GEAR THREAD

Any reason not to buy a used battery grip over a new one?

>>3029383
just check to see if your batteries fit it before buying, maybe also see if it attaches to the camera properly and doesn't slide off if you fling it around

File: 084638FC-0C85-493E-8D02-0A647A60663B-975-00000165468E8E2D_tmp.png (137KB, 817x626px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 817x626px

>>3029388
>fling it around
what did he mean by this?

File: EF0FD087-EC1C-439D-B276-E97288B728C6-3110-000005E6B5921CAD_tmp.jpg (756KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

756KB, 2048x1536px

>>3029362
I'm going on a mountaineering trip to the Andes and I'm trying to figure out what slr would work best
Needs to be
>compact
>lightweight
>uses big batteries (the bigger the more charge it will retain at freezing temperatures im told)
>removable lens
any suggestions?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	u720SW,S720SW
Camera Software	Version 1.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	314 dpi
Vertical Resolution	314 dpi
Image Created	2009:05:31 04:50:04
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	6.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1536
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Compression Setting	Unknown
Macro Mode	Normal

Is the upgrade from a canon 50mm 1.4 to the 50mm 1.2L worth it? I'm using a 6D and shoot a lot in bad lighting. Is the AF that much better?
I'm thinking about buying a used one for around 800€ but I'm not sure if it's worth the money.

>>3029362
Last thread is on page 1 and hasn't even hit 300 you dumb faggot, lurk more

>>3029362
>all that garbage and clutter

I'd sell all that shit to have maybe 2 or 3 decent cameras.

>>3029399
I feel it'd only be worth it for the bokeh rather than low-light purposes. For low light shooting just bump your ISO or use a tripod. Don't be afraid to use ISOs as high as 6400 or even 12000 since you actually have a decent camera

File: s-l1600.jpg (218KB, 1599x1509px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1599x1509px

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FotoPanda-FPBH-40-40mm-Low-Profille-Tripod-Ball-Head-Arca-Swiss-RRS-Comp-20kg-/332053509284?hash=item4d4fee74a4:g:puUAAOSwmLlX39ur

Has anyone used this? Is it good? Looks to be a copy of the RRS BH-40 ballhead.

>>3029410
My main concern is also fast focusing. I have other L lenses which are pretty fast finding the right focus, but the 50mm 1.4 misses it in bad lighting more often... I'm tempted but also a bit afraid of paying a lot for minimal more performance

Bought a new Nikon battery for only $25 today

can anyone recommend the sigma 50mm 1.4 Art?
Sigma has a reputation for doing no quality control, so does this apply also for this lens?
Good/Bad Experiences to share?

>>3029501
>Sigma has a reputation for doing no quality control

False reputation caused by Canon being secretive about their mount.
This causes some combinations of body and lens to either back or front focus.

Maybe test the focus in the shop before buying, especially when you shoot Canon.
That's a good idea with any lens desu.

>>3029395
Canon SL1/100D is about as small and lightweight as a DSLR can get. Its an entry level DSLR so don't expect nice pro features though.

>>3029418
The f/1.2 if only slightly brighter: T1.5 vs T1.6
So you gain hardly anything in low light performance.

The f/1.2 is also quite slow to focus.
This is because it has to move a lot of heavy glass around.

I don't think there is any significant difference in focus reliability.
And shooting at f/1.2 requires even greater accuracy.

>>3029520
Thank you, this helped a lot!

Could anyone recommend for an entry class dslr? i'm an architecture student, lots of these photos will involve mostly landscape and buildings.

I got a bro that showed me that had a sony a6300 that shot some real great photos,and is compact and lightweight that i really liked, but if /p/ has better, possibly cheaper alternatives, i'm all ears. budget is $1200

>>3029580
You could make do with the A6000.

The advantages of an A6300 or A6500 aren't particularly great for architecture photography, your money is likely better spent on lenses and lighting.

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-27 at 10.29.56 AM.png (676KB, 854x844px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 854x844px

Does anyone here use the Sigma MC-11 adapter for a cropped sony e-mount camera? (a6k series)

I was wondering if from anyone's experience, using native sigma lenses on it to sony cameras would work better than using canon mount sigma and canon lenses on the adapter?

First camera:

Looking at a used d7100 body, and trying to figure out what lens to get.

I know i'm starting out, but I've been borrowing a camera from the university library, so I know how to use one and I enjoy photography a lot, but I need to step up.

>>3029580
For a 1200 budget you can get most anything you want as far as upper-entry Nikon, Canon, or Pentax desu
Spend 4-6 on a body and the rest on lenses.

The Ricoh 35mm point and shoot I was about to order on ebay was bought just as i was about to buy it. I'm kinda pissed

>>3029580
a6000
Tilt shift adapter with 20mm or 24mm SLR lens
Samyang 12mm
Kit 16-50

>>3029758
35 1.8 DX, 50 1.8 D, 16-85 VR, 70-300 VR. Pick any or all.

Hey guys, I'm wanting to purchase a 6x7 camera. I'm trying to decide between a Mamiya 7 or Fuji GF670. What should I get? I'll only be using the one focal length lens so I was kinda leaning towards the Fuji.

What are some lenses i should buy for a Nikon D750?

>>3029931
Depedns on what you want to do, but here are some suggestions:
Samyang 14mm
Nikkor 14-24mm
Tamron 15-30 Di Vc
Tokina 24-70 Pro
Sigma Art 50mm & 85mm
Tamron 85mm Di VC
Tamron 70-200 Di Vc
Nikkor 200mm
Sigma 120-300mm (either C or S)

In case anything is ambiguous, it's always the newer / faster lens.

is the canon m5 a good camera to travel with? I want something small that doesnt take shit pictures

>>3029758
Get a 35mm lens

>>3029580
You have to buy a camera around the tilt shift lens you want, not the other way around.

>>3029580
5d mark ii ebay $700'ish
Landscape: 16-35mm f4. The F2.8 II was just replaced by the III version so is relatively cheap. A little soft in the corners.
General purpose landscapes and people: 28-70 F4. 2.8 if you can afford it.

The mark ii auto focus isn't as advanced as the mark iii. If you're shooting things that don't move or don't move fast or you aren't shooting in run and gun situations, the quality is very close. Mark iii auto focus has far more capability, more auto focus points, different types of tracking etc.

If you're really not ever going to shoot anything that moves than the samyang lenses manual focus are great quality. In that situation is forgo Nikon or Canon and get the highest end Sony you could afford. The second things move they become a pain in the butt.

Remember you're really buying into a lens system as well. Once you collect a bunch of Nikon lenses you're not going to switch to Canon because of that commitment. Your can get adapters for the Sony but they'll frequently not be perfect.

Help a bro out? Looking for a more of a beginners dslr on the cheap either between the canon t6 or nikon d3400. For info purposes I used to own an a6000 and a d7100 at different points in time but had to sell them. choosing between these two cameras because they're cheap and I can still have a digital alternative to shooting film. spec wise I know the d3400 is better but I'm leaning towards the t6 because I've rarely gotten to shoot with canons but liked the overall shooting experience with them. Don't really want to get another nikon especially if I'm downgrading and have had one in the past. Any suggestions?

>>3029580

a6000 w/ Samyang 12mm

Cheapest combo and best performing until you go past your budget.

SEL1018 if you want some zoom. Stay away from the new small kit lens, has some major (but correctable) distortion that may hurt architecture photography.

You could probably find a fullframe a7 and keep it under your budget if you wanted to try that.

>>3029723

There are actually two different versions of the Sigma MC-11.

One is designed for Sigma's mount, the other is designed for Sigma lenses on the Canon mount. It only officially supports Sigma lenses, but works very well with almosy any Canon lens. Try google for compatibility lists.

It will only work properly on a6300, a6500, a7ii and a7rii.

