/gear/ - Gear thread

Do you guys think pentax 35mm macro limited is good choice comparing it to 35mm f24, especially since I'm not planning on using the macro feature.

should i buy a kit lens or fork over an extra $100 for f/2.8

>>3118383
Trying to decide between D3300 and A5000 for my first decent camera. Give me advantages of each one and what each camera is more appropriate for.

>>3118391
the 35/2.8 is well-built and optically good, but it's way overpriced for what it is. The 35/2.4 is cheap and built accordingly, and is optically... okay. It's actually the optics of an FA 35/2.0 with an aperture limiter, since the FA is kinda weak wide open. You might look for a used one of those.

Anyone else nab the GX85 with 12-32mm for $298 on amazon this morning?

Best deal in a while. So excited to replace my old ass pentax k10d

>>3118383
I want the Fuji 35mm f2. It's just the perfect lens.

>>3118398
Extra $100 isn't really all that much for two stops of light

>>3118398
fuck the kit lens, go for f2.8

Are there any good budget lenses for Sony fe or should I just save and buy the Zeiss and gmaster lenses as I am able to

I was recently reading RX100 V review and what strucked me at that time was that reviews of different cameras (P&S, DSLR) appear to point the burst rate as a very important feature.

Am I missing something deeper besides buffer size that comes with burst rate, or is it just an attempt to move models apart so one will look better? I understand that this is crucial feature for sport and wildlife photography, but for an average user?

Hello gear people,
i just want a simple nikon f mount to sony e mount adapter, no aperture or electronic connection required. i thought there was a straightforward choice but i cant find any good information. all adapters i find are either chinese with hugely varying quality i dont dare to order or some ridiculously overprized >100€ adapters with decent ratings. pls spoonfeed me secret tips so i can shoot more pics

Do people with Leicas genuinely just use zone focus and not touch the lens whilst shooting? I gues I need to get better at judging distances.

I have a seven year old laptop, and I have no idea how good the monitor is for photography. I was thinking of getting a new one, but are there any good Windows ones recommended for photo editing?

Pretty much all my laptop is these days is a music, internet and photography machine. I have heard that Apple displays are good, but I don't want that. Any recommendations or are they generally pretty similar?

sigma 24-105 or nikon 24-120 for a d750?

File: 1.png (411KB, 769x1982px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 769x1982px

If I was Canon/Nikon and was on the lookout for a new mount, I would make the new mount for curved sensor, this is the way to progress ahead.

Sony just revealed a bunch of Curved sensor lens designs.
The amazing part about this is all the lenses have 4-6 glass elements at most.

These lens designs are all super simplistic. They are easy to manufacture with high precision.
From what we have seen, wide angle DSLR lenses become so much better, and yet so much lighter when they are made as wide angle mirrorless lens.
But this step is an even larger difference than from DSLR->mirrorless, these lenses are far more simple, they will be even lighter than the current mirrorless lenses, and corner sharpness will be greater than ever.

File: pentax.jpg (77KB, 754x500px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 754x500px

Is there a compact 1° spot meter that could fit in my pocket?

>>3118486
Doesn't every camera have this built in?

On my camera I configured my AEL button to toggle the center spot.

>>3118487
It's for film photography. Old film cameras usually either have no meter at all or a central weighed meter.

>>3118477
I would love to see that, but they'll probably be far behind Sony.

>>3118498
Sony should probably just try and make curved sensors fit into E-mount. And use that mount for multiple censor lineups and multiple lens lineups.

I don't think people would mind their current traditional lenses on curved sensors and get a bit of soft corners here and there.

It's mostly Canon and Nikon who can start on a fresh, while Sony sort of needs to stick to current mount.

>>3118398
>$100
Spend $1000 if it gets you noticeably better glass. You'll be using it for a few years anyhow if it is actually good.

>>3118405
Both are appropriate to annoy you. Get a A6000 or D7200 or better so you have a few features, better AF and not always a full buffer. You're still not going overboard, its only just somewhere in the (low-ish) midrange.

>>3118511
I'm on a pretty tight budget, so I don't think I'd be able to go that far. I'm considering A6000, but it'll be quite tough and probably mean that I won't have money for anything but the camera. D7200 is certainly out of my range.
I'm also considering D3400 since it's a pretty cheap upgrade from D3300.
Is A6600 worth the sacrifice?

>>3118477
>that sensor size change
can't tell if the lenses are gigantic or the sensors are small.

>>3118513
a6000*
didn't even proofread the post

>>3118447
Monitors aren't OS specific.

Apart from that, while they have different technical features there isn't really any need to get anything particularly good EXCEPT if you need to be able to exactly have your monitor represent what will be printed on your printer or such.
There are monitors, printers and calibration tools that can achieve that, but it's generally not worth it for most people 'cause it costs a bunch.

For most normal home users: Even if your monitor is a bit too blue-ish and too bright vs print, you'll just learn to correct a bit the other way when you edit & print - problem essentially solved.

>>3118515
It's Medium Format.

The 84mm is super compact though.

>>3118518
if the sensor on the first one is MF then that lens is gigantic.

>>3118519
Yeah, 679mm,

Giant, but super simple construction. It's literally just two lens groups.

>>3118513
> Is A6600 worth the sacrifice?
Probably. At least the body will be much less annoying.

The imaging capabilities of a camera is still defined by both the body AND the lens. (And in various situations also accessories like flash units and tripods and stuff).

>probably mean that I won't have money for anything but the camera
Well, as long as money comes in next month or whenever, you might just buy lenses and accessories then? You'll presumably be okay with the kit lens and no extra accessories until then.

>>3118439
Yea, buy a decent looking Chinese one? If it turns out to not be good enough after all, get another... but probably it is. China makes a lot of decent and good stuff.

>>3118521
I don't think I will have much money to spend on it past that. I could slowly save up for lens and such, but like I said, my budget is quite tight. It'd take me far more than just a month to throw in money on whatever else I need unless it's just an extra battery.

>>3118422
Sure, Samyang and others have very decent lenses. And a bunch of the non-GM Sony lenses also are quite good.

But for your most used lenses (if there are any such): Perhaps really just get the best you can afford, yes.

>>3118524
Do keep looking for deals, might save you some good money. Also, sticking with the kit lens isn't something bad, it'll do the job just fine

>>3118529
I'm not worried about lens kits, as I've shot some good photos with them.
Even with good deals, it might be quite expensive. I'll keep searching, hopefully I'll find some good deals. What's a good deal price for an A6000? I've barely seen any deals for it below $480.

>>3118524
That makes it a lot less easy then. For some people getting even a cheap macro lens on top of the kit lens would be more useful than a better body. And for some it's going to be the opposite.

OTOH it's actually hard to imagine you can't at least start to get Chinese or used / vintage accessories / lenses with not too much saving up. So really, I'd still tend towards the A6000.

>>3118533
Perhaps, but not as quickly as you think. My learning pace will probably compensate for that. I assumed that I'd get few essentials with my camera right away, but I guess I'll just have to pass for a little bit.
Still praying on some good deals though, as even the camera w/ lenskit alone is out of my total budget.

