/gear/ - Gear Thread

First for Sony 70-200/2.8 GM flop

does the first extra lens you buy fully depend on the kind of photography you want to use it for?

or is there an all-purpose one that works well on portraits as well, for example?
(in general, but more specifically for m43)

>>3004663
Usually we encourage people to get a normal focal length prime. You can never go wrong with a standard prime. The rest is up to you and what you need.

File: tokina-firin-3-stan-moniz-photography.jpg (179KB, 1000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1000x1333px

20mm F2 for half the price of a Zeiss Loxia one stop slower.
Clicky-clickless aperture switch.
Actual useful Aperture ring at the front and not hidden in the back and hard to use.
Perfect Coma free images wide open.
Sharp from corner to corner wide open.
EXIF for distortion correction data and focal length data for sensor's image stabilizer.
Compact and small for its aperture.

Why are you not hyped for the perfect wideangle lens?

cheapest xt2 option for aus?

>>3004668
Because sony are announcing a 20mm in February, if it sticks to the ethos of the 55 and 28 it will not only be more affordable than the tokina, but also with af and more compact.

Also waiting to see how it compares to the samyang & sigma 20mm 1.8, venus 15mm and voigtlanders 15mm. And if any of them are worth it over a 16-35 if i don't need the speed.

>>3004670
Sony a7 from japan

>>3004655

Actual SEL70200GM review with photos.

>http://photo.yodobashi.com/gear/sony/lens/sel70200gm.html

>>3004672
>Because sony are announcing a 20mm in February,
>with af and more compact.
It will perform worse than the Firin 20mm in all likelihood. This lens is a tier above what you think it is.

>samyang 20mm 1.8
SLR nonsense and pricey.
>venus 15mm
Lacks aperture features and EXIF
>voigtlanders 15mm
Lacks the speed.

>>3004673
i dont want a shitty sony i want a good fuji

>>3004676
>being this jealous at Sony pricing because Fuji stuff is priced far over his allowances

>>3004676

>good fuji

Nice oxymoron.

>>3004679
>>3004676
Both of you, >>>/out/

I want an xt2 not a sony a 7 im not here to debate that i just want to know where dudes get it for the best price

>>3004676
Just fyi, if you take a crop body and a ff body of equal mp count, the crop body lens would have to be able to resolve around 140% more detail to get an equivalent level of sharpness.

Also, look at the prices of fuji lenses and how they forbid all the major review sites from testing them. Also notice how fujis lens roadmap currently has 1 lens for release in 2017, sony has 6 for the first 6 months of 2017. Also count how many 3rd party companies are bringing out lenses or flashes for xmount (hint, it's zero)

And finally, look at the features, the xt2 is as much as an a7ii, but it's got a crop sensor, no ibis, worse af, no flash system, worse evf, no lenses, no customer support, no ergonomics, no customisation.

If you want a hipster wannabe toy, go ahead, that's the target market. Real hipsters actually choose the best tool for the job though.

>>3004666
>devil suggests standard prime
you mean like a 50mm or whatever portrait ones are for m43, or a wide-angle one etc?

there was this youtube guy suggesting to get a telephoto zoom lens as the first extra one, which sounded slightly odd, wouldn't that be roughly similar to the kitlens most people already have?
>I'm a noob

>>3004687
The standard focal length for MFT are around 20-24mm. Get something in that range.

>>3004685
drivel

>>3004690
i should add i am here doing my own research i dont want to hear shit about camera v camera i just want recomendations re best place to buy

>>3004683

Sorry, broski.

I just wanted to prevent a fellow anon from paying money more for less camera.

>>3004692
ff is not the be all and end all im not some sperg pixel peeping for maximum sharpness. i really couldn't give a fuck about full frame. its the reason im ditching canon instead of getting a 5d.

>>3004693

I didn't just mean the FF (though even if the a7 sensor was cropped it'd still perform better), I meant the whole thing.

Less lenses that are worse IQ, almost zero third party support especially for adapted lenses, and a lack of features too.

>>3004693
Ok, that's cool bro, Just one quick question, why do you want the xt-2? What is it about a $2000 oversized crop body that made you think "yeah, i need that".

Also, I'm >>3004685 the other responses was another anon trying to save you from disappointment.

>>3004694
what features does the xt2 lack that i would care about

fuji lenses are universally adored by their owners. sony owner can't sling any shit at fuji for lens price choice or selection desu.

provide evidence for what you are saying. im looking at the dpreview iq comparison between the a2 and the xt2 and the xt2 appears to have the edge but the difference is minor to the point I doubt you'd notice without pixel peeping.

Does anybody here have the Dell U2515H? I'm looking for an entry level 1440p IPS monitor and this looks pretty good, it's also 25 inches instead of 27 which is what I want since I'm going to run two monitors. Anything from Dell Ultrasharp should be pretty good, right?

>>3004685
>soon he's going to post a picture of trash bins

>>3004699
>what features does the xt2 lack

No ibis, lost 2 stops handheld

no full frame, lost 2 stops in noise performance

No flash system, Fuji apparently do one $700 flash, good luck getting one in stock though

Image quality - the fuji uses a cut down sony sensor

tethering - the sony is a joy to use tethered to either your pc/laptop or phone, the phone app is particularly impressive and a great way to get wildlife and selfie shots

Lens selection - Fuji currently has no pro lenses, nor does it have affordable lenses, if you're happy to pay $700+ on average performing primes that will die out with the system within 5 years because crop is dead, that's your choice :) Just to show you how badly they perform, look at pic related, that's a $100 nifty fifty from canon (arguably one of the worst lenses ever made) making fuji's $800 prime look pig ugly

lifespan - x mount is winding down, you're investing in a dead system, e-mount is being adopted professionally in the film world, so will be here for good.

Editing software - Fuji raws are currently incompatible with adobe, dxo and capture one, if you want good quality results from a fuji you either have to take sooc jpegs or use the mac only iridient developer (a hacky bit of sw made purely by 1 man) or fuji's version of silkypix, which again, is trash for usability.

I can go on?

File: dscf5188-copy~2-2400x894.jpg (509KB, 2400x894px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 2400x894px

>>3004708
Forgot pic

Also notice, sony users have reasons, fuji users have piss and vinegar.

File: aligned-700x229.jpg (41KB, 700x229px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 700x229px

>>3004699

Hey man, if you wanna get the xt2 go ahead, it is your money not mine.

>what features does the xt2 lack

Image stabalization, mic port are biggest.

The Sony tethering app is an absolute joy to use too.

>fuji lenses are universally adored by their owners

And no one else. When it comes down to it they are decent, but overpriced crop lenses. It has no G equivalents. No autofocus support for adapted lenses, and very little third party lens support.

Not to mention Fuji isn't really releasing any lenses for the x-mount. Sony is pumping them out fast as fuck.

>dpreview iq comparison between the a2 and the xt2 and the xt2 appears to have the edge

I assume you mean a7?

I don't know what comparison you are looking at, but the a7 is visibly sharper. Though to be fair that only really matters at 100% crop.

