/gear/ - Gear thread

Should I get a cheap point and shoot camera? Will it be better than a camera phone?

I've got a lg g2 and the camera is terrible.I think it's fucked up.

I need to take better photos and some video for some projects.

I was thinking about getting a cheapo used canon 400D and a cheap lens but I still need a solution for video...

help

Did sony just stop pumping out bodies? The full frame ones are taking their time to depreciate.

>>3055048

They had an earthquake and their high-end fabs got fucked.

It is part of why they dropped so high in sales, their high end bodies were flat out unavailable for months.

Rumor has it a7iii and a9 will be announced sometime this month though.

File: EXIF_inf.png (747KB, 1200x4480px) Image search: [Google]

747KB, 1200x4480px

>>3054999

EXIF analysis.

This is only of stock photography, however.

Seems heavily weighted towards RUSSIAN stock photography too.

>>3055125
...and this is relevant how?

>>3055037
eos m + kit lens.
sony nex + kit lens.
panasonic gx1 + kit lens.

the other brand are shit for videos. the cheap cameras that is.

>>3055048
kumamon died.

>>3055255
Who the fuck cares about your pokemon you autistic manchild?

Guys I'm debating on getting the 24-105 f/4 IS or the 24-70 f/2.8 lens for my Canon.

Pro of 24-105
>cheaper (around 200$ less)
>lighter (I mostly do travel photography and have to carry it around with me a lot)
>extra 35mm of focal length
>IS allows me to shoot at slower shutter speeds (I mostly shoot handheld

Pros of 24-70
>better image quality (less chromatic aberrations, sharper)
>extra stop of light
>???

Are there any other arguments speaking for the 24-70 I'm missing?

>>3055290
What for?

>>3055294
travel photography. Mostly architecture/landscape/general snapshitting

>>3055297
Both will be good, the 24-105 is better for video. If you have the budget, go for the 24-70 and get a travel tripod like the manfrotto befree.
If you get the 24-105 then also get the trippd, it is practically essential for landscape. Also compare sharpness and CA at f/8-f/16, that is where you will mostly use them for landscape and architecture. If the difference is small I would go for the 24-105, more practical, more focal range and IS.

>>3055290
Sigma 24-105 is much better.

>>3055037
>Will it be better than a camera phone?

Not if it has a slow zoom lens, which most do.

Phone cameras are fairly decent because they have reasonably fast prime lenses.

>>3055290
Af speed and accuracy
Weather sealing
Build quality
Less sample variation

Having owned both I'd never buy tge 105 again.

>>3055300
I looked at some test shots, seems like there's not much of a difference there thanks
>>3055304
in what regard? It's priced between those two so it's certainly an option
>>3055309
none of those things really seem like a deal breaker for me personally desu. Was there something else that bothered you about the 24-105?

>>3055315
> Was there something else that bothered you about the 24-105?

The images never got past pedestrian, I never like the rendering and it feels like plasticcy shit. I wouldn't put a red ring on the 105, it's not worthy.

>>3055315
>in what regard?

In every regard:
Better optics, better build, better stabilization.

The Canon 24-105 only makes sense as a kit lens, where you can get one for about $300.
Sold separately it's way too expensive, even on the 2nd hand market.

Two questions:

1. Where can I clean a smudged kit lens?
2. Should I buy a Youngnuo 50 mm f1.8 or the Canon one?

>>3055318
I'll see if I can try it in store so I can get a feel for it, thanks for the input
>>3055319
I see thanks! I read about some backfocusing issues with Sigma sometimes, how can I make sure to not have that when I buy one?

>>3055345
you can clean a lens with your t-shirt, they're really not that fragile.

The yongs af sucks balls, image quality is largely similar. second hand canon one's go for as little as the yong tho.

I just bought my first Nikon full frame. What lenses should I look at getting?

I'm about to buy a used Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art for canon

Its out of warranty. Price is 295€

Should I do it? Its on a craigslist equivalent site, so if I'm doing it, I'm showing up physically. How do i quickly test it for the worst AF issues?

Best Nikon flash? Money is no object, but if the difference between the SB600 and SB910 is a number I'll take the 600. Can you optically slave or radio slave the 600?

I'm also looking to upgrade my 50, and have been torn between the 50 1.4 AF, the old school one with the aperture ring, the Sigma Art or a 50 1.2. Is the Art a meme lens? I know some of you have it.

>inb4 the Df is a meme camera

Also I know a few of you in here have a Df, how is your battery life? One battery, fully charged, with semi-regular daily use will be done in about 3 days, my D7000 hasn't been charged in 3 weeks and is still full. Or anyone else with an entry-level Nikon that has an EN-EL14 battery? I've never had a camera suck this much juice down but I guess that's what happens when you feed a D4 with a battery designed for a Coolpix compact cam.

File: 14639112184_daa5c9a20d_o.jpg (467KB, 1125x900px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1125x900px

are there any recommended entry level cameras? not anything particularly professional, but I want to have a decent one to carry around without spending my entire paycheck on it

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Epson
Camera Model	PerfectionV700
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2014:07:13 00:18:16

>>3055395
for me the simga 50mm is just too fucking xbokshuge compared to any of the other options.

And the real meme lens is the 1.2, it's too soft in the centre until f2 and the corners never really get sharp.

The 1.4 af is also pretty unusable wide open, the af-s version fixed that though.

>>3055402

a6000

>>3055402
Any entry to mid range DSLR like Nikon D3300, Canon 1300D/700D/760D and Pentax K-S2/K-70/K-3II

>>3055395
Why not just get some Paul C Buff strobes, unless you're going for ease of portability?

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2017/04/06/sigma-qa-cp-2017-global-vision-and-sony-fe-mount-lens-plans-and-what-on-ear

why is this dave guy a doofus of an interviewer?

>>3055380
A 400 2.8 FL, and a 13 5.6 AIS.

>>3055345
2. yongnuo lens is shit. af motor scream. optically worse but not that far off. i suggest getting the canon 50 1.8 stm. better build quality than the II but no mechanical manual focus.

>>3055427

Portability. Come on man I'm a trucker lol.

>>3055403

Really? Our Father in Holy Satrimony shills it hard and said the AF-S was "the same thing with horrible sunstars, plastic, worse distortion and made in China"

So I'm down to f1.4, anyone wanna post some FX samples of their Nikkor 1.4s? I have a 1.8d which I do like but I'd like to step up a tad.

>>3055380

35/2 AF, 50 1.4 or 1.8 AF and 85 1.8 AF, which is a setup I use for walking around.

Or you could do

28 1.8 / 50 1.4 / 105 Macro if you want to only use 3 primes and don't shoot much in the way of people.

Whatever you do I would definitely consider the 35 if you like to walk around. It's plenty sharp stopped down and even at F2 it has plenty of detail, plus it weighs nothing. I've spent a whole day just walking around with that lens alone. You can't go wrong and it's a very versatile lens for cheap, focus distance is almost macro and it takes cheap 52mm filters.

The 75-300 metal AF lens from the 1980s isn't too shabby especially at F11.

>>3055380
my full frame setup is the 50/1.8, 20/2.8D, 80-200/2.8

File: 4990225447.jpg (51KB, 660x495px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 660x495px

Used Olympus Stylus XZ-2 worth 110€?

I am moving to Uni this fall and I will be sharing an apt with a roomate (idk who yet). I want to keep all my gear safe and sound. I already have a rider on my insurance, but I still want to keep it safe. I was thinking of getting a pelican 1510 for everything, locking it, and keeping it under my bed. thoughts?

