/p/ - Photography » Thread #2636264

[308 / 37 / ?]

43KiB, 650x488, 1.jpg

Gear Thread

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 19:24:52 No.2636264 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>2636558 >>2637292 >>2638776

Gear thread!

If you have questions about a new camera, new lenses or unnecessary accessories that just look cool, post them in here!

You can of course post your own individual threads on your specific gear if you like, but if you want a quick answer and some discussion with other gear enthusiasts, then this thread is for you!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 19:49:03 No.2636281 Report

Quoted By: >>2636284 >>2636613

First post for "get a nikon d3200"
it's an excellent cheap first camera

buy a pentax K-50 if you've got a bit of extra cash and want a better body in exchange for a much worse (and overpriced) lens selection - weather sealing is nice

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0132.jpg, 390KiB, 664x1000

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 19:58:33 No.2636284 Report

Quoted By: >>2636378

>>2636281
I got a d3200 and I really love it.

Related question: What are my flash options?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:34:12 No.2636373 Report

Quoted By: >>2636379 >>2636384

What should I use for editing/resizing my pictures? I'd rather not ever use GIMP.

Also, is the Olympus E410 good for somewhat professional/good photography? It's my first DSLR.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:34:51 No.2636378 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636284
>Related question: What are my flash options?
Quite many, but why not get a Yongnuo? Manual or Nikon TTL.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:35:08 No.2636379 Report

Quoted By: >>2636383

>>2636373
>Also, is the Olympus E410 good for somewhat professional/good photography? It's my first DSLR.

If you get it for free, sure. Otherwise, it's garbage.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:39:18 No.2636383 Report

Quoted By: >>2636386

>>2636379
I did get it for free (made a thread about it...Yesterday I think? I'm new to /p/, I didn't get to read the sticky).

I need to go help family out at an event for racing drones. Will it work for this? The alternative would be my iPhone 6.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:39:43 No.2636384 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636373
> What should I use for editing/resizing my pictures? I'd rather not ever use GIMP.
Well, the first thing that offers itself is the initial RAW editor thing. Darktable, lightroom, Rawtherapee or whatever.

But certainly, GIMP, Krita, PS, (...) also work.

Some people also just use Picasa... not great, but "easy", eh.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:43:48 No.2636386 Report

Quoted By: >>2636390

>>2636383
> The alternative would be my iPhone 6.
Might actually be better, but either is obviously far from a decent option for something like photographing flying drones during the race.

Maybe you can get a few okay photos of people anyways...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 21:46:24 No.2636390 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636386
I'll probably bring my video camera then, I have some shitty video camera that records in 1080p 60 FPS, so I don't have to try to take proper photographs, and then just use E410 for taking pictures of people and products and all that shite.

I'd just look dumb and unprofessional using my fucking phone.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1438210640637.jpg, 145KiB, 980x698

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 22:57:22 No.2636484 Report

Quoted By: >>2636597 >>2636601 >>2636634 >>2637221 >>2637758

What do you guys think about fuji xe1 as a second camera for street photography? I like the price/quality ratio.
Is there any info on the way fuji calculate their ISO? I've heard here that ISO 100 on non-Fuji cameras is actually ISO 200 on Fuji. Is there any place where someone did a side by side test to see if that's true?
Repost out of previous thread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 23:16:07 No.2636505 Report

Quoted By: >>2637129

good camera strap to sling my camera around my neck+shoulder? Like a messenger/laptop bag.
Preferably with a pocket or two on it, so I can throw some film canisters in it as well.

Thank.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 23:48:30 No.2636558 Report

Quoted By: >>2636934

>>2636264
will serious camera get a modern design like they tried with pentax ks1?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.jpg, 111KiB, 985x399

Anonymous Wed 29 Jul 2015 23:50:16 No.2636562 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636239
But the X100S doesnt have IS either..

