I bought a used Sony a6000 for $325 as my first camera. Roast

don't buy a lens, shoot everything with the sensor exposed

Go the default "I bought a Sony because I'm too poor for lenses" and get some old Olympus or Minolta lenses. I GUESS you could get one of those cheap Sigma Art lenses too.

File: 1491431767000_819163.jpg (58KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 500x500px

i could spend more, i just don't want to at the moment. what is someone who's never taken a serious photo going to do with more expensive camera?

i'll look into the olympus and minolta that will fit that camera.

i might be able to get a Sony SAL1650 16-50mm DT SSM f/2.8 for $300 if the stars align.

>>3133283
lol literally me

>>3133283
>>3133293
tfw me too

>>3133293
>>3133294
Same. It's honestly the reason why I bought an A7 since it meant I could just use all my old film ones.

>>3133289
Keep in mind with any screw driven Sony or Minolta Alpha lenses that you'll need an LA-EA4 (The older LA-EA2 might work too) to drive them. That 16-50 would just need the LA-EA3/LA-EA1 though.

>>3133305
good to know

i could also pick up a Sony 24mm f/1.8 E Mount Carl Zeiss Sonnar for ~$400

i mainly want focus on wider shots for landscapes and later get into macro.

>>3133283
Well cannon and Nikon have more budget oriented offerings and suck at adapting vintage lens.

>>3133278
Buy an adapter for EF or A mount and buy some lenses that actually made by people that have an idea that picture quality is more than contrast.

>>3133280
This. Why have inferior glass when you can have max resolution.

File: b91987c0951e4a5aaafc045bcedce01b.jpg (88KB, 560x419px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 560x419px

There are two lenses that are must haves on this system. They are both Full Frame E-mount, but they are still compact and incredible value, so save up for them.

>85mm Sony F1,8.
You get this lens for just 600 bucks, but it's actually equivalent to Zeiss' 85 Batis which is worth 1200 bucks. Same optical formula, half the price. It will be a nice 127mm long lens for portraits and landscapes for you.

>28mm Sony F2
That will be your normal lens, 42mm equivalent, and very versatile for almost every situation.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 7
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/7 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	3.99 mm
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto

>>3133334
I'm sure they're good value on ff but they're compromise focal lengths on crop, unless you love portraits.

OP asked for width. Just get the sigma 19 2.8. There's a 12mm f2 Samsung if you want really wide.

>>3133385
>42mm is a compromise focal length
What? That's literally a perfect normal prime to walk around with.

>>3133278
as said above if you dont need autofocus get an old vintage prime lens for 50+/-30$ and an adapter for 10$. consider nikon and canon glass aswell, maybe your uncle even has some old nikkors laying around.

>>3133385
If I'd buy an a6000 I'd get this 19 2.8 for street shooting and a 50 1.8 or 60 2.8 for general portraiture (usable for indoors). The latter depends on the budget, better if used.

If only the a6000 had touch screen (touch-focus-shoot) capability for waist shooting this camera would be perfect for my needs.

That's a pretty good price for a used a6000. I paid 550 a year and a half ago for a used a6000 with kit lens. In total with tax it would have been around 900 CAD new at the time. Guy even had box, receipts and warranty.

>>3133442
They could be had for $399 new late 2015, not sure why they crept back up.

File: E8DE82FE-FFE0-45D8-822F-BDFF261A4BF6-3230-00000568BD07354B.jpg (122KB, 499x750px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 499x750px

>>3133397
My uncle is a professional photographer for a special effects company. His equipment is light years out of my league.

>>3133442
I thought so too. It doesn't come with battery or charger but I picked up a couple aftermarket batteries and a charger for $20. I thought about spending more and getting an a6000 with the kit lense but everywhere I look people say it's shit.