>>3029580
If I were you I would go for a used XE1 (dirt cheap) and a samyang 12mm f2. Plus maybe a standard zoom like a 16-50 or the 18-55

File: 7904d9dba27b592d424c3070dcff42cb.jpg (37KB, 1014x396px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1014x396px

Good morning p
Over the past year I got more and more into animal photography and have been doing so with nothing but my phone and some 37mm attachments but I need something more here so I wanted to know if the qx1 (attachment relevant) would be a nice way to up my arsenal. If I wasn't on such a low budget I'd get an a6000 or around that but cash is an issue. First I'd get some adapted m42 lenses before getting some newer gear.


Any thoughts?

TLDR: better than smartphone?

I'm tempted to get the tamron 150-600mm G2 for my a6300.

I've never owned a lens like this and neither a teleconverter.

Iirc the AF just doesnt work if you go above a certain amount of minimum f-stop or something like it?

So a 2x converter would make the lens manual only?

Not that AF would be useful at this length, I think I'd prefer manual focus for these lengths anyway.

Just want to know.

Stupid question.
Looking to get into /p/ and checking out entry level cameras.
I heard a lot of talk about the a6000 being pretty much the best for the price when it comes to still photos
Is this accurate or are there other good cameras for the price?

>>3030933
i'd honestly suggest sticking with what you got and save up for a proper camera/wait for a good sale

>>3030933
it's clunky, and you need to pair it everytime you want to shoot.
don't do it, better get a used nex 6, 5t, a5100.
or canon eos m.

>>3031015
yes

File: EOS_1200D_Default_tcm16-1125480.jpg (49KB, 530x265px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 530x265px

Is this a good beginner camera body?

Also, what lenses are recommended if I want to make pictures of people and buildings?

Reposting from last thread:

My old shitty point and shoot camera just shit itself. I pretty much used it only for /toy/ related stuff though. And I don't really know shit about cameras, this was an older hand-me-down from the early 2000's.

Whats a decent, not too expensive ($150-ish tops) camera that would be good at taking pics of toys?

>>3031065
I'm not an expert, but you could try for a Sony CyberShot or a Canon PowerShot.

>>3031114

Any idea which would be a good one to look at? Theres quite a few of'em on the market it seems.

>>3031118
Recent models are always the best, but of course you can find older models for cheaper. But I wouldn't go back any more than three years, personally.

Make a note of what kind of specs you want (megapixel count, video resolution, etc.) and go digging around for models that match. Then see what you find, what they cost, and which ones offer more to you than others.

File: 17080753629_1532ddebe2_b.jpg (139KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1024x576px

>>3030933

I actually have one of those. Worth it if you are on android, not so much iOS.

It is decent enough, compact, good IQ, and the app is wonderful. Can throw it in a bag and forget about it.

But pairing with iphone is a pain. First, you power on camera, then go to wifi settings on iphone, then select proper network, then open the app.

On Android you just power on camera, touch NFC and go.

Also, while it works great with AF lenses, I'd be hesitant to recommend it for anything manual. No evf, and possible lag in connection just makes it less than ideal.

Plus isn't it priced similarly to a5100 and a6000?

>>3031120

Any chance anyone would know how good/bad a Canon PowerShot ELPH 180 is?

Looking for a dirt-cheap ($20) flash that I can use as a slave to hand-hold. Recommendations?

>>3031166
It's shitty even for a compact, which itself tends to be shitty as compared to even the lower end of IL cameras used here, and this place here is actually more, poor/fiscally conservative than most.

>>3031277
Not even enough money to pay even the Chinese for anything decent.

Save up until you can afford at least a somewhat reasonable flash built-in RF receiver or transceiver.

Something like a YN560 III/IV or better YN660 - they are still only only like $55-70. Dirt cheap.

>>3031062
> Is this a good beginner camera body?
Not particularly, no. It's a low end camera.

Beginners will also do better with a midrange or high-end camera The automatics are better on these, and you kinda know how to operate most details on even a pro camera after just a bunch of days anyhow...

You'd ideally just start with the hobbyist or pro camera you kinda intend / expect to end up with.

> Also, what lenses are recommended if I want to make pictures of people and buildings?
A lot of lenses apply.

Generally speaking, a ~30mm-85mm (FF equivalent) lens should be okay for people and building details, a ultrawide (~10 - 16mm or so) lens with low or largely correctable distortion tends to be good for buildings.

I'd advise against making it all one zoom lens. Two or more good primes / good zooms in the approximate range will do better.

Anyone with the Charters Pole?

The 6M selfie stick basically.

It's just what I've been looking for. Many times I reach up with my tripod and take shots from taller heights.
But this will take it... to a whole new level...

Bit pricey but I guess they have to be made good to withstand the weight fully reached out.

>>3031651
Thanks for your reply.
After lurking around /p/, I decided to go for an a6000 instead. Can you recommend me 2 lenses (one for people, one for buildings)?

I want to take photos of models that are very sharp, clear, and with great colours, mostly with an f 1.4 or f 1.2 lens. Currently I have a Canon T2i and it's fine but I am ready to upgrade now.

Would be convenient to have a smaller and lighter body, so thinking of maybe going mirrorless, but I don't know what the pros/cons are besides size.

Budget is whatever. If I can buy a used camera and lens and sell it a few years later for about 75% of what I paid, that's a good value for me.

File: maximal-power-en-el14-generic-rechargeable-battery-for-nikon-dslr-cameras.jpg (56KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 360x360px

Didn't wanna make a new thread so I'll ask here; what's the consensus on third party batteries? Are they even worth it or is it better to go with the manufacturer's battery? I've always chosen the latter, but wanted to hear other people's experience with generic batteries.

>>3031724
its annoying to put in because you have to go through menu selections every time and you get no battery indicator but i bought 4 of them for less than the cost of a real battery so to me they are worth it.

>>3031724
i have 2x wasabi batteries and 1x pentax battery for my k50. the wasabi batteries work fine.

>>3031724
I got 2 chinky no-name batteries for my X-pro2 for like 17€. Manufacturer brand costs three times as much for just one. At that price I was willing to put up with 50 shots per charge, but these damn things seem like they're exactly the same as Fujifilm's.

QC isn't likely as good in the future, but I got lucky with those. Be prepared to pay for both the knockoff and the real thing though.

>>3030677
I second this. I have the a6000 with the Rokinon 12mm (same as the Samyang) and it is an excellent combo. I love that lens.

Are Zeiss lenses ever worth it?

>>3031778
Depends on what you define as worth it but you are largely paying for the name. They are in a lot of cases marginally better than some other equivalent lenses, but unless eeking out every last iota of quality is your goal, you could probably get two lenses for the price of a Zeiss.

>>3031645
the YN flashes are pretty big, and they swivel and do more than I need.

How do I win at getting rid of my gear on auction and for-sale sites? Idea being not to get scammed and to maximize $$ in a reasonable time.

I need to rig an a6000 securely in a car.
Anyone got any tips?

Reeeeeally confused about how adapters work. I have a Canon AE-1 and a 35mm 1.8 (manual focus only) that came with it. I was told I'd be able to get an adapter to use this lens on my Nikon D5200. I'm having trouble finding one. Can anyone suggest anything or help me understand this more?

>>3031940
Canon ae-1 is canon fd mount so you need canon fd to nikon f adapter like this

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995088-REG/fotodiox_fd_nk_g_pro_nikon_f_adapter.html

Just mount the adapter on the lens and then on the body. It's simple, though fd mount needs some fiddling usually.

Also, there's no 35mm f/1.8 on canon fd mount, did you mean 2.8?

>>3031960
I did mean 2.8, my mistake. Thank you for the find! Hopefully the 1.4x zoom doesn't make too much of a difference.