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 00:36:31 No.2636597 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636484
irc fuji (and others) doesn't start overstating their iso until 800 or so

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2015-06-24 12_21_37-Lightroom.jpg, 299KiB, 2036x1322

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 00:49:09 No.2636601 Report

Quoted By: >>2636623 >>2637221

>>2636484
Canon ISO 100 and Fuji ISO 200

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 01:16:24 No.2636613 Report

Quoted By: >>2636936

>>2636281
>much worse (and overpriced) lens selection

idk I got the 35mm f2.4 for $120 new, pretty great price. The 55 f1.8 is $100. It's not that the cheaper lenses are overpriced, it's just that there aren't as many cheap lenses compared to canon/nikon.

but yeah, the limited selection isn't easy and you do get bullied on /p/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 01:31:40 No.2636621 Report

Quoted By:

Agreed to meet with a pensioneer street vendor in 5 hours time to check out his old soviet cameras and he said he has a "high end Kiev" - which could mean anything from a sexy Contax rangefinder copy, through three variants of medium format systems to some shitty half-automatic SLRs. The uncertainty of which it will be, an awesome bargain or a poopy slr, is driving me crazy because he'll most likely part with it for a pittance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 01:40:42 No.2636623 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636601
canun is kill

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 01:54:43 No.2636634 Report

Quoted By: >>2636652

>>2636484
x-e1 has pretty slow af so idk if its good for street

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 02:26:13 No.2636647 Report

Quoted By: >>2636761

How much should you typically spend on a tripod? Any recommendations?

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO FUJI6929.jpg, 478KiB, 1050x717

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Thu 30 Jul 2015 02:35:37 No.2636652 Report

Quoted By: >>2636662 >>2636764 >>2636856 >>2636875

>>2636634
You really should get in the habit of prefocusing for street anyway. Stop shooting wide open, too.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2015-07-29 at 7.58.1 (...).png, 1008KiB, 957x654

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 03:01:24 No.2636662 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636652

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 03:17:54 No.2636665 Report

Quoted By: >>2636671

I'm looking at Nikon manual focus lenses, specifically the AI-S lenses.
I'm looking at the 105mm 2.5, 35mm f/1.4 AI-S, 28mm f/2.8 AI-S, 85mm f/1.4 AI-S, 200mm f/2 AIS.
Are these lenses well corrected for aberrations? How is wide open performance?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 03:23:42 No.2636671 Report

Quoted By: >>2636677

>>2636665
The 28mm is excellent at every aperture and every focusing distance, even up to very close focusing. It's a really good lens, note that the AI-s lens is the good one and it's completely different from the AI lens which is nothing special. The 105mm is pretty damn sharp, the AI and AI-s are basically the same. I don't know firsthand about the others but I can tell you that you probably shouldn't expect really excellent wide open performance from old f/1.4 manual focus lenses, they're just probably not going to be that great until you stop down a bit if you're pixel peeping.

All of those lenses are perfectly capable of taking good photos though, if you were wondering.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 03:31:31 No.2636677 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636671
Thanks. Price seems to be limited factor now. The 105 can be had super cheap, less than 200 dollars, compared to over 500 for the DC. But the rest are fairly expensive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 06:10:17 No.2636761 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636647
My opinion is that something good enough for "typical" cameras and usage will be around $80-350. Of course, some also will not use anything but $600+ Gitzos, so my opinion clearly isn't everyone's opinion.

The go-to that I'd personally suggest for people who want cheap but not crap is a Dic&Mic E302 which is either $80 for alu or $120 for carbon.

It should work okay for most people, even if the ball head is not high-end. But it's also something that you need to import from China through aliexpress or some store. And I noticed not too few here seem to have an aversion to that somehow...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 06:15:54 No.2636764 Report

Quoted By: >>2636767

>>2636652
lol you think this is street

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 06:21:39 No.2636767 Report

Quoted By: >>2636769

>>2636764

In all fairness, alabama only got streets a few years ago.

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Thu 30 Jul 2015 06:26:22 No.2636769 Report

Quoted By: >>2636774 >>2636775

>>2636767
Fuck you too, Sherman.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 06:39:32 No.2636774 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636769

Don't worry, baby. There's always Mississippi. ;)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 06:40:38 No.2636775 Report

Quoted By: >>2636784

>>2636769
how do you manage to post here like 20 hours of each day?

Archiiiiiie RipTrip

Archiiiiiie RipTrip Thu 30 Jul 2015 07:03:25 No.2636783 Report

Quoted By: >>2636791 >>2636796

So I may get into event photography. Rock bands, music venues, ect. It's a possible job.

Should I invest in a Rokinon 8mm? Too fishy?