I can pick up this lens, used, for a bit over $400. It's very well reviewed and fits my camera without an adapter.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/818647-REG/Sony_SEL24F18Z_SEL24F18Z_24_mm_f_1_8.html

I'm not entirely unschooled in photography and art in general. I was a graphic designer for a few years but left the field do to the fact that clients are retarded and kept insisting on compositions that broke fundamental rules of design and I didn't want to put my name on them. I've been working in the medical marijuana business for the last 7 years and it's been the greatest time ever. Things are becoming more legitimized here in my state and competition within the industry is growing. I smell the need for marketing material brewing and doing photography work within the industry could be very lucrative and I already have all the connections. I just need to spend the next year training myself to be a better photographer

>>3133462
He is talking about fake dollars, aka canadian dollars.

You're talking about rare sales.

>>3133465
The best charger I have tested for this thing is this one: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Probty-NP-FW50-NP-FW50-LCD-Battery-Charger-2-Port-USB-Plug-For-SONY-NEX5T-A5100/32773690085.html
A 2 amp port for the charger, and a 1 amp port for 3rd battery in camera.

>>3133465
>I can pick up this lens, used, for a bit over $400.
That's one hell of a deal.

But I wouldn't go for it, there might be some damage on it, maybe the previous owner dropped it or something.
Also consider the fact that the FE 28mm F2 is slightly smaller, and 25 grams lighter.

You lose that 1/3 of a stop but it isn't much, considering you also gain compatibility with Full Frame cameras.

>>3133474
$400 for a $1k lens
Something's not right here.>>3133465

>>3133474
>>3133484
It shows a bit of wear on the outside but seller insists the glass remains in perfect condition and that the wear and tear is simply cosmetic. He also has listed his title kind of funny which is keeping it from popping up if you search for that particular lens. I'm willing to take the risk. I pay with paypal so I'll have some protection.

>>3133474
>Also consider the fact that the FE 28mm F2 is slightly smaller, and 25 grams lighter.

I'll look at it. I have until tonight to decide.

File: Corner-sharpness-600x1393.jpg (124KB, 600x1393px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 600x1393px

>>3133506
Here's a pretty good comparison to one of the other guys suggestions of using old canon lenses: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/slr-magic-25mm-f1-4-cine-review-comparisons/
Note that's one of the more expensive older Canon glass you will find, and it doesn't really hold up against the new FE lens. So the other glass you will find at 30-50 dollars will be even worse. (also the table is a little wrong, the Canon lens is heavier than 200 grams)

The 28mm is a fine lens. But the real gem is in my opinion the 85mm. That one is spectacular, and Sony could easily have charged 1000 USD for it, I feel that's where I would price it if I was a lens maker.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:23 12:18:17
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	730
Image Height	1695

>>3133592
It was my understanding that while an FE lens can fit an e-mount that it's not going to produce the quality is should simply because it's meant for a full frame sensor and it's being shoehorned onto an aps-c.

True or not?

>>3133602
>it's not going to produce the quality is should
Not really true. It's just that the APS-C sensor only uses the center of the lens and doesn't use the corner.

It's like buying a big cake and only eating the middle of the cake. That doesn't mean you will be eating a bad cake, it just means you will waste some of the potential.

(And in certain cases some people argue the lens is bigger and larger than it ought to be. But this particular lens is so light and small that this criticism doesn't really apply here)
I would also simply consider the extra compatibility with Full frame to be an added value.

>>3133602
>>3133603
not entirely true. the smaller sensors often have a higher pixel density so if for example we have a full frame lense which optical resolution fits the resolution of the full frame sensor, a smaller sensor with higher pixel density can not be fully satisfied by it. or short: aps-c sensors zoom in on the image circle, and thereby on optical imperfections of full frame glass while aps-c optimized lenses can trade heavy vignetting for increased center resolution and perform better on the aps-c sensor. that being said most of the full frame glass outperformes the smaller glass in optical resolution and is therefore very suitable and their adaptation in fact very common.

>>3133657
The 85mm FE is definitely high resolution enough so it never becomes an issue. It's the 7th sharpest ranked on DXOmark. Not too shabby for a 600 dollar lens.

In my opinion the main argument is the size and weight. And it's a valid argument when looking at huge zooms like 70-200 F2,8. You would definitely want something smaller, and custom made for APS-C sensor instead of using FF lens.

