
Thx! What about the 18-135 compared to the 16-85? The former can be found quite a lot cheaper on the used market.

>>2968919
The 18-135 is a kit lens. Good for a travel zoom, not very good for nice images. Like all superzooms it has bad distortions and CA at both ends.
The 16-85 is currently the sharpest lens in its range for Pentax. Very-very nice lens at all it's range, corner to corner sharpness and minuscule CA.

>>2968914
Total bokeh whoring I don't really need, but just enough to clearly delineate the subject from the surroundings I think.
I think I'll probably go for the 50mm equivalent. A bit more versatile for out and about.
I already have a couple of adapted lenses, a 100mm equivalent and 140 - 420. Great bokeh on the zoom but I'd need to be down the street.

>>2968927
>Total bokeh whoring I don't really need, but just enough to clearly delineate the subject from the surroundings I think.
Often that's around f/2.8 on MFT.

>>2968064
So you're saying get the equivalent of 50 either way..

File: 1478141933333.jpg (301KB, 1024x723px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1024x723px

What is a microlens for?

Why does no one make a 24mm f/2?

>>2968921
>buy interchangeable lens camera
>buy a do it all lens
>never change lens
just get a bridge camera.
rx10, fz1000, g3x.

>>2968960
Yeah, I think that was the point.

>>2968964
Someone might still want the benefits that come with the larger sensor dood.

>>2968932
Where is it on aps-c?

>>2968989
f/2.8
It doesn't matter how much the sensor is cropped, the lens focal length and aperture is the same.

>>2968992
DoF varies, actually:

4/3 total DoF for a 25mm lens at f/2.8 with a subject 5 meters away:
~3.812m

FF total DoF for a 50mm lens at f/2.8 with a subject 5 meters away: ~1.729m

You do get virtually the same framing (almost exactly the same diagonal FoV), but the FF subject isolation is much stronger.

>>2969008
DoF varies from focal length and the subject distance. Not from crop factor.

>>2969015

It varies from crop factor as well, or more specifically, circle of confusion.

So.. you're wrong.

>>2969018
CoC is not crop factor related. The word(s) you are looking for are "pixel pitch"
Crop factor has no say in this.

>>2969021
>CoC is not crop factor related.

lol, yes it is. that's why it changes with film formats, which all have the same "pixel pitch". why are you even going to try and argue this shit? fuck off.

>>2969022
How stupid do you have to be to believe all this?
If CoC is 1mm, it doesn't matter if it is 1mm on MF film, FF digital or MFT. Simple as that. Elementary school tier geometry you braindead monkey!

File: coc.png (34KB, 412x591px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 412x591px

>>2969025

lmao rekt

>>2969028
I think he means that changing the format does not change the CoC, rather you have to CHOOSE a new CoC

All of those numbers are chosen based on the pixel pitch in order to achieve "reasonable" sharpness. Sometimes, especially MF/LF film shooters use a smaller CoC constant for their DoF calculation to ensure that the "reasonable" sharpness is within what THEY are looking for, not whoever made those calculations. When I shoot MF film landscape I use an extra stop (half the CoC) of aperture for DoF i.e. when I want 20m-inf and my scale says to use f8, I jump to f11 to effectively change my CoC constant which leads to the same total DoF calculation as whatever CoC constant was used to calculate the DoF scale on that camera. Nothing in front of or behind the plane of focus is actually in focus, the CoC constant is just chosen to make things in front of or behind the plane of focus within reasonable sharpness

File: Chris-Gampat-The-Phoblographer-Fujifilm-X100s-for-street-product-photo-1-of-1ISO-4001-80-sec-at-f-5.0[1].jpg (150KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1000x667px

I sold all my Canon gear to buy this thing.

Going to spend the next 8 months traveling and didn't want to carry a bunch of lenses.

I also got an RX100 V for video projects.

Will I regret my decision?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D7100
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	740
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:03:22 11:26:37
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Fine Weather
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Return Detected
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2969050
RX100 V is pretty cool for a compact, but it's still a compact.

Can't say I care at all about the Fuji X100T (it's that one, isn't it?)

>>2969050

Depends on if the X100T's successor comes out any time soon.