OR just buy some shit tier fisheye attachment?

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Thu 30 Jul 2015 07:03:39 No.2636784 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636775
Alabama does have mobile technology too, you know.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 07:22:04 No.2636791 Report

Quoted By: >>2636985

>>2636783
Probably not.

Get good rectilinear wide angle lenses instead. The famous 11-24mm Canon or 14-24mm Nikon lenses are good starting points.

carlo

carlo Thu 30 Jul 2015 07:36:54 No.2636796 Report

Quoted By: >>2636812 >>2636818 >>2636985

>>2636783
do not i repeat do not get a fisheye unless you're doing stuff that isn't from the photo pit

it's boring and drawn out. it's even boring from a backstage perspective but it's more rare that way

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 08:19:11 No.2636812 Report

Quoted By: >>2636818

>>2636796
Probably, just don't use a fisheye lens.

Sure, it *could* give you some shots your customers like. Like an overhead cleavage-exposing "we have a party here... BOOBIES!" - ad poster shot.

But overall it's a crappy match for anything but panorama shots, of which you might need few and that require a bit of extra work.

Really, just primarily great rectilinear shots made with good gear instead, it'll probably work out better for you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 08:30:22 No.2636818 Report

Quoted By: >>2636840

>>2636812
>>2636796
I'd say a decent fish eye isn't bad so long as you're doing a rectilinear conversion on most of your shots.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 08:54:14 No.2636840 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636818
Using a rectilinear conversion on a single fisheye shot is a terrible idea.

You need like 4-8 suitable FoV fisheye shots stitched together to more or less match a wide angle rectilinear lens in most aspects.

That can work well for landscape panoramas, but for events or any other motives with moving subjects, it's just a terrible option and a pain in the ass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 09:09:59 No.2636856 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636652
You really should get in the habit of choosing subjects & actually composing for street.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 09:48:13 No.2636875 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636652
I'm not the typical anon that follows you around bashing everything you post, but holy fuck this is bad. You shouldn't post any sort of advice relating to street photography with this image attached.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 10:06:31 No.2636880 Report

Quoted By: >>2636884 >>2636887 >>2636906

Heyoo everyone, i kind of want to start a photography business at the end of the year.

The thing is my dad has this huge printery from back in the times with me grandpapa.

Now the thing is which is really neat. It has a professional studio in the attic and a dark room in the cellar.

Now the thing is my dad has made it his hobby film photography. I was thinking about the service of both Film and digital photography.

Any recommendations for professional FF camera's?

Especially which brand.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 10:21:44 No.2636884 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636880
I really need to start getting to the point a lot quicker.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 10:34:02 No.2636887 Report

Quoted By: >>2637060

>>2636880
>Any recommendations for professional FF camera's?
>Especially which brand.

If you are having to ask these sorts of questions, you are in no position to be starting a photography business.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 11:04:48 No.2636899 Report

Quoted By: >>2637457

I think i'm going to pick up that $270 d3200 tomorrow i'll buy a lens online for it and save some cash

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 11:18:55 No.2636906 Report

Quoted By: >>2636909 >>2637060

>>2636880
>Any recommendations for professional FF camera's?
- Sony A7R II
- Nikon D810 (you might be able to do with a D750 or D800)
- Canon 5D III / 5D S

Regard this list as an "or better" - affair. Of course, you want matching lenses, and you might very easily need multiple of these just to avoid switching lenses, being able to shoot multiple angles simultaneously, and all that...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 11:26:17 No.2636909 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636906
I'd say you might probably spend $10k or more on new cameras and lenses, initially, so you can offer professional digital photography with modern high-end lenses.

Maybe another 3-10k if you need to upgrade the pro studio lighting with modern lighting and tripods and fixtures and stuff.

Also very important, if you're going digital only now, you need like $4k for a decent computer, monitor, and two NAS with 4 drives on RAID each so you will NOT waste time on managing storage or miss your backups and loose data.
(You could also outsource the backup to the clouds, but that might have issues with bandwidth and cost over time.)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 12:31:40 No.2636934 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636558
if the 50 year old brand loyalists won't buy it then no

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 12:34:15 No.2636936 Report

Quoted By: >>2636941

>>2636613
nikon will sell you their 35mm f1.8 for the same price and it doesn't use screw AF
same with the 50mm, the others have in body AF

it's so fucking frustrating, i want to buy a dslr but i can't pick between nikon and pentax

maybe i should just save for a used D600 - shutter replacement is free even for second hand ones

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 12:47:27 No.2636941 Report

Quoted By: >>2636943

>>2636936
> i want to buy a dslr but i can't pick between nikon and pentax
Do you like Nikon lenses and intend to buy more? Maybe external TTL flashes and stuff as well? Want a little more DR and pixels? Get the Nikon.

