/gear/ - Gear thread

File: DSC03863.jpg (2MB, 2764x1814px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2764x1814px

general questions, I have been using the Sony A mount for a while and at this point, Sony pretty much said that they are going to abandon it.
So, what i want to ask is, how long do mounts typically last for. If I invest like $5,000 in going into the canon or nikon family, how long until it becomes unsupported?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:09:04 00:22:40
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/14.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/14.0
Brightness	-2.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

Looking for a new portrait lens for Nikon.

I'm stuck between 85 1.8G or Tokina 100 2.8

Open to other suggestions

>>3145016
85 1.8G

>>3145011
Nikon F mount was introduced 1959. I don't think it's going away anytime soon, although Nikon is certainly making a new mount for their mirrorless effort. Canon EF mount was introduced 1987, and there's no clear indication that canon is abandoning it, since it's a completely electrical system. In CaNikon land you're quite safe for atleast a decade or two.

>>3145016
58 1.2/1.4
60 or 105 micro-niggors
105/2 or 135/2 DC if you're not looking for critical sharpness
Zeiss/Sigma/Voigtlander/etc 85s or 100/105
Nikon 85/105/135 non-AI/AI/AI-s/AF/AF-D/G 1.4/2/2.8
Mitakon 135/2
S-mount Nikon 85/105/135

You're not very specific about what you're looking for in a lens.

File: DSC03855.jpg (3MB, 3115x1869px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3115x1869px

>>3145031
thanks for the response, I plan on getting a camera and collecting lenses while im in college, and i want to be able to still use them after i graduate

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:09:04 00:22:33
Exposure Time	1/10 sec
F-Number	f/14.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/14.0
Brightness	-0.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: ql17 reduced.jpg (408KB, 1000x658px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1000x658px

>>3145016
I have the tokina 100 2.8, beautiful lens. I would say it's too long for general use portraiture though. In my opinion it flattens people too much = limiting some face shapes and body types. I imagine the 85 is more flexible.

>>3145075
but tony shoot portraits at 200 2.8

>>3145078
He claims it is actually 150mm f/4

File: images.jpg (19KB, 328x449px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 328x449px

>>3145011
>Sony pretty much said that they are going to abandon it.

Sony has repeatedly said they WONT abandon it. It has been around since 1985 though and is a very mature mount. Sony is focusing resources on filling out their mirrorless for now.

Your cheapest move to a new mount would be going e-mount and adapting all your a-mount lenses. You get full autofocus, even with the screw mount lenses.

Plus you can adapt pretty much any lens from any mount and get fullspeed autofocus with them.

I'm going to buy a macro lens soon.
Anyone have some experience with 105 VR micro nikkor?

>>3145147
It's shit, should buy a Sony FE 90mm instead.

so since i own 2 dx lenses, i decided not to buy a fx body. what is better, the nikon d7200/d7500 or another cam from another brand?

i really wanted the nikon d800 body, but i doesn't make that much sense to use dx lenses on a full frame body.

what should i do?
1. get the nikon d7500 or something similar
2. get a full frame body and buy a cheap and old 50mm lense

>>3145147
Judging that I have pin sharp results from an old 90s design Tamron macro lens it will be more than adequate.
Do remember that at macro distances the focus only controls the macro ratio, you have to place the focus with the whole camera. Moving your body/tripod or using a macro rail system is needed.

>>3145164
Definitely the D7200 offers the pro features from those two.
If you only want to admire the specs sheet then get the D7500.
It would be better to state what kind of photography you do, do you need high ISO and quick AF in your work or do you use low ISO and manual focus or stationary subjects?
In the latter case even a used D7000 is more than enough.

>>3145147
I have this lens. What would you like to know, besides what's in the DRTV vid on youtube? It does exactly what it says on the tin, but the variable aperture at close focus caught me out a couple of times.

>>3145179
Every macro lens loses light with increasing magnification, it doesn't matter if you achieve this with an extension tube or internally with optics.

>>3145179
How does the focus ring feel?
And how good/reliable is the VR?

>>3145147
>>3145161
It's worse than the 90mm FE, sure - but what you actually should consider on your Nikon is maybe a Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di macro.

>>3145256
Fuck off!

>>3145262
Well, you unfortunately can't really put a 90mm FE on a Nikon. You'd have to swap camera systems, which is probably excessive for the average /p/erson.

Tamron's 90mm will probably be okay enough, really.

tamron made a 18-400 lens.

File: useless photo.jpg (443KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1800x1200px

hi i'm looking for a new camera to replace my Canon 400D/Rebel XTi

For under $700 I need the camera, a telephoto lens, and ~ideally~ a regular ol' kit lens or prime lens. Now, I already have a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM kit lens and Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III telephoto lens. Neither have image stabilization I don't believe, and I'm under the impression that Canon glass from the mid-2000s is kinda bad. For the telephoto it's not a big deal to me, but the other lens definitely is.

On the Canon side I was looking at getting a T5i, T6i/s, or the new SL2 since my lenses will work fine, however the cost is a big thing. I can get a new T5i in the box with either the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM prime or The EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 III kit lens for right around $500. The cheapest body-only used T6i is the same price, and the SL2 is $550 new for just the body, and $700 with the kit lens. Canon has some refurbished ones on sale, but that sale will end when I get the money to get a new one.

The other thing is that if I can get a camera from any other brand with a 300mm or so telephoto + some other lens for under $700 I would be more than happy to do it. No loyalty to Canon or whatever nonsense. Any help would be great. Sorry for the long post

tl;dr: I need a camera + telephoto + kit/prime lens for $700. Do I get a Canon and keep my 2006 lenses or get another brand with new lenses.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows)
Photographer	unknown
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:09:05 11:55:11
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1800
Image Height	1200
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3145290
I should also say I have the opportunity to actually try and use the T5i with the kit lens. I can get them from my library for two days.

>>3145290
> Canon glass from the mid-2000s is kinda bad
A lot of cheap glass today is also kinda bad.

But you're not bringing the money to get much good glass (you're basically done after one Sigma Art or a upper midrange Canon lens before even getting the body), so what do you expect...?

> Do I get a Canon and keep my 2006 lenses or get another brand with new lenses.
Probably keep the Canon, or you just have less money for glass.

Or, you know, raise the budget so you can get a lot of good gear.

I've convinced myself to purchase a used xt1, I only have enough money saved to purchase 1 lens. What's the best fuji lens for the money. I was thinking the 35/2 wouls be nice

can anyone recommend a nice tele lens like a 70-200 for a crop body?

I currently have a sigma 17-50 F2.8 and I am looking for an affordable companion

>>3145376
like a fucking idiot I forgot to mention: F-mount

>>3145377
the sigma 50-150 ain't bad.

Is a Leica actually worth it? The M6 is like $1200
I kind of want one.

>>3145470
Emphatically no. Sony, Panasonic and Olympus and so on are all better in all ways that matter to shooting images.

>>3145471
PS: No, you won't be shooting that one special type of photography where film is better than digital, either.

>>3145473
>that one special type of photography where film is better than digital

So he wont be shooting any film at all?

>>3145482
Yea. If you use a $1.2k camera even the smallest advantage of 35mm film -possibly very low initial cost of investment- is basically gone.

And even *very* low initial investment costs are rarely worth trading for high costs per shot for a hobbyist. Doesn't take many thousand shots with film to have paid enough to buy not only an equal MFT / APS-C on the low end, but a high-end FF camera.

>>3145011
Just go MFT

>>3145482
>>that one special type of photography where film is better than digital
>So he wont be shooting any film at all?

I can think of one. Extremely (like, on the order of days or longer) long exposures. Digital sensors don't like being turned on that long.

>>3145045

Just looking for a portrait lens. I already have done research on majority of those lenses comparing them and narrowed it down to the 85 1.8

The Tokina was on there as an alternative because I had been looking at it to use for macro, but thought of also using it for portraits, although 100mm or more wasn't exactly my first choice in a portrait lens.

>>3145075
>In my opinion it flattens people too much = limiting some face shapes and body types

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for the comment.