>>3055380
>buys FF camera
>doesn't know what lens he needs
*sigh* never change, /p/

>>3055450
Keep your stuff in a scruffy unrelated bag. The locked pelican case under your bed just screams "expensive stuff, steal me"

>>3055450
just get a gun

>>3055459
I have a gun, but since my apt is technically "on campus" and my campus is not gun friendly. Iowa state

File: Untitled-2.jpg (149KB, 1577x1315px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1577x1315px

>>3055395
>>3055454
>>3055445
>never change, /p/
also
>consider the 35
> stopped down and even at F2 it has plenty of detail
>>3048113
>The 75-300 metal AF lens from the 1980s isn't too shabby
>especially at F11
Shit Jessie a lens being good at f/11?!? Teach me plz!

captcha : gas station

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:11 21:14:34
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1577
Image Height	1315

>>3055403
>>3055422
sweet, I'll look into em. thanks a bunch

>>3055443
If you already have the 1.8 go for something that offers something different, zeiss 50 1.4 and voigt 40 1.4 spring to mind, you mainly do landscapes so af performance is moot and I think these offer a more appealing rendering.

>>3055474

You know I've thought about those but I'm trying to branch out into different subjects and if I'm plunking down the kind of cash required for a Df and it's AF system I want AF lenses to go with it, I only have two MF lenses in my entire lineup and one is a macro and the other is a portrait, things that don't move.

I'll look into the Voigt offerings they have a 58 1.4 Nokton that looks pretty cool

>>3055495
Get a Helios 44M and correct the rear element for the Nikon F adapter (1mm O-ring shim)
That should give you a good novelty branching and swirly portraits.

I used to be way more in to photography than I am now and I want to get back in to it. What is a compact but versatile camera for general use under $400 (new or used) that I can still use to make 'real art' without having to lug around a dslr with a telephoto lens and 30 filters?

i need a bag/pouch/case/whatever for my slr as keeping my camera just in a messanger bag with loads of random stuff kind of scares me.
i'm looking for something
- small (there will be only x-700 with a 50 mm lens inside) - the smaller the better as it'll take less space in my bag
-offering at least a big of cushioning (nore than a layer of normal cloth),
-cheap (i wont pay more for a bag than i paid for camera).
- lightweight

being easyfast to open is a big +.
i don't need anything waterproof/drop resistant. i don't care about brands and i'm willing to buy from aliexpress if there's something decent there.

>>3055508
Ricoh GRII, Fuji X100T or X70
For the GR and X70 you might want to grab a flash mounted OVF as well.

>>3055509
DSLR insert, you can find tons of sizes and forms on ebay and amazon.

>>3055345

i skimped out and got the youngo or whatever lens, and it's absolutely terrible. Nothing is ever in focus, and there's ALL kinds of aberrations when it's fully open. Don't waste your money on it

>>3055515
These all seem really nice and I'd gladly take any of them, but they're all at least $100 over my budget still.

i currently have the Canon FD 50mm 1.8 - is it worth getting the 1.2? I've seen decent ones for around €250/300 Obviously, the 1.4 is much cheaper, but is it even worth the small speedup?

>>3055509
I usually just bring a thin jacket or sweater and put it between my camera and the rest of my stuff.

Any piece of cloth would do really.

>>3055526
Canon doesn't make any good 50's.
Even the f/1.2 isn't that great and doesn't even let in more light than an f/1.4.

Sigma makes much nicer 50's.
Their new "art" 50 is incredible sharp but expensive and the bokeh isn't very nice.
Their previous 50 f/1.4 (EX DG HSM or whatever) is decently sharp and has superb bokeh.

>>3055347
>I see thanks! I read about some backfocusing issues with Sigma sometimes, how can I make sure to not have that when I buy one?

Go to a physical store and try it before you buy it.

>>3055525
Buy used, gringo

>>3055530
I've got a 2.5 kg Sigma 50mm with OS. It is huge.

>>3055440
>5.6
just get a samyang

>>3055448
>1/1.7" sensor
not really.

>>3055569
It's not about the aperture, dear anon.

>>3055576
i'm talking about the sensor size, anon.
it's only slightly bigger than a phone sensor.

>>3055402
D5300

>>3055508

a6000 can be had about $400 if you look hard ebough. I've seen it as low as $350.

It is a great camera, and the best price for performance out there. Nothing really beats it for under $1000.

File: D3S_1688-1200.jpg (146KB, 1200x1295px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1200x1295px

>>3055569

>he doesn't know about the Holy Grail lens with zero distortion Nikon made to order that was blessed by a Shinto priest at the factory

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/13mm.htm

I bought a
>Tokina RMC 80-200mm f/4 MF Lens Nikon
but I don't think it fits my D750.
Someone had added a review saying they used it with a D3200 so I bought it.
Anyway, I asked the seller what mount it was, and the seller just says it's supposed to work with
>D3, D300, D200, D2, F-F6, D80, N80, and FA models

So what mount would it be? And it doesn't fit the D750?

File: 20170411_193640.jpg (648KB, 3024x4032px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 3024x4032px

>>3055625

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-G935W8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:04:11 19:36:40
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/1.7
ISO Speed Rating	160
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	4.20 mm
White Balance	Auto

>>3055632

Olympus OM mount. Won't work on Nikon.

Tokina made lenses for a lot of companies, I had that lens for my FG back in my pre-/p/ days and loved it. Find a Nikon F-mount version, you won't be disappointed.

Better yet, pony up a bit for the 70-210 f4 Nikon AF or if your pockets are deep enough the 80-200 f2.8 Nikon.

Nikon AF is weird, some bodies focus some lenses and others don't. All of my AF lenses are first-gen AF and don't work on D3xxx and D5xxx. But my AF-S 18-55 DX lens works on my FX Df in 1.5x mode even though technically it shouldnt. When you slap it on a 1.5x box appears automatically in the viewfinder. It's confusing if you don't know much about them. I'll try to make it easy for you.

1st-gen AF was screw-drive and the focus ring rotated as it focused automatically. They work on some 2nd-gen AF bodies with focus motors built in like the DF, D7xxx, Dxxx and D90.

2nd-gen AF has the focus motor built into the lens and there's a few different versions of that, and none of them work on 1st gen bodies if I remember correctly.

Mid-range and pro-bodies will usually focus both, my D7000 and Df will do them both, and the Df will even natively work with pre-Ai lenses all the way back to 1959, your D750 doesn't.

>>3055634

Also you can't always trust those sellers they sometimes don't know what they have so they say its Nikon or Canon just to move it and when you go to return it because it doesn't fit they throw their hands up in the air.

File: 1479345726986.jpg (4KB, 229x220px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 229x220px

>>3055616

>>3055634
Thanks for the help. Fucking guy made me try to make it fit telling me he tested it on a D3200.

So it is not a Nikon lens at all. I was looking for a cheap telephoto. This one was $35+$15 CAD.

The search continues.

>>3055638

if you must have manual focus, Nikon Series E 70-210 f3.5

AF, 70-210 f4, 75-300 AF (the first one made of metal with a built-in tripod mount, I have one and love it) or 80-200 2.8 if you got the cash. the first two can be had for less than 100, the 3rd for 500-700 dollars.

If you need stabilization the Nikon 70-300 VR, the 350 dollar one, or the Tamron alternative for the same money.

For my first Prime lens for my APS-C camera should I get:

1. 24mm (38mm equivalent)
2. 35 mm f2 (56mm equivalent)
3. 50 mm f1.8 (80mm equivalent)

Mainly for street photography

>>3055642
Couldn't really find those, but found some other ones I hadn't seen before thanks to the suggested focal lengths. CAD prices:

>SIGMA 70-210MM F4-5.6 UC-II
$100, new, made in japan

>Tokina AF 730 II 75 - 300mm f:4.5 - 5.6
$115, used, 300mm, made in japan

>Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm f4-5.6 D
$142, near mint, nikon, f4

Chose this cause cheapest + shipping within Canada.
Want to use it for an upcoming trip and care mostly about sharpness probably.