Are you probably going to stick with the kit lens unless you need to upgrade, and even then probably will take the cheapest manual lens that fits? Are you going to be in a lot of rain or shoot a lot of moving objects in proper daylight? Get the Pentax.

Sony Alpha in the price range (A58 and such) also are an option. Excellent kit lenses, would also apply for about the same scenario (minus rain) than the Pentax.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 12:53:26 No.2636943 Report

Quoted By: >>2636945 >>2636950

>>2636941
>implying the K-3 has less pickles and DR than the D7200.
cry more fanboy

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:00:21 No.2636945 Report

Quoted By: >>2636947

>>2636943
the d7200 has an entire stop more DR than the K-3

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:01:17 No.2636947 Report

Quoted By: >>2636948

>>2636945
it's the same sensor you dolt

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:02:34 No.2636948 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636947
don't be so rude man
i'm not the one writing the DXOmark reports

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:03:31 No.2636949 Report

Quoted By: >>2636951 >>2636956 >>2636957

question: should i buy the Sony A7 or is there a better option of that tier? some photos i've seen with that camera are pretty ridiculous

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:04:01 No.2636950 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636943
We were comparing D3200 and K-50.

But theoretically, yea. D7200 also beats the K-3 in terms of dynamic range. And the K-3 II is more expensive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:08:47 No.2636951 Report

Quoted By: >>2636956

>>2636949
> some photos i've seen with that camera are pretty ridiculous
I'd mostly call the A7R / A7R II pictures "pretty ridiculous".

The other pictures mostly look as well as most other modern cameras around $1000 also would shoot them with a good lens, at least to me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:14:37 No.2636956 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636949
If you want overall image quality of that standard just go for the d600, you'll be able to find that at a similar price and the quality is about as good as you can get, literally the best in the world. At the very least, just get the D7200. If you insist on mirrorless, go for it.

>>2636951
you are clueless

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:15:23 No.2636957 Report

Quoted By: >>2636960

>>2636949
Umm...just so you know, those "pretty ridiculous" shots are far more the product of the photographer/other people who worked on creating that image than whatever lightbox was used to capture the image.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:18:00 No.2636960 Report

Quoted By: >>2636962 >>2636968

>>2636957
Just so you know.. There are such things as "better" cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:30:52 No.2636962 Report

Quoted By: >>2636971 >>2636979

>>2636960
I never denied that. I'd also say that the abilities of a Canon Elph or Nikon Coolpix FAR outstrip the capabilities of the vast majority of photographers. This is without pointing out that the "better" cameras in the consumer and prosumer ILC ranges are only better by what's truly a marginal amount (it's a real amount, but again, the differences are most always less than the differences caused by the person using them, and only a factor in certain circumstances).

But yeah, go ahead and keep believing that molehills are mountains and that the next few thousand dollars you spend will make you a master photographer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:42:24 No.2636967 Report

Quoted By:

I am looking for like.. a viewfinder adapter you put onto a lens to look through it like a binocular.

I have seen something like it before but I never got a name for it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:47:44 No.2636968 Report

Quoted By: >>2636975

>>2636960
In the hands of a talented artist, taking photos displayed on a computer screen, resized for consumption, you'd be very very hard pressed to tell the difference between a photo taken on an A7r2 against a D3200. Yes, there are better cameras, but there is no camera you could put in the hands of an unfocused amateur that would take his shitty 40D photos into amazing "a7R sample photos". It doesn't work that way. Most camera improvements that truly make a camera better are designed to assist with usability and reliability/consistency, rather than image quality. A bump in max iso from 6400 to 25,600 is only two stops, for instance. On paper it looks awesome. In practice, it's not that big a deal.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 254.gif, 2MiB, 276x225

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:50:00 No.2636971 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636962
>ps elph
mfw