>>3118477

Curved sensor is useless for ICL because the curve of the sensor is different for every focal length.

>>3118603
You're replying to a patent that shows 5 different lenses pointing towards the save curved sensor.

>save
*same

File: SLR lens curved.gif (22KB, 550x471px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 550x471px

I think Canon is slowly regretting not investing into more advanced semiconductor fabs.

They lost out on the smartphone craze. They are going to lose out on self driving cars and trucks with 10-20 sensors per vehicle.
And now they will be behind in curved sensors.

Even Nikon is dabbling into curved sensors now. Although their lens seems to be a lot more clumsy than the Sony design.

>>3118422
There are very few truly 'bad' Sony e-mount lenses. Even the 50mm FE 1.8 is not bad after the v3 firmware update, and its IQ has always been great.

File: s-l1600[1].jpg (185KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1200x900px

What lens is this?

File: s-l1600[1].jpg (207KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 1200x900px

>>3118672

File: DSC00336.jpg (130KB, 600x899px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 600x899px

Pic related just arrived. I'm super impressed with the shots I've gotten just in the first few minutes.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6300
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.10.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:21 20:27:28
Exposure Time	1/20 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	1.0 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	16.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3118673
This one maybe?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/TAMRON-28-300mm-Macro-lens-for-Canon-EOS-7D-SL1-80D-T6i-T5i-70D-5D-II-III-6D-etc-/352103603777?hash=item51fb029e41:g:GFwAAOSw5cRZLvo8

>>3118674
post one

with Sigma releasing their new 24-70 ART and Tamron releasing their 24-70 G2; who do you guys think will make the better lens?

>>3118677
I figured it out. It's the Tamron 185D, which is a 28-300mm full-frame lens from several years ago.

I sold my Mark II a while back so I was lucky to get another with this lens, battery, and charger for $225 on ebay.

File: selp18105g_test.jpg (74KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1000x667px

>>3118678

>>3118699

dubs checked

and a remarkably cute Chi

>>3118701
she's actually really ugly irl. that's how good the lens is.

>>3118691
Tamron's v1 is already better than the sigma art. I just assume they're updating the vc so it lasts longer than 6 months.

File: smiling-owl-e1352312824780.jpg (62KB, 630x463px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 630x463px

>>3118704

Camera is 58mm, just got a lens that's 55mm. Do I get a step up or step down ring? Am confuse.

File: lens.jpg (66KB, 1131x475px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1131x475px

should I buy this?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Me
Image-Specific Properties:

>>3118752

u fucking wot m8

You mean a lens you have has a 58mm filter thread and you got a 55mm filter?

>>3118782

depends, what camera do you have?

>>3118790
d3300. I only have a 35mm lens

>>3118789
no like the thread of the camera to the thread of the lens. Camera takes 58mm thread, lens is 55mm.

>>3118782

I mean, it would make a decent enough vacation/walk around lenses.

But I would suspect that for only a little more you could find something better.

>>3118801
Yeah that's kind of what I was thinking, since I like the idea of low light pics. I guess I'll just wait a bit

>>3118383
I just grabbed an old lens of my grandparents. All in all it was pretty good at first besides the rubber on it getting gooey. However now I cant zoom as the fabric lining on the outer case has gummed up and got stuck. How best can I clean it? Hard bit is getting up into the bits where it is stuck already

>>3118782
It's a decent lens, a little better than average kit. It's worth $72.

>>3118791
Buy it. It's cheap, it's good, and it will help guide you to make further lens purchases down the line if you're inclined.

>>3118489
C E L L P H O N E A P P

I'm trying to buy a body + lens that would last me for like 5 years minimum (more lenses probably will come later). I didn't invest in any system yet. It has to have enough power to get me through

- traveling, small and big (closest trip: Iceland!)
- events (available light)
- concerts
- walkarounds
- astro
- macro at some point
- maybe occasional portraits, but I'm not a fan

So far best I could theoretically afford is:

X-T2 + 23/2

D750 + 35/1.8

If D610 or X-T20 with the same lenses would be enough, even better. Any advice that could help me to decide what I really need, not what I want? I'm also opened for other suggestions. (I was in the shop, they had X-T20 and D610 and DSLR ergo felt much more comfortable)

Have a nice weekend!

>>3118856
Maybe the A7S (II?) or A7 II, or even the A6x00.

Various small and big setups possible. System has really great macro and portrait lenses. Only Astro isn't utterly ideal, but it's still okay for artistic shots.

Alternatively, how about getting the Pentax K-1 or such?

>>3118857
The most I'd want from Sony would be 6500, but from APS-C I prefer Fuji. a7II felt mushy, plus lenses, with few exceptions, are very expensive. There is adapting, but I'd like to stick the given system.

K-1 would probably be the best, but it's a bit too expensive in Poland (around 9300 PLN, which gives ~2500 USD for body only). There are shops that sell it internationally but I'm not so trusty with cash this big.

>>3118856

Yea, like the other anon said, take a look at the a7ii (or wait a few months for the iii). Closer to DSLR ergo and hit most of your points. Considerably better low light performance too. Lenses run roughly the same as Fuji (outside of the GM ones) and they are all pretty damn good.

Also take a look at Pentax. Crop only, so you don't get that nice low-light boost the a7 has, but they have some neat astro things built in, and a whole bunch of nice crop lenses that are all weather proofed (not resistant, PROOF!).

Personally I am a little hesitant of Fuji. Their special snowflake sensor causes no end of issues. Poorly supported, and has color and detail issues.

>>3118860
> The most I'd want from Sony would be 6500
The A7S was mentioned first because it's basically the best "available light" camera that you can get for its price.

> a7II felt mushy
?

> plus lenses, with few exceptions, are very expensive
Fuji is much worse in that regard.

Sony doesn't have many cheap zoom lenses, but otherwise the lenses generally cost as much as good lenses cost.
With a bunch of rather cheap deals like the 28mm f/2, the 50mm macro, the Samyang lenses and so on.

> There is adapting, but I'd like to stick the given system.
And then there is that, too. Why wouldn't you also adapt if you prefer some lenses to be cheap rather than particularly good?

>>3118861
>Considerably better low light performance too.
The D750 is okay. Not as good as an A7S, but it'll actually do better than a A6500 and about the same as an A7 II,

It still has the extra bulk and weight for camera and lenses (weight primarily for the lenses) which make it less ideal for travel, not equally interesting macro lens options, and so on.

Not a bad camera, but personally I can't see why you'd pick it over the A7 II or A7S.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-22 at 6.14.41 AM.png (251KB, 970x1280px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 970x1280px

They will trade for a Mamiya 7 or 7 II

I have a 7II with 80MM

why shouldn't I?

>>3118517
Well, I didn't mean OS specific, but just that I've heard Apple monitors tend to be better than Windows.

Thanks, though. I'll just look for performance rather than screen quality. My laptop is unbearably slow now.

>>3118885
Try reinstalling windows on an SSD and maybe upgrade the RAM in your laptop.
Very cheap and often whats needed to make your laptop run faster again.