Is Nikon best cause Nikon?

>>3055652

Look at photos for each lens and see if you like one more than the others.

I've done street photography with 75mm and it was my favorite focal length, but most people will say it's for portraits.

Then between the other two it depends on how wide you want it to be. Probably better for you too. So then do you want to have more space in front of you, or less?

File: IMG_20170411_114828.jpg (156KB, 640x1137px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 640x1137px

I unearthed this recently cleaning my dad's basement. Too bad the outside of the case is filthy and needs cleaning.

>>3055694
i swear everyone's family members have cool and expensive camera shit left behind but mine

Just getting into photography
Ordered an 80d and a 24-70 f4l
How bad did I do anons
I plan to shoot portraits and groups of people, but I heard some people get awk when they see cameras so I might have to invest in a telephoto if they can't grow balls

Going to post this here, but what programs do you guys use to edit photos? I was looking into buying LIghtorom 6
Should I get PS elements 15 too?

>>3055712
You want to do portraits so got a crop body and a slow lens?

You did shit anon.

Portraits are best on full frame with longer, faster lenses, I'd say send the 80d back, get a full frame camera instead and make the difference up getting a 50 and 85mm f1.8 prime.

Your current setup is a tourist special.

So the D7500 was announced and it looks like Nikon will merge the 7xxx and 5xxx series. No more magnesium in, body, only one card slot, tilting screen...

>>3055531
I want to buy a used one. I'd have to find a seller in my area then I guess

>>3055712
You really should have asked first, I hope wherever you bought it does returns!

>>3055712
Get an EF 50/1.8 STM (the STM is important) for that camera, it is portrait focal length on APS-C sensor. Use the 24-70/4 for random walkabout/event lens. It is also nice for landscapes.

>>3055730
Nikon clearly took inspiration from Sony's success and realised that single card slot and less battery life is the pro choice.

>>3055688
I think more space would be better, because I would already get a 50mm f1.8 (80mm equivalent). Thanks a bunch

>>3055664

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Nikkor-AF-75-300mm-f4-5-5-6-Macro-Lens-75-300-4-5-5-6-548-/401303906640?hash=item5d6f93a950:g:mZMAAOSwhQhY5am8

This is the 75-300 I was talking about. Built like a brick shit house, IQ is excellent considering the price, it's going to be heavier than the other three but will probably still work if you drop it (don't) Roberts Camera is good people bought my Df from them and if you go here

http://usedphotopro.com/products/usedlenses/used-slr-lenses/used-autofocus-lenses/nikon-nikkor-af-75-300mm-f4-5-5-6-macro-lens-75-300-4-5-5-6-110061?source=category

you can get it cheaper because they don't deal with eBay fees. Roberts photo is pretty legit and Usedcamerapro is their non-ebay subsidary

>>3055730
>>3055767
... so I better look around Pentax's offerings for a good mid-range DSLR from now on?

>>3055807
Used d800

>>3055718
but aren't full frames expensive
Unless I buy a 6d I can't afford any 5d mark iii or iv or something around the bunch

>>3055807
single card speeds are plenty good enough and a non shitty sd card has minimal chance of going bad on you. It's still a perfectly capable camera.

It depends on what you need, what feels good in your hand and what feels natural to use. Pentax has a shit lens selection, canon has a shit sensor, nikon is expensive and the colours can be suspect, sony have battery life and autofocus issues, fuji has a laundry list of problems.

>>3055818
Have fun with the shutter issues

>>3055819
6d is fine, 2nd hand gives you the option of the 5dii if you must stick with canon. If budget is a concern, why on earth have you added a 24-70 f4 L? A 2nd hand tamron 28-75 2.8 can be had for a quarter of the price and has largely similar image quality but is also faster.

Looking at the circa $1500 price mark you've gone for, you can get a shit ton better gear for what you want to do.
If you must stick with Canon, For me it would be a 2nd hand 5dii, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8 and 28mm 1.8.

When you can afford to, get a 70-200 2.8, it's the ultimate in easy portrait photography.

Fast primes on full frame will help you shoot portraits in all sorts of light, and will give you that shallow depth of field clients are looking for. (don't discount bokeh because it's a bit memey, it's the biggest moneymaker in photography).

>>3055822
Single slot is not a card speed issue. It is about redundancy, same thing with Sony. You can't put a whole business on a singular system with no redundancy and having a singular card system means once the card craps itself everything on it is gone, can be a whole day or a whole week of work.
I've seen a renowned guy getting rejected with two A7 (A7II and A7s) as his tools while a newbie got the job with a single D7200. Yes, the results were mediocre but having a two slot system means you go through the preliminary checks. No matter how bad you are or how many bodies you carry.
Now the new D7x00 line stopped being a gateway professional line and have sunken down to the plebeian soccer mom pro-tog-wannabee depths.

>>3055825
i feel dumb I should have asked in advance
my idea was to get started with my original goal of capturing people, but I thought maybe my goals would change over time so I went with 24-70 bcus my next lens was going to be a 70-200/2.8 and if I'm enjoying it I'll make the investment to buy a full frame
thanks for the advice anon

File: rokinon-announces-new-affordable-professional-grade-cine-lens-system-3.jpg (183KB, 1043x1000px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1043x1000px

My Sony kit lens died when it fell off a tripod. I'm looking for a good replacement.

I was thinking of getting the Sony 18-105 G but that shit is huge and it doesn't seem to offer much of an improved IQ from the kit lens. I could get a 35mm prime but it doesn't offer the versatility I need as a part-time photojournalist. I could live without zoom. Stabilization would be nice. Maybe I should just get another kit lens?What can you guys suggest?

Pic not related

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2986
Image Height	3689
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:08:11 11:57:27
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/14.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/14.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	0.00 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3846
Image Height	3689
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto

>>3055838
Is it for FF or APS-C?

>>3055842
>>3055838
Also, if crop then get the Sigma 17-50/2.8 and get an old manual 28mm and an adapter.

Is there any test of the metabones mk V yet (doesnt seem to be on sale yet). Allegedly they saying fast CDAF for real this time.

>>3055842
>>3055843

APS-C. I was thinking I should get native e-mount lenses. There's this whole rubble of lenses and adapters and I don't think my wallet is ready for that.

>>3055846
I could rec some very nice lenses in Nikon and Pentax mount that are also budget friendly. It is surprising how Sony doesn't have this range chock full like Nikon and Pentax does... So far third party is the way to go, expect some random compromises to deal with. Unpleasant bokeh, build quality, AF speed and accuracy issues etc...

>>3055846
Ah well. Suggest ahead m8. I'm not in a rush to buy :)

Currently owning a t1i with kit lens, just ordered an yongnuo 50mm, im so hyped

about to pull the trigger on an a6000. is the 55-210 lens worth the money for some wildlife stills or should i wait until i can invest in a higher quality dslr system? money is tight now but won't be in, say, a year or so.

>>3055879
image quality is no different than dslr

>>3055879
200mm is too short for wildlife, you will need at least a zoom going up to 300mm or better, a 300mm prime and a TC.
For starters look at some decent budget telezooms like the Tamron 70-300 VC.

>>3055525
I was checking used prices. Lowest I found was $500 for the x70, which I might still splurge on if I save up for it but it still is outside the budget I set.

>>3055610
Thanks for this. I'll check it out. Do you have any recommendations for a cheap versatile lens to go with it?