>>3004672
>Because sony are announcing a 20mm in February, if it sticks to the ethos of the 55 and 28 it will not only be more affordable than the tokina, but also with af and more compact.
I have never heard of this. Do you have a reliable link to this rumour?

>>3004688
Oh I see what you meant

I kept reading how good this sigma 30mm lens is, but I have no idea why really. I mean I get that it's sharper than the kitlens, that it might have less distortion and such, or is that the whole point? Does it allow you to shoot better in low light, or better landscapes. I don't really know where to read more about how this works exactly, only watched some general videos about focal length, dof, and such, but I can't relate those to lens choices yet

Maybe I'm too stuck on bokeh in some typical beginner phase or smth. I'm mainly asking because the 30mm is at a good price secondhand, otherwise I'll try things out with the kitlens for some months to get wtf I'm doing/need in the first place
I think I should take this to the SQT lol

I dont use the flash I have. I dont need ibis to the point its worth worrying about, id just use a tripod.

Iq I already told you is too close to matter with the xt2 having an edge w/ source

Dont care about tethering
Dont care about pro lenses because I'm not buying them. Already covered lenses

Xt2 is supported by adobe, you're an idiot sony fanboy. Credibility lost. Lol at having issues wth sooc fuji. Its the one thing they are irrefutably excellent at

File: 1.jpg (140KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 853x480px

>>3004714
Not the other two Anons but,
>Its the one thing they are irrefutably excellent at
This is more like hearsay and feathers becoming chickens.

The camerastoreTV asked a bunch of guys who work at printing stores which jpegs where the best, and they gave Fuji very mediocre scores.

Just stick to Canon mate. Better jpegs than fuji.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	paint.net 4.0.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	96 dpi
Vertical Resolution	96 dpi

I figured it out. I asked a bunch of gearfag fanboys when I should be asking people who actually use the things they buy.

>>3004722
Those were made at full auto settings, not exactly relevant results.

>>3004723
Rule number 1 of /gear/ threads: don't ever take anything seriously from the guy who wants to sell you a Sony. He is the local autist.

>>3004726
In addition, sometimes he likes to pose as a Fuji shill but disguises himself very poorly. Still some people take the bait and feed him drama.

>>3004714

While LR does have fuji raw support it is half assed, you get better results using pretty much anything else.

>>3004702
May want to try >>>/g/

>>3004702
>Anything from Dell Ultrasharp should be pretty good, right?
in my experience yes

I have one at home and another 3 different models at work, and they've all been great, I especially like that you have extra ports behind

they also have good quality image, reliable, and thin bevels lately
they're reviewed among the best in a lot of categories so I think it's a good choice

>>3004702
I have a Dell P2412H. It is a TN panel display but it is surprisingly good for editing photos. The IPS version should be even better. 24" is good enough for editing so don't worry about 25".

I want to make the move to full frame and don't feel like getting a mirrorless. I hear good things about the 6d, but i hear it's due for a replacement soon. Worth getting it?

>>3004733
I'd rather go for a Nikon at this time, either the D750 or the D800 if you have more money will be a better option.
At this rate I don't think Canon will come out with something signifcantly better than a last gen Nikon.

>>3004733
>>3004737
Or even the Pentax K-1, it is currently the best value FF option. Dunno how I could forget about it.

>>3004733
>don't feel like getting a mirrorless
Don't worry. The sonyautist will be around soon to convince you otherwise

Anyway, Nikon is greatly ahead of Canon in cameras. But you should base your choice on the full system of lenses

>>3004726
>Those were made at full auto settings,
No, one of the tests was a lab test with the colour temperatures fixed. And the Fuji still lost that.

>>3004742
Point to the part where they say what JPEG settings they used on the Fuji.
Like Chris said at the beginning they didn't do this test to see which JPEG is the best from the photographers viewpoint but which camera made the best JPEGs straight out of the box like any pleb philistine would use it. I doubt any pleb would dive into the menu to set one of the characteristic filmlike Fuji JPEG settings.
That test is not relevant to us, photographers.

>>3004743
Why does jpeg settings even matter?

It was about colouring, and it simply failed on that portion where the colour temperature was controlled instead of being on auto.

>>3004748
Because colouring depends on the JPEG settings? Have you ever used a camera?
Okay I agree I don't know how to set a JPEG in mine properly because I shoot RAW but I know there is the option to do it.

>>3004737
Thanks. I'd jump ship, but I have an ef 24-105 II, a nifty fifty, as well as some adapted old soviet m42 stuff. Canon has been disappointing lately. I have a 550D, and while the 750D does have an improved sensor, I feel when upgrading I should go big (FF) or go home. Tech has really slowed down this decade, typing this from a 6 year old laptop that's still going strong.

>>3004751
>Because colouring depends on the JPEG settings?
I'm pretty sure that's just various compression levels. The only one who had issue with that shit was the iphone.
the other Jpegs were fine.

>>3004707
>>3004709
my homie sonyposter, he like a clockwork ninja

Rummagin through my grandfather's stuff today I found the following:
a folding "Shinwa" tripod (folds into something the size of a chef knife which is pretty cool), looks nice and works fine but I wouldn't leave my camera on it while going to take a piss in the bushes

a sexy Nikkormat (Nikon) FTN with a dysfunctional 28-210mm Vivitar lens and a dead battery, I might ask him if he's willing to part with the camera and I'll try to find some way of getting it powered again (maybe you gearbros have an idea)

Two other cameras, one a Canon and the other I don't remember, that frankly look even older than the FTN but they were in a nice leather case and I didn't really take a good look at them

and a VERY nice looking vintage (probably from the 50's) Fuji 200m lens in tip top condition inside a leather case, which unfortunately I can't use on any of my cameras

Currently my only film SLR is a Nikon FG, which I love dearly as it was a gift from my ex but I want to try using a real oldie, one that weighs like a brick and would probably save my life if someone shot at me while I was aiming it. The FTN is my hope for filling that itch right now.

>>3004661
AF-S 70-300 VR to save the most money
VR1 still ok on crop
VR2 for full frame
70-200/4 to save weight
80-200 2-ring for saving money, no use for VR, and dat old Nikkor aesthetic
Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC for 2.8 and IS and saving money
AF-S 80-400 for zoom range in a modest package.
200-500/5.6 for max telephoto and penis compensation.

Any thing else I wouldn't consider, but others might disagree.

>>3004754
>I'm pretty sure that's just various compression levels
You are stupid

>>3004709

>post actual evidence of mediocre fuji lenses
>every response call you a shill

I thought Sonyfags were in denial, but fujifags are living in a fantasy world.

>>3004707
>>3004709
lmao

>>3004766
>thinking you and your opinions are the most important things in the universe
Autism

>>3004711
Nah, I was speaking to a sony rep at the nec photography show and was discussing the lack of options wider than 28mm and how i was after a 20mm but the 28mm adapter wasn't good enough. He said wait till the beginning of 2017 for an announcement, sony have said they're announcing big in february.

>>3004714
>having issues with fuji jpegs
I don't have an issue with them, I just think anyone that uses sooc jpegs doesn't really care about their images or doesn't have the skill to analyse and improve them. For P&S holiday snaps they're great.