I've taken shits than can pull a better shot than one of the ps elphs even if taken by the greatest photographer

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:52:35 No.2636975 Report

Quoted By: >>2636983

>>2636968
I agree with this but the D3200 is as good as you can get for the money. A7's are just a lot more practical and are cool as fuck. Seriously though what else am I going to spend my money on, alcohol?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 13:56:07 No.2636979 Report

Quoted By: >>2636982

>>2636962
No, a D3100 can outstrip the capabilities of the vast majority of photographers, but just about any phone will 80% of the time take a better shot than a cheap Canon. That camera is a piece of shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:04:04 No.2636982 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636979
>I'm not even a good gearfag, I'm a brandfag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:04:07 No.2636983 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636975
> A7's are just a lot more practical
Not really in its price range, though. They have bad AF, troublesome compatibility with non e-mount lenses and other problems.

Archiiiiiie RipTrip

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Fuckpissshit.jpg, 1MiB, 1916x742

Archiiiiiie RipTrip Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:06:51 No.2636985 Report

Quoted By: >>2636987 >>2636989 >>2636993

>>2636791
$1300 compared to $295 for the Rokinon.

I'm a poor college student also by the way. Unless there is an offbrand 11-24 that's good. I can do with fixed distances also.

>>2636796
I mean it's not like a 145 Degree fisheye like the shitty attachments. The 8mm is a lot less than 145.

Here's a comparison image I did. The only thing is that I've changed my mind, the 8mm is too fishy. The 14mm is not as bad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:09:08 No.2636987 Report

Quoted By: >>2636988

>>2636985

>a lens that turns your photos into eyebleed tier HDR

No thanks

Archiiiiiie RipTrip

Archiiiiiie RipTrip Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:10:20 No.2636988 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636987
>>2636987
Taking the bait.

Probably just over processed clarity bar.

IM BUYING THE LENS AND THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO TO STOP ME

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:11:14 No.2636989 Report

Quoted By: >>2636992

>>2636985
I picked up the sigma 12-24 for £250 and is a freaking bargain if your on full frame. If you're on crop you may be better off going for the 10-20 3.5 as it's a similar price and you get a bit of a faster lens.

Archiiiiiie RipTrip

Archiiiiiie RipTrip Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:13:43 No.2636992 Report

Quoted By: >>2636994

>>2636989
If I can find a lightly used one for ~300 I'll try and pick it up. I've got some older sigma lenses and they're damn good.

I keep forgetting to mention my budget is 300 USD.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:18:58 No.2636993 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636985
> $1300 compared to $295 for the Rokinon.
And probably about 10 times better for this purpose.

> I'm a poor college student also by the way.
Rent one for the events, especially if you get paid to shoot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:20:13 No.2636994 Report

Quoted By: >>2636998

>>2636992
If you're on crop there's loads of affordable options
https://www.keh.com/search/list?n=147&sort_by=priceMax-desc&category[]=Zoom+Lenses%2C+Non-Mfg&fl[]=12-24mm&fl[]=11-18mm&fl[]=11-16mm&fl[]=10-24mm&fl[]=10-20mm

If you're on full frame it's either the sigma 12-24 or samyang primes. Personally I don't think the quality, inconvenience and size of samyang lenses are worth their small price tag.

Archiiiiiie RipTrip

Archiiiiiie RipTrip Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:28:09 No.2636998 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636994
Thanks for the help. Never heard of this site. I'm still torn, not that I want a ton of distortion. But I guess I'm looking to introduce a "public crowd" killer into my lens set. Seeing that the general population usually gets wet over fishy shots.

I've already got ;
18-35 Kit
50 1.8 G Nikon
70-300 Tamron
70-200 Sigma (No F mount adapter yet)
135mm Mamiya
50mm Mamiya (Butchered lens mount to fit nikon for time being)

All on a d5200. Which sucks because of the flange, the two Mamiya lenses don't have infinty focus unless I buy that stupid $40 adapter that has another piece of glass in it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:30:47 No.2637001 Report

Quoted By: >>2637005 >>2637017 >>2637021

I don't know if this is the right thread to ask, but is rawtherapee any good? I installed it recently and it looks a bit confusing, so i don't know if i should switch to gimp

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 14:33:56 No.2637005 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637001
It is fine.