>>3118886
Thanks, I'll see what I can do.

>>3118863

Ohh D750, for some reason I read D610 twice. That is definatly a much better choice than the D610 or X-T2.

D750 had the screw drive, right? Could probably pick up some old film era lenses dirt cheap.

But you could do the same thing with old minolta lenses on the a7ii.

>>3118898
Only with an adapter.
A99 and A99ii have the native mount for the sweet Minolta glass

>>3118850
Inconvenient.

>>3118916

The e-mount adapter works pretty well though.

>>3118923
It you carry a tele lens, use that for metering. Or get an OM-4ti.

Today I decided to redpill myself on chinesium and ordered the new 7artesans 7.5/2.8 fisheye for my Fuji. Made an offer of $128 on eBay. Will report on it in a few weeks. If it's not total garbage, should I go for the 50/1.1 as I lack a decent M fit fifty?

>>3118856
a dSLR is quite big, if you want something more the size of the XT2, get a Sony A7ii or Sony A7iiR

File: lens.jpg (31KB, 860x172px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 860x172px

Anybody have this lens? Does it have any softness on the wide end? Will I get annoyed by the noisy autofocus

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Me
Image-Specific Properties:

>>3118952
good lens, the af is rather annoyingly noisy, and the manual focus is terrible (at least on my copy)

never had any issues with it regarding iq though

>>3118961
cool, thinking of picking it up used for $200.

Do you think it'd be better getting the non VC version since lots of reports say it's sharper? What about saving an extra $80 for a Sigma 17-50 OS instead? Or is there another ~17-50 range zoom I should be on the lookout for?

>>3118795
What camera and lens(es) do you have exactly?

File: 1622851105295709249-account_id=1.jpg (229KB, 1616x1080px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1616x1080px

I just got this at a garage sale for $0.50

Would the an EOS 5D be a suitable first professional camera? I have a guy that will sell me the body just for $500

>>3118952
Somewhat soft borders at 17mm f/2.8, extremely soft at 50mm.

Will you get annoyed? If you buy mainly $300 zoom lenses and were happy with them, probably no. It's okay for one of these.

If you mainly decent buy primes or higher-end zoom lenses and want to get like 70%+ of your sensor's worth of resolution as usable image even when wide open., this one doesn't really measure up. It is a lot worse.

>>3119001
Probably no. I figure much of the competition will be using a 5D IV or 5DS R with good glass (or comparably high-end gear from the other brands).

But of course it depends on your customers.

>>3118856

If you want to do astro, don't get a sony, they have the star eater problem.

>>3119007
It's probably not a problem. The majority of astrophotography isn't about capturing the last star possible, but just to have many stars for artistic effect.

>https://www.lonelyspeck.com/sony-a7s-astrophotography-review/
>For astrophotography the a7S seems to offer the cleanest image of any camera I have used so far

File: images.jpg (18KB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 384x384px

Is this a good buy? This is my first cam and im excited to learn more.

>>3119012
That review looks like it was from before the firmware update that causes the problem.

>>3119019
Should work. It's already a pretty useful camera.

OTOH if you can somewhat easily afford the A6500 or A7 II, you might as well get one of these instead.

File: serveimage.jpg (112KB, 1024x899px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1024x899px

Anyone got something to say about the Pentax K-x? Found one for decently cheap and I thought it might be time to finally get a DSLR. Comes with a couple of different lenses as well.

>>3119048
I only heard they fixed the issue in newer firmware.

>>3119051
That was a fairly okay but not fantastic camera 8 years ago.

I'd suggest getting a newer DSLR or MILC. For Pentax, the K-1 is pretty good.

>>3119054
>the K-1 is pretty good
>$2000
jesus christ anon i'm looking at old cheap cameras for a reason. I aint rich.
the K-x I found is only $120

I have a Canon XSI, I've been using it for a year now and I would like to upgrade it. What is a good camera that I can buy brand new and isn't extremely expensive? I was thinking about buying a T6i, is there a better one for that price range?

File: Image2.png (149KB, 355x352px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 355x352px

I'm supposed to do a review of a chess set for a company and the deadline for it to be posted is Monday.

The camera I was going to use was my Canon Powershot SX210. But now that I have a better camera coming in through the mail (Canon 1D Mark II with 28-300mm lens) I am tempted to wait for it to get there this next week so I can do the photography portion of the review with it.

The SX210 has a focal range of 5 to 70mm so it should technically do better in up close shots, right? And it has a higher megapixel count. So people reading the review will be able to pixel peep the photos. But my gut is telling me the 1D photos will just plain look better.

What do you say I should do? Should I just stick to my deadline and use what I already have?

>>3119060
You should be able to find a Canon T2i for a similar price, great camera for its age. I just sold mine after 6 years, really good low light performance for how cheap it is.

>>3119069
>So people reading the review will be able to pixel peep the photos
They're not going to. They don't give a shit.

>But my gut is telling me the 1D photos will just plain look better.
A 28-300 lens is going to be garbage. I bet you the SX210 takes a sharper picture, with less effort, and more of the object in focus at minimum focus distance.

Why don't you work on your lighting technique instead of worrying about what camera you use?

>>3119068
77D, T6s.

>>3119070
That'd be cool. I have a bit of exprience with canon cameras. Problem is I'm in scandinavia and most stuff costs twice as much as they would in the states.
Whats the difference between the 550D and T2i?

>>3119072
But the 77D (Body only) costs even more than a T6i with the kit lens. Also, why is the T6s better than the T6i? Is it really worth the price difference?

>>3119050
That's good to hear, my savings was not put into waste.

>>3119072
My lighting is going to be the morning time in the kitchen since the pieces are a stark black and white color with a glossy finish.

>>3119075
They are the same thing.

I'm literally just starting photography. Any tips on what starter things I should buy?

>>3119095
A camera

How worth $1300 is the canon 16-35mm f2.8 II?

File: 49 years old.png (5KB, 511x114px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 511x114px

Does photography cause autism?

I noticed Gearfags tend to become more and more aggressive and childish as they age.
It's as if the entire photography environment is damaging to the mind in most cases.

>>3119060
> jesus christ anon i'm looking at old cheap cameras for a reason
> I aint rich.
Yea, I can't know that. Having $2k to spend on hobbies doesn't make you anywhere near rich.

> the K-x I found is only $120
For that price it's reasonable enough.

>>3119095
Once you think you'll be actually doing this as a hobby or even professionally for a while, get a good camera (probably digital, film costs a lot rather quickly if you shoot more often). plus a good lens or two.

Also, lighting + light modifiers if appropriate for the types of photos you do.

>>3119131
You seem like a kid if you can't handle being called a "Bozo" over ignoring clearly stated premises and wasting other people's time.

>>3119051
Get a Pentax Q

>>3118447
Get a desktop, dumbass

>>3119155
I think I just have naive expectations people in nearing their 50's.

In the end everybody is just a 12 year old inside grown up bodies.

>>3119165
> In the end everybody is just a 12 year old inside grown up bodies.
I don't really disagree, but if you think you're an exception - well, I sure can't see you as such.