Also, if you can't see that fuji produce noticeably softer results, I'm probably on a non starter, but, you never answered what drew you to the fuji. You say you don't care for all the extra, better features & performance of the Sony, but can't say why you want the fuji? I'm putting my money on you awkwardly troll posting.

>>3004726
>Those were made at full auto settings
You mean it was a subjective test, based on each OEM's preferred settings, and Fuji got rekt.

>>3004733
>>3004740
All I'm gonna say is, go into a shop and play with one. I've yet to interact with a professional photographer that hasn't fallen in one way or another for the allure of the A7 series, studio, product and wedding togs have all found a reason to either replace their system or have the sony as a second body.

>>3004756
always bro, I've still yet to see anyone come back and say the Fuji looks better, or even remotely ok.

>>3004708
Hey moopco
you're not a photographer
you're a disabled man in his late 20s or early 30s who will probably die in his 40s. You're effectively middle aged.
And you still don't have a body of work to look back on and say, "This was me."

Would a Nikon D3400 be a good choice for someone buying their first DSLR camera? I was debating mirrorless but DSLR still have more lenses available in comparison.

>>3004785
Lenses available is one thing. Lenses you will need and can afford is more important.

>>3004785
A D3300 would be better, or a Pentax K-S2 or K-70

>>3004786
You can afford more lenses for a DSLR, mate

>>3004792
Kind of not relevant to my point. For example, he could be choosing between many DSLR systems, so it's worth thinking differently.

Or he could be needing a lens with Tilt-Shift features, which costs between 2000-3000 USD because the are MF glass on a DLSR system, but mirrorless APS-C can adapt that shit from cheap 500 dollar rokinon FF glass.

>>3004786
>Lenses available is one thing. Lenses you will need and can afford is more important.
Which is why DSLR is a better option for beginners than muhless

>>3004813
See>>3004797
When you go there, you also have to ask which brands of DSLR,

I know you idiots are just trolling and pretending, but it's worth considering.

>>3004785
yeah
get a cheap body so you can spend more on glass, which is more important.

>>3004823
>get a cheap body so you can spend more on glass
Of which Nikon isn't necessarily the cheapest.

>>3004824
cheap yet decent, of course. And the 3400 is decent enough to start

>>3004826
But some of Pentux/Canon's stuff is cheaper and still decent. So if you're going all in on that thinking, most glass for your money, it isn't necessarily the best place to start.

>>3004828
What would you recommend then?
I admit I've mostly used Nikon and even started with a 3300 myself.

>>3004829
Nothing.

I know you were just trying to bait DSLR vs mirrorless responses.

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

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>3004655
>not opening the gear threads with the ol' secks sebin

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024

>>3004838
I do quite often mate, you musn't be keeping an eye out

>>3004844
Last few have been pentiks that are digicuck mode

>>3004845
gotta keep the plebs happy somehow

I have a manual-focus lens, and the rubber grip on the barrel slips. I wanna glue it back down, so I don't have to pinch it to focus. Do I need any special substance to do that? I read that it was bad to use ordinary cyanoacrylate superglue around lenses, something about the fumes it gives off.

so should I get an EF 50mm f1.8 stm?

I need something for low light situations (rainforest mainly) to be used on a 750D

>>3004853
I would use rubber cement but be sure to clean the surfaces properly before you apply the glue.

>>3004833
What. I was genuinely trying to get some feedback.
Next time I guess you could just shut your whore mouth, then.

>>3004729
I want to hear opinions from a photo editing standpoint because that's what I'm going to use it for, people on /g/ are 90% gamers

>>3004886
I will definitely won't help such an ungrateful little twat

how good is a nikko 28mm f2.9 manual

i dont know the name of that lens when i search nikkor 28mm f2.9 i find the af version

>>3004900
Who said I needed help anyway. I just wanted to share thoughts but your autism showed up.

macbook question... for editing in Lr and Ps CC, what ẃould be better?

macbook air 13"
i5 1.6GHz dual-core; HD graphics 6000; 8GB ram; 128GB SSD
1.199 cad

or

macbook pro 13"
i5 2.0GHz dual core turbo boost up to 3.1GHz; 8GB 1866MHz ram; 256GB SSD; iris graphic 540
1899 cad

i'm sticking with apple because new windows is utterly shit and i'm tired of crashs during rendering or editing

>>3004905
Pro because CPU power. Air is nothing more than a glorified facebook machine. Also get a nice display so the small laptop display won't limit you.

>>3004905
The pro is definitely superior to the air, but both are going to be definitely inferior than a desktop.

>>3004913
Dude, I'm doing my processing on a 2013 mediocre Dell laptop. It will be fine.

>>3004915

>not editing on an Alienware

It's like you don't care about the process.

>>3004901
The best version is the 28 2.8 AIS. It has CRC and is rather sharp. The AI one is not quite as good. The AF model is a turd by Nikon's standard.

>>3004917
It's like you have autism

>>3004905
>>3004915
>>3004917
I do mine on a desktop, but I built it quite a while ago. My processor is getting pretty long in the tooth, being a 3770k, but the vid card and ram are totally fine. I should put my pics on an SSD, but the two in the machine are uh...full.

That's what I get for dedicating the 256gb as my O/S and program drive, and the 512gb as my games installation drive.

>>3004923
>My processor is getting pretty long in the tooth, being a 3770k
3770k what? If dollar that is a very expensive equipment.
>512gb games
Come back when you grew up.

>>3004923
pssst.
3770k is completely fine.
the latest 7700k is only 10% faster.

>>3004926
>>>/v/

>>3004926
3770k refers to the model of Intel processor, not the dollar price. It's an i7-3770k.

As for games, meh. I don't keep everything installed at once.

>>3004928
It's not just about raw GHz though.

>>3004933
If you don't plan on batch processing 100MP files then it will be just fine. My old ass i5 does 24MP quite decently.

>>3004936
Oh, my machine does quite well at handling stuff in LR. Honestly, the best upgrade I've done for that was getting a hold of some old HP ZR24w monitors to improve my size of workplace.

>>3004785
Lenses barely even matter when you're just starting out, at most you're going to use the kit lens and a prime lens. What's more important is actually going out and taking pictures which you'll be more likely to do with the mirrorless since it's much easier to just put in your pocket when you go outside

>>3004943
fuck off autist

>>3004947
No, by the time you need more lenses than the kit lens and a 35mm or a nifty fifty then it's time to upgrade the body anyways. Basing the choice of your beginner DSLR on what lenses that are available is what's autistic.

>>3004950
fuck off autist

>>3004953
Prove me wrong, fag

>>3004957
fuck off autist

>>3004920
how do i know which one i have

>>3004911

I`m going to connect it to a ips monitor.

>>3004913
I know... but i can't handle all those random crashes anymore. i don't know what the fuck they did to win10

macbook air is more affordable to me right now. going to see if i can find a pro 2015 maybe. ther's still some new on sale at BH, but they don't ship to canada

>>3004959
>>3004953
>>3004957
>>3004947

Candy asses

>>3004968
If you build a desktop there's nothing stopping you from sticking with Windows 7. Word on /g/ is that you can get keys on ebay for like ten bucks, if you don't want to pirate it.