But, nah, you won't regret it. The X100 series is pretty godtier. I use it way more than my FF DSLR these days.

It also gets the most attention from the general public. They all want to know what kind of camera that is, etc. Not once has anyone ever approached me when I had a DSLR. You end up just looking like a firstname lastname wankster with one, while the X100 series is just fucking cool. Cool as ice.

>>2969047
>I think he means that changing the format does not change the CoC, rather you have to CHOOSE a new CoC
This.
The "acceptable" circle of confusion for various formats is entirely arbitrary, at least down to the point where the difference could not be detected at the closest possible examination of the capture medium.
This is evidenced by the fact that it's showing different values for different film formats, even though the capture medium is identical in its absolute resolving power (presuming a control film stock).
On a digital sensor, it's more readily calculated because the pixels actually have known, fixed physical areas, and any circle of confusion smaller than that is undetectable as a resolution increase.
On film, it's a bit hazier because all film is different, and at the finest magnifications, details don't entirely disappear, they just become less discrete.

>>2969051
Admittedly I am a little concerned about shooting with a (Sony) compact, but I've seen some footage on youtube and it looks really crispy. They put PDAF in the Mark V too; perfect for my gay travel vlogs. I am actually surprised how full featured it is compared to the vast majority of interchangeable lens cameras on the market.

>>2969052
Shit, I heard people ignore the X100 cameras more than DSLRs, haha. I guess it'll be a fun conversation starter. I shoot street photography so anything that makes people curious/happy is usually a net plus to the experience.

I am having a lot more difficulty framing my shots using the OVF, however.

>>2969061
>Shit, I heard people ignore the X100 cameras more than DSLRs

They do ignore them more when you're actually using them, because they look less "serious" and like any other compact. If you haven't used one yet, you'll be surprised by just how small they actually are.

You just get lots of conversation when you're not actually shooting.

>>2969061
>Admittedly I am a little concerned about shooting with a (Sony) compact, but I've seen some footage on youtube and it looks really crispy.
Oh, between the two, I'd clearly prefer that one as a device. I already preferred the RX100 IV.

> They put PDAF in the Mark V too
Sony's PDAF and generally the automatics (auto everything - WB, exposure, shutter speed) should be better, they already were better on the RX100 IV.

> I am actually surprised how full featured it is compared to the vast majority of interchangeable lens cameras on the market.
Yea, Sony does pretty okay hardware upgrades in the lineup, and the software is also ~the same between all cameras, no really big "nerfs" to upmarket you to other cameras on that end.

Then again, Panasonic or Pentax (I think also Fuji?) and others don't fuck your software much either.

I'd say the "vast majority" is maybe quite strongly Canon / Nikon... they're the main offenders, from what I can tell.

>>2965713
Whats a good sturdy tripod to buy? Best bang for your buck.

>>2969130
Q666, Dic&Mic E302C, Sirui T-1204XL

Most of them most easily bought off Aliexpress.

>>2969139
Ah yes, they're travel tripods.

If you want a heavier studio tripod, I made good experiences with the Manfrotto XPRO. Could get an older or a current model, I don't recall any of them being bad.

I'm putting aside money for a 70-200 lens for shooting sports. Football (American) is one that gets a lot of interest, and it tends to get dark out fairly early in games (or by kickoff, late enough in the season), and stadium lighting is usually terrible.

Would a 70-200 f/4 be sufficient, or should I save up the extra for an f/2.8 lens?

>>2969157
f/2.8 for sure, and a pretty decent FF camera

>>2969157
Stadium? Save your shekels for a 70-200 IS II, IS I, non-IS, or 80-200 2.8, in decreasing order of cost. You'll need every last stop of light, especially on Canon. Focal length is a bit short, but you don't have the dosh for a 400/2.8. Consider a 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 if shooting crop and you think its long enough. Don't forget your second body with wide angle or kit lens on it.

>>2969050
Not one bit.

Actually, maybe if there's something REALLY far off and you yearn for a tighter length, but oh well.
After doing three summers of traveling,
once with APSC DSLR with lenses,
once with A6000 with lenses,
and last with the X100T
gotta say the X100T made the experience the most enjoyable. No thinking and fiddling with the controls, just taking the picture. Smart of you to take a camera for video too, for obvious reasons, although I gotta say the RX100V shouldn't be a slouch for stills either, so there's a bit of redundancy.

