Domain changed to archive.palanq.win . Feb 14-25 still awaits import.
Threads by latest replies - Page 10
Anonymous
>perfect colors right the first time edition >>4484029
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489260 That's gonna be exciting. At that price I am not worried to yank around on it. We'll see if I can make it work.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4485653 Any recommendations for a no-frills digital pocket camera? All I need is a point & shoot, maybe a cheap zoom function.
-Drifter.
Quoted By:
>>4486079 As a person who has used it for a month now. At 25mm yes it is OK to shoot close up even wide open.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4485913 Is that what you call this?
>>4485751 Have you considered relaxing?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4485977 >>4486193 >5D Newfag here, been looking at either getting a 5D used or a 60D. Educate me on which model would be better for a complete beginner that just doesn't want to take phone pictures on trips anymore. I do enjoy a more vintage digital experience, as I had a Sony H50 but that was 15 years ago and I sold it
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Haven't posted in a couple of months but got a few rolls developed recently and I'm slowly going through scanning them.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493288 Thanks, bro. I also really enjoy that one.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4487758 >He doesn't know voigtlander lenses are optically on par if not better than lenses these days. Anonymous
Love the colours in the 250D shots. They don't have a green tint that I see other people get from it. I hate green tints.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493620 Right? I don't know how OP does it, these are bright and colorful with tasteful halation while any time I shoot vision3 it comes out with weird color cast that can't be easily fixed. Maybe he's using bona-fide ECN2 chemicals or is just better at scanning. I'll stick to gold and ultramax or the de-remjetted vision3, those come out ok.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4487005 Bro did you just post a pic of your mrs on a chins?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I like having the extra possible color spaces to work with when I want
Anonymous
>>4494267 Can I do this with a non-retarded amount of money?
Anonymous
>>4494275 If I remember right the camera I modded and shot that with cost 40€ in local shop new. (Canon PowerShit A800.)
I replaced the IR cut filter with one cut from a polyester 780nm IR pass filter which cost around 30€ + postage.
Low end PowerShots had thin IR cut filter which could be tossed or replaced.
Cameras with a thick builtin filter (low end Nikons?) may need a clear glass replacement to focus properly.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494104 >320x240px dropped
Anonymous
>>4494306 >>4494275 amazon lists IR filters for pretty cheap. like under 30$ usd
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494558 You need more than just a screw on filter anon
Anonymous
New Ricoh GRIV Monochrome. What's the verdict?>1800€ / 2200$ >built in red filter >25mp apsc >28mm equiv lens >very compact and light >no evf
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494266 If it's so consumeristic then the sales must be through the roof, right?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494266 >Can't think of something more consoomerist than paying $50,000 for a manual car with no AC or radio That's what you sound like
Anonymous
>>4494206 Uhhh, anon literally every mirror less and dslr is an imagination of a film slr. Dumbass
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494316 Zoomers like you think all old cameras are the same and the manufacturers milk this
A Nikon F5 is night and day difference to an FM or F3
Anonymous
Anonymous
I was hiking last week with my camera and when I reached the summit this couple approached me and asked me if I could take a couple pictures of them and asked me how much it would be. I've never charged for a picture so I said it was free, but they insisted and gave me $20 for like 10 pictures.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
This kid paid me $300 for 3 hours of my time. We went around taking pictures of his car. Easiest money I've ever made.
/\nonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494123 Yep, you're set for life now. Remember us, anon.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494128 >If it werent for normies mirrorless wouldnt sell and we’d all still shoot film Do normies hate DSLR and film?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494123 >also those shitty car pictures with tons of filters on them, people actually charge money for that stuff. Hohoho boy do they
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494123 I have similar memory
>Be me >Roaming around club street or something at night >Entrance room before a public toilettes, funky graffiti >Owooooo im gonna street shooooot >Some mildly drunk middle eastern? or spanish dude exits from the toilettes >He notices me and i let him move along first but he insists >Ohh take picture me! picture me! >So we go a 5 minutes photography session around the entrance and near stair >Download the pics to my phone via app, send the pics via airdrop >He asks me how much for the pictures? >I say no money >He says thank you a dozen times Of cause he was kinda drunk but he was oozing out of le bro energy so much.
I regret that i should have take more pictures of him.