It's especially a bad sign that you can't take some -ultimately very mild- expression of displeasure at not putting effort into reading stated argument and apparently just wasting time.

>>3118856
Canon 5D IV and 50mm f/1.4

>>3118881
Because the Mamiya's better

>>3118885
>I've heard Apple monitors tend to be better than Windows

MS doesn't make monitors.

>>3119001
Should be $400 at most.

>>3119079
Kit lens is shit.

Shouldn't you still have your glass from you XSi?

>>3118856
A7ii for full frame or A6500 for APS-C.

If you get the A6500, the 18-105 G lens is a good match for it.

>>3119178
> professional
> $400
Not even close, and that's despite the initial investment for an actual professional photography setup being really comparatively pretty low at a few grand plus maybe a studio rent or something.

>>3119186
I meant for the 5D

File: 1498452200829.jpg (59KB, 522x583px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 522x583px

I don't want to make a new thread for a dumb question but when shooting b&w, is it best to shoot in monochrome or edit the photo in lightroom?
>t. someone who has never shot b&w

>>3119254
Don't bother doing it in-camera. Do it in post on your RAWs.

Possibly, but not necessarily in Lightroom. Photoshop or alternative such image editors are almost better for it, actually. The now free Google Nik Collection or other more specialized tools can also be useful.

>>3119264
Thank you for the quick reply and info.
>The now free Google Nik Collection
Will look into this. Thanks again!

Black&White in-camera is a meme.

You need post processing to first correct chromatic aberrations in the best way, otherwise you won't get the sharpest B&W images.

File: Canon_Angle_Finder_B.jpg (42KB, 597x436px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 597x436px

Does anyone know what cameras this fucker is compatible with and how I can get it on the 1D series?

>>3119048

a7s never had star eatwr.

Only the a7sii. It got partially fixed in an update, but it is still there.

File: .jpg (144KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1000x1000px

>>3119288
Huh looks like it just attaches to the eyepiece slot. Remove your camera's eyepiece cover and see what the mount looks like. If it looks close then I'd give it a shot.

>>3119288
Oh you're looking for the B. Well someone here recommends it at least for the 1D
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/1056101#forum-post-11358832

File: .png (200KB, 942x556px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 942x556px

>>3119288
last one from me but looks like it should be compatible.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/231382208398

Is a D7100 worth $100 more or so than a D5300?
D5300 was my first camera. I've learned a lot with it but have been pretty restricted as far as lenses go. I can probably unload it for $400-450 locally. D7100s pop up every now and then for around $500.

>>3119377
A thousand times yes. That's 10 times yes per dollar.

File: serveimage.jpg (174KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1920x1080px

this worth 70£ ?
anyone ever had it, also retarded question , can you charge it via a battery bank?

File: BoatFluke.jpg (191KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1000x667px

>>3119269
>Black&White in-camera is a meme

Thinking this is a meme

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:08:09 19:34:36
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	4.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

I'm about to start doing portraits. What is better on a crop sensor:

50mm or 85mm?

I already have a nifty 50, and will take advantage of its wide aperture. Is 85mm worth it?

I am considering the Canon 85mm f/1.8. Is there a better option near that price range? (under $400)

>>3119413
>buying a bridge shit with peanut sensor
>ever

Hello , I found a d3400, 18-55mm kit lens, and a 35mm 1.8 prime for 350$. Decent? Should I go for it?

File: Nice1.gif (3MB, 420x300px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 420x300px

>>3119415
>that picture

File: Canon_Angle_Finder_EOS1n.jpg (42KB, 800x535px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 800x535px

>>3119374
>>3119376

Thanks, I got confused when I saw this listing that had the Ec? frame around it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Excellent-CANON-EOS-1N-RS-35mm-Film-Camera-w-Angle-Finder-B-from-Japan-/232419921194?hash=item361d4e8d2a:g:qFIAAOSwUKxYlBY6

>>3119424
Whatever suits your style of portraits better. You probably could use the 50 to begin with as you already have it as upgrade to something longer if you feel like it, or be happy and never look back

What is the best value full frame dslr? Probably not current gen but somewhere in the realms of 5diii d750 a99 ?

>>3119457

For what usage?

>>3119457
Used d800 for portraits and landscape is a really good deal imo

>>3119457
D700
7
0
0

Legendary build, sub $1000, great handling of light, pretty much the same AF system from the D3 which only went under some refinement between then and the D4s era.

Alternatively, the D800/D800E. More money, but if AF performance isnt 100% critical, it's most of a D810 for less.

is the nikon df out of production? several places seem to have them out of stock or backordered, and there are rumours of a df2 announcement on their anniversary

So I finally fell for the full frame meme and got myself a 6D.

Is magic lantern worth on it? What features does it add?

>>3119413
Everything else aside, I used to use a powershot a bit at work that had a reflective metallic ring on the front of the lens like that one, and it would constantly reflect rings of light onto any surface I'd shoot. Maybe not a problem if you're only shooting stuff indoors or from a distance, but I would never in a million years recommend any camera that has that feature.

File: DSCN0506-1080.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

My last camera just died, close to 60k photos with it. It was a point-and-shoot, Nikon Coolpix L100 and the only specialty thing I did with it was to take super close macro shots of insects (reposted pic fully related).

I'm in the market for a new camera, but I'm no longer going with a point-and-shoot. I need a camera and one good macro lens. While on /an/, earlier this year, discussing insect macro shots, I was told this by an anon who does amazing insect macro work,

>A Canon Eos 7D with the Tokina 100mm macro. For these high magnification shots I also have a set of (cheap) extension tubes. Lighting is a ring flash with a homemade diffuser (literally just a clear plastic box with white paper inside).

>If you use any kind of system camera use extension tubes and not magnification lenses for more magnification. Those just put awful, cheap glass in front of your good lens.

That Cannon BTFO my budget ($700), but that Tokina lens is within my range. That would mean nearly $400 for lens and $300 left over for camera. Not exactly out of point-and-shoot range. Though, that lens goes well with Nikon AF-based cameras, but would be f/5.6 at 1:1 for macro which is fine for what I want to do.

After searching forever, I found, "Nikon - D3400 DSLR Camera with AF-P DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Lens" for $499. I've been googling and reading and more reading and I'm fucking cross eyed and brain dead now. I figure I'll digest all this info for another week before making any decisions. I thought, I'd at least run this by you guys since I'm sure I've made some critical mistake somewhere that's easy to spot.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON
Camera Model	COOLPIX L100
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	83 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3648
Image Height	2736
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	2017:05:28 14:17:09
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	128
Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cool White Fluorescent
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	15.10 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

I want a photocamera. I want something decent and not some hipster monkey with a nikon like stuff.
However, I'm a complete beginner when it comes to anything bigger than a compact camera or smartphone.
I prefer to shoot people and hate hate hate lense distortion. Also lost places and nature.

What cameras and lenses should i look into for my needs? Lets say up to 1500 Euro (body and lense). Its just a now and then hobby, so I dont want to sink thousands of euros into pro-gear.