>>3055881
i'm not as concerned with the body as i am lens/lens selection. e mount crop doesn't seem to have anything that reaches past 200mm except the 300mm f/6.3 unless i sink into a teleconverter or a converter with a lens from another system. i wasn't intending on sinking everything into the a6000, i am very much intending on upgrading later on.

is the sony rx100 still worth buying? Found it for £300

>>3055890
Yes, but only from the MkIII model.

>>3055884
I just purchased a used Ricoh GR for ~370, and I think I could have still done better if I started looking earlier. Keep on looking anon, it's all a matter of how long you're willing to wait for a deal.

>>3055890
new?
yes. unless you want tilty screen

I have a d5200 and would like to trade it for something with more buttons, was thinking of Pentax, any recommendations?

>>3055917
K-70 or K-3II

File: eheee.gif (455KB, 500x334px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 500x334px

>>3055801
Bought a 70-210 cause read it's better optics than 75-300, but the seller sold it in store and refunded.

Finally opted for a 80-200 2.8.
I was planning on getting a cheap one and sometime later a tamron 70-200 2.8, but might as well get that now.

Thanks for helping me, I won't bully you again.

>>3055987
The beauty of an f/2.8 70-200 lens is if you put on a 2X TC you can still reliably AF at f/4.
This is usually the go-to combo of beginner wildlife shooters.

>>3055991
2X TC's are a meme.

No lens is sharp enough to benefit from more than a 1.7X TC and even that's pushing it.

>>3055993
It gets you closer and you can frame better. In wildife the subject itself is more important than the actual technical perfection like in a studio portrait shoot.
Renowned wildife shooters often use TCs even on known less sharp lenses like the Canon 400mm DO and even stack TCs if need be to get that shot. If the subject is reasonably close even stacked TCs will get all the necessary details.
Watch and learn, young padawan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNM3nx-LQOA

>>3056000
Cropping gets you just as close.
And lets you frame in post, with less chance of missing a moving target.

TC's reduce AF speed, so they aren't without penalty.

The only benefit I can think of is that you get to see the animals better through the viewfinder, which can make the process more enjoyable.

>>3056003
How new are you, son?

>>3055885

A prime in your preferred focal length. The Sony ones are a little pricey, but has OSS. Look at the Sigma ones to save some cash.

The kit also gets a lot of shit, but it is pretty good for what it is. It is decently sharp ik the center, ultra compqct, and has overall passable IQ after lens corrections.

>>3056005
Old enough to ignore anything (((B&H))) claims.

>>3056010
>>>/pol/

>>3055886
You have the option of using a mount, sigma mount or canon mount long tele lenses with an adapter and still get native performance. The cost of an adapter is fairly insignificant next to the cost of a half decent tele lens.

>>3056013
Or not and you have to pay $600 or more for a single adapter to be able to use the lens aperture and AF

File: 1462891948342.jpg (50KB, 353x251px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 353x251px

>>3056010

DELET

>>3055380
Basic 50 1.8g, the older 35 is pretty nice if you don't want to spend the money on the newer one. 85 for portraits is a must.

Is there any major loss of quality from older D series Nikkor lenses when used with modern FF models?

I really want to get the AF-S 17-35 f/2.8 D but don't want it to underwhelming on my camera. Only asking because I've read reviews from people that say these D lenses won't perform as good as modern G lenses, but can't tell if this is true, different opinion or just shill bias

>>3056092

don't want it to give me underwhelming results on my camera*

>>3055308
>>3055254
thx for the answers

>>3055823
Memes

>>3056013
>>3056029
I know there's all kinds of adapters but would I be better off switching to a dslr later or is the a6000 that good? For comparison sake I'd be looking at a 7dii in about a year or so. If I can save money for a better body and a more broad lens system then I'd rather do that than sink money short term into a body that will leave me wanting more later.

>>3056010
Speaking of which, they're not shipping anything until next Weds when Passover ends.

>>3056092
I've owned 2 D lens, 35 and 20. Loved them both and used both on a D800.

>>3056109
And I should mention I sold both for G lens, but the compact aspect of them is what I miss the most.

>>3056109
>>3056110

Compact aspect is really appealing for primes.

What made you sell them for the G lenses?

>>3056111
G lens are sharper and have better contrast and there are some other stuff like the nano Crystal coating. Although, it's a bit over blown, imo.

In hindsight, I would've kept the 35, but I have no regrets selling the 20 for the 24 1.8g.

>>3055987

<3

>>3056029
What
Sonys best a mount adapter and the sigma mc11 are both around $200?

>>3056104
If you want a body that doesn't leave you wanting more, go full frame. The sony a7ii is full frame, has ibis, a class leading sensor and some of the best lenses on the market, between ibis and full frame you could have 5 stops better low light performance.

>>3056029

>$600
lol wut

I can't even find one that high.

Link, I wanna see what site is scamming you so hard.

>>3056199
$250

but that guy might be referencing the stupid metabuns, probably the speedbooster.

I picked up an AE-1 Program recently with a 35-70mm f3.8 zoom lens. It goes well, but I'm wondering if I should upgrade the lens, or at least cop another one. Any recommendations?

>>3056216
>speedbooster
>a7ii

Shows your typical anti sony fag level of intelligence.

>>3056234
there are dumbfucks out there, that thinks speedbooster works for full frame.

just saiyan.

>inb4kiponmediumformatspeedbooster

>>3056242
My speedbooster works great on my a7rii and I get a wicked vignette that makes my images look awesome

>>3055402
Got the same question as this anon, except I don't particularly care about the price.

I'm thinking of getting the Sony 20mm f/2.8 SEL20F28 lens for my A7R. I know it's not a full frame lens. Reviews suggest it works okay. I just want something to fuck around with and take some wide angle shots that are decently sharp. I realise this isn't an FE Zeiss lens, but it's only costing me about $200. Is this reasonable or am I being a moron? There are some Samyang/Rokinon WA lenses available, but they are either 3x the price or don't have AF and probably equal quality at same price, but uglier lenses.

File: 09c451a4a8ed569bdf2e770d1bfef2e9.jpg (67KB, 736x490px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 736x490px

What camera is the sexiest and why is the Olympus OMD EM10 Mark 2?

>>3056092
AFS 17-35, 28-70, and 80-200 are prone to squeaking and dying AFS motors. Older lenses perform just as such. The good ones remain good, better when stopped down in the corners. The center frame is unlikely to see large improvements. Good way to save money if you're not trying to pixel peep in the extreme corners at f1.4 and with the sun just out of frame.

>>3056266
looks like cheap plastic toy.

File: Minolta_X-700.jpg (67KB, 700x464px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 700x464px

>>3056266

Wut.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Camera Model	E-10
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2005:05:21 21:13:14
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	80
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	36.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	700
Image Height	464

>>3056266
>how many different design languages can we squeeze into one box of shit

Mang, just look at the fucking knobs, every one is at a different height with a different pattern on it.

It's not "retro" or referencing any earlier design aesthetic, it's a clusterfuck of awful decisions made my middle aged asians.

>>3056257
the 20 2.8 was shit on crop, it sucks fucking dicks outside the crop image circle, you might get about 30mm equivalent of half usable image out of it.

The 28mm f2 on the other hand is one of the best 28mm lenses ever made at a ridiculously small price, there's also the 21mm adapter for it if you must go wider.

Anything wider than 28mm on e-mount tends to get expensive as the optics have to jump from a relatively simple design to something ridiculously convoluted.

File: uchylonepm.jpg (1MB, 2048x970px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x970px

>>3056283
agree - i have 28mm and 21mm adapter and its brilliant lens. i love shoting with 21mm and 16:9 proportions.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7R
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	21 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	7360
Image Height	4912
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:12 02:02:44
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Brightness	6.1 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	21.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2048
Image Height	970
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3056257
The SEL20F28 isn't terribly good even on APS-C, it's just compact.