But the 28mm and 85 mm are so compact, and just 200 grams and 371 grams.
So that particular argument falls apart.

So the only argument left is yours: whether the lenses are sharp enough. They definitely are, Especially the 85mm.

>>3133603
>>3133657
>>3133671

I appreciate all your input. I've verified with the seller that the Sony Sonnar T* E 24mm f/1.8 ZA Lens has no imperfection on the glass itself. I don't think I want to pass up an $1100 lens for only $400. I will save all your posts so I can reference them as I add to my collection. Who knows, I may not win the bid tonight. I'll update with the results around 9 pm eastern tonight. Thank you.

>>3133707
good luck dude, any test shot posting will be appreciated btw

>>3133278

The 35mm f1.8 for crop from Sony.

Have fun.

I won the auction for $455

File: Screenshot_20170815-212149.png (2MB, 1440x2096px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x2096px

>>3133790

>>3133278
20mm f2.8 or 19mm f2.8, 35mm f1.8 or 30mm f1.4, 50mm f1.8.

a bunch of minolta md or canon fd + zhong yi lens turbo 2.

>>3133309
you can get eos m5

>>3133404
a5100

>>3133404

So get an a6500. Has all that plus much faster autofocus and an improved sensor.

>>3133809
This thread is for poorfags.

I will say though, Sony is shooting themselves a bit in the foot by not having touch screen in their most popular camera since forever. Since this camera is how they will be know by majority of their customers. They should have at least phased the A6000 out with something named A6000s or something, which has that touch screen. It would still keep the A6000 moniker and the marketing value of it.

>>3133811
Who let you out of /g/?

>>3133812
Just look up youtube videos of vloggers who just purchased their A6000. There are many of them, since you know it's one of the most popular cameras ever.

The first negative remark they give is the lack of selfie screen, and this goes for pretty much the vast majority of them. You can tell in the atmosphere of the video they get disappointed at that point.
Sony could have avoided this.

>>3133814
The day I take a selfie is the day I throw myself off a tall building. Fuck the selfie screen.

>>3133815
It's too late anyway. All those people who were not satisfied with the A6000 all jumped to the Canon 80D.

>>3133814

Honestly you would be better served in almost every situation by the tethering app. Especially since it is pretty much instant when nfc is used.

And the a6000 is cheap because it hasn't changed. It was the APS-C flagship years ago, and has gradually dropped price. It will eventually be replaced by the a6300 and then the a6500.

For everyone in this thread, just sell everything and buy a Fuji.
>>3133326
>lenses that actually made by people that have an idea that picture quality is more than contrast
How high are you right now?

File: 1390167628169.png (430KB, 824x720px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 824x720px

>>3133820
>It will eventually be replaced by the a6300 and then the a6500.
I don't think so.

Sony is stuck with the A6000, just like Canon is stuck with the 6D mark 2 sensor.
I believe A6000 use sensors from a slightly older 180nm factory.
While Canon's 6D series is from their 2 decade old 500nm factory.
Both companies have the problem they can't keep these factories closed, or they will lose money. They have to always produce SOMETHING, or be sold off.

In Sony's case, they are lucky, the A6000 sensor is pretty damn advanced, and the 180nm technology is still a powerhouse in the camera business.
Canon is less fortunate.

That's why Sony can't easily get rid of A6000.
They can at best keep producing the same sensor for low end, but add smaller additions like new buttons and dials and new screen.

>>3133278
Could have picked up a 40D, a prime, a zoom, and even a bag or a flash for those shekels.

When will sonyfags ever learn? M4/3 people are autists, but these people are just clueless.

>>3133278
Get that 90 dollar meike 35mm lens and learn to shoot manual. Or get a k mount to e mount adapter and some vintage pentax smc lenses and learn to shoot manual.

Manual focus isn't too hard when your camera has focus peaking and a magnifier. You'll be forced to set the aperture and you'll actually learn about photography instead of just shooting automode.

Or spend the extra money to go out of your budget and get the 35mm sony and you'll get autofocus.