>>2969160
>>2969161
Fuck. I was hoping maybe, just maybe. But you're right. I've shot with a 50 f/1.4 and wished for more light.

>>2967361
In my opinion, full frame mirrorless is the way to go. just keep in mind, i think most sony glass is aps-c and the a7 just crops anyway on these. but i run vintage lenses and would love to have a full frame, just cant afford one yet.

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

182KB, 1536x1024px

Anyone have anything good or bad to say about Chinese "speed boosters"?

File: 81A-7iExBVL._SL1500_.jpg (167KB, 1500x1185px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1500x1185px

Is this legit? I was looking for entry level DSLR, and after reading reviews and these threads, I was looking at Nikon 5300 on Amazon and I found this for $540.

However, many of these are sold by this:

Warranty NEW PRODUCTS, SEALED PRODUCTS ** Do not buy until you contact me at: anne53[at]tirusa.Net!!!

Is this legit? since it's just launched it sounds fishy, like someone taking advantage of black friday shoppers

>>2969190
oops forgot link

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00FY3T3TM/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all

>>2969191
no these are all over amazon used deals

they lure you off amazon and scam you

>>2969173
They work well.
Pretty durable.
Good conversation starter.

>>2969194
Well shit, anywhere else I should be looking for a good deal on a 5300 with a 18-140mm lens?

File: 1479404509798.jpg (705KB, 1840x1232px) Image search: [Google]

705KB, 1840x1232px

If you could only bring one lens with you when travelling, which focal length would you go for? 35?

I have an 18-55 kit lens but I'm thinking of getting a prime and just bringing that with me everywhere.

>>2969390

Depends.

Traveling alone? 35mm

With a person I like enough to want to take pictures of? 50mm

All FF of course.

>>2969390
21 or 28mm

So, the D750 is still the best out there, right?

That's why you poorfags haven't mentioned it at all?

https://www.amazon.de/Sigma-17-50-HSM-Objektiv-Filtergewinde-Objektivbajonett/dp/B003A6H27K/ref=lp_11575221031_1_1?s=ce-de&ie=UTF8&qid=1479809547&sr=1-1

>Sigma 17-50 mm F2,8 for 255€.

Fuck I dont really need it, but this looks like a damn good offer. Should I?

>>2969157
Get the Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC, much better than the Nikon and just as good as the Canon counterpart but much cheaper.
I have the older "Macro" one which is already very nice and they only improved on the IQ. You won't regret it.

>>2969390
On an APS-C?

18-35mm Sigma Art

Or the Samyang 12mm f/2 if I don't care about shooting people

Or some sharp prime at like 30mm f/1.4 if I care about shooting people

Of course it's easier to bring both the 12 and the 30mm prime, who says you can bring only one lens after all.

>>2969545
>Sigma Fart
Why not get the Tamron 15-30 instead? much better IQ, better build and costs the same

>>2969546
> much better IQ
It's virtually the same on average, but has no f/1.8. f/1.8 is quite good to have - for more subject isolation, bokeh, lower light situations, ...

> better build
I don't see the advantage.

>>2969562
PS: Not to say the 15-30 f/2.8 isn't also an option. I'm sure it'd also be fine. But I prefer the Sigma Art.

>>2969568
So you just want to spend the most money on a bad lens?
You won't get a better deal than the Tamron at this point, only similar IQ for much more money or much worse IQ and build for not so less money.

>>2969545
>Samyang 12mm f/2

Love this lens. I take pictures of stars and all that gay shit, but for landscapes it's really just amazing all around which is great for travel.

Sigma 30mm 1.4 is surprisingly sharp for a lens under $400

>>2969570
It's not a bad lens. It's the (slightly) sharper and certainly faster one than the Tamron on APS-C:

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Tamron-SP-15-30mm-F28-Di-VC-USD-Model-A012-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000-versus-Sigma-18-35mm-F18-DC-HSM-A-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000__1420_680_1140_680

Note the Xbox huge T-stoppage difference. But yes, it's also sharper.