Only thing you have to watch out for is that on Skylake systems USB doesn't work until you finish installing Windows and install the drivers. The easiest way around this is to just use a DVD drive like old days, instead of a flash drive.

>>3004972
>desktop
Hello grandpa

>>3004980

Less spent on computer shit means more money for gear.

>>3004980
Well he said he'd be connecting it to an IPS monitor. So if he's going to plop it down on a desk to use it, there's no compelling reason to choose a laptop. Literally the only point of a laptop is mobility, they're worse on every other measure (cost, speed, upgradability and repairability, etc)

>>3004972
it can't be a desktop since I have to travel and be able to send quickly some imgs..

>>3004984
>Well he said he'd be connecting it to an IPS monitor.

That doesn't mean he's only going to use it at his desk, only when he has access to it, otherwise I don't think he'd be that dumb to use a laptop over a desktop

>>3004967
By not being a helpless fuckstick and looking up information on the internet, you useless fucking millenial.

Tried out Pentax Q-S1/Q7 in store with own SD card, IQ is better than I was expecting, kinda keen to pick up on the cheap if I can.

>>3004674

Rough translation.
>There are lots of 70-200 f 2.8 lenses available and this is the most expensive, but we are convinced that there is nothing better. It is Sony's ultimate release.

Shots look good. How trustworthy is Yodobashi reviews?

>>3004702
I'm using an Ultrasharp U2711. IPS panel, 1440p with sRGB pre calibrated. It works like a dream with Lightroom.

Got a 17-50 f/2.8, 50 f/1.8, shitty kit 18-55, and a 55-300. On a Nikon APS-C, but I think I might get a full frame when I get the cash.

What's next on the list of lenses?

>>3005151
Maybe a Macro len? Tokina 100mm f2.8 is nice.

Or a proper portrait len like the nikon 85mm 1.8

>>3005151
Going outside to shoot pictures. Or possibly a macro lens if you ever have the urge. Maybe think of replacing the 55-300 with a 70-300 VR or something bigger before you move to full frame and enjoy dat crop factor. It al depends on what you shoot.

Maybe focus on ancilliary things. Tripods, bags, speedlights, light modifiers, remote triggers.

If you can't think of anything, it's best to put it to roadtrips and vacations.

>>3005154
already got a tripod, bag, flash and trigger. I just have a lens fetish.

>>3005153
...that tokina does look nice

>>3005151
Honestly all you need is a good macro at this point. LBA is all well and good, but you pretty much have your bases covered.

Maaaaybe a fisheye if you like that. I'd like to get a tilt-shift lens, but it's such a silly thing that I would upgrade bodies before bothering with one of those.

File: s-l1600[1].jpg (67KB, 1440x956px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1440x956px

well, I just went off the deep end and bought this as my first DSLR

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-1D-Mark-II-N-8-2MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-no-charger-364-/401261699423?hash=item5d6d0fa15f:g:ZmAAAOSw5cNYf7Au

Tell me how much of a retard I am

I need a Full Frame lens with wide angle, 21mm or less.
Cheap as dirt is preferred.
AF/MF is doesn't matter, but it must have a functional aperture ring which I can work with manually.

Does Canon or Nikon have the cheapest wide angle lenses of that type? Or is it Rokinon?

>>3005195
Probably get a Samyang 14mm.

>>3005197
That one is a bit too much distortion. Is there something else that produce better straight lines?

>>3005189
By the way I plan to try to charge the battery with a universal charger like this one:

https://www.amazon.com/Tenergy-Smart-Universal-Charger-Battery/dp/B001AVUAVC/ref=sr_1_36?ie=UTF8&qid=1417895053&sr=8-36&keywords=12v+charger

The OEM charger is very expensive.

>>3005198
12mm Venus Laowa?

Or just apply lens correction profile and get your straight lines.

I'm aiming at starting a portraiture business but I need to upgrade from my tiny Nikon D40. I'm thinking I'll need a full frame DSLR.

My budget is pretty shitty (making just above AZ minimum wage) so I'll probably have to buy something used. Right now I have a Ricoh film camera with a 50mm f2 and a 70-210mm f4.5-5.6 lens, so I'm thinking of getting a Pentax to save money on lenses. Alternatively I can just be a faggot and buy a Nikon better than my D40 but with a crop sensor.

Is it worth getting a full frame to start a business, and would the glass on my low-end Pentax lenses defeat the purpose of getting a full frame camera in the first place?

>>3005189
That's a great price for an average camera, especially if you're just starting out. Universal chargers are good too.

>>3005244
> Is it worth getting a full frame to start a business
With all new good gear included, you should end up well below a self-employed taxi cab driver.
At least if your competition offers equal facilities and gear and customers care, you might halfway have to to get the same clients.

But it's not just a FF camera & neat portrait lens, it's also a studio with good lights. [Unlike the FF camera it's very unlikely that that is extremely high end lighting, though].

> and would the glass on my low-end Pentax lenses defeat the purpose of getting a full frame camera in the first place?
Yes. Very much.

>>3005245
It's missing the eyepiece cup. I have my old SLR Rebel II that has the rubber eyepiece. Think I could take it off and put it on the 1D?

>>3005252
My first camera was a Nikon D40 and it didn't come with an eyepiece either. I've never felt the need for one on a digital camera given that messing up a shot due to viewfinder difficulties isn't as big of a consequence as it is with film.

Also I think Rebel cameras have their own specifically sized viewfinders. If you can take it off easily it wouldn't hurt to try, though.

>>3005248
In that case would it be wiser to invest in some speed lights and reflectors before upgrading my camera? If anything I'd like to shoot for friends and students on the weekend, to give you an idea on how serious the "business" I have in mind is.

will an m42 mount lens fit on my canon without an adaptor?

File: DSCF0573.jpg (827KB, 1500x843px) Image search: [Google]

827KB, 1500x843px

>>3004708
>Fuji raws are currently incompatible with adobe

Except that's totally untrue.

If you're talking about the soft results, that's largely been solved too, you just need to sharpen differently. Default Adobe settings don't work for Fuji RAWs but tweaking a few sliders around changes things entirely.

Pic related is a comparison between standard settings and appropriate ones for Fuji. Keep in mind that I'm not the best at this stuff and that we're still breaking new ground when it comes to working with X-Trans files.

>>3005333
Oh and just in case it wasn't clear, these are 100% crops.

Looks like I forgot to turn off EXIF stripping, so I'll say here, this was an X-Pro2 with the 23 1.4 at f/10 and ISO 200. (f/10 was probably overkill and there are likely diffraction issues in this photo too.)

>>3005333
>he needs to artificially sharpen to get his raw look sharp
enjoy your halos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLWPnrkWk4o

>>3005333
Wow, the one on the right looks awful, look at the power lines, they don't even go straight anymore.

>>3005324
No. But adapters are cheap.

>>3005333

If you need PP to get meme sharpness, then your problems lie elsewhere

>>3005387
Idiot. He said the default settings in PP makes the blurriness, the settings need to be adjusted to a new default to bring out the original sharpness that is in the RAW.