Wouldn't recommend it for Sony FF cameras unless it's just an extra - like a tertiary lens or something.

IMO, get a regular FF Samyang 14mm. It has got a quite good performance for wide angle lenses on the cheap.

Or get the 28mm f/2.

File: kVxLU12.jpg (78KB, 1280x787px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1280x787px

Good mourning.
I'm in a pickle and I really need your help here.
Looking for a cheap camera to take canon lenses I stumbled upon the original EOS M to which I can adapt ef lenses but instead of just adapting them I'd like to get a speedbooster to it. I found many from m to nikon mount and others but I have access to a variety of canon lenses already and would like to continue with them so if anyone knows where I can get a speedbooster without paying an arm and a leg. i don't need autofocus or anything else. I much prefer manually doing the work so electronic ones aren't necessary.

TL:DR Need eos M to ef speedbooster on the cheap.

>>3056283
>>3056290
>>3056302

Any opinions about the samyang 20/1.8 for fe mount? Ephotozine seems to like it, and it's not terribly pricey. No need for af.

File: lens.jpg (2MB, 2000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1500px

>Find Tair 300mm f4.5 in thrift shop
>Labelled as telescope for 1 eurocoin.

Time to pretend to be KGB.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3054999


I have a Panasonic DMC - GX7, if you want to take pictures of meals or of model trains or guns or something that requires a lot of focus and detail, it's really good, tons of settings and you can set up 3 custom modes and switch between them whenever you want.

However it's gash for selfie-videos, I'm looking at making travel videos at the moment and turning the camera around and filming myself for a camera piece is impossible, the camera simply won't focus on my face, even when held at arms length, I have auto-focus on but it just refuses to focus on anything closer than 3 feet away, it's an absolute nightmare.

Any recommendations on a modestly priced camera than has a screen I can turn around to make sure it's filming me properly?

>>3056315
Nice! Been looking for one myself.

Which has better looking photos at higher ISO? D500 or D750?

They are around the same price, and I mostly want to do indoor portraiture work. I'm not sure if it's worth going full frame because I'd have to spend another $1500 on top of the body to get my glass up to speed.

>>3056351
D750

>>3056351
think of it like this man,
low light artifacts are caused by your signal to noise ratio being too high (iso is a gain control, it raises your signal AND your "noise") and it's a ratio, not a constant.

With the above in mind let's ascertain what our signal is, it's light, the stronger your signal, the less your noise. How can we capture more light at once? We can increase the size of the surface that captures light.

The surface area of full frame is pretty much double that of crop, and we know that a doubling in iso/shutter speed is one stop, from this we can ascertain that a crop sensor will always be around 1 stop behind on it's signal to noise ratio.

So even before we get to the fact that bokeh is the #1 tool a professional photographer has to make money, we're at a constant one stop disadvantage.

To answer your original question though, the d750 wrecks the d500 for low light.

Hi anons, I need an advice. I own a Nikon d7000 and I'm looking for a small, light and all around (more or less) lens. I'm thinking about the 35 1.8 dx and the 24 2.8d, what do you suggest?

>>3056376
18-50 2.8

how do camera mounts work? Are they universal? I'm looking for a GoPro style handle but for a handycam, so it's not so close to my face when I film myself, the camera is a Sony HDR CX240E if anyone was wondering

>>3056375
This is the best response I've gotten asking this. Thank you.

What camera should I get for mainly videos but some photography?

What camera would you guys recommend for someone who's trying to get into shooting sports? I have a 5D Mark III now, and I find myself frustrated by the shooting speed.

>>3056302
>IMO, get a regular FF Samyang 14mm. It has got a quite good performance for wide angle lenses on the cheap.

Yeah but the MF and infinity dial fuck up sounds like a massive headache when I could just get the 28mm Sony and the UWA adapter.

>>3056382
I think by "camera mount" you mean tripod screw thread?

They are universal but there are two sizes: 1/4" and 3/8". (with adapters available to convert between the two)

>>3056394
D500, 70d if u have glass

>>3056378
I'd prefere a prime lens, I already have a couple of zooms.

>>3056378
smegma 18-35 1.8
primes are deprecated.

File: [-__-'] Planetes - 21 [BD 1080p AAC] [086FB71D].mkv_snapshot_07.08_[2017.03.18_23.19.50].png (4MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1920x1080px

what camera is that?

What kind of camera should I get if I want to take those hipster looking pictures

>>3056462
fujifilm xt2 in silver.

>>3056463
Maybe something less pricey? I don't really need video recording

>>3056310
That's a model that I haven't tried yet, IDK.

>>3056395
You could. I just don't know if you want to if you are very price sensitive. You are paying about twice as much for that and there are further downsides in a little sharpness and how wide the angle you get is.

Of course AF and having two focal lengths is nice, but I assume it wasn't an extremely high priority if you picked the A7R.

That the infinity marking wasn't (isn't?) always on infinity is not necessarily a big issue and not necessarily present on your lens.

>>3056470
> hipster looking pictures
Instagram or whatsapp or some shit on your smartphone. Tits on ~30% of images help, and make sure to feature a quite different set of people on every fourth shot at least if it's not a pure selfie.

> I don't really need video recording
Doesn't really help with the price, we weren't thinking about actual video setups anyhow.

Explain a bit better in what situation with which subjects you're going to use the camera in first, then maybe give a hint at how much (monetarily) you want to do it well.

File: f100.jpg (55KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x375px

>>3056456
Closest real camera would be something like a Nikon F100 - except for that xbox huge prism housing.

>>3056485
My bad for explaining so poorly. I don't have any experience with photography so I have no idea what to really look or ask for.

>Explain a bit better in what situation with which subjects you're going to use the camera in
Nature, most likely. I'm not a people person.
$1000 is probably the highest I'll go.

>>3056471
>Of course AF and having two focal lengths is nice, but I assume it wasn't an extremely high priority if you picked the A7R.

Why do you say this? Because AF on A7R is slower?

hi /p/, about 6 month ago i bought a sony nex-5n to shoot digital with my old glass for cheap
it's been pretty great at doing that, focus peaking and magnification works great for mf, iso performance is really good and i overall enjoy this body very much but i have some second thoughts now
i want to get some af/is and overall modern glass, i bought it without a kit lens and sony kit is like 2 times more expensive than canon and sony 50 1.8 is like fucking 3 times as much as canon 50 1.8.
should i just jump the ship? i'm pretty poor and i bought this body becouse it was the best price/performance for vintage glass but system lenses are just plain overpriced on sony

File: Raynox DCR-250.jpg (11KB, 320x273px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 320x273px

How well would this work on my 55-200mm dx?
Want to try macro but can't really justify buying a dedicated lens.

>>3056522

They are overpriced for a reason. Most lenses have OSS and pretty awesome image quality (avoid the 16mm and pancake kit).

If you are interested in cheap glass, you can look at third party (samyang, voigtlander, etc) or get an adapter for a-mount lenses (which can be had DIRT cheap, but do add bulk).

You could also adapt the Canon lenses to your Sony body, but since your body is so old, it wont have all that great autofocus speed outside of a bright sunny day.

Currently shooting a 550D. Trying to upgrade to a 70D. I do fashion shoots mainly but also spreading to social events like weddings etc. Is this a good choice?

>>3056582
Same thing if you put a loupe in front of your lens. It will be shit.
Get a proper macro lens like a Tamron 90/2.8 or Sigma 105/2.8 and call it a day. They can also double as excellent portrait lenses.

