Domain changed to archive.palanq.win . Feb 14-25 still awaits import.

Threads by latest replies - Page 161

No.4403090 View ViewReplyLast 50OriginalReport
Why do we even need big, clunky, interchangeable lens cameras when phone cameras already produce images as good as this??
51 posts and 6 images omitted

No.4405679 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Opinions on fine art landscape photography?
16 posts and 2 images omitted

No.4406710 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
photos for this feel?

No.4406468 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Why do people hate on direct flash photography. I think it looks pretty cool. If you hate it, then post a better portrait photography style if you even have the balls to.
2 posts omitted

No.4404221 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
The great debate
>muh primes
[spoiler:lit]I actually only own primes, but IMO unless you are doing something where you need a focal length you can't get in a pro level zoom, like 400mm or 600mm
pro level zooms > consumer level primes >garbage > consumer level zooms > why are you using a "pro level" prime you weird retard?[/spoiler:lit]
18 posts and 3 images omitted

No.4400910 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Anyone here stick a 105mm f/2.4 pentax 67 lens on a pentax 645 body and was it worth it?
14 posts and 2 images omitted

No.4400493 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
So I get sticking your camera right up in someone's face looks weird because too close so generally people want 85mm-200mm for head shots. but beyond that, if you are taking nonhead shot portraits, what do the focal lengths do? is it just a matter of you choose closer to 35-50mm if you want the background around the subject and you chose like 105-135mm to use the compression to isolate the subject from the context of the background and the only other big consideration would be how much physical room you have to shoot?
IE if you are shooting at a park and have room and want the background to fuck off, the compression of 135 mm or 200 mm will do that the best, where as in a studio with a controlled background you might pick 50mm or 85mm because lol no space to get the 2/3rds or what ever % of the body in shot you want?
Let's say I want to do cowboy (mid thigh up) framing, 40mm, 50mm, 90mm and 150mm would all work fine and it would just be a matter of how much physical space I have and how much I want to show the background vs use compression to isolate the subject from the background?
31 posts and 4 images omitted

No.4401688 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Why 85mm, 105mm and 135mm
>muh compression
I get that, but why those 3 specific numbers. why not like 90mm? or 100mm?
7 posts omitted

No.4405533 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Have you noticed this weird sentiment being spread lately about how if you take photos, then that means you aren't enjoying life, usually termed as "living in the moment"? It's so strange, what causes this and how do you deal with it? I love photography because I feel it connects me deeper to things, but it seems that's not the common opinion
23 posts and 2 images omitted

No.4406360 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Lookin for LowRes Cameras that mimic the look & feel of a Public Access Show from the late90s-early00s, one w/ HDMI so I can plug them into a Multicam Switcher for a Podcast type setup.
Any good recommendations? This seems like the right board to ask, if not sorry.
(Pic Unrelated)
3 posts omitted