>>3119613
$499 for a D3400 is too much unless you're buying new (which there's no real point to)
You can find the same kits for roughly $390 or lower.

>>3119616
I'll do some digging, yes that was the "new" price.

>>3119622
You can also get it cheaper if you're willing to give up the kit lens, if you plan on just doing macro work.

File: canon80D_nikonD7200.jpg (692KB, 4096x2304px) Image search: [Google]

692KB, 4096x2304px

>>3119615
me again: layed my eyes on the Nikon D7200 and Canon 80D, which one to go? or something else?

I kind of tend to the nikon. should i buy the 18-140 lense or 55-200 or 55-300 if i mainly want to shoot people/portraits?

For hands on I will visit a local store tomorrow

>>3119674
I have no experience with the 80D but I can say the D7200 is pretty nice, fits well in my big man hands

>>3119674
>should i buy the 18-140 lense or 55-200 or 55-300 if i mainly want to shoot people/portraits?

Neither.

Buy a nice prime, preferable 85mm but 50mm will do too (and will be cheaper).
Those lenses are too slow for nice portraits.

Is the DSCHX90 any good? looking for a hiking camera so things influencing my choice are
>compact
>zoom
>mini sun proof lens thing (viewfinder?)
>price (under £350)

planning on nature shots and some astro shots also can you turn off metadata in the options is that standard or will I have to strip it myself before uploading and archiving?

>>3119627
Being able to have two lens would be optimal in the long run. The macro stuff is the only specialty thing I'd need to do. I still need to do normal photos so having a range will help.

File: 1497971102975.jpg (75KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 540x540px

I want to upgrade from Canon 700D (T5i)
Is it a good idea to buy a full frame (5DS r I was thinking)? I mainly shoot outdoor portraits for a bit of money here and there, and wonder if it's worth changing my main camera? Especially that it's quite expensive for a poorfag like me

>>3119731
jesus why a 5DS? get a 6D or a Mark III if you really want FF

>>3119692
thanks for the tipp. I have problems finding an 85mm equivalent for a cropped sensor though. Nikon has a 58mm one (x1,5=87mm) but that one costs 1.800 bucks, nearly double the price of the body alone. Are there any other ones on the market?

the other option coming near would be a normal 50mm lense (=75mm). i saw some 60mm lenses but those were macro lenses, apereantly not that great for shooting portraits(?).

>>3119768
50 is A-OK

Currently using a little Lumix TZ70 and having fun taking pictures at long zoom ranges despite the massive side effects on such a small device.
Looking at the market it is disheartening how little options there are to get lenses in the 400mm range for mirrorless systems. Budget bodies like an A6000 / XT-10 all look like fun but matching up a long lens costs like 2000 euro.
The only way I seem to be able to get reach is by going for Canon and dealing with (to me at least) hideous ancient looking DSLRs.

In no way does a Canon 70D or D7 look appealing. The awful video compared to the budget mirrorless systems is also a pain.

I might wind up picking up a cheap Canon body to only match with a lens for wildlife and doing everything else on a Sony / Fuji I guess. Adapting lenses to work on the Sony camera's seems both expensive and flaky as an alternative.

Quite a confusing market to me, not seeing why a Sigma or Tamron doesn't make a 400mm range camera for a Fuji or Sony.

File: 1462319549729.png (3MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1200px

Changing professions and can afford to buy one camera before I do.

Should I get a 7D Mark II and have a crop sensor camera that I already have a wide degree of lenses for and could use to shoot and potentially earn money on the side.

or

Buy into the full frame meme and get a 6D while I can afford one and hope that I can afford lenses at some point in college.

>>3119786
Get the one you can support with lenses the easiest way.
You will need to save up money for all the business stuff. Changing professions always cost a lot of money and time.

>>3119786
If you need the frame rate get the 7D, otherwise, get the 6D

I need a small white-balance 'card' that I can carry with me for use with the custom WB setting on my A6300. Suggestions?

>>3119838
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/231564-REG/Delta_98705C_Gray_Card_4.html/pageID/accessory

File: DSCN0688-ryan-in-pool.jpg (167KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1000x750px

What's a good bang for the buck carbon travel tripod? I have had good luck with my big aluminum Vanguard so I started looking with them but I wondered if there wasn't some other offerings I wasn't aware of. Other than small and light, my only requirement is an arca Swiss compatible ball head. Thx.

What's better? Why?
Canon 85mm f1.8
or
Rokinon 85M-C 85mm F1.4

>>3119865
do you like autofocus?

you will NEVER notice the dfference between 1.4 and 1.8 especially at 85

I've got an AE-1 and the 50mm1.8 FD lens that came with it, got both for free. I'm still learning photog, is it worth buying another lens, and if so, what one?

>>3119865
>tried and tested optical formula from the worlds largest camera manufacturer
>korean garbage

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B01HMWKRP6/ref=twister_B01IDEL1U2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

any experience with these filters?

>>3119961
the Gradual ND kit specifically

>>3119888
I just sold my AE-1, but I absolutely loved the 28mm f2.8.

File: slidelite.png (278KB, 460x440px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 460x440px

Hello,

Lets talk straps.

I'm about to get the Peak Design Slide lite - any other recommendations/considerations?

>>3119613
>While on /an/, earlier this year, discussing insect macro shots, I was told this by an anon who does amazing insect macro work,
Has this been archived anywhere?

>>3119975
Not really, the Peak Design is the best you can get. I have the wide one and it holds up my Bigma without any problems during my usual walks in the nearby hills. The anchors are strong and don't scuff easily, they hold up strong while easy to swap anchor points when you go from telephoto to small lenses.
Stay away from the chinese blackrapid shit, the lugs break easily.

>>3119613
I use a cheap old Tamron 90/2.8 AF lens on my Pentax and the results are excellent.
You can get a K-50 or K-S2 and get a used Tamron 90/2.8, it will fit your budget without any gimped features.

>>3119983
Nice.

Yeah, I've been holding out for a good strap and it seems PD is a cut above the rest.

Thanks for the input.

>>3119980
There doesn't seem to be a website that archives /an/. I only saved that little bit of text.

>>3119985
>>3119616
Buying new means no gray market and no problems sending it in to get fixed by the manufacturer as well as having a longer/better warranty.

i still have a D90. it's heavy and big but it's working just fine. should i think about selling it and buying something else ?

>>3119997
Pretty much all my photo stuff I bought used, never had a single problem, but I also checked the seller.
Photographers generally tend to their gear, it is very rare you would see a bad condition gear being sold without specifically stated "as-is" or "for parts"
The body I got from a photographer, lenses I got from reputable stores selling used, refurbished and B-stock items.
I recommend looking up B&H, KEH or in the EU SRS Microsystems and Photo Koeberl Graz. They are the best shops so far I did business with.
Plus even if you buy new and you get a problem you will most likely have to pay up just for checking, even if in the warranty period. Consumer electronics warranty in itself is a grey area.

File: nikkor.jpg (196KB, 970x450px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 970x450px

Noobie question, never hold an DSLR.