Anyone tried adapting any 24-70 onto the a6000?

File: IMG_0197.jpg (336KB, 1536x1060px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 1536x1060px

Also just picked up a Sony 30mm f3.5 Macro for the a6000

Now I'm just waiting for delivery

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Comment	Screenshot
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1536
Image Height	1060

>>3133278
i bought a 50d with 3 lenses for less than that you got fucked

File: sony-qx1-grip.jpg (107KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1200x900px

>>3136431

He means creep shots.

The Sony mirrorless cameras are great at creep shots because you can tether to you phone and control the camera while it looks like you are just playing with your phone.

Sony even made a creep specific body with just a sensor, mount, and battery.

>>3136428
Ya I won't be doing any prints much bigger than 11x14. This camera is to get my feet wet. Eventually it will be replaced by something more expensive and the a6000 will become my backup.

Give me the quick answer for a good all-rounder:

>XT20
>A6000/6300
>200D/750D

I'm leaning towards Fuji atm, easy to carry around, retro look which I really like, based film filters, even has a 4k recording and all in all just packs a lot of power in it. On the other hand, D200's Bluetooth connection with a smartphone, twisty screen and smallest dimensions amongst DLSRs are also looking nice, although I don't know if they will really matter in a regular use. I don't care about selfies, but that option of being able to look at and download photos to my phone is probably the biggest advantage for me.

>>3133278
Use your sensor cover as a pinhole and go full artsy.

File: IMG_5890.jpg (38KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 640x400px

>>3136435
Olympus did the same thing too. Just hold the lens and snap with your phone.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	640
Image Height	400
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3136440
Are you pricing a system or just bodies?

Might make a difference if overall cost is an issue.

File: 1.png (46KB, 840x294px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 840x294px

>>3136440
I kind of lost all respect for Fujifilm when I found out their APS-C lens is large than Full Frame lenses of same FL.

>211 mm

>>3136594

Also a lot more expensive. You are better off buying something from Canon, Nikon or Sony.

File: 1433792332953.jpg (77KB, 508x504px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 508x504px

>>3136634
The pricing doesn't boggle my mind.

It's the fact that an APS-C lens is LAAARGER than a fucking Full Frame lens that boils my brain cells.

>>3136644
Autism

>>3136644

Fuji can make decent bodies (except for that weird obsession with x-trans), but they sure suck at lenses.

>>3136564
>>3136594
>>3136634
>>3136717
Eh, I think I'm gonna buy Fuji X-T20. Who knows how many lenses I'll need in the future or if I'll switch to another brand, but while I'm not invested in either one, I think this little guy will be pretty good for my first camera. I've read so many reviews and comments that I'm getting sick of it, but all in all, opinions are vastly positive. I really like both how it looks and operates and how its' pictures and videos look.

I'm only a bit worried because I'll probably go with the cheaper 16-50mm, since the price difference between that and 18-55mm is pretty huge and I can't push the budget that far. It should still be a decent lens, though.

>>3133278
get a used 35 1.8 or get a brand new sigma 30 2.8

File: khajj4.jpg (787KB, 1500x844px) Image search: [Google]

787KB, 1500x844px

My camera and lenses came in.

this is the Sony Sonnar T* E 24mm f/1.8 ZA. can post larger if requested.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	3376
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:22 00:32:43
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/2.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/2.5
Brightness	-1.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	844
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: vornado.jpg (666KB, 1500x844px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 1500x844px

>>3136863
this is the Sony E 30mm f/3.5 Macro.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	3376
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:22 00:51:06
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	7/1280 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	844
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3136930
Fuck is this shit?

>>3133278
get the 50mm f1.8 OSS
dont get any stupid shit without autofocus enabled

File: background-1500x844.jpg (206KB, 1500x844px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1500x844px

More macro from this morning.

>>3137054
dude weed lmao

>>3137054
I think the 30mm macro is a good choice for the plant photos you want done.

It's also a very easy macro lens to use. You just need some good lighting equipment and you're done.