>>3005391
But in the proof shot it's fucked all the straight lines and left artifacts everywhere. It's dogshit.

>>3005392
Read the post again.

File: 2043698_l.jpg (993KB, 1599x2400px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 1599x2400px

>>3005387
>meme sharpness
How do you like this sharpness? Is it still a meme?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3 II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Windows)
Photographer	ANTONIO
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:17 12:20:14
Exposure Time	1/4 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3311
Image Height	4967
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Macro

>>3005396
>Camera Model PENTAX K-3 II

You tell me bro

>>3005396
>>3005397
Oh wait, this is pickleshift from a Pentack
Sorry, my bad.

>>3005392
What is bayer interpolation artifacts? Actually any kind of interpolation leaves artifacts, the X-trans with it's clumped together texture can produce much bigger artifacting.

>>3005396


>fujishills are so desperate to look good they try passing off shots from good cameras as their own

top kek

>>3005394
What, that you can't follow a tutorial - or that the original tutorial is a guide to horseshit.

>>3005400
This is why you use software that is compatible with your camera. Or it looks like shit.

>>3005409
>software is compatible with camera
>doesn't know the difference is the default interpolation settings
How stupid are you? Do you enjoy the corporate cock, you little consumer whore?

>>3005408
I'm not Fuji user, broski

>>3005414
How stupid are you, trying to get your rafs to work on unsupported software because you realised sooc, silkypix and id were shitting awful to use.

Just buy a camera which the industry takes seriously homie.

>>3005420
I don't use Fuji, broski

>>3005333
>X-Trans files
Why does Fuji insist on being special snowflakes on the edge?

Don't their new 24MP cameras use Bayer filter sensors like everybody else?

I don't know jack shit about cameras, do you guys have a wiki I can read to spare you from endless noob questions?

>>3005477
sticky

Does Canon or Nikon have a 20-24mm equivalent to the cheap nifty fifty?

>>3005481
Nikon has a 24mm f/1.4 but it's like 2 grand

>>3005483
Ain't much nifty fifty about that.

I guess it's inherently a focal range which lends itself better to mirrorless systems.

>>3005486
>what is 14-24 f/2.8

>>3005486

What would the mirrorless "nifty twenty to twenty-four" be?

>>3005489
You mean hat gigantic Nikkor lens that's 1900 dollars? That's not exactly what I'm looking for either.

>>3005490
I meant prime lens in that vicinity, not zoom lens.

>>3005492

But still, what would it be?

The Fuji 18mm is $900.

>>3005495
Fuji is always overpriced so that doesn't surprise me.

One of the other Anons in this thread said Sony is announcing a cheap-ish and small 20mm lens, i line with their 28mm F2.

It sounds somewhat plausible, since Zeiss/CV have shown they can reduce the big size of Zeiss Milvus 21mm and reduce it to Zeiss Loxia 21mm and retain slightly higher IQ.

>>3005499

Sony already has a pretty decent crop 20mm pancake.

>>3005495
The Fiji 18mm averages around $250-$350

>>3005503

Used maybe.

It is a trash lens anyway.

>>3005502
I'm interested in SLR lens for my mirrorless camera, so I can adapt them with Tilt/Shift adapter on my A6000.
I was sort of getting tired of seeing the trees leaning at an angle instead of standing vertical in some of my shots.

Currently the best candidate I can get my eye on is the Rokinon 16mm.

He also said the upcoming E-mount 20mm is full frame. So it's necessarily going to be a bit larger than the crop lens.

>>3005522

As long as it is similar to the Zeiss 35mm it would be perfect.

>>3005523
Oh god I hope not. that Zeiss badge is too expensive.

I can make do without.

Do you guys really need AF at 20mm though?
If you look at DoF scale here
>>3004668
Literally just let the lens sleep at F5,6 and everything from 2 meter to infinity is magically in focus.

The DoF at 20mm is crazy deep.

>>3005528
If my camera had such unreliable AF I would've left it like that too.

File: Tokina-Firin-20mm-Schnitt-750.jpg (89KB, 750x533px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 750x533px

>>3005530
AF is reliable enough. It's more an issue of manual lens being better image quality because it's 0 compromise, and the glass piece can be as heavy and large as you want.

AF puts in further design restrictions.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	PaintShop Pro 18.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	750
Image Height	533
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	750
Image Height	533

>>3005524

I don't care if it has the badge or not, as long as it is the same size.

The 35mm wasn't that badly priced anyway. Launched at $800, but I got mine for $550 not long after launch.

>>3005533
Why are you so deranged?

>>3005536
No need to be so insulting Anon.

Cosina Voigtlander also prefers the manual lens approach, because they don't like the restrictions introduced by AF design..

File: TechArt-Pro-L-Bracket.png (225KB, 676x326px)

225KB, 676x326px

>>3005541
>Cosina Voigtlander also prefers the manual lens approach

>tfw you autofocus dank Voigtlander lenses

>>3005542
Man, we could do away with all that roundabout weightlifting adapters if Sony could just make their IBIS do the Z-axis shifting.

And take it a step further and introduce Tilt-Shift feature for the sensor itself.

>>3005548
>z axis tilting

From my understanding the ibis barely moves, the adapter moves quite a bit. It'd probably be considerably heavier to do that.

It'd be cool as fuck though.

File: seatbelt strap.jpg (23KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x500px

Happy New Year /p.

Anyone have any experince with Souldier Camera straps. I'm looking for a strap for shoulder holding, but I don't want to use the rigs that mount to tripod hole.

>>3005561
I use the wide Peak Design strap because I often use tele cannons. There is a slim version if you have a lighter gear.

File: 1.png (111KB, 851x427px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 851x427px

Did Fuji just kill Pentax's MF business in one big swoop?

Or are we going to see aggressive price war?

>>3005570
Introduction price. The lens deals will die off in a month and the body price will increase, that is how every single introductory deals worked on cameras.
Since internally it is mostly the same as the 645Z I doubt any Pentax owners will run to the store to get the same package. Also I doubt the low number of lenses will attract many users, at least until the selection broadens up a bit. I would love to see a whole line of lenses with leaf shutter and flash sync. But so far Fuji is entering the field with something that is not exactly an improvement on the already available player(s).

>>3005481
Used Nikon AFD 20 or 24
Canon EFS 24 (you didn't say if you wanted a 24 or 24 equiv)

>>3005570
>>3005576
Also with the increased competition the prices will be forced down, including Pentax, so far a modern cmos digital MF will be at the price of a pro FF DSLR. This is interesting times indeed.
With all this said I would love to play around with one, even the older 645D just for the fun of it, even if glaciers melt faster than it's writing speed.

X100F and XT20 announced. It's over, somebody is finished.

T20: similar to the T10 compared to the T1. High end features cut out, all the core bits identical. Best value Fuji camera once again.
F: focus system upgraded, front dial added, same lens. Still fucking expensive. I wouldn't mind owning one, but not at that price.
50/2: there are people who will unironically complain about the focal length, aperture, and/or price. Well, the price is pretty high at $450. Adapted 50mm would be a better deal. WR and AF isn't worth a $2-300 premium to most people who know about adapters I'm guessing.
GFX: >no leaf shutter lenses

>>3005628
>50mm f2
>$450

Is that a joke?