>>3056598
Doesn't look too shit to me.
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/raynoxdcr250/pool/interesting/

What's the best affordable telephoto for Nikon FF?

Looking somewhere in the 70-300 range. Doesn't need to be very fast aperture

>>3056646

Does it need to zoom?
Does it need to autofocus?
What's affordable to you?

>>3056646
Spoiler: it°s the AFS 70-300 VR.

>>3056647

>Does it need to zoom?

Yes

>Does it need to autofocus?

don't need AF but it is welcomed

>What's affordable to you?

Between $600-800 range. I don't want something cheap, but I don't need a pro lens either

>>3056649

Will check that out

>>3056499
A6000 with maybe 1-2 of these lenses (if 2, then obviously a 12mm and a ~30mm) should be good. Fairly light to carry, fairly cheap, decent performance.

Samyang 12mm f/2:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=13719&camera=1875

Sigma 30mm f/1.4:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2955549@N21/pool/

Sigma 30mm f/2.8:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=13478&camera=1875

Sony 28mm f/2:
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=14138&camera=1875
https://pixelpeeper.com/adv/?lens=14138&camera=1875

I prefer sharp and flexibility aperture wise on a lighter camera that also can shoot a bunch of shots to a fairly big buffer.

Maybe you prefer to use zoom or telezoom lenses for your nature shots though, IDK. Or you shoot so much at dusk/dawn that you really want a FF camera. The above is a decent <$1k setup, but not the ultimate answer to everyone's usage.

>>3056582
Dunno about that one but the Marumi close-up filter I have is quite okay and I heard Raynox was about the same.

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

It's still much better to use a decent Macro lens - faster & easier to work with, better images. I never regretted buying a very good one.

>>3056646
> best on FF
> affordable
Not really possible.

Maybe a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD comes fairly close?

>>3056703
PS: Yes, that 's the older / worse variant of the Di VC. Makes it cheaper.

>>3056522
Well, if you want ibis, it's sony or bentax, whilst sony lenses aren't the cheapest, they are the best, pentax's are objectively poor and hugely overpriced.

If you want to go canon, there's a $700 price difference between the 70-200 2.8 is and non is.

Sony have 2 big announcement coming in the next month, if one is the new a7 the a7ii price will plummet, it's got great af and is and for $200 you can get an mc-11, canon offers the widest range and most affordable lenses.

I use this setup, I have some native primes, some L zooms and a shit ton of old glass. Couldn't be more pleased.

>>3055448
I think so, very good camera despite that sensor size. Basing this on its brother tho, the Pentax mx-1, same camera but without a hotshoe or control ring.

>>3056597
Bump

>>3056653
Poorfag tier: Tokina AT-X 100-300mm f4 (manual focus) it's indestructible with nice IQ for under $200. Metal, not for pussies.

Now this is podracing tier: Nikkor 300mm f4 prime, old screwdriver version, probably around $400, you can use the remaining budget for an intermediate prime. I have an AI'd 135mm f2.8 Q-Nikkor that I got for $40 to go with mine. Also metal, build up some sweet muscles

>>3056646
>>3056653

read the fucking thread dillhole someone else asked this exact question and I answered it here

>>3055801

This guy here

>>3056649

Is right. For 600-800 you could get a 300/4, or a Sigma 150-500 or Tammy 150-600

>>3056785

Thanks for your help, angry photographer

Is the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 the best standard zoom you can get for a Sony A6000 with a MC11 adapter without having to take a bank loan?

File: 1.jpg (39KB, 950x608px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 950x608px

>>3054999

R.I.P. Nikon

>http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/sony-overtakes-2-position-in-us-full-frame-interchangeable-lens-camera-market-300439821.html

What's your current lens line up /gear/?

Mine is;
>Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
>Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART
>Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 DG II HSM
>Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC USD
>Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD

Currently using the Sigma 12-24mm the most so very tempted to upgrade to the f/4 ART version. Just need to save up the dollarydoos right now.

Barely use my Tamron 70-200mm, so I'm tempted to trade it in for the Sigma 12-24mm ART but I "love" the lens too much to let it go...

would using a non ai lens on a d3300 be hard. Want to get a Nikkor 50mm

Cant decide between a Contax G1 & 28mm Biogon w/ a bunch of film or Fuji X100F. What do?

>>3057149
16-45/4 and 35/2.4 tourist gear
Tamron 70-200/2.8
Tamron 90/2.8
Sigma 50-500
1.4x TC

The 70-200 is kind of redundant since the 90/2.8 is better with portraits and the 200mm+TC is too short for a tele. Still good for events and small field sports but it doesn't get too much use lately as well.

>>3057201
Forgot my Godox TT600, makes all the difference for portraits.

File: 56109230585.jpg (347KB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 2500x2500px

Anyone know of a larger-than-average L bracket? Base needs to be at least 14cm long, vertical length doesn't matter too much.

What's the successor to the Panasonic GM5?

I'm considering buying a lightweight mirrorless camera with evf similar to GM5. Any suggestions?

>>3057299
Sony a6500

>>3057301
>>3057299
I'm looking for something with the same weight category.
GM5 body only: 185g

A6500 body only is already 453g

>>3057299
Try the GX series, newest is the GX85, previous is the GX7

What's a decent entry level Canon birding/wildlife telephoto to put on an A6000? Is 300 long enough or do you need 400?

>>3057330
>is 300 long enough
depends how much patience you have, but in general, yes.

Your bigger issue is "entry level", cheap long tele's are slow, bad at focussing and you're gonna be wobbling like michael j fox on the san andreas fault line. If you want to try and use cheaper lenses, a very sturdy, possibly weighted tripod is a necessity.

As for suggestions, the old canon 300mm f4 L is a great lens for not a lot of cash. After that things rapidly go up the wrong side of a grand.

>>3057356
Using a tripod isn't an issue, it might even be necessary if I'm using a mirrorless so it doesn't become too top heavy. I'll give it a try and see

>>3057330
300 is the absolute minimum, but the A6000 AF is not very good for wildlife, it can get confused easily with a closer background and in the bushes.
I personally would get a cheap but nice 300 manual lens like the photosniper or Canon FD 300 L, even a Sigma or Tokina 400/5.6 manual focus.
You wouldn't be able to do BIF so savong money and going for static subjects and learning proper manual technique is the better way to go.

>>3057365
> it might even be necessary

It's definitely necessary, 300mm on crop is 450mm equivalent, which is about a 4 degree window on the world. You will still need about a 1/250 shutter speed on a tripod to get a stable shot unless your tripod is a fucking hefty beast covered in sandbags.

>>3057370
>1/250
>on tripod
LOL
I don't get out of the bed below 1/1600s and ISO 800 and I use a Sigma 50-500 handheld, most wildlife shooters consider this a lightweight kit.

>>3057299
The GX850 (not 85), but they dropped the viewfinder.

File: 750D.jpg (402KB, 1920x1712px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1920x1712px

Canon EOS 750D with 18-55mm for first DSLR amateur, yay or nay?

>>3057413
18-55 is crap, but an ok one for a start
750D is too expensive for your needs. consider any previous models - the changes are minor while cost be even several times lower
in fact, anything with manual settings and interchangeable lenses is okay

>>3057413
I have a 750D, and use it today for paid videography work. (The adjustable screen is so so useful)

The camera will scale to your needs once you get past being a complete noob. If you do, get one without the kit lens and get a decent prime lens instead, pancake 40mm is very compact and super sharp.

It's very robust and the quality of the sensor will more than meet your needs.

What subjects do you intend to shoot with it?

File: Nikon-24mm-f1.8G-ED-650x433.jpg (37KB, 650x433px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 650x433px

Planning on getting this soon. What should I expect from it?