>>3145509
So you get the 90-100mm macro for multi-use, the only concession to portrait specialty being focal length. Or you pick one of many 85s or 105s, each different for its price, rendering characteristic, and sharpness.

Can't go wrong with an 85/1.8D or G.

Also there's the new Tamron 85 VC.


>>3145470
The M6 is $1200, but I expect you didn't want a lensless paperweight.

File: 6199284209_383e590ca4_b.jpg (283KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1024x683px

>>3145501
>>3145493

The joke was that all film was better than digital. You two missed it.

But yea, Leica isn't really worth it. Especially considering the best Leica M-mount camera was made by Minolta and can be found for $400.

>>3145613
I'm the anon who asked. It's the 2nd time I read about that M mount Minolta in here.
Care to explain? I'm too lazy too google it.

>>3145613
>the best Leica M-mount camera was made by Minolta

What am I reading? How is it the best?

File: CLE-06.jpg (472KB, 1600x1178px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1600x1178px

>>3145624
>>3145627

Leica and Minolta had a partnership, two m-mount cameras came out of it designed by Minolta (the other being the Leica CL which is the smallest M-mount body made to date) and they are both pretty well regarded.

Until the M7 was launched it was the only m-mount camera with a the combo of a TTL Flash, aperture priority, swing film door, and electronic shutter.

The shutter is also the quietest I have ever heard.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	200 dpi
Image Created	2004:04:10 17:20:45
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1178

File: 15755264470_a848ef9e41_b.jpg (166KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1024x768px

Is it actually useful to have an external finder for the Ricoh GR? Do you guys actually use it when you're shooting or you just use the screen?

I'm thinking about getting a GR II since they're on sale until the end of the month, but the finders are like over $150 on internet...

File: images.jpg (18KB, 470x313px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 470x313px

Mirrorless or DSLR?

>>3145664

For what?

>>3145666
Landscape photography

Should I get a Sony 20mm pancake or the Sigma 30mm 1.4?

I'm torn between portability vs quality. I'm a photojournalist and I do weddings on the side. I already have the 18-105, it's versatile but bulky. Help me decide /p/

>>3145678

Budget?

>>3145423
Brb time to rob a bank

My canon 1d mk III is starting to crap out on me. I'm really poor so I'd be looking at something under £500. Would get a second hand a7 with Eos adapter be better than another second hand canon body?

>>3145771
A7 can't af with canon lenses for shit, I've seen a7ii for £800 and they work fine.

>>3145664
Mirrorless, it's easier to learn with due to evf and you're more likely to use it more as it will fit in more pockets.

>>3145771

Only a7ii, a7rii, a9, a6300, and a6500 autofocus Canon lenses with any degree of speed/accuracy.

I recommend the a7ii, has ibis, a ff sensor, and can be found relatively cheap.

>>3145772
Is £800 less than £500 in your opinion?

>>3145786
The £500 option doesn't work you fucking pleb.

It's far easier to get an extra £300 then it is to re-engineer a sony a7 so it will work for op's intentions.

>>3145643
I recently got an external finder for a different camera, and I found that I hardly use it. I think if I were shooting a lot of street style, I'd find it more useful. You can say you're saving battery by turning off the back screen, but batteries are small and easy to carry. Not a real reason desu.

File: Screen Shot 2017-09-06 at 7.58.17 PM.png (2MB, 1220x1220px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1220x1220px

Does anyone know where one can get this strap for your camera? WANDRD used to make them but they don't now. I like the idea of the camera hanging from a bag strap rather than your neck when in the field.

>>3145682
If you do weddings on the side, surely you could afford way more than just a $450 lens like the sigma. Plus if you do weddings then you should know what you need to make sure you can deliver the best product...

>>3145788
I'm glad you know op's financial situation better than he does.

>>3145810
Well he lives in the UK and would rather spend 500 on a camera as opposed to food and rent. So he's either a complete fucking moron, or he has some financial stability and income.

Why do you think he's a moron? That's a bit harsh bruh.

>>3145423
I second this, it is a fucking awesome lens.
It is discontinued though and not many people are willing to sell theirs.

>>3145828
OP here, im a complete fucking moron.

Was just wondering if the EF adapters were worth checking out desu. I tend to shoot manual on anything other than my 1d because I have a metric shit ton of m42 lenses.

I know the A7 lineup is decent for adapting and the video would be nice but not essential.

After testing the 1D today i think most of my problems are with my cards, I still have 200k expected clicks left so I doubt its anything mechanical but the electronics are almost 10 years old now.

>>3145682
Which Sigma 30mm f/1.4? The native APS-C or an existing Art line lens for Canon or the future native Art lens ...?

Anyhow the pancake probably isn't ideal for weddings or photojournalism & if you want a pretty good slim prime maybe look at the FF Samyang AF 35mm.

I need to replace my yungnuo flash since it didn't survive a trip into the river - it was my only light system for portraits and while I enjoyed it - not having a constant light for video, and not using an official flash for iTTL (Or equiv) was sort of a bummer over the course of its life.

Strobes look cool but I'm worried about what I'll get in my price range, especially since I don't have any power options available to me, aside from wall power, but I'm shooting outside %90 of the time.

I'm not against buying used but I have $100 amazon (ca) giftcard I'm looking to expend - any ideas? Should I just go back to yungnuo?

>>3145929
> I don't have any power options available to me, aside from wall power, but I'm shooting outside %90 of the time.
You could contemplate a Godox Wistro, but even those aren't THAT cheap even if they're much cheaper than other options.

And well, many people will get tired of just having that relatively big gun and no easy portable strobe... so it might be a Wistro and one or more 860 II / TT685. And of course the trigger.

> Should I just go back to yungnuo?
I have few complaints about the YN660, so unless you're going with something like a Wistro - that is the cheap way to get some flash power, yup.

>>3145938
PS: Constant video light can be a Yongnuo LED panel, too.

Yup, it'll look a bit amateurish still, but it's not actually cheap to get something much more powerful with constant light output that can run okay for an hour or so on not too huge batteries.

>>3145938
>>3145940
My one advantage in this situation is that I'm a big guy who's not afraid to look dorky transporting stuff around, Weight is one thing I can afford to go cheap on.

>>3145943
Look at "ELB 1200" and you'll for the most part get why you can't easily trade off weight (& an older wired studio strobe) for price.

But I guess you could carry a Godox Wistro then? Well, have a look at what they got.

>>3145951
Oh well, there was a hope - you gave me some names to look at which is certainly more info to work with than I had 20 minutes ago so thanks dude.

File: 91d3vFHtnZL._SL1500_.jpg (305KB, 1500x1194px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1500x1194px

Is the Canon EOS 1300D worth the 400$ price?
It also comes with a stabilized lens

>>3145952
Sure. And honestly, the nicer Godox / Yongnuo battery powered options aren't bad (or expensive, comparatively speaking - but maybe some of the Wistros do cost more than you wnated to spend).

BTW for WIRED usage there are pretty cheap "video" CFL or LED bulbs with cable and stand-mount sold in China that you might use. Oh, it's not a perfect video light, but they're very cheap. In case you get no other fantastic lights these might augment your 90% use case.

Anyhow, have fun looking.

>>3145953
Nah, I'd say that trades more for $330.

Also, it's not worth my time as a hobbyist. It's annoyingly bad if you ask me.

>>3145955
guess I have to get something better for my first camera

>>3145634
Obviously haven't heard anything with a leaf shutter then....

The cl and cle are a bit hobbled by their short rangefinder base distance...

Also the m5, Hexar rf, and Zeiss Ikon all have their proponents as well.

>>3145954
I think I've decided on buying a yungnuo flash for now / outside - and then saving my leftover money for more proper lighting solution purchases about a month or two from now - which will probably include something like a Godox.

Heck, might even build an LED rig for indoors - been a while since I did a proper diy project.
Only thing stopping me from that is finding properly rated quality strips.

>>3145968

Probably pretty close to my x100 in sound.