I'm looking for a telephoto lens to pair with Nikon d610.
I'm amateur so this will be mainly for holiday and music festivals.
Should I look no further than Nikkor or Tamron 70-300?
Or maybe wait for Sigma 100-400 pricing?

>>3031964
I can recommend the tamron 70-300 vc. I had one of those with my d600, it performs admirably and the vibration control is very effective. Can be had for around $250 used.

>>3031963
To be fair, iq probably will not be great with that adapter. Since the flange distance of canon fd mount is shorter than nikon f the fd lenses can't focus to infinity without optical correction, which on a cheap adapter will impact the iq. Without the optical correction the lens focuses much closer than originally intended, effectively making it a macro lens, which can be fun.

>>3031964
Sigma 50-500 OS is very good on FF, I'd say you won't see much difference between it and the 100-400. The Nikkor 200-500/4 would be better if you don't mind losing the short end.

File: Nikon16-35_525.jpg (33KB, 525x315px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 525x315px

Anyone own this lens? Been eyeing it as my next pickup for landscape shots.

>>3032041
Get a Tamron 15-30 instead

>>3032041
It's a good lense.
Altough, since you're asking such a question on /p/, I would advise you to buy a cheaper lens and shoot with it, since the price of the glass doesn't make your photos better.

>>3032042

I'll check it out

>>3032043

Just wanted to hear people's personal experience with it

>>3032040
Both seems interesting, but for their price I could get Tamron 70-200 2.8 for example. But again for holiday shooting I think that I don't need such big and heavy lens. My other idea was N80-400 VR1 used

>>3032057
Actually the Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC Gen 1 would be an even better choice, coupled with the Tamron 2x TC it would be a 140-400/5.6 and the big FF pixels would be much more forgiving with the TC. Light and double the versatility with TC on or off.
Avoid the new Gen 2 though, it is chinamade and falls apart quicker than a Yongnuo flash.

Are 400€ a good price for a sony alpha 6000 body?

And if yes, what lense should i get along with it?

>>3032062
You will need $1500 or more if you want anything half decent on that body.
It would be better if you looked at some lenses you like and choose the system and body for it instead. A good body worth nothing with a bad lens.

>>3032062

It is a pretty good price.

As for what lenses, what type of photography are you interested in?

>>3032063

>$1500 or more if you want anything half decent

lol wut

What is your definition of half decent?

>>3032065
Actually i like
-Taking anything portrait related
-Architecture

Travelling in general

I have absolutly no clue about lenses beside the fact that kit lenses are shit.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (182KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1920x1080px

>>3032066

>Taking anything portrait related

SEL50F18 - Solid, simple 50mm. Fast autofocus and OSS make it a pretty useful lens. 50mm works really well for portraits on crop, though some prefer longer. ~$200-300.

SEL55F18Z - One of the best ~50mm ever made, sharp as fuck, and great IQ. ~$800

>Architecture

Samyang 12mm F2 - Fantastic lens. Manual focus, though that matters very little for architecture. Also great for astrophotography. $350

SEL20F28 - Native pancake. Decently sharp, and small as hell. Maybe a little tight on a crop. A damn fine lens I would like to buy, but way too pricey for what it is. ~$300.

Sigma 19mm F 2.8 - AF lens. Extremely sharp for the price. Many people swear by the Sigma lenses, but I have personally never used them for long. ~$150.

>Travelling in general

Kit might actually be a good idea here for vacation snapshits. It isn't G Master quality, but it is decently sharp, quick to autofocus and compact as hell. Sure the distortion is an issue, but it can be fixed easily in post. The older kit is also an option. It is a little larger (pic related) but generally a better lens.

SEL18105G would also be a good choice. Rather large, but it covers a large zoom range and has above average IQ. See it as low as $450 here.

I am sure some others have recommendations for you of things I forgot or didn't think of.

File: 28-80mm-KEN_6230.jpg (27KB, 460x370px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 460x370px

>>3032066
>kit lenses are shit

28-80 would like to have a word with you

>>3032072

35-70mm F / 4 too.

File: 33f1b1420bbd7914e8352356d60fc11b.jpg (55KB, 550x359px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 550x359px

>>3032074

And I forgot my pic.

File: IMG_1684.jpg (501KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

501KB, 1200x800px

>>3032072
If you take off the front lense group, the remaining part makes an excellent macro lense.
AF still works too.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	Digital Photo Professional
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2015:03:03 11:21:38
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/inf
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1200
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: IMG_1676.jpg (211KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1200x800px

>>3032079
Goes from about 2:1 to 1:3 reproduction ratio,
I believe many other kit zoom designs from other manufacturers will also do this, but I've only tried with this particular lense.
It has very strong field curvature, but essentially zero longitudinal CA, which is pretty rare

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2015:10:12 09:56:34
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/inf
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	0
Image Height	0
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3032072
>>3032079
>>3032082
Oh, but also, worth making the point, with the front group still attached, it is an abjectly terri-fucking-ble lense.
Mind-boggling distortion and mid-frame softness at 28mm.
This-is-totally-not-worth-it CA and softness at 80mm.

>>3032071
>SEL50F18 - Solid, simple 50mm. Fast autofocus and OSS make it a pretty useful lens. 50mm works really well for portraits on crop, though some prefer longer. ~$200-300.

SEL55F18Z - One of the best ~50mm ever made, sharp as fuck, and great IQ. ~$800

So, what kind of differences might I notice between two identical photos taken with each lens?

Trying to figure out if it's worth the cost difference, as it sounds like both will be easy to use, and only difference is image quality.

>>3032082
>good macro
>lots of field curvature
Macro isn't simply the reproduction ratio, otherwise people would simply reverse mount 20mm lenses all day.

So my D300 which I bought for $200 4 years ago is starting to give me grainy pictures regardless of whatever I do.

Have a shit load of nikon AF/manual lens.

What does p recommend? Sony is giving $300 ontop of existing trade in if I get a A7ii so I could possibly make money with my D300.

or should I just wait and see if Nikon comes out with a D620/D775?

File: 20170218_030415.jpg (180KB, 1500x1034px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1500x1034px

Favorite portrait lens that you guys have owned?
If none, dream portrait lens?

>>3031781

Was looking at the Distagon T* 35/2, and compared to the Samyang 35/1.4 and Sigma 35/1.4 Art it looks good for the price. But most of the time no one looks at the details anyway I guess.

>>3032173
After using a 200 2.8, 50mms suck for portrait and there's nowhere near as much bokeh nor is it as smooth.

this is coming from a nigga who had his 50 1.4 fused to the camera body for over a year straight and shot mainly wide open

File: canon_ef-s24mmf2.8.jpg (15KB, 500x286px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x286px

>>3032173
going against the grain here, but I like 24mm for portraits. I might be the only one though.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

>>3032173
Nikon 85mm 1.8G

Pin sharp and top end bokeh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUg5B22dFRk

What's a good lens to use for Leica if you can't afford a Leica lens?

My Voigtländer Nokton 35/1.4 seems to be pretty soft wide open. Is the Zeiss ZM 35mm f/2 any good?

>>3032195
That is a 40mm equivalent, not 24mm. It is good for group portraits or single full body plus some surrounding composition, but for single head and shoulders you will need around 80mm equivalent or more.

>>3032126

The 55mm is considerably sharper (though only noticable in.most situations if you pixel peak). It is also sharp from edge to edge wide open, even the corners. The 50mm is sharp in the center wide open, but you need to step it down to get sharp corners. The colors on the 55mm are also supposed to be considered superior.

If you plan on upgrading to FF someday, I'd say the 55mm is worth it. Otherwise it is kind of a tough question.

There is also an SEL50F18F available, but it has major AF issues.

>>3032316
>but it has major AF issues.
And massive purple fringing. Don't forget the purple fringing

>>3032317

Except it doesn't it real world usage.