Have a canon 60D and want to replace my kit lense:
>Sigma 17-70 mm f2,8-4,0
+20 more mm, less chrom. aberration
+sharper
-not 2,8 all the way
-costs 150€ more

>Sigma 17-50 mm F2,8
-cheaper
-more light for the sensor

Did i miss anything? i tend to the 17-50 mm, just because of 2,8 part. But missing 20mm and the colouor error makes it a hard decision for me :/

>>2969590
>dxo
kys
also consider that Sigma has repeatedly proved they can't do reliable design and durable build. You buy a Sigma you can be sure it will crap out on you soon and the repair will cost a lot more than just buying a good lens in the first place.
Sigma is a shit, deal with it.

>>2969602
Tamron 17-50/2.8

>>2969603
No, I can't be sure it will break. The lens is fine, as are many other Sigma lenses.

And DxO's measurements just happen to be way better than your simply wrong feeling that the Tamron is sharper / better. It's not, and it's precisely why we want measurements rather than your feels. Your feels never are accurate.

Hi guys.

Bit confused here, and my google fu is failing to give me the answer i need.

I have a nikon crop, and I want to buy the sigma 18-35 f1.8. I am also getting a sony A6***, so I am looking at the sigma mc-11 mount to use for that.

The question is, does that work for the Nikon version of the 18-35 aswell? Or does it have to be the canon version...? Can't really figure it out.

>>2969390

Buy old legacy glass and see how it feels.

I've got that memetastic Tamron 35-80, and it's sharp as hell

Sure you'll do a lot of that stepping back and forwards, but it won't cost you $1000 at least

>>2969613
I think the MC-11 only adapts Canon and Sigma lens mounts.

There are other adapters for Nikon -> E-mount but IDK how well they work first-hand.

>>2969618

Metabones just released a Nixon adapter capable of pdaf.

I am pretty sure techart has one too.

I believe they work quite well from what I have read, but they lack screw drive lens support.

>>2969578
Yep. It is a very nice lens.

Surely one of the best if not the best wide angle prime for APS-C and MFT, and not expensive (eBay has them new under $300 most of the time) or heavy.

Can't recommend it enough.

>>2969618
This makes me sad then. Damnit. This is kinda what I was thinking but I wans't sure. Fuck.

Anyone who knows it better are more than welcome to chime in.

>>2969648
I think you still have a chance to just find another decent Nikon F -> Sony E-mount adapter.

Besides, how are you going to use these cameras. Won't the Nikon be fine with the 18-35 and the Sony just use another lens (assuming the Sony Axxx is a second camera rather than an outright replacement...?).

File: Meike.jpg (134KB, 1000x882px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1000x882px

So apparently a few companies are starting to revive fully manual lens designs from the past and update them to current mounts. they have sharpness problems like vintage leneses but are new and dont need an adapter.
What do you think of this? Would you buy an $80-150 fully manual lens? Fewer glass elements would mean better color-pop, if that really is a thing.

File: maximum_sustainable_defects.jpg (167KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1000x667px

>>2969669
I've bought a $25 Chinese manual lens recently, so I guess yea, I bought one. But it's an *effect lens* and will be used relatively sparingly.

Not extremely interested to get many more, overall. I strongly want "modern" lenses for their glass coatings that make their t-stoppage better and make them flare-resistant etc., complex glass elements that give corner-to-corner sharpness at wide aperture, and all that modern stuff. AF / IS is also necessary on some, but not all lenses.

> Fewer glass elements would mean better color-pop, if that really is a thing.
No, it doesn't mean that.

And I don't care for the "color pop" nomenclature nonsense - it's basically just blur, various forms of CA and contrast issues. No need to rename it to feel good about yourself.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>2969669
Just look for a Helios 44M without any other series number, it is the most recent. The swirly bokeh effect is reduced but the coating and the build quality was improved a lot. It is reasonably sharp wide open and crazy sharp stopped down, on par with basic 50mm primes but with much more different "feel" in the actual image.

>>2969669
>they have sharpness problems like vintage leneses

Only in the corners.

I'd say the distortion is a biffer issue.