>>3005277
Yes, actually light will be the first thing you want, if in doubt.

Get some studio strobes and diffusers, reflectors etc. Or portable strobes.

Make sure you can adjust their output remotely, there are even quite a lot of Chinese models offering that feature - running around between strobes isn't worth it even as amateur hobbyist when you shoot portraits, takes too much time away.

>>3005565
Do yiou worry about those little round things popping out?

>>3005693
No, they are quite snug. Actually it takes a lot of effort popping them in and takes a lot to get them out, even after a year of switching from the body anchors to the lens anchors and vice versa. Also arca swiss anchor qr plate by default and you can get an arca swiss/manfrotto RC2 qr plate as well.

>>3005711
Oh, and the wear on the anchor strings is color coded so you can see right away if it needs to be replaced.

>>3005641
I wish it was...

>>3005628
> X100F and XT20 announced
They look overly expensive for what they do again. Beh.

>>3005641
I don't feel that'd be much of a problem if it happens to be as great as the 55mm f/1.8 on the E-mount. Which it probably isn't.

>>3005721
It should be a pro grade portrait lens for crop sensor. Pentax also has one in the same price range, the DA* 55 but it is an f/1.4 lens.

>>3005728
So go buy the 90/2 or 56/1.2

>>3005726
Sony shill pls go and stay go. Go glue the AF motor back together on your beloved 55 or something.

>>3005746
> Go glue the AF motor back together on your beloved 55 or something.
So, if you imagine severe problems on all other good lenses (going by Fuji's other lenses, it won't only be the 55mm that is much better), this Fuji 50mm f/2 lens will have justifiable pricing.

Is that how it works?

>>3005760
>>3005746
End it now, both of you! We all agree it is priced way above of what it should be. There is no disagreement in it whatsoever. Get a room or go into the discord thing and spare us the nonsense drama!

>>3005387
You need PP to get ANY sharpness with a RAW. It's an inherent part of the conversion process.

I also admit straight up that I suck at this. Somebody who's actually a landscape or macro shooter would figure it out pretty quickly and get much better results. I'm a portrait shooter and don't publish or print at large sizes, so even default sharpening is generally adequate for me.

All I was trying to show is that the detail is there in the image and CAN be gotten out of it with Adobe processing.

>>3005769
Or more precisely the Adobe process' image degradation can be minimalized with the right settings.

i bought a nikon d3200 as my first dslr a few months ago when i was only interested in photography. i'm starting to want to shoot video, now, and i've heard only negative things about nikon cameras' video capabilities -- should i get a different camera?

>>3005782
Yea, but with -I imagine- there being cost reasons behind your purchase of a pretty poor for anything D3200, it's hard to say what you might want to buy. I imagine it won't be a RED hobbyist cinema camera or something like that.

Perhaps a Panasonic or Sony or one of the FF Canons that supports magic lantern?

>>3005782
If you want good affordable video then get a panasonic gx7 or g80/85
The latter option (not the gx85!!!) is a good combination of good stills and excellent video capabilities. And it doesn't want to catch fire every 5 minutes like the Sony which you have to turn off for at least 10 minutes to cool down somewhat.

>>3005788
i'd say i'm willing to spend up to ~$1000 or so for the body. i just saw the d3200 + lens on ebay for like $200 or something. thanks for the recommendations

>>3005790
thanks

would your suggestions change if i wanted something that would work well for photo and video?

>>3005776
I'd hold short of even calling it "degradation" since Adobe is generating the image from raw data in the first place. It's more like subpar generation than degradation.

I suspect Adobe is working on the whole thing anyway. I keep in mind the fact that X-Trans is quite new, while Bayer has been around for almost 20 years now, and there's still a lot to be figured out when it comes to processing Fuji raws.

Fuji has really taken off with "serious" photographers lately, too. I'm a former pro and when I hang out with my pro friends "off duty" it may as well be a Fuji owner's club meet, pretty much every single one of them has an X100 or a Fuji ILC as a "casual" camera now. A few have actually switched and are using their Fuji gear for real work, too. I think we're hitting the point where Adobe is going to have to get serious about Fuji files.

>>3005817
Since the GH4 is pro budget tier I'd stay with the G80/85. Maybe second option is the Canon 80D or M5 but the video features are lacking compared to Panasonic.

>>3005817
> i'd say i'm willing to spend up to ~$1000 or so for the body
> photo and video
A A6300 or Panasonic G81 would be my suggestions.

The earlier if you still might do a bit more photo, the latter if you might do more 4k video.

Big issue with the A6300 is that depending on ambient temperature, it can overheat on filming 4k video (triggering a thermal shutdown for minutes).

>>3005840
do you think the a6500 is worth it?

>>3005849
It could easily be worth it... or not. Tough question with how many options you have at that price level, really.

But it does offer a good improvement over an A6300 at least. It does have IBIS. It does have a bigger buffer. It does have a bunch of interesting slow / quick video modes extra. A quieter / better shutter. BT on top of WLAN for smart phone connectivity. And more stuff.

Well, at least I don't think it's a device you easily regret buying, it's a fucking nice APS-C, easily a candidate for "the" nicest APS-C camera.

>>3005790
What's wrong with gx80 compared to gx7, g80 in stills image quality? It's small and new shutter+ibis first of all, all the sacrifices get negated by 50% less price.

>>3005860
The gx85 is a compact where the g80/85 is a more serious camera. The gx7 is somewhere between.
You might pay less but you are also stuck with less.

>>3005849
>>3005859
Sony's lenses are either mediocre or expensive.
There's a real problem of battery life, overheating, which I find very annoying.
Mirrorless bullshit aside, the a6300/6500 are very good at what they do, but they can be a fucking pain in the ass to use/get used to.

>>3005865
Easier to stabilize and control a larger body. If you're casual snapshitting and amateur videos, then the GX85 is capable and compact. If you want to be more serious about video, then the higher end bodies come into their own. Stills capability is about the same across all the current m43 bodies.

>>3005869
> Sony's lenses are either mediocre or expensive.
Most are pretty much in line with the performance-quality ratio you get on most other APS-C systems.

Plus you can use Sigma, Samyang or whoever else's lenses, and these offer above average value / quality, even if of course there are still trade-offs involved.

How come it costs almost as much for a large format shutter than it does to buy a 2nd hand lens?

>>3005880
Don't LF lenses have leaf shutters?
Also shutters are high precision parts, It has to be accurate and consistent at 1/4000 or 1/8000s

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/attempting-snapbridge-profe.html

It's over, Nikon should just commit sudoku at this point out of shame.

>>3005886
>Don't LF lenses have leaf shutters?
They do.

I'm talking about a 2nd hand LF lens with a shutter selling for $250-$300 and a 2nd hand shutter selling for $350~ and a new shutter starting at $400-1200.
It's just something strange that I've noticed in pricing.

>>3005888
There's a reason why I tell all the D3400 newbies to switch off snapbridge and leave it off.