>>3133334
SONY & ZEISS 85mm are not equivalent. Clearly you've never used a zeiss. The Sony lens color sucks compared to the zeiss. Zeiss lenses for sony are the only lenses that have any soul. landscaping at 125mm cool times bro.

File: p sweden.jpg (292KB, 2000x740px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 2000x740px

>>3136752
This seems optimistic, I've been looking for the sony 35mm (because it's half the size of the sigma 30mm 1.4 and has OSS). However second hand lenses seem to only be 10% cheaper, they may as well be full price.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	paint.net 4.0.16
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:01 00:05:52
Exposure Time	0.8 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	0.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	19.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: 6AC22298-6A75-4E49-9DFE-7570FB0091BA-1919-000001BE47834BD1.jpg (813KB, 2000x1334px) Image search: [Google]

813KB, 2000x1334px

>>3137108
He hasn't, but he knows a man who has.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

File: 452AA586-AB9E-4CE4-9168-1E8833A69E51-1919-000001BE5C0876CE.jpg (856KB, 2000x1334px) Image search: [Google]

856KB, 2000x1334px

>>3137142

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

>>3136717
Bullshit. Their lenses are great and you have a decent amount of options now.

>>3136731
Go with the fuji kit lens f2.8-4. It's a great first lens

>>3137173
>APS-C 100-400 is somehow larger than all FF 100-400
>great
What are you on about Anon? You're at the point where the whole smaller sensor=smaller lens becomes a lie.

>>3133293
>>3133294

Got a6000 because small and decent. Kit lens sucks, want mostly /out/ photos anyway, shelled on samyang 12mm and used 55-210.

Understood I am shit and nothing is sharp, got Helios 44-2 to learn mf in spare time. Holyshit it is amazing. Now I rock said Helios, jupiter 11 for wildlife etc. Considering Sigma 30mm 1.4 for emount and Canon 50mm 1.4 fd. The 12mm/55-210/kit lenses are forgotten mostly.

Love Helios, but the Bokeh is too overused now

>>3137176
Does it really mater that much?

>>3133328
>24mp of ultra smooth bokeh
The"insert classic lens here" only resolves 8mp and has shit bokeh
Why even buy glass

>>3137173

They still lack an even halfway decent macro lens.

Exceot for a few passable fast primes (which almost all suck wide open) their lens lineup is an overpriced joke.

File: LRM_EXPORT_20170822_210037-1600x900.jpg (178KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1600x900px

Some low light from this evening.

>>3134746
You goofed.
It's shit.

>>3136507
>Not just pressing the shutter button

>>3137564
Seems fine for $200 here
>>3137054

>>3137256
what's the ISO on this one?

>>3137568
3200

File: DSC08036.jpg (5MB, 6000x3241px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 6000x3241px

>>3137568
Heres a better version I did on the computer. First one was edited on my phone so it came out meh.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	3241
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:22 23:40:25
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Brightness	1.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	3241
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

Recommendation. Get as much adapters as possible. Buy old lenses from eBay at good prices. Become artfag with bokeh

File: highres-carl-zeiss-sonnar-t-18-24-tstar-8_1366281529.jpg (2MB, 2252x2211px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2252x2211px

>>3137603
The bokeh on the 24mm I got used for $400 is so painfully beautiful that you have to stop yourself from setting at f1.8 every shot. I need a 50mm next I think.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-30
Camera Software	Version 1.1
Photographer	Picasa
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	314 dpi
Vertical Resolution	314 dpi
Image Created	2013:04:18 11:17:30
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2252
Image Height	2211
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Unique Image ID	6a8c54b1aa6c2cdeafd90778247ea1c2

>>3137802
What the fuck do you need all those lenses for, You're just shooting some plants.

File: budtender-bud2-500x310.jpg (26KB, 500x310px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x310px

>>3137808
Portraits, individual plants, whole grow rooms, macro work. I need to build a diverse portfolio and that means I need a diverse set of lenses. As the marijuana industry continues to grow so does its need for marketing and photography is a big part of that.