And yea, it isn't perfect but it is damn close. It also has some non-standard rangefinder lines too.

Other manufacturers have some decent options, but none that were produced in 1980.

>>3145164
save your shekels and get a second-hand D7000. It's 98% as good as any DX body except the D500. The D7500 is stupid, don't buy it.

File: Angry_Photographer-Ken_Wheeler_s.jpg (14KB, 240x179px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 240x179px

>>3145267
and the obese man on YouTube who's probably got bipolar disorder claims it's surprisingly good.

>>3145972
Sounds like a good plan.

Though I do think its also easier to buy a Godox / Yn or such LED panel 'cause yea, finding strips with high CRI and exactly the color bin you want on all LED in the strip is surprisingly hard / expensive. And having a remote and a case where you can just snap on a battery & no loose parts is also nice.

I'm a t5i owner. I feel like I've outgrown the camera, specially video wise.

I do video and photo mostly as a hobby, but I'm starting to take in some video work and slow and steady growing my customer base.

I need an upgrade. What the hell did I get into?

I'd love to get a sony mirrorless, for it would allow me to throw in a pancake lens and just have it on me everyday, taking more pictures and shooting more ofren; that said, I don't know what to do.

What would be the logical step up from a raaaballl if I was to spend no more than 1800 on camera + one or two lenses? I already sold my canon lenses, so I'm buying everything new.

First time poster, i need an entry level fluid head tripod suggestion, thanks in advance!

File: lomography-red-logo-500.png (8KB, 500x104px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 500x104px

Do they make anything decent or is it all garbage

>>3146034
garbage

damn, /p - I just bought a super clean used Sony RX-1, and it's one of the nicest cameras I have ever had. I know that just the word "Sony" will trigger many of you autists, but for those of us who actually enjoy the art of photography instead of just being massive gear fags, the RX-1 is an amazing image making machine....

>>3145993
I'd say a D7000 is only 90% as good as the cameras that came after it. Sensor technology aging not withstanding, the 39 pt CAM4800 was never as advanced as the 51 pt CAM3500. It just doesn't hold up.

>>3146034
They make a fucking half frame cam that also does 24x24, AND it can switch ratios between photos, AND has 4 levels of zone focusing, AND does bulb plus 2 selectable apertures, AND lens is a 24mm. Its a fucking miracle camera. Also its small and cute.

Dont listen to the no fun cuckholds and get one Lomography Diana Mini(tm) asap.

>>3146034
Trash. It's for when you want to return to worse equipment than the ancient film past had, because... cheap initial costs & "art".

About as decent and artsy as using poorly made ancient animal leather condoms rather than modern ones.

any first lens(prime) suggestions for d7000 ?

File: mamiya645.jpg (299KB, 1600x1598px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1600x1598px

I've been thinking of getting into MF photography, and I have been looking at a really nice Mamiya 645 Super which looks basically like image related but with the AE finder and a bunch of extras, like original manuals and such. Is it a good choice?

I have also been looking at the Bronica ETRSI, and have found one for basically the same price as the 645, but with less extras. It has the AEIII finder and the grip, though.
Is any of them better than the other?

I know about the size of 645, I wand a nice compromise between quantity, quality and portability, hence why I don't get a 6x7.

>>3146132
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF

I don't have one personally, but they seem great for the money. On a DX format like the D7000 it works out to like 75mm, which is p great for portraits in my opinion

File: lens.jpg (1MB, 4000x1945px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x1945px

I've come into ownership of a bunch of Minolta lenses +a teleconverter, and I want to downsize to 1-2 out of these before I pick up a more recent lens. Recommendations?

Disclaimer: I get the gist of lens details, but I'm not deep into photography; mostly do macro photos.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:09:06 18:58:59
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	4000
Image Height	1945

>>3146161
The 100-300 and 35-70 are probably the best two. If you keep three, my next suggestion would be to keep the 28-85.

The 100-300 is useful as a telephoto (the other three are just standard zooms). Quick research suggests the 35070 is going to be the best of the other three from an optical perspective, plus it's the most compact. The 28-85 wins on range (it goes wider than anything else there and longer than anything else there other than the telephoto). The 35-80 doesn't really have anything going for it other than being snazzy white.

Disclaimer: I'm not a Minolta/Sony guy, so these are just from very quick google searches and a general understanding of how lenses normally perform.

>think of buying a camera
>nikon d7100 looks ok
>but wait what about full frame, I can afford to spend a bit more
>sony a7 is neat
>a7ii is supposedly a huge improvement, expensive though
>and don't get me started on glass
I think I'm too autistic to ever actually purchase a camera, looking up reviews is fun though.

is a 21mm (32mm equiv) lens too similar to a 30mm (45mm equiv) lens?

I was also looking at a 35mm, but those are overpriced and I think a 50mm (75mm equiv) would only be good for flowers and portraits.

Best long term storage for cameras and equipment?

Going to do a shoot or two on my late uncles Canon, might adapt one of the lenses - refuse to sell but also dont want to pretend I'll be using a mid 2000's prosumer dslr for much.

>>3146161

Here is a page with detailed reviews:http://kurtmunger.com/lens_reviews_id21.html

I think the middle two are the best performing, but the 100-300 isn't terrible.

I'd keep the 35-70 and 100-300. I'd be tempted to keep the 28-85 too, but the 35-70 is just better.

>>3146206
> Best long term storage for cameras and equipment?
Dry cool climate-controlled storage.

>>3146202
> is a 21mm (32mm equiv) lens too similar to a 30mm (45mm equiv) lens?
In terms of field of view? It's quite but not extremely close. Pretty much the typical 35mm vs 50mm thing.

Other attributes like sharpness will obviously depend on the individual lens.

>>3146197
It's not that hard. Put money aside, buy camera, practice your hobby.

Not enough cash to just get an A7 II or other FF camera? Start with the A6000 or D7200 or whatever - decent APS-C or MFT.

File: DSC_0102.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

How do you guys like my new setup?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	402SO
Camera Software	32.1.D.0.430_0_f900
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:09:07 11:47:01
Exposure Time	1/32 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	400
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.60 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3840
Image Height	2160
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3146303
wtf am i looking at, whats before the adapter?

File: qx1l.jpg (102KB, 494x358px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 494x358px

>>3146306
Probably a QX1L or something. It's meant to work together with a smartphone.

>>3146309
that's actually pretty cool, not practical at all, but it will turn some eyes.

>>3146309
>>3146306

It is a QX1.

Works surprisingly well actually. The app is pretty nice.

File: ThePhoblographer_AbramGoglanian_RicohGR_ProductImages-1-680x453.jpg (36KB, 680x453px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 680x453px

Wanting to buy a GR but I'm hesitant because I feel like Ricoh will release a new one this year. What should I do?

File: 7737156321[1].jpg (74KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 600x450px

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2307159404/hands-on-with-new-fujifilm-x-e3?slide=8

https://www.dpreview.com/news/9977804309/fujifilm-x-e3-offers-24mp-sensor-and-extensive-touch-control

Is the XT-20 worth getting over the X-t2? I can't see much difference in specs and the 2 is a fair bit bigger.

>>3146438

t2 has faster autofocus.

Kind of a big deal, Fuji is slow to autofocus to begin with.

File: 1380116308387.png (685KB, 762x948px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 762x948px

>>3146419

>x-trans

FUJI PLEASE.

Give us a good sensor for a change.

>>3146438
Depends on what you need. I own the X-T2 and I probably only need an X-T20. Though, I have been in situations where weathersealing was essential. I don't need the faster autofocus of the X-T2 either I don't think.

X-T20 is better value for money, but if you need faster autofocus and weathersealing then the only option is X-T2 or X-Pro2

>>3146438
yeah im thinking between those two as well.
x-t20 is like twice cheaper on grey market compared to x-t2. But then again, im so used to iso dial on my x-t1 i cant even think about not having one on my upgrade.

Question for pro.
Hi anons. My wedding/portrait photography business have never been working so much since now.
I have a lot really a lot of pictures to edit, I just can't to it myself.