>>3005888
What's the tl;dr?

>>3005914
Snapbridge is as awkward to use as any wifi features before and drains the battery like it is a Sony.

Nikon just need to shut the fuck up about action cams and make that D900 already.

It's been 5 years since the D800. How much longer are they going to make us wait?

>>3005914
Nikon can°t program worth a damn, and are rapidly being left behind in a fast modern world while their management are insistent on living in the glory days.

>>3005950
It will be a D820 which will be a D810 with snapbridge slapped on it.

>>3005956
nah they'll at LEAST put the buffer capacity and card support of the d500 into it

>>3005982
That too, but as far as the core camera goes it will be the same.

Is there any way I could use a neutral grad filter with my Ricoh GR?

>>3005950
>It's been 5 years since the D800.

So?
It's still a perfectly fine camera.

You don't have to spend $3000 on a new body every 5 years.
Spend it on lenses instead.

>>3005993
Shove one in front of it?

>>3005995
yeah but I mean without having to manually hold it. I was wondering whether these is something I could put over the lens that allows me to put filters on it

>>3005865
>>3005840
>Micro Four Thirds

lol

>>3005999
>Lumix has not time limit on recording
>Sony bursts to flames after 5 minutes of constant use.

lol

>>3005994
So because you don't want to update a camera after 5 year, it means no one else should either.

The world would turn into shit if you had control over it.

>>3006010
Yeah, it is good to know that Trump is at the wheel

>>3005985
you mean the sensor? does it really need any more megapickels at this point? it already outresolves most lenses. Color resolution could be improved but I think that can wait until a three-color sensor comes out.
do you really need night vision? the only thing that really pisses me off is they won't put in IBIS. In terms of a wishlist, bigger autofocus area, support for a software infinity stop, RAW histograms, magic lantern-type capability, smoother computer tether operation? So mostly I wish they'd improve the software. I mean we are getting pretty much to the point of a perfect 35mm CMOS still camera hardware (in terms of practical lens manufacturing limitations), so much so that most people are already shifting focus to video support. And the bells and whistles it'll inherit from the d500 are great, the light-up buttons e.g. are pretty cool.

>>3005726

Probably closet to the SEL50F18F post fw update.

>>3006016
Because of the earthquakes the sensor fabs can barely work on the enormous backlogs, Pentax K-1, Nikon D810, various new cameras can still only be bought after preordering and waiting for weeks. I really doubt they could push the r&d through with a new design let alone setting the new lines up for the new sensors.
Some other parts might be upgraded like a new processor but regarding the sensors, AF systems etc... there is not much improvement done. Maybe end of this year but more likely 2018 second half.

>>3005728
>pro grade lens

Would be nice for Fuji to finally have one, but that seems unlikely.

>>3006022
oh yeah, I'd be really shocked if they did IBIS or introduced a new AF. IBIS cuts into their lens business and they only upgrade the AF with their pro line.

>>3004990
i did this and have the ai version you fucking cunt

laid 25 bucks for it anyway good buy the ai ks like 150 bucks online got it off a brick mortar shop seller

>>3005685
Thank you for all of this. Before posting here I was looking at full frame cameras despite having only an off camera flash and a mini-diffuser.

>bought a refurbished L lens from Canon
>they sent me a free lens hood that costs $50ish
Do they normally do this or were they just being nice since the lens was a lot of money?

>>3006048
I think most L lenses come with hoods?

Apart from that these hoods only cost *you* $50 if you want to get jewed off by Canon. The Chinese variants are like $3 and the actual price is probably something smaller than the random small gift you might occasionally get from an eBay seller.

>>3006039
Pretty good price, and congratulations on graduating from being a fuckstick. May the lessons learn carry into all facets of your life.

>>3006013
Sometimes the world is reversed Anon. You think Trump is Satan himself, but that's only because his opponent is controlling you though the media and hollywood.

In reality you are the evil one when you want to brain drain their country and steal the bright minds of their young ones and take their best workforce for yourself, instead of letting them stay in their own country to make their own country better.

>>3004668
longest 20mm i've ever seen. That new fuji 50mm f/2 is long also. So are most of the sony primes.

File: ed373351da0e4327983ffcc9ef0c2bb9.jpg (40KB, 560x308px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 560x308px

>>3006153
I think you're visually deceived. It's actually not that much bigger than Loxia 21, despite being 1 stop faster.

The Sigma 20mm F1,4 weighs 1 Kilogram. That that lens is also just 1 stop faster than the Tokina Firin.

I'm definitely have interest in it, not just because it's size, but also because it's half the price Zeiss is asking.

File: 3aa7427cfbf8455787b594e17bd40319.jpg (87KB, 951x641px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 951x641px

>>3006153
Here's a slightly better comparison, the Loxia actually hides some of its length underneath the the lenshood.
So its lenshood actually makes the Loxia seem shorter than it is, but there is optics right in the middle of the hood.

Found a Tamron 24-70 f2.8 in great condition for $800. Should I scoop it? Definitly in need of a good "all in one" lens for my Mkiii

>>3006316
Yes. If you can, save up for a Tammy 15-30 later.

>New metabones 5th generation
>Fast contrast-detect AF on all E-mount cameras

That means I dont need to upgrade from A7s?

>>3006376
Tried one in a store about a week back, it's still nowhere near as good as pdaf af, stutters a lot, still too slow imo.

>>3006377
Tried mc11 on cdaf camera? Only seen very few videos on it but looks alright

>>3006316
>>3006331
Is the 24-70 that much better than the 28-75 f2.8? The latter is around $500 new, though I paid $236 for my copy used.

>>3006439
Yes. The tamron 28-75 is a mediocre len in all aspects. For the 24-70, check decentered problem, zoom ring and focus accuracy.

File: IMG19021-2.jpg (774KB, 1400x927px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 1400x927px

>>3006441
Hm. Well, the used copy I ended up with is fairly sharp stopped down, and it does good work as a walk around lens for me. Unfortunate to hear the 24-70mm is that much better, though. I'll have to upgrade eventually, but that'll probably be after I replace bodies.

Still, it performs well enough for my snapshits of cosplay and other junk.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-5
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Windows)
Photographer	Brandon Postal
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	94 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	1080 dpi
Vertical Resolution	1080 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:20 09:13:17
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	63.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Close View

>>3006439
I got mine for $130 second hand, and for that price it's unreal, but if you're paying closer to the cost of the rest of the competition I'd probably stick with one of the other models.

I've never had a problem with focus (although I'm using it adapted), and sharpness is acceptable wide open. IME Negatives are pretty poor loca and sometimes nervous bokeh, edges are soft until stopped down, corners are dark and soft at 28mm.

I'd only recommend upgrading if you feel the 28-75 is failing you in some respect, for myself zooms are more of a convenience, I'll use primes if I crave quality that day.

>>3006450
I mostly got the zoom for walk-around at conventions. It's much easier than swapping between the old manual 50mm & 35mm SMC-A lenses I have, and the shots come out fairly well regardless.

Looking into it, I don't think the 24-70mm is even available in a K-mount anyway.