It's a tool designed to fairly quickly adjust the most common settings needed when "developing" RAW image files.

It's not a replacement for GIMP, which is more for general bitmap-based painting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 15:06:20 No.2637017 Report

Quoted By: >>2637019

>>2637001
rawtherapee is an extremely powerful and technical tool - it's not easy to use but it's arguably better than lightroom if you know what you're doing

it's not a replacement for GIMP, and if a photo needs work after rawtherapee is done with it, GIMP is a good option

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 15:07:21 No.2637019 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637017
oh if you're not shooting RAW and just using jpeg don't bother

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 15:08:58 No.2637021 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637001
Also give Darktable a try, you will be amazed.

Archiiiiiie RipTrip

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO GGWUyui.png, 841KiB, 485x701

Archiiiiiie RipTrip Thu 30 Jul 2015 15:54:36 No.2637039 Report

Quoted By: >>2637055

Also I almost forgot. I came across this old Mamiya Nc1000.

Is it worth to rig something, or fix up to use this old 35? Or should it just be a shelf life camera? It was handed down to me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 16:16:48 No.2637055 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637039
Sell it for parts on eBay. Someone with more experience could salvage some parts to fix someone elses camera. It would save you a lot of time and money just to buy one in a working condition.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 16:39:57 No.2637060 Report

Quoted By: >>2637072

>>2636906
>>2636887
Allright you got me, i actually wanted to stir on some discussion.

>>2636906
Cheers, i actually had the 5D S in mind actually.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 16:54:36 No.2637072 Report

Quoted By: >>2637075

>>2637060
Get a Rebel, 700D or 760D instead for starters.
Also 5D S is for studio work only! It has the dynamic range of the beginner DSLRs and can only deliver results with accurate studio lighting. It is intended as a poor mans digital MF.
When you actually know what you are doing then you might go for a 5DIII or better.
Same for the Nikon route, D5500 or D7200 for starters and go for D810 later.
There is also the Pentax way, but you might have to wait till christmas for the FF camera. Until then you can get a K-3 and some of the limited series primes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 16:57:32 No.2637075 Report

Quoted By: >>2637077

>>2637072
Forgot to mention, for studio work you might want to take a look at the Pentax 645z. Delicious image quality, great vintage lenses for those artistic desaturated portraits and affordable. You can also take it out because it is a rugged build and has weather sealing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:04:02 No.2637077 Report

Quoted By: >>2637078 >>2637080 >>2637082 >>2637251

>>2637075
ahaha are you fucking for real
the 645z is a fucking catastrophe
get a film MF (or a phase one but those cost tens of thousands)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:05:03 No.2637078 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637077
or a FF nikon tbh

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IJAI43PBTOW3Vzii8BzY_Hit By Car.gif, 2MiB, 296x149

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:05:57 No.2637080 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637077
[citation needed]

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:08:52 No.2637082 Report

Quoted By: >>2637255

>>2637077
Please elaborate in which ways the 645z is a catastrophe.

Apart from how catastrophically it destroys any FF camera currently on the market.

Also
>get a phase one but they expensive
So he shouldn't get a 645z, yet should get a phase one, despite the fact they use the same sensor and Pentax have shown time and time again they can rock the shit out of sony sensors.

I'm surprised Pentax now have anti-shills, what is it with p/entax and this board?!?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:12:20 No.2637086 Report

Quoted By: >>2637087 >>2637091 >>2637120

external flash worth getting if im a newb?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:12:49 No.2637087 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637086
Do you need it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:18:47 No.2637091 Report

Quoted By: >>2637092

>>2637086
do you find yourself using the internal flash and finding it's not powerful enough?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:19:24 No.2637092 Report

Quoted By: >>2637093

>>2637091
sometimes yeah

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 17:19:50 No.2637093 Report

Quoted By: >>2637120

>>2637092
Yongnuo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 18:15:51 No.2637120 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637086
Definitely.

Good way to get creative without spending too much money.
Like >>2637093 said buy a Yongnuo since they are cheap and decent.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 18:26:25 No.2637129 Report

Quoted By: >>2637131 >>2637144 >>2638939

>>2636505
>good camera strap to sling my camera around my neck+shoulder? Like a messenger/laptop bag.
>Preferably with a pocket or two on it, so I can throw some film canisters in it as well.
>Thank.