Do you guys use companies to edit your pictures when to much?
Have you tried countries like India where the price is very low?
Should I better raise the prices?

Thanks for answers anons!

>>3146455
I'd be inclined to keep your X-T1 unless you want a second body

post some sexy cameras, i want to jerk off to them so fucking bad

>>3146442
Never gonna happen, they use xtrans and don't release the algorithm so they can never have their products tested against others without throwing out "oh but it's not fair, cos xtrans means your software isn't being fair and equal"

It has fuck all to do with image quality.

File: XPro2Gra_Front_Right_23mm_F2_White_[1].jpg (68KB, 500x366px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x366px

>>3146465
i really find the x-pro2 graphite version to be the sexiest digishit

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:26 12:46:56
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1466

File: IMG_3976.jpg (21KB, 342x356px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 342x356px

>>3146473
fuck you, anon
FOR FUJI

[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	342
Image Height	356
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3146473
i bought this the other day. it seems the shops in my country didn't get the memo that the graphite version is more expensive.

>>3146485
lucky bastard. this one is like 30% more expensive

>>3146303
>>3146309
I understand the usecase for mounting on drones or what-not..
I find it hilarious it has a pop-up flash

are no name batteries okay? looking for a second one for my M10 ii and the original ones are about 50€

>>3146488
Sometimes they're even better than original spec. ones while being cheaper.

>>3146478
god speed anon

>>3145075
That 'flattening' effect is called compression. It can be done well it just has to be done right. The least amount of elements you've got in the lens the less cardboard flatness you'll get- one of the reasons I hate tele zooms.

Wider lenses will blow out certain parts of people's faces and make them look kinda alien. I've been told that a 105 is the best as far as compression accuracy goes, not an 85. But, there's hardly a difference. I tend to do my portraits at 135 or 180.

Is it a bad time to buy into Sony's faggotry? How far away are we from another iteration in the alpha lineup.

I mean, will I be screwed if I buy an a6500 now?

Nikon D5300 any good? Looks better than Canon's similar offerings and the kit lens is supposed to be alright. Prime and telephoto lenses not too expensive either.

>>3145016
samyang 135mm f/2, 85mm f/1.4
nikon 105mm f/1.4

longer samyang and nikon are pretty much perfectly apochromatic

>>3146615
Great camera. Get the sigma 17-50 F2.8 though. Not that much more expensive and much more awesome

Looking for a good fluid-dampened video tripod-head with ARCA-SWISS for less than or around 100€
Anyone got any pointers?

>>3146615
Not much better than a D3300 and certainly does not worth the price difference.
A used D7000 or D7100 is the better option above the D3300 level.

ALRIGHT YOU NIGGERS

i WANNA BUY A FUCKING MILC, SINCE MY FATHER'S PENTAX HAS A LIMITED AVAILABILITY. I CAN BUY EITHER AN USED A6000 W/ KIT LENS AND SOME EXTRAS FOR ABOUT 500 BUCKS (EASTERN EUROPE) OR FUJI X-T10 W/ KIT LENS AND ADDITIONAL BATTERY AND SD CARD FOR ABOUT 700. WHAT SHOULD I CHOOSE?

>>3146646
I HAVE 3 M42 LENSES TO USE AND I'D LIKE TO GET INTO FULL FRAME SOMEDAY IF IT MATTERS

>>3146644
Have used the 7000 and the 5300. I prefer the 5300. Flippy screen is quite useful. Wifi and gps are fun to have too. Besides that, depending on where you live the 7000 and 7100 are more expensive even used than the 5300.

>>3146654
No indexing tab and screwdrive
You don't save on the body, you save on the older cheap screwdrive lenses.

>>3146707
If that is your thing, fine. But how many people are going to get those old lenses?

File: canon_eos_rebel_sl2_dslr_1498708233000_1346737.jpg (53KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x500px

>>3144405

Should I get sl2 or 7d mark ii? Looking for an aps-c in case I need added reach, and the sl2 seems pretty fucking good for such a low cost.

>>3146242
I think part of my issue is that I actually have a decent job now so I can just put aside a chunk of cash each month and eventually afford the more expensive stuff, and I have literally zero other planned expenses or hobbies right now.

But I think I'll eventually buy a D7100 or D7200 after all because while I can buy an A7ii body right now, it would take too long to save for more than a single good lens.

>>3145978
Basically the same as a x100 I presume, seeing as their both electronic leaf shutters.

It's a good camera for sure (and the non standard lines are helped a bit by the relatively inexpensive and nice C lenses available).

Don't think the 1980 thing is too relevant at this point though, seeing as it's... Will not 1980 anymore.

>>3146751
You think you can buy more than a single good lens on Nikon either? Quality lenses cost money no matter the system. Not counting your standard cheap and good 50mm equivalent prime, nor any adapted or non-current production lenses.

>>3146736
>let me just compare a compact rebel to canon's best apsc sports camera with wild frame rates, 1dX AF, and weather sealing for days

The 7D2 is good value either way (dat grey market price), if you don't think Canon's old sensor will get in the way of your type of photography.

>>3146641
Seriously, cunts, I've been searching for quite a while. I am currently using some 25€ PoS from andoer whose screws needs retightening every week and that cant be perfectly fixed, ever. It always tilts over slowly.
Fucking pissed RN

would it be worth it for me to move from a a6000 to an older FF like an a7? a7ii? a7r? For landscapes.

I'm only about $500 invested into crop lenses and seeing as the a7iii is supposed to come out in Nov, I was eyeing up some of the sony's FFs.

Is it a wise decision to switch to the Sony system?

File: tmp_7868-IMG_20170907_200602980827905.jpg (1010KB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1010KB, 2448x3264px

Can anyone recommend me a good but cheap 24mm-35mm lense that is f2 or faster. Vintage is a-ok. Really trying to spend less than $150.

or should I just save for a Rokinon 35/1.4 instead?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Nexus 5
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Image Height	3264
Image Width	2448
Focal Length	3.97 mm
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Time	1/20 sec
ISO Speed Rating	1775
F-Number	f/2.4

Considering getting an A mount 70-400G to throw on my A6000, they are pretty cheap on the second hand market. It seems some people are replacing them with the 100-400 GM. The converter for APSC and even the one for full frame can be had for pretty good prices second hand too.

In all it will be somewhere around 1000 eur, this seems to be the only way to get to 400mm with decent quality I have found so far. The 100-400 is just way too expensive.

I'm worried about the autofocus for the 70-400mm though, especially when it comes to birds.

Might just keep saving money until I can get an A6500 and 100-400GM at some point.

>>3146814
From what I've seen the lenses all hold value quite well still. That shouldn't be hard to sell off. The A6000 also still has fine second hand value.

The full frame lenses seem more interesting, I wouldn't do it for the bigger sensor alone though.

>>3146832
There are adapters that allow Canon EF lenses to autofocus on Sony E-mount

>>3146646
I really like both Fuji and Sony. However, the X-T10 is just a bitch version of the X-T1. Can you afford an X-T1 instead?

Also, Sony has a nice ecosystem because you can switch to full frame while using the same mount. Which brings me to question 2: Can you afford an original a7 instead?

I think you should basically consider Sony a7 vs Fuji X-T1, and theyre both fine choices.

File: D3S_0851-1200.jpg (263KB, 1200x848px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1200x848px

>>3146473
X-T1 is sexiest looking MILC

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3146442
>>3146466
x-trans is cool because theres no anti-aliasing filter

i fucking hate anti-aliasing filters

>>3146846
>not the x-t2

>>3146442
Eh I don't mind X-Trans. Maybe a decade from now people will miss it due to how it renders colours. Just like people miss the Classic 5D, Fuji S5, or even the 12mp X-Trans in the original X100.

>>3146851
what was special about the original 5D?

>>3146851

The original x100 had a normal sensor.

That is why people miss it, because it wasn't a shitty x-trans.

The way it "renders color" is vastly inferior to anything else. If you want film simulations, just pirate VSCO.

>>3146866
the X100s had an X-Trans. and fyi, the Bayer filter is also fucking garbage

>>3146851
Did you mean X100s?