There was only that one test where they specifically tried to make it fringe and even said they could do so to almost every lens.

>>3032327
Except it does whenever you have bright stuff in your frame, like exposing for shadows where the skyline is part of your composition.
That is where everything creeping in there like branches, railings etc... will turn everything a massive purple blur.

Help. Friend recently let me borrow his D500 with Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4D for me to shoot sports photography with, and I really enjoyed it. Currently have a 40D with just kit lenses I think (hand-me-down). What would be the best upgrade path to pursue? Do megapixels and low-light ability matter enough to get a new body (I've heard conflicting opinions) or should I get a better lens?

>>3032167
they will come out with a new full frame camera this year, they've as much as said it.

>>3032358
From a 40D? Yeah, almost anything is a massive improvement from a sensor performance viewpoint. The 40D was no slouch back in its day though.

You might look at 70D or 80D (preferably 80D for actually new sensor tech) if you want to stay Canon. If you want the direct equivalent camera (flagship sports APS-C), then you'd get a 7DII and a 85/1.2L. The 85/1.2L isn't going to compare to the AF-D 85/1.4 in AF speed though.

>Do megapixels and low-light ability matter
Megapixels do in the sense that there's not much room to crop with 10 MP, nor the resolution to print big and look as nice. Low light ability matters once light levels drop, or are marginal year round (heavily overcast/rainy cities). The 40D was maxing out at ISO 400... today's crop cameras can be comfortable shooting at ISO 6400.

>>3032211
What about the Voigtlander 40?

I need a good 50mm for my nikon. I'm looking at almost all options. I just want a lens that is sharp and that renders light nicely. Any recommendations? Even a 35 would do the job, I just want a nice prime lens.

My budget depends on how much I can get for my 18-105mm (came with the d7000) + 200 bucks I already have.

Also, how much can I ask for the 18-105? it is in good condition.

For the first time, I tried shooting while only looking at the histogram to guide my exposure, and I've gotta say this is waaay better than the little +/- exposure tickmarks.

Now optical viewfinders appeal to me even less. I don't see how my poor DSLR can recover from this!

File: images (1).jpg (18KB, 443x332px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 443x332px

Hey is there anyway to convert a canon ae-1 to a full analogue/manual camera?

File: img_s_content3-mv1-s.png (50KB, 640x620px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 640x620px

I wanna buy a 360 camera on the cheap.

Thinking about getting a Ricoh Theta second hand, are there any cheaper alternatives that'll do mostly the same job? Basically just buying for shits and giggles.

Bought a Nikon D750 battery grip used for only $210

Really liking it so far

>>3032521
https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-Focus-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0/
35mm 1.8 crop sensor lens

or

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-NIKKOR-2215-Length-Cameras/dp/B00HQ4W4XO

35mm 1.8 full frame lens (so on a crop sensor camera it'll be 52.5mm)

personally i prefer using 35mm focal length and assuming you're using a crop sensor i would recommend the 35mm dx lens

So right now i am testing the camera from a turkish guy

He has a Nikon D7100 with a Sigma af 17-50mm / f 2.8 lense

He would sell it to me for 550 euro

Is this a good deal? It would be my first DSLR

>>3032692
Sounds like an average deal. Figures it should work.

File: 412em5zrVeL._SY400_.jpg (21KB, 500x324px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x324px

I have an a6300 with
- 16-50mm kit lens
- Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 Lens
- Raynox DCR-250 Super Macro Snap-On Lens

I want to get a Sony SEL90M28G FE 90mm f/2.8-22 Macro G OSS

I'm also thinking about replacing my kit lens with one of these
-Samyang SY12M-E-BK 12mm F2.0 Ultra Wide Angle Lens
-Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN-Sony E 440965
-Sigma 30mm F1.4 Contemporary DC DN Lens

Most of my pictures will be of aircraft and scale anime figures. Aircraft are usually static, but we occasionally have airshows with stuff flying around.

Input?

>>3032715

You are gonna get some dank ass lewd anime figure pictures with the 90mm.

Haven't been to an airshow in years, but I am pretty sure 135 might be a little long in a crowd. AF is slow on it too, so it might not be all that great for aircraft flying fast as fuck.

File: IMG_2364.jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

Hey guys, i'm not from around here, i'm more /k/ and /mu/ but I just have a few questions.

So i'm actually a sound guy, sound design/foley etc etc. I was out walking with a friend a few hours ago and i found this in the grass by the side of a road/bridge. I looked around thinking maybe somebody had left it on the floor but there was only one guy with a car but he was far far away from it and wasn't even aware of it. it was muddy and wet so i assumed it had been out in the rain last night. especially as the ring on the strap was rusted to hell.

When fully extended it's taller than me and has 3 extension stages with legs made of carbon fibre. A cursory google makes me believe it's one of these http://cvp.com/index.php?t=product/miller_1505

Any more info?

Thanks lads

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 4S
Camera Software	Photos 1.3
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:03 17:29:12
Exposure Time	1/17 sec
F-Number	f/2.4
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Brightness	0.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.28 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2448
Image Height	3264
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3032715
>I want to get a Sony SEL90M28G FE 90mm f/2.8-22 Macro G OSS
I really like mine, so why not.

It doesn't have fast enough AF to shoot airplanes.

> Samyang SY12M-E-BK 12mm F2.0 Ultra Wide Angle Lens
> Sigma 30mm F1.4 Contemporary DC DN Lens
Try both. One can't do everything, really.

>>3032806
Looks like it's a tripod

Guys I'm this close to buying an a6000.
Do I do it?

I just want to make nice portraits and pictures of buildings.

>>3032806
its a murder weapon

>>3032875
>>3032854
i'm aware it's a tripod, just wondering if it's sought after, decent etc...

thanks

>>3032881
It has three legs, you put a camera on it. There is not much more you can say about a tripod.

>>3032881
I'll buy it for $10

Posting in this thread too about a pair of used linkstar bi color led panels.

>>3032897

>>3032899
>bi
>>>/lgbt/

>>3032863
If you had more money to spend on a better camera, of course that'd be better.

Otherwise, I can't find any important reasons why you shouldn't,

>>3032899
Overly expensive shit. Buy Yongnuo or whatever LED panels off Ali.

>>3032913
Do they have power/temperature knobs and doesn't give off that shitty green tint?

>>3032912
Well I could squeeze my budget to around 700-800 for the body alone if that makes a big difference?
Any recommendations?

File: YONGNUO-YN-300II-YN-300-II-LED-Video-Light-LED-Camera-Light-Color-temperature-controlled-for.jpg_640x640.jpg (59KB, 509x504px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 509x504px

>>3032919
Controls depend on the exact model. I got a remote and knob + buttons on the panel. (pic related is a current dual tone led model, I chose to have only one color of LED on my panel)

Not sure what shitty green tint you are talking about.

>>3032925
I'll look into it, thanks.

Some led panels give off a slight green tint that is noticed on canon sensors quite a lot. I got sony but it should still be noticed.

Whats a good DSLR under 1k for a beginner, mainly for making portraits?

How is the 70D?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Screw-Mount-52mm-Standard-Metal-Lens-Hood-for-Canon-Nikon-Pentax-Sony-Olympus-/281580700581?hash=item418f8483a5:g:gF8AAOSw1ZBUydvd

is this lens hood mountable on the Canon 40mm f/2.8 without an adapter or anything?

>>3033001
A6000 or A6300.

The 60mm Sigma f/2.8 is superb for its price as long as you don't need to bokeh whore. If you do, you could use a 30mm Sigma f/1.4 or Samyang 85mm or such. Or all of them.

>>3033025
Would a 50mm f1.8 with an a6000 work for portraits?
It fits perfectly into my budget.