>>3057446

gold ring performance

>>3057446
A guy I trust and agree with on many subjects says it's "awesome".

>>3057446
>not a zoom
DROPPED

Im on my first time ever buying a camera, which one should I buy? And also, I'd rather spend money on an average-good camera than a cheap one to begin learning. I also I woukd like to know which is better, Mirrorles vs DSRL?

Thank you very much in advantage!

>>3057473
Mirrorless vs DSLR isn't really a "is one better than the other" question, it mainly comes down to size, features, and lens selection. I'd recommend the Sony A6000 over a DSLR, it's one of the best cameras you can buy for less than a grand and it's got features that makes opearting it more similar to a smartphone compared to DSLRs, like USB charging, transferring pictures via Wifi and an electronic viewfinder. Meaning that what you see through the viewfinder is affected by what settings you have on the camera and that helps you learn how settings interact with each other much faster when you're just starting out.

>>3057473
Learning on a mirrorless is much easier as the viewfinder gives you a wysiwyg preview.

It also looks less autistic than a dslr, can use adapted lenses really cheaply and sony offer a better feature set than any dslr.

There's a very vocal anti sony crowd on here, expect lots of people to say sony are shit but that's as far as their argument gets.

>>3057356
>>3057367
That 300 Canon lens looks neat, but does it work with the Sigma MC11 adapter or do I need a special adapter?

I've recenty thought of Juping ship to a Song system.
I'm currently using a Nikon D600 and have been satisfied with the results, but the shutter issue and clunkyness of it is starting to put me off. I love the idea of more portability. In terms of raw performance, how doesn't the d600 compare to the a7ii?

>>3057529
Jumping*
Sony*
Fuck posting on mobile

>>3057473
Just don't buy anything new.
It's a waste of money until you know you're going to stay with the hobby.

The internet is full of people selling their hardly ever used DSLR's for cheap.
Any of them will do.

>>3057480
works on the mc11

>>3057446
Recently got it myself. Expect sex on camera.

Is it worth spending almost $600 on a very good lens for my APS-C body or should I save up for full frame?

>>3057554

Great to hear. What body are you using it on?

>>3057556
Camera gear is never worth it.

But at least lenses don't depreciate as fast as camera bodies, especially if you buy second hand so you don't pay the unboxing tax.

File: IMG_20170415_155406.jpg (302KB, 843x1500px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 843x1500px

Throwing this out there for help IDing.
MC mount 80-200 F4.5, but there are millions of these and this particular one is unbranded.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OnePlus
Camera Model	ONE A2005
Camera Software	OnePlus2-user 6.0.1 MMB29M 15 dev-keys
Sensing Method	Not Defined
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	4 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:15 15:54:07
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	319
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.48 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2160
Image Height	3840
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3057556
Depends on what you want to do and how that lens will help you achieve it

600$ is not a lot of money for a lens

If you're looking at a very wide-range zoom it's absolutely NOT a good lens you're looking at

Post current gear, what you wanna do, and why you think you can't do it

>>3055251
idk how is any of this relevant?

>>3055450
you could make friends with your roommate and keep your stuff safe with mutual trust. but if he's a creep then I would go with the scruffy unrelated bag

Best cheap brushless gimbal for a6000 slow mo video?

I've had my a6000 for just over 2 weeks and I'm already dying to move from the kit lens to a good starter prime.

These are the three I'm looking at right now and what I perceive to be the pros and cons of each:
Sony 50mm 1.8 OSS (non-FE) - has the best reviews of the three and is also the cheapest, but I'm worried that the zoom factor might be too restrictive. I do take a lot of 50mm shots with the kit lens but I also take many wider ones.
Sony 35mm 1.8 OSS - also has very good reviews and includes OSS, but is the most expensive; not sure I want to spend almost as much on this as I did for the camera itself.
Sigma 30mm 1.4 Contemporary DC DN - cheaper and faster than the Sony and apparently much sharper, but no image stabilization - I'm not sure how much that could negate the increased sharpness. It's also larger and heavier then either of the Sonys.

Any thoughts on these three? Other suggestions also welcome.

>>3057658
>I've had my a6000 for just over 2 weeks and I'm already dying to move from the kit lens to a good starter prime.

Here is a tip. I assume you have shot a couple hundred shots at least with the kit lens, right? Well take a look at your exif data and see what focal length you shot at the most. Should be a big help in deciding.

I thing there is a tool somewhere to do it all automatically, but I don't have it.


>Sony 50mm 1.8 OSS (non-FE)

This is a great lens, and one of my favorite focal lengths. On crop, however, it is a little long. If you are mostly going to be taking pictures of people, it could work. But if you are traveling and want some scenery shots it could be a little awkward at times.


>Sony 35mm 1.8 OSS
>Sigma 30mm 1.4 Contemporary DC DN

Honestly about equal. The Sigma is a tad sharper in the center wide open, but not enough to notice without pixel peeping.

Honestly unless I was short of cash I'd lean towards the more expensive Sony one. The OSS is awesome and it is a great lens.

>not sure I want to spend almost as much on this as I did for the camera itself.

The saying goes "marry the lens, date the body". It is NORMAL to spend more on a lens than a body. A lens will last you through numerous camera bodies, I am using some lenses that are older than I am. A body, on the other hand, will be replaced in 5 years or so because digital sensor tech is advancing so fast.

>>3057658
Do you need autofocus?

>>3057682
>take a look at your exif data and see what focal length you shot at the most
That's a really good point. Of the photos that I deem good enough to import to Lr (~40 out of ~800 total) there's definitely a high concentration at or around 50mm. I don't do shots of people but I like zooming in on things for a more focused view. I can always carry the kit lens with me for wider scenery shots.

>"marry the lens, date the body"
I get that, however the fact that these lenses are crop makes me wonder if I won't eventually file for divorce harhar. Actually though, wouldn't that saying apply much more to FF lenses that can also be used on APS-C, rather than crop lenses that can't usefully be used on FF?
I'm not planning on jumping to FF anytime soon but I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that it could happen in a couple years. I suppose a smaller body like the a6000 would still be useful for light travel, but it makes me question how much I should invest in something as fundamentally limiting as a crop lens.

>>3057687
I don't NEED autofocus but I would certainly like to have it. I frequently resort to manual focus when AF doesn't give me what I want, but its usefulness for fast snaps is difficult to let go of.

>>3057694
Don't buy crop lenses wherever possible.

Full frame lenses will retain their valu MUCH Better, go for the very best lenses 2nd hand and they will barely budge in price making them much more affordable than cheaper lenses as long as you can afford a few grand tied up.

>>3057595
I'm looking at a Nikon 17-55 f/2.8

My current gear is a D5200 with the 18-55 kit lens
I want better low light performance fast AF.

>>3057299
gm series is discontinued, according to the rumors

>>3057794
too bad, I can't think of a mirrorless system with evf as light and portable as the GM5

>>3054999
Looking for a smaller camera to use for when I want to hang out with friends and don't want look like a fucking loser lugging a bag of dslr gear. I've been leaning towards a gx850 for a while, but I have found a new a5000 listed as 379 USD with the kit lens. This feels like a steal and I'm starting to lean towards it. Is this a good call? Thanks.

>>3057694
> there's definitely a high concentration at or around 50mm.

Then get the 50. It is a great focal length, and if the shortness isn't an issue you might be very happy.

Some of my favorite crop shots are with a 50mm.

>I get that, however the fact that these lenses are crop makes me wonder if I won't eventually file for divorce harhar. Actually though, wouldn't that saying apply much more to FF lenses that can also be used on APS-C, rather than crop lenses that can't usefully be used on FF?