>>3146867
Yea, but he was talking about the x100, it is the only one with a 12mp sensor.

The x100s is 16.

And bayer may be garbage, but it is vastly superior to x-trans.

>>3146862
The colors are better than the rest of the 5ds

What's a better deal? Getting a used canon 6d for 750$ or a 5d mk iii for 1200$ (it has some scuffs on the body). What would depreciate less over time so I can sell it down the line?
Really looking to upgrade from my t2i

>>3146886
I'd be inclined not to get a used 6D, I've owned 2 since it's release and just got sick of the horrible autofocus, I could only end up trusting the centre focus point. I'd foot the extra cash and get a used 5D3 or even switch boat to Sony.

>>3146889
Two? Are they prone to breaking? What would you say is an acceptable shutter count? The 5d is a good deal but the post says it's been used for wedding photography. That could be a lot of clicks

>>3146892
I had front focusing issues on both. One of which had a weird issue where some of the focus points would front focus, and the others didn't. Canon couldn't even calibrate it because their calibration system (from how they explained it) could only calibrate all focus points, not individual ones.

Yeah I probably wouldn't get a used camera after heavy wedding use.

Yongnuo seems to be shitting out relatively cheap lenses now for some reason. What are the odds that they put out a fisheye in the near future?

>>3146907
Unlikely, just get a Samyang/Rokinon

is the fuji x-t20 a good enough camera for photos to last the rest of my life?

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2307159404/hands-on-with-new-fujifilm-x-e3

>no flippy screen
>not even tilty
no buy. even though it's the best form factor.

>>3146951
It will break one day so no

>>3146951

No.

If you want something that will last you forever, get a film camera.

An old Leica for example is fully repairable no matter what you do to the thing.

File: s-l225.jpg (9KB, 225x152px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 225x152px

>trying to finish my full CLE set
>every 28mm is so dirty it is visible in the thumbnail

Man, no one wants to part with a clean version. Shit sucks.

>>3146646
If you want ff then it's sony or nothing.
The a7 2nd hand is a far better buy than the a6k new.

>>3146814
The a7 and a7r are lacking in a couple of areas, decent af performance being the main one, and ibis is just realy nice to have. If af is definitely not important and you usually use a tripod, look at the a7 and a7r, if you want something that just works in any condition without breaking a sweat, get the a7ii.

>>3146815
Yes, if you value size and quality.

>>3146847
I bet if I took 2 shots from cameras identical in every way except aa filter, then printed them at a3 size, you wouldn't be able to tell which is which. And fuji does have an aa filter of sorts with it's super smeary noise reduction it applies to every raw file.

I really want a old nicely built nikon film camera. Can anyone recommend the best one between the F, F2 Fe, Fe2? or anything similar? I've been shooting film on a crappy plastic canon slr but all my lenses are nikon ais and I'm a sucker for well built stuff, time for an upgrade.

>>3146992
F: Ancient tank
F2: Less ancient tank
F3: most modern of the manual focus Fs, but 1/2000 max shutter and wacky flash shoe
FM2: All mechanical prosumer tnak
FE2: FM2 with a shutter that can't go out of whack and aperture priority

If it's a manual focus body that starts with an F, it's bound to be good.

>>3146907
Tokina 10-17, look it up

>>3146984
>a3 size
also

>I bet if I took 2 shots from cameras identical in every way except x-trans filter, then printed them at a3 size, you wouldn't be able to tell which is which

Okay look, this is gear related but I probably should have (and I still might) made a new thread for this since it's gonna be a big one.
I'm a poorfag who finally has enough money to splurge a bit.
I'm currently using a K-50 and while the camera is solid, I was hoping to get better low light performance, which is why I've made the decision to upgrade.

Now the biggest question I have by far is
Do I go full frame or do I stick with APSC?
If I were to stick with Pentax then that would mean buying a K1, and as much as I'd love to do that, I just can't ignore the huge price of this thing. I'm not saying I couldn't get it, but it would eat into all of my money honestly and I wouldn't have shit left to play around with lenses and what not.
The other option would be to sell my K-50 and upgrade to the K-70 which unless I'm mistaken seems to be Pentax's best APSC camera at the moment.

If I took that route I could buy either multiple solid prime lenses or a really good zoom. The primes I was thinking about are from the Samyang/Rokinon line. The 85mm and a wide open lens, maybe 16mm or something.Maybe throw in a macro lens too since most of my pictures seem to be of fucking flowers and insects and shit.

The other option which I'm not too hot on (but am open to change my mind on), is to move from Pentax and go all in on another brand. Maybe become a mirrorless fag, I dunno.

Do you guys have any advice for me?
My target budget is about £1,000. Again, I can go higher for that (and would have to if I picked up the fuckin' K1 goddamn why is it so expensive) but I'd really really rather not if possible.

Let me know what you guys think, I'm curious and would like to just buy some shit then get out there and shoot some images.

>>3146847
So... anything Sony 24MP APS-C or 36MP FF, or newer.

>>3147217
>Okay look, this is gear related but I probably should have (and I still might) made a new thread for this since it's gonna be a big one.
No, post it here.

>Do I go full frame or do I stick with APSC?
You go FF, murdering your budget and picking up a new toy, if you're a gearfag. You go APS-C and a pile of lenses if you actually take pictures. It's as simple as that.

If your style of photography only requires simple primes (say, just a 35 eq), then maybe go FF if you're going to spend money on something. But if that was the case, you'd already know what you wanted, and wouldn't be asking these questions.

>>3146356
just buy a fucking GR and don't be such a gear fag that you can't buy a camera because you are stressing about missing the new features and pricing on gear....

>>3145698
not op but I'm looking for a mirrorless for landscape photography under $600

>>3147217
budget under 1000? get something APS-C and get either a 50mm prime or an 85mm prime. Combine the prime with a set of macro tube extenders instead of a marco lens/filter. the filters fuck your image quality and a dedicated macro lens is simply out of your price range.

>>3147243
>>3147263
K-3 ii or K-70?

>>3147279
K-3. You wanted a big boy camera, right? Not that there's much the K3 can do that the K70 can't. But I don't see a new K3 coming any time soon, unfortunately.

>>3146766
First, from what I've been seeing, it seems full frame lenses are significantly more expensive.

Second, and probably more important, I wouldn't really mind putting a less than ideal lens on a cheaper camera, while it would feel like a waste with a more expensive one.

>>3146844
DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR AN XT1, THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH. I'VE HELD THE T1 TODAY AND I'M EVEN MORE DISORIENTED FUUUUUUCK

>>3147243
yes, i hate the anti aliasing filter on all cameras that have them

also, if you shop intelligently, FF can be plenty cheap. Plus you get to use vintage 35mm lenses at their appropriate FoV.

You can find an a7 for $500, and buy 3 vintage lenses for like $200 total for some good glass. FF doesnt have to be expensive. FF DSLRs can be even cheaper, but with less choice of using vintage glass usually

>>3147256

a6000 is your only real option at that price.

~$400 for just the body, or ~$550 for the body and kit.

Get the Rokinon/Samyang 12mm lens for it. Manual focus, but that isn't really an issue with that wide of a lens, plus you are using it for landscapes so no need for autofocus.

>>3146135
If i remeber correctly supers had more electronic issues, I know mine does, I would be more inclined to reccomend a 645 pro TL or a m6451000s

>>3146992
I have fe, it's good. Less prone to malfunction than the fe2, or that's what I've heard.

>>3146984
>fuji does have an aa filter of sorts with it's super smeary noise reduction it applies to every raw file
It's quite obvious you don't really have any experience with fuji rafs.

It'd been 3 years ... where the fuck is the new Ricoh GR?
Only other fixed-lens camera that does DNG is Leica.

>>3147006
Print it at a0 if you want, still not gonna see a difference.

>>3147217
Ive seen lce sell a7ii for £800. Which is a bargain for what you get.

>>3147256
2nd hand a7 or 5d or d600. Ff is a necessity for landscapes.