>>3032921

Not really, a6000 is best sub $1k mirrorless.

You'd be better taking that extra $400 and putting it towards lenses.

What's a good camera for video that does 1080p at 24, 30, and 60 frames that I can get for under $400?

>>3033046
ELE Explorer, GitUp Git, Yi version 1 or 4k.

"Good" is very relative in that price range, though.

File: IMG_0204.jpg (104KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 540x720px

What Nikon is this?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	540
Image Height	720
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: s-l1000.jpg (27KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x600px

Do you think it's possible to mod a single lens glass into a body cap, and transform it into a lens of sort, with a small hole in the cap?
Like a more advanced form of pinhole "lens".

I have a bunch of old lenses that aren't worth a lot. Maybe I could take one of them apart ad use one of the glass pieces for this.

>>3033010
bump

File: meek.jpg (149KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1000x667px

>>3032944
I don't notice anything particularly green, but I'm pretty sure it has some tint with relation to how my Sony sensor would see a fully neutral spectrum...?

Pic is a snapshit with just a single YN300 III.

Anyhow, nothing hard to correct.

>>3033026
Sure, should work okay. See:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=13249&camera=1875

That said, also check out the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 and the Samyang 85mm f/1.4. Personally I'd prefer these, among other lenses (which however cost more).

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

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

Which are better, prime or zoom lenses?
I mean it does seem a bit more convenient to buy a zoom one, right?

>>3033060
Primes give you more sharpness at wider apertures plus smaller physical dimensions / weight.

Zoom lenses let you zoom.

With only a few exceptions, this is how it is at most price points.

> I mean it does seem a bit more convenient to buy a zoom one, right?
Yes, in most cases zoom lenses win for convenience.

But even there there is the exception where you could get more light (compensating for low light) or shallower DoF (subject isolation, bokeh whoring) and could use the wider aperture. Or where you'd just have a lower weight camera to hand-hold if you had used a prime.

I'm personally mostly using primes, but YMMV. Many sure prefer zooms.

File: Laowa_15mm_f2_Laowa_7.5mm_f2_01.jpg (100KB, 850x498px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 850x498px

>>3033060
I use both.

On mirrorless the wide angle primes can maintain a relatively small size. So they work out as my small lenses.

Whereas long focal range lenses will be large under any circumstances, so they might as well be my zooms.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2480
Image Height	1753
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	150 dpi
Vertical Resolution	150 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2016:09:15 12:38:40
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	850
Image Height	498

>>3032806
>>3032881
Yeah it's an expensive tripod and well sought after brand. Depending on overall condition you could easily sell for half retail price in beat up condition, and more if it's been cleaned up and works nicely.

Anyone have suggestions on who makes decent backpack dividers?

File: 666-Pentax-07-Mount-Shield-Lens-5_1382093366.jpg (62KB, 666x436px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 666x436px

>>3033050
Gets done from time to time.

Making one yourself would be tough since you can't control any of the parameters of the lenses you have, you just have to mount them and see how it goes. Note that you'll never make a single element lens that sharp, and it'll be fixed-focus unless you rig up something to move it. You'll probably want to put in some kind of aperture stop though, even if only a fixed one, since a smaller aperture will make things less horrible.

>>3033054
kawaii

>>3033001
70D will be good. Get a Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC and you are set for portraits.

>>3033049
D3100

Haven't really delved in that whole camera thing for years now, don't know what's good anymore or not.
Been using my 30D for the past ten years but I've gotten tired of this clunky ass thing, so I usually just leave it at home or in the hotel at most times for the past trips.
Surely a compact-ish sized camera should be able to perform at the level of a ten year old DSLR by now, most likely even surpass it in terms of ISO performance and all?
Aren't there compact cameras with APS-C sized sensors now? (I only remember those shitty Sigma brick ones)

I've been looking into that whole MFT range but you'd have to buy lenses again and they're not that much more compact then anyway. Even though those Olympus models look pretty sexy.

Anyway, I would pretty much be content if I were able to keep the 17-50mm range that I used on my 30D 99% of the time. F/2.8 or better would be nice as well.

What's a recommended buy or just a general overview of what's on the market now in this specific range?

>>3033054
cute pic

File: 1000-top_1444834821.jpg (98KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1000x750px

>>3033238
>Aren't there compact cameras with APS-C sized sensors now?
There are compact cameras with Full Frame sensors even.

I guess a lot of things has happened since 10 years ago.

>>3033238
Ricoh GR II, Fuji X70 and X100 series

File: DSC04304-01.jpg (251KB, 1567x523px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1567x523px

>>3032735
>135 might be a little long in a crowd
I'm not too worried about crowds. The camera will be in the truck for most of the day.

>>3032735
>AF is slow
>>3032815
>doesn't have fast enough AF
That's what I'm reading. I'll probably swap back over to the E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 if it turns out to be too much of a problem.

Everything else I see about it is overwhelming positive. I think I'll get the FE 90mm f/2.8-22 now.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6300
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:04 13:19:32
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Landscape Mode
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	10.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	16.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1567
Image Height	523
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Landscape
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3033473
Why is the focus fucked? Everything is blurry like on a scratched 1st gen iPhone camera.

Didn't find anything fulfillling about this upcoming topic, so I'll just try my luck here..

So the thing is my APS-C is blacking out some pixels and i've wondered if there's any clever way of performing such change operation by myself. I have read that the main problem will be the correct adjusting of the censor. As I havent yet opened my 550D, I don't know if I'm eager to roll the dice with it cuz the dead picture_elements aren't really disturbing the stable-shots side of the hobby.

Anyway, I have access to CNC-machinery so kind of a adjustment piece may be possible to be made.

How do they calibrate them in workshops? Still a good camera for me and wouldn't want to change it yet

Thanks in advance
inb4 get ur self a full frame etc:)

>>3033552
Transferred to phone via WiFi. Really shrinks it down.

>>3033563
It can be adjusted by special equipment if disassembled properly but you need those special equipments and tools which usually cost as much as a new camera.
It is much cheaper to bring it into your local shop and send it for servicing. It's a bunch of adjustment screws but special sizes so you can't do much with regular tools. Even standard JIS tools are only good for the body disassembly but you will need some spacers too for reassembly.

File: IMG-20170303-WA0010.jpg (43KB, 557x759px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 557x759px

How would my experience differ between an X100F (£1250) and an xPro 2 with XF 27mm lens?
I'd prefer the slightly longer focal length of the 27 but what other divergences between these two cameras?

[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	557
Image Height	759

>>3033563
>blacking out some pixels

What do you mean by this?

You mean the sensor has dead pixels?
If so you can't fix that, but I do think there is software that can interpolate the dead pixels from surrounding working pixels. - can't remember what it's called but it's based on dcraw (a free as in freedom decoder for raw files).

If you only have a dirty sensor you just need to clean it - that's easy.

>>3033060
>Which are better, prime or zoom lenses?

Zoom lenses with a small zoom range (4X or less) tend to be very good.
Zoom lenses with a large zoom range tend to be utter shit.
Prime lenses in the 24-85mm range usually have a wider aperture.

So best set of lenses:
- one ultra-wide zoom
- one telephoto zoom
- one or two fast prime lenses to fill the gap between the two zooms.

And out of those you'll want to start with either the ultra-wide zoom or a wide-ish prime because wide is better than telephoto.

I currently own

>Nikon D7000
>Nikkor 50mm 1.8D

I'm thinking of selling just the body and buying a Sony A6000. Would this be a downgrade/sidegrade/upgrade/stupid idea?

>>3033669
It's an upgrade.

But you won't be able to adapt that lens without losing AF.

>>3033676
Do you mind detailing which important aspects make it an upgrade?

I don't mind the loss of AF, since I rarely use it anyways.