Seems the wider you get, the worse they are.

>>2969664
I was going to use the nikon as a beater camera, and the sony was more towards some video work :)

But yeah, I was just hoping i could save a bit on a lens for the Sony, I'll just have to adapt now :P Thanks for the replies guys! :D

>>2969710
Hm, maybe? You could also just try to start with a super cheap MF Nikon F->E-mount adapter.

I myself prefer even the A6000 (never mind the later models) *especially* as a photo camera over any APS-C Nikon apart from the D7200.

>>2969669
I actually like the idea of modern "primitive" lenses. surely beats shit like Lomography that perfectly recreate ancient lenses, mount and everything, and sell them for like 3 times that you gert the originals used.

>>2969733

Voigtlander has done it for years.

I just got an AF 35mm for $80

>>2969734
Yeah but they produce high-quality lenses for lotsa money rather than at the cheap end of the scale. Don't need a $80 lens, I'd also take a $200 or $300 fully manual lens

>>2969739

The cheap old style Voigtlander manual lenses are around $300.

Look at the Nokton series. The Nokton 40mm f 1.4 has some good reviews. Solid lens except the corners.

>>2969739
What system are you shooting? There are loads of cheap options for Canon and Nikon and especially for Pentax. Why not buy an adapter and a couple of Pentax SMC-A and M lenses like the 50/1.7 etc...

>>2969464
I had the older 18-50 mm and didn't like it. Heavy and clumsy for the focal length, had zoom creep, soft at 2.8. Replaced it with a pentax da 16-45 f4 and was happy with that. But the 17-50 might be different. Would by it on the used market though and sell it at about the same price if not up to standards. With a new item you lose a lot of money the minute you unpack it.

>>2969742
I'm shooting MFT, which is why the Meike re interesting, Clickless aperture rings are ideal for video.
Sadly, very few fast vintage lenses exist in the 20-25mm range, which is standard for me
Also, softness isnt that big a deal, since lower resolution.
I use an old canon FD 50mm as my portrait or long range lens.
maybe I'll get a 35mm for talking heads/interviews.

>>2969748
Well, unless you use a speedbooster you are out of luck on the vintage lenses on MFT.

Any Memory card deals for Black Friday?

>>2969811
Why would you want a deal on memory cards? How poor are you?

>>2969800
Yeah, considered getting an FD-speedbooster. could use my 28mm 2.8 as a standard lens and my 50mm as an interview lens.

>>2969832
I just bought a camera, and need a card. So a deal is better than no deals.

>>2969866
It's chump change, not worth the time. Just go out or go on the internet and buy whatever you like (preferably a reliable brand like Lexar, Sandisk etc...)

File: flashq_exmp.jpg (467KB, 1494x1067px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1494x1067px

>>2968858
If you just need a discrete controller, I was happy to find this little flashq set. I think I got 1 sender and 2 receivers for 60 bucks, the only annoying part was US Customs left it in chicago for a week or two so it took a month to arrive instead of one week.

The limit for sync is 1/250s though, so they're amazing for convenient little portrait controller, but not so good for extreme sports. Though I've never shot sports with 2+ external lights and I can use my 430EX-II on top of my camera to signal if I need HSS. Canon price watch I think has a deal for $150 on 430ex-II, I paid 250-300 for each of mine a couple months ago.

>>2969911
That actually looks awesome.

Then I can still keep my camera light, while strapping my flash unit on my belt of something.

>>2969935
goddamn weak-ass millenials

File: 1479059058551.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>2969849
I just got an FD Speed Booster for my Fuji. I have a Vivitar (Kiron) 28mm f2.5, Vivitar (Kiron) 28mm f2.0, and Canon 28mm f2.8, all in FD. Cant wait to receive it and test it out

[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

File: YN560-TX_YN-622-TX_b640.jpg (105KB, 640x282px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 640x282px

>>2969935
>>2969911
This doesn't seem great since you can't use TTL and can't control the settings of your flashes manually either.

Which IMO is absolutely distracting and annoying when shooting portraits with someone, you really don't want to run to your flash units to adjust settings, go back, do a shot again, find out it sucks, and repeat this dance like 5-6 times...