>>3147531
Are you claiming fuji doesn't use heavy handed nr on it's raws? Because that just makes you look dumb, anyone can google it for confirmation. I have a fuji x trans body btw :)

>>3146135
Get a Pentax 645n II or whatever iteration you can find. MF film shooters agree it is the most fun to use MF camera, almost like a 135 SLR but with much more detail.
Plus you get more shots per roll compared to a 6x7 MF system.

>>3147586
Sure they apply some noise reduction, just like everyone else. Claiming that it's 'super smeary' and akin to an aa filter == you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

>>3147586
>FF is a necessity for landscapes
Says the retard who never shot landscapes

File: IMG_0450.jpg (78KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 800x533px

Anyone here have any experience with bellows replacement?

I have this old ADOX Golf with a leaky bellows and judging from some replacement guides on a similar style camera it doesn't seem that hard to replace.

I guess the biggest question is where to get the replacement bellows. There's this one guy from Hong Kong on Ebay that sells custom bellows for $40 a piece. There's also this guy: http://www.sandehalynch.com/camerawork/bellows.php

(pic not mine)

>>3147581

Ricoh is about to go under. Going through major layoffs recently.

>>3146994
thanks a lot for this, they all look great but obviously arnt the same and you saved me spending hours reading lengthy write-ups.

>>3147525
thanks, very helpful

I'm leaning towards an Fe2, fm2's seem to be double the price.

Can someone pill me on Macro lenses for portraits? Traditionally I've been doing the very bog standard upper-body & head but I want to do some close-ups and I'm being bombarded on all sides by the 85-105mm Macro/Micro crowd, is it worth the $400 to get a nice used one off keh?

Should I just use my old 300 f4 and stand 60 feet back for the same effect?

>>3147651
I watched a vid on that recently.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9saMdLVR0Qw

>>3145376
Tamron 70-200 f mount 2.8 g2 $1,200 I want one....

>>3147651
They work from a focal legth perspectivebut may not have the sharpnessor bokeh characteristicsyou are looking for. Look at sample photos on flickr.

Should I go Sony a6000 or Panasonic gx85 for my first camera? Same price with kit lense in my country. Help a newb out.

A7r II still has the best dynamic range of any FF camera. It's almost 2 years old.

Why can't anyone do better? Seems like even Sony is delaying the release of new A7 models, probably for the same reason.

>>3147824
>2 years old
>implying thats old at all

Just picked up a canon sure shot ii (Af35m) and the auto film advance seems stuck. The auto rewind is also not working, but it worked fine the first time I tried it about 5min before. Maybe I touched something I wasn't supposed to?
Literally everything else seems to work fine, but the auto advance.
Any ideas?

File: DSC_0003.jpg (4MB, 3072x4096px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3072x4096px

I've been thinking of picking up photography as a hobby. I have been thinking about it on and off for years.
I went into Jessops today and asked around. I got recommended this camera - Nikon D7500.
I am not sure if I should get it or try and find something cheaper as a starter DSLR, I am looking into doing some street photography.

I currently have an DSC-H200 Sony CyberShot I got years ago.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	G3311
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:09:09 21:38:35
Exposure Time	7499/250000 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	320
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	3.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3072
Image Height	4096
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>bought Nikon 28 2.8 AF

How bad did I fuck up?

>>3147878
Don't make fun of him. Sony owners WANT to upgrade every year.

>>3147942
Yes, because it's an overly simplistic lens design that measures up more closely to the 28mm Series E than either the AI-s that preceeded it, or the 1.8G that followed it.

>>3145376
Sigma 50-150/2.8 HSM if you can find a used one, it is discontinued but is a beast on crop, plus half the size and weight of a 70-200/2.8

>>3145613
The best m mount camera is the zeiss ikon zm

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-e3-first-impressions-review

>made in china
btfo

>>3148019
most of your stuff including your phone and clothes are made in china

>>3148026
my phone is xiaomi chink shit. nothing wrong with that.
my tshirt is made in vietnam.

>>3148026

Fuji's big thing was they were all made in Japan.

Now we get to deal with shitty Chinese QC.

Plus Fuji's warranty service, while not as bad as Sony, is still pretty terrible compared to Canon.

>>3148106
Fujis were never all made in Japan. The XA line and XT10/XT20 are made in Thailand.
The "flagship" Fujis (Xpro1/2, XT1/2, X100 series) are made in Japan.

>>3147947

First impressions: it's actually breddy gud and has less CA than my old AI-s model. Sharpness is about on par with the AI-s too, not a bad score for a tad over 100 dollars. I was going to buy it and play with it to see what it could do and if I didn't like it I'd flip it and get my money back but I'm keeping it, and 52mm filters are always a plus.

They had a 20 1.8 I was thinking about for muh astro but for a little more I could get the Nikkor version and have better optics and less refraction, I remember the one I rented did some weird shit with large points of light in a dark setting

>>3148119
Shut the fuck up, no one wants your feedback, you have no idea what you're talking about and can only mislead.

File: trump-you-are-fake-news-animated-gif.gif (452KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 320x180px

>>3148120

>yfw I owned the f/2 and f2.8 AI-s, the 28 Series E, the original pre-AI 28 f3.5 and a bunch of Quantaray and 3rd party knock offs

I didn't say it was better than the AI-s but it ain't far behind and it btfo my Series E I had so piss off

I can't do it lads. I'm too indecisive. Everything has turned to shit because I don't know what I fucking want.
Do you have any idea how fucking mashed my brain is? Do you have any idea how long I've been researching this bullshit? Checking videos of this camera, then reading about said camera, then asking /p/ about said camera, then doing the same for lenses, then changing my mind because I'm not sure, then repeating the process all over again for something different.
At this point I'm just debating if I should even bother messing around with dslr's.
Maybe I should just pick up a GR and be done with it.
I should not be this irritated when I have money to spend on photography stuff.

Don't forget to subscribe for more of my blogs.

>>3148143
Don't worry, i did the same for at least two months before I got mine.
Watched every review on yt, read up on photography. Reading comparisons and reviews/comments then do it all from the beginning.
Looking up locally available new kits then used ones, changing the favorite every two days. Then narrowing down to essentially two candidates.
After many weeks of self debate got the first that was available on ebay from the last candidates, happy with it ever since.

File: 6962802462_dd6682690c_b.jpg (149KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1024x768px

>>3148143

Here is the secret.

No one makes a bad camera.

Some companies make better cameras than other, but a lot of it comes down to personal preference.

If you are unsure, try renting different bodies. As much as I question their reviews, lensrentals.com has some pretty nice prices on rental gear.

Rent a simple setup, go shoot a weekend, then try the other brand the next weekend.

Make sure to read manuals before you go so you know how everything works. I was disgusted with the menu of my a7ii, for example, until I figured out it could be completely customized. Every camera has quirks, and the manual will help you gind them.

>>3148143
same

hi /p/ im new here.
i recently picked up a class in uni where a dslr camera is required. i understand what i need but what i want to know is how much am i paying for when it comes to brand?
i want to know if there are other brands out there that are cheaper but offer the same quality. how much extra am i being charged for having "nikon" or "cannon" printed on my camera?

>>3148261
Best value for money comes from Sony, they have pretty much a monopoly on the camera sensor industry, nikon, pentax and fuji all buy their sensors off Sony.

>>3148267
any particular suggestions for a sony camera?

File: 1490680743064.jpg (199KB, 620x968px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 620x968px

>>3148269

Depends on budget.

a6000 if you are limited.

a7ii if you can spend a little more.

a7rii if you have no limit.

Am looking for a tripod for landscapes ~$100

Anybody tried the Amazon brand carbon fiber travel tripod?

File: Thinking_Face_Emoji_grande.png (143KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 600x600px

I'm looking for a APS-C camera that is more than capable for video /p/. My Olympus E-PL7 doesn't cut it anymore for low light and video when I need a microphone jack.