>>3033683
It has a newer sensor on par with more resolution.
On the video side it has better codec, 50Mbps XAVC S at up to 60fps.

Too bad you missed out on the holiday season sales.

>>3033669
Pretty much a sidegrade. You're going to have to completely abandon one system for another, and one that doesn't do anything drastically different from what you have already.

>>3033704
What do you mean by system?

I only have one Nikkor lens, which the other anon said I could use with an adapter.

Not confronting, just genuinely asking

>>3033704
Going from D7000 to something like D7200 is pretty damn drastic.

24MP on a more modern sensor is a very good sweet spot.

Currently shoot with a 60D and debating renting a 6D for a trip to Italy and then I actually go straight to Vegas after on a work trip but I may be able to get to a national park.

Rental would cost about $210 with full theft insurance. Real advantage is obviously full frame and better IQ, much better ISO performance, etc but also the fact that I go from carrying a 24-105 + 10-18 with my 60D and have to switch somewhat frequently to just using the 24+105 since 24 is wide on FF.

Anyone make the jump and feel like it was worth it?

Can't really justify paying the $1200+ it cost to buy one right now, especially with Mark II in the future!

>>3033740

Rental period would be about 19 days btw, so ~$11 a day.. seems easier to swallow when I think of it that way.

>>3033740
What kind of rental place would give you a body for 11 days for only $200? Usually bodies go for $100-200 a day, depending on the place and the model.

Just shoot with the 60D, you're falling for the FF meme. Pick up a standard zoom that's made for APS-C though, the 24-105 is kinda useless. Or pick up the EF-S 24mm.

>>3033742

What? Go look up any of the big lens rental sites like borrowlenses, lensrentals, etc.. they are all about the same price. $10-15 a day with coverage.

24-105 is only less useful on crop because the 24 isn't wide enough in some areas (buildings) which is why I carry the 10-18 with me. Don't see how a prime 24mm is gonna fix that.

ISO performance is light and day between the 6D and 60D.. keep in mind the 60D is now basically a 7 year old camera. Shooting at even 800 ISO is sort of testing the limits of usable desu. With the 6D most people who make the jump say you can go up to 6400 ISO.

>>3033751
>What? Go look up any of the big lens rental sites like borrowlenses, lensrentals, etc.. they are all about the same price. $10-15 a day with coverage.
Life in Canada is suffering.
>With the 6D most people who make the jump say you can go up to 6400 ISO.
So you want 2015 APS-C performance?

Just kidding, if it's that cheap, get the 6D on rental.

I am looking for a camera
>I am a total beginner
>Just take basic pictures: scenery, portrait of people during sightseeing, pictures of my plants...
>about $250 (can go up to $300 if there's a quality gap) to spend.
>digital
>Don't mind buying second hand, I am not looking for bleeding edge, I just don't want to buy a glorified compact camera that would take pictures comparable to what my smartphone can do.
>If the camera can be "modulable" (I have in mind having several lenses, filter or accessories should photography stick as a hobby) that would be nice.
>If I can get a camera that could impress the opposite sex, that would also be nice.

>>3033756
>If I can get a camera that could impress the opposite sex, that would also be nice.
Doesn't work that way Anon. They repel the opposite sex.

File: canonguide.jpg (123KB, 1136x404px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1136x404px

>>3033756
Pic related.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1136
Image Height	404

>>3033756
>tl;dr-I want to spend a fraction of what I spent on my cell phone for a much more capable and specialized device

>>3033753

If there isn't something like that in Canada you should start one, and I'm not really even memeing.

Think about it.. this 6D cost them probably $1200 off Canon's site refurbished. They probably rent it out for 2-4 years before selling it.

If you rented something out about 65% of the time, you'll end up making about $6-8K off the camera. Then you can probably sell it for $800 on your website after.

You have to deal with overhead on fraud but it's a pretty lucrative business it seems.

>>3030584
Get the M6

>>3033762
>You have to deal with overhead on fraud
That's the problem. Canada's only mail service rental company had problems with Canada Post packages being "lost". Prices weren't that great anyways. Beau Photo in Vancouver and Henry's in Ontario represent the best prices for photographic rentals in Canada. $100+/day for most bodies, $40/day for 2.8 workhorses.

Also consider Canada has a 10th of the population, spread out over quite a bit of space. I don't think there's a market for a mail order rental company that could get costs down to beat the local rentals. Canada Post isn't as cheap/subsidized as USPS.

>>3031724
Li-ion are usually pretty good and generally have a higher capacity than the OEMs if your camera's several years old. I'd go with the stock batteries if they're not much more and your equipment isn't so old that they'd be worn out given the age, but otherwise, third party are fine.

Chink Ni-MH replacements are fucking dogshit and don't hold a charge for more than a few days.

>>3031778
If you want superior quality that other 35mm lenses can't offer, buy a digital MF body.

File: rare2.jpg (24KB, 320x291px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 320x291px

Older full frame or newer cropped frame? And why?

>>3033784
New apsc, because they shit all over outdated full frame sensors

>>3033778
>spread out over quite a bit of space.

doesn't something like 90% of canada live within 75 miles of the southern border?

>>3033238
Canon M6

>>3033751
>Shooting at even 800 ISO is sort of testing the limits of usable

How clean of images are you aiming for?

File: JUST.jpg (647KB, 1646x1645px) Image search: [Google]

647KB, 1646x1645px

So has Canon killed the 400mm f/5.6?

>>3033796

Well as clean as possible really..

My goal is in every city I visit to get at least one great shot that I can print fairly largely for my wall (like 24 inches max length/width so nothing crazy but still)

>>3033800
How many feet of wall do you have?

>>3033798
Nevermind, it's back up.

Yesterday, there was no option to buy it nor did Canon list as out of stock.

Hi /p/,

The time has come for me to move from Dx to Fx. I have been shooting with a D300s for about 7 years now and I'm torn in between the D750 and D810.

From the looks of it, the D810 is more expensive but the price difference (600$) is not that much considering I'm willing to spend the amount a d750 cost.

Considering I'm mostly shooting landscapes and that I'm not a professional photographer, is the D810 "too much " and i should buy a d750 ? Or should I just go the extra length and go for a d810 ?

Thanks !

Red pill me on lens hoods

How's the Sony E 55-210/4,5-6,3 OSS?

I can get it for 150usd.

I don't have any zoom lens. I was looking at the 18-105mm but it just doesn't have the range I'm after.

But I am considering the sigma 150-600mm as well...

>>3033909
Its basically a handy zoom lens, I use it more often than I realize even though I prefer primes a lot more.

>>3033909
It's actually sort of okay for the money. It's part of my trio, I have the
Rokinon 12mm F2
Sigma 30mm F1,4
Sony 55-210mm

I heard some Anons say you can actually mod it so it can be used for Full Frame E-mount as well, with nearly full coverage as the wide end.

>>3033904
They help prevent lens flare...what is there to explain about them? Modern lenses with better coatings mean you could probably get away without them sometimes but they still do a valuable job if you're shooting towards the sun.

File: 1487861080955.jpg (241KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1280x1280px

Is there a sony e mount 70-200mm f/2.8 besides the Sony branded $2,500 retardedly expensive abortion?

>>3033929

You can adapt a Canon lens. $250 adapter and $1000 or so for a lens without IS. Sigma and Tamron are cheaper too.

But the best IQ comes from the stupid expensive Sony.

>>3033910
>>3033911
Huh, alright then..!

I got those two other lenses as well.

File: 1485891486141.jpg (203KB, 1241x1511px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1241x1511px

>>3033935
All these feels. I was on the fence about selling off my Nikon gear to go full Sony, hoping an EF Tamron gives good IQ. I guess I'm going with an adapter. Thank you for the guidance anon.

Also fuck Nikon for being remarkably incompetent in their business and R&D strategy.