That is true to a point.

But all three of the lenses you are looking at are cheapo budget lenses, you aren't buying Canon L or Zeiss or anything.

If you want a full frame 50mm, look at the 55mm f 1.8 Zeiss. It is an absolutely fabulous lens, and only $800 or so.

>>3057807
The a5000 has no viewfinder,the nex 6 and 7 are better, have a great evf, and probably cheaper.

>>3057837
>>3057807

And honestly, $379 isn't all that great a deal. The a6000 has been as low as $400 before and is a much better camera.

>>3057855
>before
what about now?

>>3057874

$598, it has no sales currently.

But even at full price, the evf, faster af, and better sensor is worth the difference.

File: [HorribleSubs] Stella no Mahou - 03 [720p].mkv_snapshot_11.37_[2016.10.22_20.46.20].jpg (166KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1280x720px

guys,
listen,
listen guys,
what if,
what if canon ef to ef-m adapter?
with speedbooster.

>>3057885
because kumamon is kill.
there will be no sale.

File: DSC_0003.jpg (3MB, 4000x6000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x6000px

>>3055495
>>3055502
I tried the Helios out the other day on a photoshoot.
The Bokeh looks like this at f5,6

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3300
Camera Software	Ver.1.01
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	15256
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:15 14:46:44
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3056283
>>3056290

Is there a reason why I have rarely seen the SEL1635Z mentioned? It covers 16-35mm. f/4 is a disadvantage, and it's much more expensive, but it's also much more versatile, and having wide max aperture is less important on a wider angle, isn't it?

>>3057949
>>3055502
Aren't there specific versions that produce the Helios signature swirls, while other versions don't? As I recall they're the 44-2, 44M and the 40-2 85 1.5? I'm not sure though.

>>3057980
the lens used on >>3057949 is the 44-2 85 f2

>>3057977
I've never looked into it merely because the canon 16-35 L is half the price.

Any manual wide or ultra wide I can adapt to my a7?
Small and not too expensive..

File: 145633752676.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>3057986
>he fell for the sony meme
>he's falling for the ultrawide meme

File: 20170414-DSC02872.jpg (712KB, 2000x1125px) Image search: [Google]

712KB, 2000x1125px

>>3057986
Rokinon 14mm f2.8, Canon 24mm f2.8 IS USM, Minolta MD w.rokkor 28mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 35mm f/2.

pic is minolta 28mm f/2.8.
The f/2.5 is better but harder to find, the f3.5 is better for its IQ.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7M2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.8 (Windows)
Photographer	David Mornet
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:16 18:02:57
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	1.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard

>>3057986
depends on your definition of expensive.

the 28 f2 is a great lens and smaller/lighter than any equivalent DSLR lens as it's designed for a short flange distance. Old wide angle designs, especially if you go past 28mm are either shit or expensive or both, and they're all massive as they need retrofocal designs.

there's voigtlanders 21mm f4 for m mount, but that will give purple corners, the 1.8 version is still relatively compact but much more expensive.

the olympus 21mm 3.5 is supposed to be decent, but it's hit or miss with quality and they're up around $300.

>>3057987
Sorry, no clue about memes. I'm using this for my own business.

>>3057991
>>3057992
Seems the rokinon might be the way to go, but it looks a bit clunky and not great.

I was looking at the voigtlander and they look great aside for the price. Same with Sony that are extra expensive in this country.

Thought there might be older wide lenses but seems not. Thanks for the reply!

Canon 1300d with 18-55mm & 75-300mm kit lenses

Good for a first DLSR for someone who likes taking pictures of far away scenes?

Previously been using a Fuji SL1000

File: 6056224804_47f2cc4098_b.jpg (372KB, 1024x678px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 1024x678px

Original Fuji x100 in 2017 as travel/walkaround cam.
Good idea? bad idea?
what alternatives are there for around 300 bucks ? (thats what th ex100 goes for used)

Where can I find cheap (~10$ + shipping) used K-mount lenses?

>inb4 thrift shop
Welcome to Europoor land

File: 17536baab076bfaebdc8049249de3678.jpg (344KB, 1619x1080px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1619x1080px

>>3054999
Recommendations for a EF-S prime wider than 24mm? I've been using my 24mm f2.8 a lot for landscapes but it's still pretty tight on crop sensor. Not horrendously expensive would be nice.

Pic related is a borrowed 10-18mm but I'm thirsty for primes.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1.1 (Windows)
Photographer	SR
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:04:17 17:26:36
Exposure Time	30 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	10.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3058010
Yes, but I would go for the EF-S 55-250 instead of the 70-300, better but not by much.
This will cover most of the focal lengths and you can try out landscape, portraits and wildlife/birding as well.

>>3058014
slow as ...

>>3058128
as what?

>>3058128
I read it's not too bad with the newest firmware.
Used a p7000 for that before and could live with it's speed. I'm sure the x100 is a bit faster.

File: DSC_00021_01.jpg (789KB, 2000x1330px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 2000x1330px

>>3058118
I have the Tokina 11-20mm, for Nikon though, but I'm sure there's a Canon version.

There's a Sigma 10-20mm but is F3.5, the Tokina is F2.8.

Pic related, see the exif.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	darktable 2.0.3
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	22810
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	16 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2016:04:06 01:37:52
Exposure Time	30 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	11.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1330
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
ISO Speed Used	3200
Image Quality	RAW
White Balance	INCANDESCENT
Focus Mode	MANUAL
Flash Compensation	0.0 EV
ISO Speed Requested	3200
Flash Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
AE Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
Lens Type	Nikon D Series
Lens Range	11.0 - 20.0 mm; f/2.8
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Single Frame/Off
Noise Reduction	OFF
Camera Actuations	16026

File: 1488097767750.jpg (1MB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1333px

i want a nice, pocket friendly camera for under 350$ usd. I dont mind buying used. my requirements are:
>manual mode
>decent iso performance
>wifi or nfc
>optical zoom
>manual focus
-bonus points if view finder but i know thats unlikely in this size and price group

so far ive considered
>canon g9x
>sony rx100 mk3
>seppuku?
so far ive looked at

>>3058232
sudoku.

>>3058232
g9x, no tilty screen, starting from f2.8, lens kinda soft. it's tiny though.

rx100 3, no 4k, but that's it. if i remember the video is full sensor read out?

lx10, no evf, starts at f1.4.

g7x, review said the lens is softer than sony's, so it depends on the price.

nikon dl 18-50, seppuku.

File: 1137-7600.jpg (676KB, 1440x954px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 1440x954px

>>3058118

Tokina 11-16 2.8

It is as good as prime glass and covers FF at 15mm

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi

>>3057157

Manual exposure for everything. It will mount.

Get a d7xxx second hand for the same price and you can use aperture priority

>>3057165

Contax

>>3057149

>Df/D7000
>F100/FE
>Tokina 11-16
>18-55 VR II
>Smegma 28 1.8
>Some sort of 3rd party 28 2.8 Macro with the same optical formula as an Albinar ADG 28
>Nikon 35/2 AF-D
>Nikon 50 1.8 AF
>Nikon 85 1.8 AF
>Nikon 75-300 AF
>Nikon 180 2.8 ED-IF

>select all commercial trucks

>>3058118
>10-18mm but I'm thirsty for primes.

With ultrawides zooms make more sense.

You generally don't want the most extreme ultra wide angle all the time, it only works for certain shots.
And f-stop, price, weight and image quality are similar so there is no drawback of ultrawide zooms vs primes.

My Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 is my standard lens I have on 80% of the time.
If it were a 15mm prime I would probably only use it about 10% of the time. - not exactly economical for a $1k lens.

Between 35 and 85 is where primes make sense.