Is a D7100 bad for video? I'm planning to get one used for occasional 1080p video recording. I do want a flip up screen or a vari-angle screen though I have four Nikkor lenses:
Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
Nikon 50mm f1.4 AI
Nikon 100mm f2.8 AI E-series
Nikon 135mm f3.5 AI
Nikon 200mm f4.0 AI-S

>>3148267
>Best value for money comes from Sony
>fuji all buy their sensors off Sony

2/10

>>3148325
>D7100
the auto focus when recording may not be great, look into that.

https://vimeo.com/73047422

you should get a 35mm lens I think.

>>3148404
>you should get a 35mm lens I think.

I'm planning to get the 35mm f2d but enough gearfaggotry though

>>3148325
The video is of mediocre quality and there are no aids for focusing in video mode.

just a quick question.

Nikon f100 - cheapish
Nikon f5 - bulky cheapish
Nikon f6 - nice but expensive.

>>3148466

F100 is all you need for most 35mm situations, I love mine. Beware they have a known issue with film advance mine did it if you're lucky like me it's just dirty contacts from sitting so long and that's usually the case. It feels right in the hands and has a good amount of heft to it but nothing like the F5. The AF is good too. The big advantage to the F100 is it runs on AA batteries which means you can run it on rechargeable batteries like the F5.

F5, if you need the AF get it. It's fucking huge. Makes my F100 look like a Playskool camera. You are getting what you pay for with the flagship bodies. If you get robbed, you can use it to beat the robber down and then take his picture afterward.

F6 is the patrician choice for AF 35mm F-mount but you can find them for a little cheaper used, in some cases in the territory of F5 prices. It has all of the best parts of the F100 and F5 with none of the drawbacks, but it is expensive.

If all you are doing is usual 35mm stuff that most of us do, F100 is all you need. If you need the faster AF for whatever reason get the F5 and if your pockets are swoll get an F6, and if you do get an F6, post back here I've considered one.

are telephoto zooms fun to use? thinking of picking up the Nikon AF-P 70-300 DX VR

>>3148106
whats wrong with sony warranty service?

>>3148538
as another smart anon once said, zooms are great tools.
personally i find primes are a lot more fun.

>>3148551

Costly and done through a third party in the U.S. That thir dparty can be a dick at times.

Their professional services are nice, but hard to get into.

i found this for really cheap, at first I thought I was just gonna use the lenses for my sony alpha camera, Is the minolta SPxi any good. only other film camera I have is a really worn k1000

File: DSC04951.jpg (827KB, 3872x2592px) Image search: [Google]

827KB, 3872x2592px

>>3148767
forgot pic
also, got all of this for $20

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A200
Camera Software	Windows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:09:10 21:38:30
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3146886
Where the fuck are you seeing these prices? Both are great prices. It depends on how much your budget is and what you already have in terms of lenses. If you already have a good amount of lenses than maybe the 5D3 would be a better pick. If you don't the $450 would be better spent to lenses.

As far as the AF on the 6D, I'm on a Canon 60D but rented a 6D for about 2 weeks for a trip. The 60D probably has better AF than your t2i and I honestly felt at times the 6D's AF was a noticeable step back from 60D.. it just seemed to randomly miss more shots. I do wonder though if this was just me being more critical because I was looking to possibly buy a 6D.

I'm not in any rush to make a big purchase so I'm thinking I might wait until 5D Mark III prices drop to like $1200 used for decent ones or 6D's start dropping to like $800 refurbished.

File: top.jpg (123KB, 953x384px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 953x384px

What's the new meme strap?
About 4 years ago when I bought my last camera this thing was all the rage and I wasn't really disappointed with it, but I'm thinking I could waste my money pc something better this time.

File: 160f3eb00c059380eae566e1cb455e06--paracord-ideas-paracord-projects.jpg (12KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 236x236px

>>3148800
i made my own wrist strap

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2014:03:18 17:21:33

>>3148800
I'm a big fan of my peak design clutch strap with the belt clip. Pretty good memes if you ask me.

>>3148326
Where do you think fuji buy their sensors from then?

>>3148551
Nothing at all, one guy dropped his camera in the ocean and sony refused to fix it under warranty. Since then the anti playstation crew have latched onto it as bad service. Sony pro services are fucking awesome, 24 hour turnaround free replacements from lensrentals.com if any of your gear breaks and free rentals on sony lenses 4 times a year.

Which camera is the smallest ILC with weather sealing? XPro?

well, /p/ was right the 28 AF is a colossal piece of shit at infinity focus, up close it's decent but even my Streetsweeper will shit on it from a distance, so I'll probably flip this and try to get back to Yukon to get the 24 2.8D they had, what is /p/'s consensus on that one? It looked pretty nice, they also had a 20 1.8 Sigma I'll probably grab too.

>>3149059
I think /p/'s consensus is that gear is not and never has been what's holding you back you foul retard

>>3149054

Xpro is fucking massive. It is larger than the a7. It also isn't fully weather sealed, just resistant. It isn't Pentax-like weather proof.

Smallest is one of the m43 bodies. I think the EM-5 2.

>>3148490
well thanks for the input, im not buying any time soon, too poor, just starting my research early.

File: Fujifilm-X-Pro2-vs-Sony-Alpha-7-II-top-view-size-comparison (1).jpg (33KB, 720x264px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 720x264px

>>3149070
XPro is only larger than the A7 if you're measuring width, which is the least important measurement to how large a camera FEELS in the hand. Height and depth are what matters, particularly depth, where the A7 feels about as bulky as a DSLR, but with far worse ergonomics.

I know you're going to disagree with me about this but that's okay, you'll realize I'm right the day you start carrying your camera daily instead of leaving it on top of your Playstation while you collect gimme-dats from the welfare office.

>inb4 "I need da big grip"
Yeah you probably have weak digit strength

>>3149077
>that shutter button placement on the Sony
has anyone at Sony ever looked at a human hand before? baka

File: FullSizeRender.jpg (164KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1000x750px

>>3149070
>Xpro is fucking massive. It is larger than the a7.
uh huh, yeah, sure, if you don't use lenses for your photography

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6 Plus
Camera Software	9.3.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:04:10 07:37:07
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	0.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: front_angled.jpg (96KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 600x450px

>>3149077

>it doesn't matter because of MY FEELS!!!!!

Disregarding the fact the whole a7 thing (it is only bigger in the other two dimensions because of the prism and grip), it is still far from the smallest weather resistant mirrorless camera.

And if we are going to go on about feels the a7 actually has a grip, something that people go out of their way to buy for the x-pro.

As for myself I actually have tiny girly hands, I hated the feel of both the a72 and the x-pro2. I actually shoot a film body now (Nikon F-501), but am considering the x-a3 if Fuji's macro coming out is any good.

>>3149081
>Disregarding the fact the whole a7 thing (it is only bigger in the other two dimensions because of the prism and grip
It's larger in 2 out of 3 dimensions, but you still want to say its smaller? And you accuse me of being all about MY FEELS? Haha

>And if we are going to go on about feels the a7 actually has a grip, something that people go out of their way to buy for the x-pro.
Mostly only gearfags that like to buy accessories or people using telephoto lenses buy grips for the x-pro. The small grip is exactly the right size for the location of the shutter button on the Fuji, particularly considering the built in thumbrest on the back right corner.

> it is still far from the smallest weather resistant mirrorless camera.
If by far from you mean "second smallest behind m4/3 cameras" sure. Name a smaller APS-C or FF weathersealed camera. It's definitely not the A7 haha.

also see: >>3149079

>>3149081
>And if we are going to go on about feels the a7 actually has a grip, something that people go out of their way to buy for the x-pro.
If you sell a product, most modern photographers (see: gearfags) will buy it.
Why do you think a camera the size of the x-pro2 needs a big grip? Do you think Leicas need big grips too? Why? Are you shooting a 200mm on them?

In my day the small depth of the Leica is what made it such a prominent camera for everyday use. Isn't that why Leica finally trimmed down the M10 so it's not a fat hunk like the earlier digi-Leicas?