And damn, that was a killer deal. Here I was happy to get the 28-74 for half the new price.

>>3006451
I thought you were on canon, I have the pentax version too, it's much faster to focus than the canon cos screwdrive. And it's super sharp in the centre so great for aps-c.

>>3006455
Yeah. Supposedly it's designed as a full-frame lens, so if I ever go for the K-1 or the like, I would expect it to have much softer and darker corners at that time.

>>3006459
Wait, are you on APS-C K-mount? Get the Sigma 17-70/2.8-3.5 or 17-50/2.8
Or go straight for the DA 16-85.

>>3006503
Yeah. I've already go the 28-75mm, and really I need to get a proper wildlife lens before I worry about upgrading that walkabout lens. Maybe in the future it'd be nice.

But I am planning on going full-frame K-mount eventually, so I'm trying to stick to full frame lenses for the upgrade.

>>3006505
I have both the Tamron 70-200/2.8 and the Sigma 50-500. The Tamron is sharp and quick to focus thanks to screwdrive but it can hesitate a lot on a TC and of course slower. The Sigma 50-500 HSM is alright, not as good as a DA* 300 + TC but is cheaper and more versatile. Quick to focus and accurate, nice tracking.
Both are FF compatible.

>>3005860
If you value portability get the gx80. It fits in a pocket and you can take it everywhere. Stills quality is the same for all of those models.

>>3006505
The new Tamron 150-600mm G2 is very sharp at 600mm at f/8 (unlike the G1)

>>3006643
>The new Tamron 150-600mm G2 is very sharp at 600mm at f/8 (unlike the G1)
A telephoto lens that isn't sharp wide open is of limited usefulness IMO. What are you going to take a picture of at 600mm and f8? Pretty much everything worth using a lens that long on (birds and other wildlife, airplanes maybe) is usually moving so you're going to have to track, and likely will wind up motion blurring in most shots unless it's a perfectly sunny day. If the light isn't super bright and you're shooting stuff that isn't stationary you'll wind up with a crappy keep rate. There's a reason serious wildlife photographers use fast telephotos that are sharp at big apertures.

>>3006648
f/8 is fast enough for me, you motion blur the static objects when tracking well, how fast of a shutter speed do you need? 1/400th to 1/800th is enough for me for tracking, that still leaves ISO to spare on cloudy, overcast, etc days.

>>3006648
Have you considered getting good or buying a $12000 lens? Because those are your choices for 600mm on SLR systems.

>>3006654
I have a $10,000 lens, and you still have to get good to use it and get good results

>>3006651
I don't have the luxury of excellent high ISO performance, anything above 800 is noticeably grainy.

>>3006656
>$10k lens
>2004 era dSLR

>>3004106 #
>>3004131 #
>>3004135 #

Two days ago I said fuck it and took the step. I found a sweet deal, met the guy on my way to work and purchased it 14h ago.

>2013 D7000
>Shutter count: 9703 (checked on the spot with a laptop)
>450€

Did I do good /p/?

>>3006697

Not terrible... I've seen them for $450 CAD (300€). But I don't know what the market is like where you are.

Only ever bought one thing used, and it was an excellent deal: A two day old D610 plus two Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB SD cards for $900 CAD. Shutter count was under 50 shots.

Old guy didn't like it, didn't want to return it.

>>3006700
>>3006700
Spanish second hand market is terrible, you can see D300 with a tamron 17-50 2.8 for 900-1100€, with not less than 20000 shots.

People literally would rather not sell it than sell it for a 50-60% of its value brand new. Doesn't matter it's an 8 year-old digital camera, it's "pro" so it must be expensive.

>>3006705

Nasty.

DSLRs became a fashion statement here, so everyone ran out and got one, wouldn't / couldn't learn how to use them, and saturated the used market with them, mostly with very low shutter count.

It's been this way since around 2009. People post them for retail prices and end up dropping it to at least 50% below within a week because nobody buys.

TL;DR: Canadians think all DSLRs are professional, and will make you take amazing photos.

>>3006709
>>3006705
Case in point

http://www.milanuncios.com/camaras-fotos-reflex/equipo-fotografico-220711890.htm

>>3006711

Good God...

Prepare yourself:

http://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorder-lens/city-of-halifax/nikon-d300s-d700-and-d3-dslr-bodies/1231797197?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true

>>3006705
can't you get a used camera from somewhere else in Europe though?

>>3006712
If I only had the geld...
>>3006724
I can but otherwise I'd have to trust the seller's word about the camera's condition and best case if something goes wrong deal with the pain of sending it back, etc. Local market was the only choice for me; instant and knowing what you get beforehand.

File: image.png (180KB, 416x354px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 416x354px

I can't find a AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VRII anywhere shops don't sell it and online stores that do are from Hong Kong and look sketchy.

Anyone know where to get? That's Australian based or ships to Australia?

>>3006775
Why do you want an absolute shit house lens, get a 2nd hand sigma 17-70 or 17-50.

File: MAIN4kcam1.jpg (18KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 960x540px

Should I wait for 4k to be more standard before I get a body or should I get a body that works for me right now that doesn't have 4k?

From my research I'm thinking 4k mirrorless is the right path to get started since I am very new and might be better off relying on an EVF until I get better.

File: Olympus-OM-D-E-M10-II-vs-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GX85-size-comparison.jpg (52KB, 720x354px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 720x354px

I cant decide wich one to buy, anyone knows which is better? They are about the same price rn in my country and they both feel equally good in my hands. I do mostly macro, landscape and Eventphotography, so does anyone knows wich one is more performant in these things?

>>3006739
I got used lenses the cheapest from Spain, but it is a close chain of pentaxians from the forums.
€500 for a Tamron 70-200 mint condition, €200 for a Manfrotto tripod with head, etc...

>>3006797
>mostly stills
Get the Oly and get an adaptor for Canon FD lens and buy all the FD L lens you want.
FD 300/4 L, excellent 600mm equivalent, light and very much portable and it is only one example.

>>3006803
Thx Ill consider that

>>3006696
>he doesn't know that good lens > good body
It's a D700 BTW

How the hell do these random Chinese youtubers have access to a lens that isn't even on sale yet?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_9B8q2k-bc

>>3006817
>Firin
Appropriately named for Sony A7 video use.

Does anybody know of any super-wide (<20mm) primes or zooms which can be converted to M42?

>>3006828
Does the Zenitar 16mm have M42 mount? Might worth to check out, it is a nice rectangular fisheye lens.

Im thinking of getting a Pentaz 645n
Any thoughts on this /p/?

It would be my first film camera, but not my first time shooting film.

>>3006850
I envy you, look for an n-II or n-III
Have fun.

>>3006850
>Im thinking of getting a Pentaz 645n
>It would be my first film camera
Are you me? I'm in the exact same position, was also looking at the Pentacks 67

>>3006858
645 will give you more frames per roll

>>3006852
:3

>>3006858
They seem like theyre mostly in great condition and pretty cheap.

>>3006860
But those glorious 6x7 negs

>>3006867
...wasted because you don't know yet how to use MF.
The 645 will be perfect for you

>>3006869
>>3006869
>>3006869

New thread