>>3033959
Sony is making quite a few mistakes as well though.

They think the A6000 is invincible at its price point forever and hasn't bothered revising a new model for that crucial price point.
It's going to cost them in the end when the other camera makers offer something even better at the 500 dollar mark.

>>3033959

There is a Nikon adapter too, buy I don't think it is anywhere near as good.

>>3033965

Absolutely, but nothing comes close to the a6000 for under $1000 yet.

File: 1486054379069.jpg (112KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 720x960px

>>3033965
>It's going to cost them in the end when the other camera makers offer something even better at the 500 dollar mark.

Sony's development strategy is beautiful. They can drop the prices of their higher end 6000 series SKUs and release the successor in no time because the marginal cost of production is no where near what Nikon and Canon have for SKUs relative to the price range.

Sony's strengths come from their production flexibility and after the a6500 it's clear that they aren't just sitting on their ass jacking off like Nikon and even to a lesser extent Canon.

Don't get me wrong, if I had an unlimited budget I would love to shoot Canon, but in terms of value, quality, and future prospects, Nikon is trying to make me a suck a dick and Canon just doesn't offer me the bang for the buck.

In a perfect world all three would be competing with each other driving up quality and driving down prices, but I think Nikon's executives are busy fingerpainting and Canon is more like the invincible feeling bunch you're talking about.

Why aren't free market principles making everything better for all brands? REEEEEEEEEE

>>3033803

Enough...

But really, I want to get a lot of shots of stuff at twilight, evening, night, and early morning. 400-800 will probably be minimum ISO during a lot of this time and likely have to get into 1600 and 3200 which is legit unusable on the 60D, not just noise but color, etc gets fucked.

>>3033863
It's easy to get grey market D810s under $2000 now. If you're coming from a D300, the D810 will feel more familiar.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2017/03/03/fuji-gfx-first-shots-the-best-lab-images-weve-ever-seen

sony fags on suicide watch.
pentax 645z deprecated.

>>3034003
>pentax 645z deprecated.
Well duh. It has a useless mirror that doesn't even help it with fast AF.
And it costs 2000 dollars more than the Fuji.

Pentux is being hit right below the belt in the value where their fans thought they were good at.

File: 51G7Iubm%2B3L.jpg (39KB, 500x396px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x396px

>>3034003
The Pentax mount is completely fucked. The sensor is misaligned and pushed off center where the lens performs the best.
>Pentac engineers in charge of precision work
Hasselblad, Fujifilm, Phase One will have a permanent advantage due to this fuck up.

>>3034003

It's true, just check on ebay, there's tons of people putting their 645zs up on auction to get the Fuji.

>>3033971
Is that an LPR patch..?

File: 2014041600024_2.jpg (181KB, 620x620px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 620x620px

>>3034018
can't really blame them. One is 1,5 Kg, the other is 0,7 Kg.

Pentax had the opportunity back in 2014 to lead the market with a mirrorless MF camera that's lighter than traditional FF DSLRs. But they chose to build a slow behemoth instead.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 11.0 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1804
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2014:04:16 12:01:09
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	620
Image Height	620

If Fujifilm were smart, they could steal the Tilt-Shift lens market away from Canon.

- Develop a good wide angle lens for the MF system
- Save $ and recycle that lens design by adopting it into a T&S lens for FF mounts, and even APS-C mounts.

>>3034017
>The sensor is misaligned and pushed off center where the lens performs the best.
wat

>>3034046
Can't you see that with your own eyes?

>>3034047
Umm... that's the mirror?

>>3034050
And what's behind the mirror?

>>3034051
Your tiny dick?

>>3034052
Medium format dick.

But yeah, retarded engineers are retarded.

File: bod_img_01.jpg (81KB, 463x354px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 463x354px

>>3034051
A sensor that is perfectly aligned? You know if you photograph it a little bit off it will appear misaligned.
Basic elementary geometry, something you clearly failed in.

Recommend me some nice, sharp lenses for my nikon FE. I'm looking at maybe a 28mm, 50mm and 80mm.

>>3034057
KEK that looks shooped as fuck.

Actually, you image shows another misalignment AGAIN. Just in the other direction, it's pushed off center downwards.

>>3034061
Keep dreaming, kid.

>>3034063
>this much denial
It takes 5 seconds in an image program to verify that shit is off center.

File: e9d.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

>>3034064

>>3034053
You mean croped medium format dick, jewboy.

File: 650_1200.jpg (37KB, 650x219px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 650x219px

It looks like Pentax really did simply push the sensor as close as possible to the contact pins.
And completely disregarded the center position of the mount.

Strange design choice.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	27 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	27 dpcm
Image Created	2014:04:15 12:09:25
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	650
Image Height	219

>>3034076
Are you seriously trying to troll with your shitty geometry knowledge?
The bayonet is way more forward than the sensor if you look at it at an angle just a tiny bit the sensor will look off.
No wonder you guys elected Trump.

File: 1.jpg (84KB, 649x500px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 649x500px

>>3034080
Meanwhile at Fuji, it's perfect.

I know it must be hard to admit such a screw up.

>>3034082
see
>>3034067

>>3033904
I like to use them so that I don't have to use front caps.

>>3034059
What's your budget? There is like a million and a half lenses that'd work fine with your fe. Nikon ai, ais and d lenses all work great, you can mount older nikon lenses as well, but you have to use stop down metering. Then there's third party lenses, eg tamron adaptall 28/2.5 is great and well made lens for next to nothing. Nikon e series lenses are cheap crap compared to their better stuff but still good enough for casual shooting. Research man.

>>3034076
There's at least 70mm between the sensor and the pins you idiot.

>>3034087
That explains why they couldn't afford to put the sensor into the center, and make the distance to the pins even longer.

>>3034086
Less than 200$ each? Give me two tiers: 100$ or so and 200$ or so.

How is my focal length choice? 28mm, 50mm and 80mm pretty much cover everything?

>>3034097
I should say I'm concerned about the quality of the glass; MTF curves/lpm. Since I obviously can't make use of modern AF features, I don't give a fuck if lenses are all manual. That's what I'm used to. If getting old manual lenses with good glass will save me $, I'd prefer to do that.

>>3034100
If you use film, why do you care about lens quality?

>>3034102
2 reasons: I can use them with digital later on, and because you can tell the difference in glass quality on film.

If I'm shooting low ISO high grain emulsions, it can be very evident. Right now the E series lenses I'm using produce images that look like fucking paintings in mud.

I've been interested in photography for a few years but I've never invested in a proper camera, I've used my phone and some basic compact and bridge cameras.

I know very basic stuff like the how the exposure triangle works and I like to use manual setting when I can.
I also like taking night shots and shallow depth of field shots.

I was wondering what camera can I get with best bang for buck that does what I like.

>>3034106
Optically I'd say nikon af-d series is probably the best way to go simply because they are newer (better design and coatings, less wear). They have af as well, if you later get a digital(or film!) body that has integrated af motor. Manual focusing them is not the best experience, but can be done. Any 24 or 28 f2.8, 50 f1.8, 85 f2/f1.8 (or 105 f2.5) ai/ais/af/afd should cover pretty much anything and they should be in your budget.

>>3034108
Pentax K-50 or K-70 with kit lens and DA 35/2.4 prime.
Nikon D3300 with kit lens and AF-S 35/1.8G prime
Canon 1300D with kit lens and EF-S 24/2.8 prime

File: uk-nx30-18-55mm-lens-ev-nx30zzbgbgb-000000037-right-angle2-black.jpg (129KB, 802x615px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 802x615px

I'm a casual with a Samsung NX 2000 mirrorless and 18-55+50-200 lenses which I like. But I want to get a larger body to fit my Sasquatch hands. Should I get a used/new Samsung nx30 to go with my lenses, or get a second camera like a Nikon D3400?
The Nikon is cheaper but I would lose out on having my telephoto lens. I also like the flexible screen and viewfinder on the NX.