And with ~10m control distance, you might actually basically use an IR blaster or on-camera flash to trigger the other units optically...

>>2969948
33 feet of range is plenty for everything I've ever shot using a flash.

Using flash light mode to trigger another requires very specific facing and any line-of-sight obstacles shut your entire setup down.

Yes, it's manual, if it wasn't manual everyone would Only ever use it and throw all those others in the trash.
The payoff for manual is it's a tenth of the size and weight. I'm not gonna slip the giant dildo-sized yongnuo controller into my pocket during casual day-to-day shooting, but the flashq is unnoticeable size or weight.

Also really nifty on 6D and other bodies where it's literally impossible to use built-in flash to trigger off-camera because there is no built-in flash.
Cheap little flash topper and problem solved.

>>2969943
lol

>>2969964
>Using flash light mode to trigger another requires very specific facing and any line-of-sight obstacles shut your entire setup down.
Nah, indirect light bouncing off stuff can still trigger not shitty strobes (meaning Yongnuo-tier and better) just fine optically. At 10 meters this shouldn't be any problem.

Even if you imagine a kind of a particular obstacle that would prevent optical triggering but not a weak 10m RF signal: How efficient will it be to go and adjust your flashes then?

> Also really nifty on 6D and other bodies where it's literally impossible to use built-in flash to trigger off-camera because there is no built-in flash.
> The payoff for manual is it's a tenth of the size and weight.
So you are carrying a multi dragon dildo sized camera with *15 times* the weight of a X1 / YN-E3-RT / 560-TX on the body alone, plus then lenses and strobes. But then the relatively small trigger is too much to deal with?

Uh, okay, use the even smaller / lighter YN-622C(-TX) or MiniTT1 or somehing? Might even be smaller in total, with the receivers built into the strobes. And obviously far more powerful.

>>2969983
:^)

File: 1447078036179.jpg (64KB, 780x465px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 780x465px

>>2968961
bump

>>2968961
>microlens arrays are often used to increase the light collection efficiency of CCD arrays. They collect and focus light that would have otherwise fallen on to the non-sensitive areas of the CCD.

>>2968961
Sony, Nikon, and Pentax make 24/2s.

7d mkII is still the best cheap pro canon camera?

>>2970170
i like the m5

File: s-l500.jpg (23KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x500px

spoon feed me pls

I'm looking at getting a 70-200 f/2.8 for my Canon 7D

I'm stuck between these 2:
Canon L Series 70-200 F/2.8 USM IS and the Sigma APO 70-200 F/2.8 EX DG OS HSM

There's a fair difference in price, but I'm more concerned about the performance, google hasnt really given me much to look at, and if anyone could give me a review between the 2, that would be great.

>>2970226
sigma and especially the tamron have a slow focus compared to the canon native.

optically the canon is sharper and the sigma has a bit of a focus breathing problem.

i honestly suggest not getting anything pre- art/sport/contemporary from sigma. too many qualoty control issues.

>>2970229

so is the sigma 30mm 1.4 DCDN a good buy?

>>2970242
I have a Sigma 30mm 1.4 EX DC HSM, I like it alot, how ever it does have a slower focus than my Canon 50 1.8 STM, not as noisy though.

>>2970242
Very sharp lens (one of the sharpest that you can stick on an APS-C E-mount) + cheap. It's generally speaking a good buy - you're not getting anything else in this FL that is this sharp at this price.

Has drawbacks in operation though, it feels really quite much like a "quirky" lens.
It certainly isn't the most pleasant lens to MF due to the odd calibration of the focus-by-wire speed, which isn't linear. Slow twist is VERY slow and fast twist is too fast. Very odd.
And you really need the lens correction profile with this one, has got a good amount of CA and barrel distortion. But the profile is built-into the lens' RAWs, so the camera and any typical RAW editor should be able to correct.
Plus AF also is a little slower and a little less reliable than on other E-mount primes, though it usually works fine. You can probably deal with that..

>>2966287
>implying ricoh cares enough about marketing to pay people to shill for them

File: 1474700697604.jpg (320KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 1920x1080px

R8 my recent purchase

>>2970293
0/10 should have bought a SONY