When having an autofocus lense, can you set it to manual mode and focus it by roating your hand like on an analog SLR? Can you change focus on the body itself?

>>3119865
Both are okay & neither rivals a Otus.

You probably want the Canon 'cause AF.

>>3119855
Q666C/Q999C, Dic&Mic E302C / P303C and similar models on Aliexpress.

>>3120003
>When having an autofocus lense, can you set it to manual mode and focus it by roating your hand like on an analog SLR?
Yes.

>Can you change focus on the body itself?
That'd be autofocus.

>>3120003
>When having an autofocus lense, can you set it to manual mode and focus it by roating your hand like on an analog SLR?
Yes, on the majority of lenses.

> Can you change focus on the body itself?
You generally toggle whether a lens is in AF or MF mode on a camera body (though some also have buttons on the lens for that).

Most cameras have somewhat indirect means to adjust focus on the camera (e.g. selecting individual focus points / moving focus areas for the AF system with a directional pad, joystick or touch screen). But "manual focus" usually happens on the lens' focus ring.

>>3120003
You could, but since most AF lenses are geared for fast focusing, their focus track (amount you can "rotate" the lens with the focusing wheel) is usually very short, so that the AF motor can as quickly as possible move the focus from one poont to the next.
Contrast this to lenses actually made for manual focus, where the focus track instead is usually exaggeratedly long, in order to allow easier fine-tune adjustment of the focus by the less precise hand motion.

So yes, you can, but it's not going to offerthe operator as good user experience as a real manual focus lens.

>>3119998
If you think a modern APS-C or FF MILC or just a slightly smaller DSLR setup would be more useful to you, you can certainly get devices that are considerably better on average and have lower weight / smaller size.

Or you could get a compact camera, there are some that are reasonably useful for some uses.

>>3120009

Not to mention most ovf's on an af camera have subpar focus screens foranual focus.

>>3120016
Most DSLRs have liveview with peaking. Unless you use Nikon, in which case sucks to be you.

>>3120017
As neato as peaking is, it can't be used with a vf on a dslr (limiting its usefullness, especially is harsh lighting conditions) and it falls way short of a proper focus-screen when it comes to accuracy and ease of use.

>>3120020
Buy a film SLR then.

>>3120020
I have AF confirmation on manual focus though. It works as a charm and can fire the shutter automatically when I bring the subject into focus.

>>3120023
More like get a MILC, they feature the best general purpos MF assist mechanisms to date.

It is not like the usual person would want to forfeit the usual digital camera advantages anyhow.

>>3120023

Or, you know, just get a good focus screen for your AF body.

>>3120029
Or just use an AF lens.

>>3118863
D750 is better than a7ii in every way imaginable.

>>3120049
Not really. As compared to the A7 II, it is missing IBIS, an EVF with focus peaking, lower weight on body and lenses, the vast majority of the good native E-mount primes, a 1/8000 shutter option, decent interaction with an app on your smartphone, a better video encoder and other things.

The D750 is a decent camera anyhow, it also has a few advantages. More zoom lenses and such.

Lads do I pay $300 for a Ricoh grd iii or $450 for a grd iv. Is the iv worth the extra cash

File: 1483438488752.jpg (15KB, 463x325px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 463x325px

Can anyone recommend a place that sells second hand cameras(like amazon or ebay but not those two) that they have successfully done business with. Ive heard very mixed things about places like KEH and don't know if i want to give them my money.

Secondly, if i buy a camera used with a high shutter count (for example a 5d mark ii with 90,000+ actuation's for $500) could i send it back into canon to be refurbished giving me a "near new" camera for a fraction of the price.

>>3120088
Why not Ebay?

> i send it back into canon to be refurbished giving me a "near new"

No, it doesn't work like that.

You sound very young and might I add, stupid.

>>3120090
Ebay is not off the table, just wondering if there are other more subject oriented sites that may or may not provide a broader range of option.


>No, it doesn't work like that.

I'm sorry, I forgot that electronics manufacturers don't stand behind their products for the life of the product anymore.

>>3120096
>subject oriented sites that may or may not provide a broader range of option.

What the fuck are you babbling about?

>I'm sorry, I forgot that electronics manufacturers don't stand behind their products for the life of the product anymore.

They don't, they've discontinued service and maintenance of the mk 2. It's basically polishing a turd at this stage for very little gain. Also, you'll pay out the ass for it, and it won't be "like new".

>>3120088
SRS Microsystems, Foto Köberl Graz

I am looking to get my first wide wide angle lenses for my D3300 the 3 lenses that are in my price bracket are
Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 EX DC HSM £329
Nikon 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6G VR AF-P £349
Tokina AT-X 120 Pro DX AF 11-20mm f2.8 £352
anyone used any of these lenses got any recommendations?

>>3120100
>What the fuck are you babbling about?
See post 1, the section asking about commerce alternatives in a niche market.

>they've discontinued service and maintenance of the mk 2
So they in fact don't stand behind their goods for the lifetime of said product. But do service goods that they deem worth servicing. Additionally the best course of action would be to ask an official canon representative instead of a random chucklefuck who can only speak on terms of conjecture, got it. Thank you

>>3120108

>>3120110
I'd get the Tokina. f/2.8 and good optics, better than Sigma.

File: 1484450789518.jpg (41KB, 594x388px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 594x388px

>>3120116

I forgot to word, Thank you.

>>3120114
You're the thick cunt posting this shit here, asking questions that can be googled in a nanosecond.

>>3120119
The "You" came through automatically

>>3119975
I started out with a blackrapid strap and I still use it now and then attached to the foot of my 70-200. Otherwise, I use all blackrapid stuff. I have the Slide (for my traditional DSLRS), the Leash (for my mirrorless), and the clutch, with the toggles on all my bodies so I can move things around as need be. Completely happy with the Peak Design system.

>>3120135
Bought the slide lite like 2 hours ago, should get it wednesday

>>3120088
I've had nothing but good experience with KEH, myself. 95% of my gear is pre-owned. I've bought stuff from verified sellers in facebook groups and eBay, and KEH or Amazon is also a good resource if there's something specific I'm looking for.

>>3120135
Fuck... I mean I use all Peak Design stuff

>>3120130
Right!? I forgot this entire website was for shitposting. Not a collaborative of people conversing with others, answering questions, and seeking knowledge past that of a nanosecond google search. There's no deeper understanding of subject matter here. Thanks for refresher. [fishhook.dng]

>>3120132
I goofed, not going to dwell on it.

File: 1436824580877.png (84KB, 248x251px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 248x251px

>buy used d3300 for $280
>week later find d5300 for $300 used

>>3120150
>More focus points and a flippy screen
It's not really an upgrade. The D3300 will be great

fuji x-t1 + 35mm lens is on sale for $800 at adorama and b&h

>>3120150
Those "much more focus points" are as accurate as the 11 AF points in the D3300. Don't worry about it.
An actual upgrade would be a D7100 or even a D7000.

>>3118928
I don't and I'm mostly happy with my current cameras, so need for the Olympus.

>>3120150
Same kind of shit.