>>3034119
Pentax K-1 or Nikon D750, D810 if your budget allows.
If poor then get a used D7000 or D7100

File: 61iL9sYiBKL._SL1024_.jpg (98KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1024x1024px

I bought a 50mm prime for my cropped- sensor EOS, and i can't fit a fucking thing in the frame.. what do?

>>3034002

thanks, ill look into that !

>>3034133
Take a couple steps backward
Or return it and get a 24mm pancake instead

>>3034118
hey, thanks for the suggestions

I know a family member with a D3200 that I bet I could get off of them at a bargain since they've gotten a new camera.. Is the D3200 vastly inferior?

and If I bought that lens its compatible right?

>>3034140
It is good to start, yes. Try not to be an annoying twat when asking for it though.

>>3034133
use your feet to move towards where your back was facing until you can fit said fucking thing in the frame

>>3034139
or this. 50mm on crop = 80mm, can be very tight indoors.

>>3034143
Will do (meaning I wont be), thanks a ton.

>>3034108

a6000

Pick up a few wide aperture primes and bokeh the shit out of everything.

Just ordered an a6300 and 2 lenses, pretty excited.

I wanted to get into /p/ for a while now and I finally have enough money.

>>3034278
It's pretty good. It costs a bit more than the A6000, but it also has much large pixels than it, and will perform better in low light.

>>3034119
>samdead
nx1 or gtfo.

>>3034278
>not a6500
goofed

>>3034294
slightly better.
it's the same sensor with some tweaks.

>>3034303
Too expensive, my man. I wouldn't have been able to buy the lenses that way.

>>3034294
Yeah I wanted to go for the a6000 at first but I read that a6300 can shoot in 4k so I just scrapped a bit more money and went for that one.

>>3034303
He only really miss out on the buffer for sports and the IBIS.

>>3034306
No, it's actually a massive improvement, much like how you see the D7200 have better low light performance despite being 24MP compared to the previous previous 16MP D7000.

The pixel count in the A6300 didn't upgrade, but the pixel area itself was upgraded massively.

Nikon 24mm2.8D or 35mm1.8G ED?
Landscape and general. Just want to get my set complete with good lens fast lenses

File: 1.jpg (1MB, 1920x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x2160px

Jesus, what kind of magic is this?

There is this huge chain physically in the way, but the STF lens can just wipe it clean and see details behind the chain.

It's not like the chain suddenly became invisible or anything, but nearly just disappears.

>>3032601
Set the aperture ring to anything other than 'A', or use a Canon FL lens instead of an FD lens.

>>3032173
I'm not much into portrait photography, but the AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G does nice portraits on a DX-format camera IMO. My Dad raves about his AF Nikkor 85 mm 1.4D for portraits, despite the noisy AF.

>>3034368
Things out of focus can go invisible. That's why lens dust does not affect image quality. Or why mirror lenses can have a big blockage in the middle of the lens and still be able to perfectly see whatever is in focus.

I don't know the actual science behind it, but most people are familiar with this mechanic in one form or another.

>>3034368

Do you not understand how focus works?

File: _ACM5035.jpg (352KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1000x665px

>>3032195
going 24mm for portraits? Not a bad choice, but I'm planing about the 35mm for both portrait and landscape..

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D700
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Photographer	Mirari
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	804
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:04 01:31:56
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: 1378939648609.png (65KB, 250x221px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 250x221px

>>3034368

>those highlights

>>3034320
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a6000&attr13_1=sony_a6300&attr13_2=canon_eos5d&attr13_3=canon_eos5d&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=3200&attr16_3=3200&attr171_1=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0

wow, massively less noise.
not.
they changed the wiring to copper and managed to recover some photosites area but still not bsi.

D300 APS-C 2007
D500 APS-C 2016
D600 Full Fr. 2012
D700 Full Fr. 2008
D750 Full Fr. 2014
D800 Full Fr. 2012

Has Nikon gone completely insane over the years?
There is no consistent pattern in terms of naming vs Format, or naming vs release year.

From 2002 to 2008, they used to be very orderly.

It's 100% bonkers.

>>3034337
Depends what you have already, and what focal lengths you prefer.

>>3034498
Coming to you from the same company that can't manage any of their product lines, or have any sort of successful marketing.

>>3034498
Nikon has never made sense. Top tier bodies get a single digit, cool. Second tier should get two digits, right? Nope! Give them three. What gets two digits? Old gen third tier!

They really fucked up 9 years ago by not splitting their naming into DX and FX with the D3, D300 and D700.

The D3 should have been the FX1, the D700 the FX100. Entry level full frame like the D600 would get the same four digit treatment as the crop bodies (FX1000). Crop bodies would have a DX designation in front.

>D300
DX300
>D500
DX400
>D7000
DX7000

>D3
FX1
>D700
FX100
>D600
FX1000
>D800
FX200

Solves the issue of figuring out which lenses go with which cameras, and it's aspirational-purchase ready since there's such a clear delineation between product lines.

Mirrorless should be MX.

File: A7rII-GFX-1024x653.jpg (130KB, 1024x653px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1024x653px

FF is dead.

File: Figure2c.jpg (189KB, 735x587px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 735x587px

>>3034543
Backside illumination technology is really awesome. It helped the A7Rii fight above its weight class.

File: Dpreview.jpg (98KB, 577x330px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 577x330px

>>3034421
>and managed to recover some photosites area
The area increase does seem to have a very visible effect on resolution in the corners of the frame. The kind of stuff people buy very expensive lenses to achieve.

It's not as good as BSI, but it's sort of a step in the right direction.

How long will it be until some used Nikkor 70-200 FL's start showing up on the market?

Thinking about getting the new Fuji x100f for street photography. I already have a fx dslr and professional level lenses but they're really noticeable and not good for candids. Is that Fuji a good choice?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr8vg52y-wM

>tfw hipster tax

File: Screenshot_20170306-092812~2.png (551KB, 1080x1494px) Image search: [Google]

551KB, 1080x1494px

I'm wanting to get into film. I was wondering if this camera was a good place to start. I don't know much yet or anything about requirements. I just wanted to learn and try medium to large format. This one goes for $110. Should I try this?

>>3034686
plastic crap.
go back to md ii generation.

>>3034682
get the x70 instead.

Anyone with sony e 2x teleconverters?

I got a little tempted of the samyang 135/2 with one.

>>3034851
>teleconverters
Not even once. Just crop.

Should I buy a rebel T6 body for $275?
Apparently it's new.

>>3034911
Might aswell shoot with your phone

>>3034915
Is it that bad?
I was thinking of picking it up to compare to my D5300 or just flip it.

>>3034918
Gear is gear the same shot made by any device will be good if its good

File: IY0P5178.jpg (4MB, 3504x2336px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3504x2336px

Well, I finally got my first DSLR that works.

After I sent back the 1d Mark II N with the battery problem I found a different 1D Mark II in a lot better shape with a 50mm 1.8 lens included. So I bought it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/262858740917?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

It's in really great shape and seems almost new. There was no charger included so I took a chance on this 3rd party one:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/332127361034?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

I connected the leads and left it charging in the bathroom for 2 hours. The red "charging" light never went off but I figured that was about enough time so I disconnected it from the wall and the charging light turned to green to indicate the battery is fully charged.

I put the battery in the camera and it started right up and the camera says it has a full charge.

All camera functions seem to be working properly. Now I just have to learn how to use the thing :^

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.2
Serial Number	0000219775
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:06 03:36:31
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Tv-Priority
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Spot
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Unknown
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	4
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Camera Actuations	4853
Color Matrix	1