File: grip.jpg (825KB, 1998x1334px) Image search: [Google]

825KB, 1998x1334px

>>3149081
>And if we are going to go on about feels the a7 actually has a grip, something that people go out of their way to buy for the x-pro.
Because most camera owners buy new gear more often than they use it. If you really think the xpro2 needs a bigger grip, you either have crippling arthritis or you literally don't know how to hold the camera. It is meant to be pinched from two directions, which provides far more stability than just a big ol' frontal grip that forces your thumb to the side of the camera if you don't have ape-hands.

bipods are more stable than monopods, are they not?

When the topic of grip design comes up like this you can always tell who actually carries a camera around in their hand frequently vs who doesn't. To the former, it's all about how well designed the gripping points are. To the latter, it's about how big around the phallic object you want to wrap your forefingers around is.

>>3149059
the sigma 20 1.8 is jank af, would much rather the nikon 14-24 desu.

>>3149059
It's alright. AF-D lenses relative to AIS versions:
20: same
24: same I think
28: worse
35: worse
50: better
50 1.4 : better
60 Micro (vs 55): better
85: better or same?
105: better
105 micro: better
135: better

>>3149096
> It is meant to be pinched from two directions
I know a guy who generally grips the A7 II in at least five places along two axis' - L grip or pinch on left hand (two circles at least), claw grip with palm support (that's three circles on it's own, wow!) on the right. And there are other options how you could grip it.

Now what, do we wank about how advanced the Sony A7 II's grip points are and laugh about how you somehow totally missed all this awesomeness?

>>3149155
what are there more stories out there of anon, dropped sonys with their plastic mount broken off, or broken dropped fujis?

This anecdote beats your anecdote.

>>3149059
I have the 24 2.8D
It's ok but not great.

Got a 24 1.4 Art 2 years ago, never looked back.

>>3149157
Dunno, probably the Fujis?

Never came across anyone complaining about a broken Sony mount. Besides, the A7 II that we compared and basically all Sonys after the A6k are using metal mounts anyhow, aren't they?

The reason why the mount was changed AFAIK wasn't that it was breaking easily, but that use with various not perfectly smooth devices shaved off a little of the plastic and then it got a bit loose.

File: fasasffas.jpg (30KB, 672x359px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 672x359px

>buy a 128gb sd card used for $35
>U3 128gb sd card that has faster speeds is on sale for $40

every time

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

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

>>3149173
link to the 128 u3 card on sale please

>>3149173
Unsurprising plot twists:
- The U3 was available online for $40 or 45 or whatever small difference all along.
- Your typical /p/overty camera doesn't even have a U3 speed card slot and / or it doesn't matter for you because you don't usually shoot fast bursts.

>>3149175
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1334897-REG/samsung_mb_mc128ga_am_evo_128gb_micro_sd.html

Here you go. Would have been really convenient for shooting 4k video on my camera.

File: hqdefault.jpg (38KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 480x360px

The fat man can't get over how wonderful the D850 is. BEST CAMERA FOR EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD EVER apparently

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QfED-ot26E

>>3149159

That's probably what I'll end up doing it's not like I can't afford the Art. I want something for astro that's crazy fast and that or a 20 would probably do the trick, the wider the better

>>3149186
It does sounds like a good camera.

The fatso has all sorts of really retarded opinions though. Can't stand to watch the whole video.

>>3149186
The Angry Photographer has a new sponsor.
HungerArmor

>>3149186
anybody else order one?

>>3149186
>BEST CAMERA FOR EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD EVER apparently

Until he finds another favorite toy 2 weeks from now.

>>3148702
>That thir dparty can be a dick at times.
care to elaborate?

>>3149304
Sony hires choads to do their warranty work in the states.

Seriously sub par service.
They have even broken peoples stuff worse and blamed it on the user and even doubled down when caught.

t. own a a6000

>never going to buy anything more expensive than that from them.

>>3149323
>>t.

Sheep post

>>3149186
His tattoos make him look like he has leprosy.

Is the Canon Rebel T6 a good beginner camera? I'd like something good for both photos and video.

>>3149168

Never seen anyone break the Sony mount.

Have seen some come lose on the a7, and I saw someone who sheared the screws off, but no broken mounts yet.

>>3149510
If you want something for video as well eithet get the 80D or the M5/M6

>>3149323
if you have a specific story to share, please do

>>3149527
Lmao the cognitive dissonance

Who can help me with picking out a tripod? I'd like to take on traveling with me so I'm after something light but probably more importantly, compact.

Something I can strap to the side of a backpack and carry around even if I'll only use it once a day.

Leaning towards this as I've got a tiny Manfrotto Tripod (Maybe only 20cm tall) and while it struggles a little with big, heavy lenses, it's been good to me.

>>3149623
follow-up question. Do you guys take tripods travelling? Or just hope you're find a fence post or a rock or bins or something to set your camera on?

umm
really sorry if im in the wrong place because this is my first time here and i havent seen any recommended gear threads/sticky/pastebin
Recently i started taking a lot of pictures on my phone and i kind of want a camera, but im a poor student so it has to be under $100. Is it even worth it if i already have a semi-decent sony phone that shoots at 13mp?

>>3149634
Which Sony phone? I don't know any of them to be honest but just saying 13mp doesn't really mean much. Good chance you're not going to get much more from a $100 digital than you are from a smartphone made in the last couple of years.
Others may well disagree though. I haven't really seen what's on the market at that price point but my thoughts would be that you're probably better off focusing on the compositions and finding interesting subjects than buying a new camera.

>>3149623
Manfrotto befree or vanguard veo something
Or man up and get a proper 055 or 190 manfrotto with a ball head

>>3149634
just find on old mirrorless or dslr. i got a mirrorless fuji x-m1 for $140. you can find dslr canon 20d and 30d for under $100

>>3149634
shoot film, body +lenses can be had for almost nothing, odds are a family member has an SLR somewhere they'd be happy to gift you.

Hey! I'm looking to get into photography... I was hoping you guys could give me a recommendation for a camera around $300 used or new that is really good for city photography especially cool modern architecture if you understand what i'm saying.

>>3149788
oh also i'd prefer mirrorless

>>3149788
>>3149789
Use your phone

>>3149747
I've in the past bought a Rebel XS for $40, D80 for $100 and a D200 for $90

I gave the D80 and the XS to friends that wanted to get started in photography.

I still have the D200 because I like it.

Getting started is pretty cheap these days.

>>3149789
Look for whatever Sony fits your budget second hand.

a3000 sometimes go hilariously cheap on ebay as people just aren't familiar with the model at all.

Other options that may fall in your budget include,
With EVF
a6000, nex6, nex7, a6300, a7

without EVF
Nex 3, Nex 5

Image quality between all of the above except the A7 is much of a muchness, and there isn't anything significantly better available. Sony make all the sensors for fuji, nikon and pentax.

Don't look at fuji, their cheapest lens starts at around $300 second hand, don't look at samsung they've pulled out of the camera market.

You may want to look at the canon eos-m option, but it's incredibly limited compared to Sony when it comes to features, lenses, accessories, upgradeability, etc.

Are laptops gear?

I'm in the market for a new laptop (on the move for most of the year) and the screen needs to be good enough to do editing -both photo and video-.

That said, I also like to play some recent games (normie AAA shit) and it's near impossible to find something that fits the criteria.

>>3149818
Satellite 15 is decent.

P55c I think.

I7 6th gen
12gb ram
4k screen.
Good battery life.

700-800 used.

What advantages do mirrorless cameras have over mirrors?

what would be the best replacement battery for a Minolta XG-M?
they're called so many different things it gets confusing

>>3149830
Complete vibration free -> more steady lenses and sensor -> higher image quality

EVF is now good enough it's reached the point of augmented reality, instead of being the slow handicap they were in the past. I enjoy using the Zebra function to identify where there is overexposure, and then using center spot meter AEL toggle on said highlight. EVF makes this possible.

>>3149846
>vibration free
Except for the shutter shock issues with Lumix, Fuji and Sony A7 series

File: IMG_20170912_151821.jpg (306KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 2048x1536px

What the fuck is pic related?