Get a D7200 or D750 (or whatever is the equivalent to these then) instead once you need an upgrade.

>>3120135
Same here.

Peak Design Slide is way more comfortable than Black Rapid IMO.

The thick padding on the Black Rapid is actually a disadvantage because it gets really hot, especially since it has to stay fixed in place.
It's also hard to put on, so you end up wearing it all day.

>>3119072
>I bet you the SX210 takes a sharper picture, with less effort, and more of the object in focus at minimum focus distance.
You were right.

File: Screenshot_20170724-012443.jpg (128KB, 521x692px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 521x692px

Plz answer

Lads do I pay $300 for a Ricoh grd iii or $450 for a grd iv. Is the iv worth the extra

>>3120221
Yes.

>>3120166
d5300 is far superior to d3300

not as good as d7xxx obviously, but a good jump from the 3000's

what's a cheap phone with a decent camera

>>3120228
Alright now new question. Do I get the iv for $400 or gr 2 16mp for $600?

any good vintage OM macro lenses?

>>3120219
I know, lad. I've got a SD850 or something that takes some wicked sharp pictures in good light. It can't resolve fine detail worth a damn, but edges and colors come out nicely. Don't underestimate the compact camera, but also know its limitations.

File: IMG_6994.jpg (3MB, 4320x3240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4320x3240px

The 1D Mark II I bought off of ebay came in today. It was actually in very good condition, but smelled kind of weird when I unpacked it. Not a moldy smell. I swear it smells exactly like Tea. Like bagged tea. The smell has gone away mostly now.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot SX210 IS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Lens Size	5.00 - 70.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:24 22:48:43
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	5.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4320
Image Height	3240
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Av-Priority
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	Single
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Red-Eye Reduction (On)
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
Subject Distance	0.210 m
Flash Bias	-1.00 EV
White Balance	Tungsten
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Image Number	144-6994

>>3120375

I got that exact same lens in a-mount and it stuck in a really weird way too.

I think it is the rubber on the lens.

File: C8S6960.jpg (5MB, 3522x2348px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 3522x2348px

>>3120375
And first photo today I decided to keep. This lens is a bit tricky for me to use, I haven't done much with the longer focal ranges before. And manual focusing is difficult with the very short range of movement on this lens. The lens is a Tamron AF28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 LD Aspherical. Reviews weren't great, but I'm just happy to have a DSLR again.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:07:25 09:25:02
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	500
Lens Aperture	f/6.4
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: 3.jpg (924KB, 3024x4032px) Image search: [Google]

924KB, 3024x4032px

just found these three?

any of them notable?

>>3120381
The Concord is pretty nice, but not valuable.

>>3120318
I am going to try the 50mm f/1.8 OM F. Zuiko pretty soon so I will let you know.

>>3120088
Just straight up ebay. The nature of the competitive market on ebay, the ability to see past seller feedback, and the well established mechanism for refunds and returns makes it the best place to do business on the internet as a buyer.

For sensor cleaning with a swab, are there any good brands which are recommended? When i go on ebay i just see a bunch of unbranded/chinese looking ones. I'm looking to clean my d610's sensor,

>>3120282
Between those, the GR 2.

Though as far as I'm concerned an IL MILC is the way to go.

>>3120381
No, nothing notable.

>>3119997
>There doesn't seem to be a website that archives /an/. I only saved that little bit of text.

https://desuarchive.org/an/

Claims it does, I don't know how far back it goes.

>>3120096
>I'm sorry, I forgot that electronics manufacturers don't stand behind their products for the life of the product anymore.

Do you want a lifetime guarantee for your light bulbs too?

>>3120375
How much?

>>3120420
Everything is expensive to poorfags and they would *at least* get warranty forever on everything if it costs anything.

Meanwhile even the high end of FF cameras is likely actually sold too cheap to make offering that service even theoretically possible.

>>3119060
I went a little beyond what I wanted to spend when I bought my K-1. No regrets though, it is fucking fantastic especially for me since my previous was the ten year old K-10.
Also if you already have several pentax K mount lenses it makes sense.

>>3120390
Wtf is that

good first cam? i just wanna take photos nothing serious.

>>3120504
Ricoh grd i ii iii iv

File: Capture.png (1MB, 934x697px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 934x697px

Where can I get this exact strap?

>>3120552
You're looking for the tags Paracord, probably etsy - not exact but I hope it helps

File: NG_MC_2250_det01_highlight.jpg (222KB, 703x669px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 703x669px

How's the Nat Geo MC2250 as a very light camera bag?

I don't carry much. Just an
>E-M10 II with Lumix 25mm 1.7
and an extra small zoom lens

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	703
Image Height	669

File: Eternal_BIONDO_Maya_high_0034.jpg (1MB, 2884x4324px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2884x4324px

Epson perfection v550 or Canon 9000f markii ?

Really hard on deciding, holy shit. Been now thinking over it since a few weeks

>>3120566
Epson's got better quality for 35mm and more knobs for twiddling. Canon has drivers in Linux. Neither is a bigger weak link in the imaging chain than your lens, or 400 speed film in Rodinal; neither produces scans that're usefully printable without heavy editing (as is usual for negative scans). For the average user it's better just to get the cheaper option, since these appear on the used market quite regularly.

>>3120570
the canon is 200 and the epson is 230.
Not much difference.

>>3120564
Probably good.

Then again, so is just about every one camera bag on Aliexpress.

Honestly, it's a padded, possibly waterproofed compartment with a sling and a few zippers.

>>3120504
The best camera+lens you can afford that also meets your size requirements and stuff like that.

> nothing serious
But you want good? So really, it depends on what you consider good, and where / how you're going to use it.

Maybe you need fast autofocus or great stabilization, maybe you don't. Maybe you need compact size or low weight or maybe you can handle something larger / heavier too. Maybe you need srs low light performance, maybe you don't. Maybe you need zoom or long reach or maybe you need wide angle and close focusing.

>>3120493
Something Ricoh doesn't have.

File: IMG_20170721_074851.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

For a beginner videofag, how good is a used T2i?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-G900V
Camera Software	G900VVRS2DQD1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:21 07:48:51
Exposure Time	1/120 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	5.2 EV
Exposure Bias	1/2 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	4.80 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	F16QLHF01SB

File: lenses.jpg (360KB, 1579x540px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 1579x540px

I have collected these three lenses from thrift stores. I am thinking of adapting them to fit my 1d mark II. I can do either the Olympus 50mm f/1.8 F. Zuiko or the combination of the Minolta Rokkor 48mm F/2 and the Minolta Maxxum zoom Xi 28-80mm f/4-5.6

I already have the Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 LD Aspherical lens.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot SX210 IS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:25 20:36:06
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/3.1
ISO Speed Rating	640
Lens Aperture	f/3.1
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Auto, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	5.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	0
Image Height	0
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3120784
Forgot to actually ask the question: which one do you suggest?

>>3118383
Is a Nikon cool pix a for $250 cad decent, it's essentially brand new?