I was so passive and introverted(still am) i didn't lead him well as a photographer.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I have way better gear but this little fucker has become a great companion for vlogging, even with all the drawbacks
Anonymous
>>4493703 There are kits that replace the lens with a M43 mount.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493840 Reminds me of my Pentax Q with the K mount adapter.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493840 ahh yes, the ribcage
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493703 I use it in b&w (and blast iso), like a little GR 4 mono. no one ever sees me take the photo
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Anything smaller than MF is cope Edition
Previous:
>>4485653
Anonymous
>>4490699 Pentax have made a few DSLRs in the last few years, the K3-III does look pretty interesting with a decent resolution and good AF (on paper). Canon's latest and greatest was the 90D which has an even higher resolution and not bad AF. Neither of those are on DXO so I can't quantify the sensor performance. However, Nikon's D7200 is and has similar performance to the A6600, actually a bit more dynamic range at ISO 100 and 200.
Personally I wouldn't start investing in antiquated technology and a dead mount but it could very well work for you and it would save you some money. I'm just too used to the advantages of mirrorless to go back now.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4490225 >buffer fills up >writes blank frames oof that hurt
w-wait I mean… the limited buffer isn't actually a problem, if you're properly taking the time to frame each shot and not just blasting away like a retard
haha gottem pentax wins again
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488324 What about the Tamron 70-300 for Z-mount? Seems pretty good to me.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4490702 What are the advantages of mirrorless besides more compact?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4490108 >Has APS-C like SNR, DR, and noise. How is the R5 II APC-C like in these features?
Anonymous
Are rangefinders just point-and-shoot snapshitters with slightly more adjustability? I'm entertaining the idea of a smaller film camera but looking at pics taken by them and what they offer they seem like a glorified p&s. Am I missing something here?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4491816 I recently bought a Canon P because it was really cheap and I already know how to fix them (they're easy to work on). It's such a beautiful camera, both to look at and to work on, but I dunno, I think I just don't like rangefinder cameras. I only got a few shots into a roll and ended up rewinding it and finishing it in another camera. I just find an SLR so much easier to work with.
Anonymous
>>4491816 Rangefinders are a fucking joke and I laugh hard at boomers who claim it's "real" photography.
Nigga, you can't even SEE THE REAL FRAMING of your shot
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I bought a 35SP and the light meter isn't working. I tried to fix it but had no luck. Should I try to get it fixed or should I just go with vibes-based lighting?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494333 Who is claiming that only rangefinders are real photography? There are a few benefits of using a rangefinder:
>Shorter flange distance can mean sharper lenses when compared with SLRs, though this also depends on the specific lens. >Less noise/vibration when taking a shot than some (especially older) SLR's. The vibration from mirror slap can reduce sharpness in photos, especially on older SLRs where dampers for the mirror may not be present or have deteriorated, see Nikon F. This is not an issue rangefinders suffer from. Also a quieter shutter can be useful in some circumstances. >Being able to see your subject through the viewfinder before they are in frame. Obviously this only applies when using focal lengths narrower than the outer-most frame lines in your finder, so it's not always applicable. >Generally easier to work on, fewer moving parts than an SLR due to not having the mirror mechanism. Everything else is either the same or a downside.
Anonymous
I'm really lost on how much sensor size matters, because while I read tons of gear stuff here and the most detailed explanations, in reality the photos taken with a small sensor still look good to me because it's about composition, feelings, emotion, subjects and things like that.
Bob Lazarone - UFO Engineer
Quoted By:
>>4478850 Any proof?
Take digicam with 1mpix sensor, take photo with DSLR, resize to 1mpix and compare.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4478844 Unironic techlet.
AI needs good quality input data to work properly. Sensor size affects the quantity and quality of said data (light). How can the AI process an image where half of it is noise and blur?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>/p/4494120
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4478830 Its the only specification that matters. Everything else only concerns pixel peepers, extreme edits (ie: fixing sony colors), people who expose for lightbulbs and the core of the sun.
Bigger sensor = better tonality and more natural DOF falloff
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4478850 >all that matters is what bots and browns on social media think What a sad life you life. Forever servile to people you will never meet.
>you can still take some good photos for instagram >cant shoot a family portrait indoors without flash >but you could do a midday building corner and raj and his 100 bot accounts would “like” it!
Anonymous
Here are some shots with people i did.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493300 Is that a real job? Maybe have to be a doctor or an engineer or an astronaut if you want to take pictures
Anonymous
>>4493652 >clutter its a plant bro
and of all the things one could with with a plant like that and a person, its one of the more mediocre photos somehow
nice photos, dude.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4493851 I mean visual clutter. But really happy you chimed in just for this.
Anonymous
>>4493188 >nothing is in focus Inb4 "that's the point"
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4494221 Yeah they already jumped me for that saying that