File: LRM_EXPORT_20170718_162023[1].jpg (825KB, 1985x1376px) Image search: [Google]

825KB, 1985x1376px

>>3120381
Pretty sure i saw a Kodak and a Rikon(thought it was a Nikon at first) at the local goodwill store last week.

Was going to grab a Olempia Big Royal View SLR when i saw and bought pic related.

File: 41vCSskrd+L._SL500_AC_SS350_.jpg (21KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 350x350px

selling a brand new sony a7ii body only for 1300 usd shipped.


email me @ [email protected]

I can do international but shupping charge may vary

File: 1488161298499.jpg (8KB, 249x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 249x225px

>buy a g7 kit for 450
>find a g8 body for 460

you think a g7 body would sell for 500?

or should i sell it at cost

Is the Zhiyun Crane worth it?

File: panasonic_h_h025k_25mm_f_1_7_lens_for_1182677.jpg (353KB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 2500x2500px

Can anybody with the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 tell me how it compares to the Olympus 25mm f/1.8?

I can get the Pany for $60 cheaper.

I plan to use it on an Olympus body.

>>3120853
they seem really good
>>3120854
go for the cheaper one

>>3120282
Definitely the GR 2 16mp. For only $200 more you get a far better camera with a much bigger sensor.

>>3120573
In that case get the Epson.

Midrange zoom for a d750 - do I need one? Which should I get?

I have a sigma 50mm right now and manual stuff for 20mm and 35mm.

>>3120784
Zuiko, it's the only one you can adapt without loosing infinity focus.

>>3120878
It's convenient for sure. If you don't know wether you need it, you probably don't. So I'd suggest you get something cheapish first, like the old tamron 28-75/2.8 or used 24-85 nikkor. There's a whole bunch of interesting and still usable old zooms for nikon, google is your friend. And uncle ken has a lot of info on these.

>>3120878
> Midrange zoom for a d750 - do I need one?
Maybe no, if you have to ask. I think you'll suspect you need one if you hit this problem.

> Which should I get?
Uh, usually I'd go with some of the best current glass I can afford if I was going to use it "frequently". In this case, it might be a Sigma 120-300 Sports, a Tamron 70-200 Di Vc, a Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 or f/4 ... something like that.

For rarely used glass on the other hand, I might go with something older / cheaper.

>>3120882
Do you think maybe I should just sell all three and use the money to buy a Canon 50mm f/1.8?

>>3120888
Not sure that is wise.

Can't you just get that dirt cheap 50mm f/1.8 without selling the other lenses?

>>3120375

Noice. I was thinking about getting a 1Ds mark II, but people are still asking too much for them, so I got a 5D instead.

>>3120888
The Canon 50mm f1.8 is a dirt cheap and very common lens. You'll be able to find a used one for next to nothing if you look around.

File: IMG_20170726_150515.jpg (3MB, 3120x4160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3120x4160px

Found a lens and was wondering if anyone can identify what mount this is??
Front of the lens says "panagor auto tele 200mm"

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	VFD 700
Camera Software	MediaTek Camera Application_
Equipment Make	Vodafone
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:07:26 15:05:15
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.2
Focal Length	3.50 mm
Light Source	Other
Exposure Mode	Auto
Image Height	4160
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Program	Not Defined
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	3120
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
ISO Speed Rating	123
Exposure Time	5381/1000000 sec

>>3121018
Can you post a better image with flat lighting, without all the reflections?

Could be a Minolta mount. Is it on an adapter?

>>3120566
Disgusting pic. Only normies could like that damn i hate photographers photographing normies

File: sirui.jpg (48KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1000x1000px

looking for a tripod. requirements
- fits into a backpack ~40cm
- under 2kg weight to be carried around
- carry weight: dunno but my dslr with currently larges lense weights 1170gr
- max height: I'm quite a short person
- stable and robust, low vibration
- ring locks
- max 200-300 Euro
- doesnt have to be carbon if its not necessary
- standard ball head is enough i gess

Maybe one from Sirui or Manfrotto? Anything else

>>3121029
See >>3120005

Sirui or Benro also are nice, but they on average ask more for travel alu tripods than the indicated brands for carbon tripods.

>>3121032
>chinese rebranding items
i'd rather want to get some really well built one i'm happy with for years, then some "okay-ish for the price" but not that great cheap one.

>>3121037
I only have one of them, but they are well-built.

And Carbon is an improvement in weight, even if on these models the joints still aren't super lightweight.

Sure enough, the tripod heads aren't terribly fancy, but if you need something better this should free some money for one.

>>3121029
I have the Sirui in that picture, am satisfied

>>3120758
Good enough. Lots of room for learning. Get magic lantern on there and start scouring for primes

>>3121029

Mefoto roadtrip

Which telephoto fool frame ef lens do you recommend if focal length from 100 to 300 is more important than aperture f/2.8. Is there a good f/4 lens reaching 300mm?

Thanks!

Looking to invest in my first digital camera, finally moving away from film. I have used my friends Rebel EOS t5, which I enjoyed. I am looking into the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, a7ii, or contemplating getting somthing like the Rebel T6 and getting a variety of lenses. I am by no means a professional, not trying to make a living off photography. But I would like something good quality that I can do a variety of things with. I want to do some animal and nature, some low light, some action, some portraiture, etc. I'll be using GIMP to touch everything up.

Based on this little amount of info, what would you anons do?

>>3120110
Anyone used any of these lenses? Would like to hear about your experiences with them?
>>3120118
Do you have that lens? Do you like it?

>>3121098
I've always been a fan of the good lens on shit body approach if you're strapped for cash or don't want to spend too much. You can keep the lenses forever and always upgrade your body at a later time.
A good lens literally will not break or lose much value even after 10 years. Just look at the 70-200mm that's been unchanged since '95 or something like that.

Sure, a 5Dmk3 is awesome, even with a shit lens, but your photos will LOOK a lot better with L glass, and you can push a cheap body to do a lot of things if you know what you're doing.

I'm looking to get a good telephoto but I'm on a student budget. I've narrowed it down to going with an Nikkor 80-200 2.8 which I found online for 550, or a tamron 70-200 vc that a friend is willing to give to me for 850. Is it worth the extra 300 for the tamron lens? I know I've heard it's optically superior to even the newest nikkor 70-200

guys I just bought a cheap nikon d7000 camera body

Should I buy a tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC lens or spend $100 more for a sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS lens?

>>3121134
Btw these are in Canadian dollars so they're both good prices Imo

File: elph100hs-blue-3q-675x450.jpg (214KB, 675x450px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 675x450px

Any disposable digital cameras you guys would "recommend"?

I'm going on a trip soon, and my relatively expensive behemoth dslr with a grip and kilogram of mass is not quite the tool i'm looking for. I'd like to buy something that's basically a smartphone, except optical zoom. It has to be lightweight, compact, and as cheap as possible, with image quality being secondary concern. The only thing i expect from it is optical 50mm focal equivalent.

If i won't find anything interesting, i'll just take my old rebel with nifty fifty. A little bit more expensive, a little bit bulkier, but quality should compensate for it.

>>3121135
Yes. You should do one of those.