Asking again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 18:28:28 No.2637131 Report

Quoted By: >>2637520

>>2637129
Sounds like most generic hippy straps. New straps don't really have film holder spots anymore.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 18:52:48 No.2637144 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637129
Get it custom made at a leather shop

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:11:18 No.2637165 Report

Quoted By: >>2637168

Thinking about buying a K-50, but I want something a bit more lightweight and cheaper. Mainly taking street and event pictures on a trip, but also some lowlight-ish photos. Should I go for a compact? Kinda want something more 'advanced' but I'm not sure if I'm ready to pay premium for that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:14:35 No.2637168 Report

Quoted By: >>2637174

>>2637165
Use your phone

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:18:22 No.2637174 Report

Quoted By: >>2637185 >>2637203 >>2637205 >>2637231 >>2639573

>>2637168
It has a shitty camera, and I don't want to worry about its battery, since I'll be using it all day. I really want to buy something decent to get nice pictures, but I just can't justify paying $500 for something I'm not using professionally, specially if it's something bulky.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:27:26 No.2637185 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637174
So you want a decent camera but you are too socially awkward and wimpy to handle it so instead you want a shitty point and shit with the same sensor in your phone.
Here is the solution:
Go to your local supermarket, grab the first camera off the shelf and don't even dare to complain about how shitty the photos are.
Now go away and don't come back.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:35:26 No.2637203 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637174
You can pay a little, or you can get good quality. Not both.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:35:47 No.2637205 Report

Quoted By: >>2637218 >>2637231

>>2637174
>I just can't justify paying $500 for something I'm not using professionally

Why not?
$500 really isn't much money for a hobby.

Also:
R I C O H G R
I
C
O
H

G
R

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:41:28 No.2637218 Report

Quoted By: >>2637231 >>2637233

>>2637205
>point & shoot with no image stabilisation

You're better off going to Keh and buying a used RX100 for ~$250

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:44:02 No.2637221 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636601
>>2636484
Note that a lower base ISO does not mean a better or more efficient sensor. If you do your research, you'll find that ISO raises as sensors become more efficient, for the same dynamic range and noise performance. And, in fact, Fuji tends to beat canon in both of those at base ISO, even though Canon gathers less light.

Tipsy R !!rEkSWzi2+mz

Tipsy R !!rEkSWzi2+mz Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:47:15 No.2637231 Report

Quoted By: >>2637239

>>2637174
Either get a cheap mirrorless camera or listen to these anons:

>>2637218
>>2637205

IQ and professionalism don't always have to go hand and hand. You can have simplicity and overall good looking pictures and not have to carry anything big around to scare anyone off in todays times.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:47:41 No.2637233 Report

Quoted By: >>2637399

>>2637218
>muh image stabilization

m43 babby detected.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 20:49:56 No.2637239 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637231
>don't always have to go hand and hand
It's a doggy dog world out there

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO [HorribleSubs] Ranpo Kitan - Gam (...).jpg, 77KiB, 1280x720

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 21:00:32 No.2637251 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637077
>is a fucking catastrophe

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 21:05:26 No.2637255 Report

Quoted By: >>2637562

>>2637082
The Pentax 645Z uses a Sony sensor.
Sorry to break it to you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 22:08:15 No.2637288 Report

Quoted By: >>2637294 >>2637303 >>2637309

Should I replace my Fuji X-E1 w. 18-55 2.8-4 and 35mm 1.4 with a Pentax K3 and weather sealed kit lens, plus a 50mm 1.4 from an old Pentax camera?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO nikonbr-6.jpg, 41KiB, 648x299

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 22:12:45 No.2637292 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636264

Did Nikon stop making these?
They are nearly impossible to find here in the Netherlands.

Or is there a modern alternative?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 22:13:48 No.2637294 Report

Quoted By: >>2637559

>>2637288
why?
not saying it's a bad idea but why?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 22:19:22 No.2637303 Report

Quoted By: >>2637559

>>2637288
Not a bad idea, the K-3 is a very good and versatile camera. Landscape, wildlife, sports, throw anything at it it will chew it.
It is bigger than the Fuji though so if you don't mind the size, then go for it.
Also the 50mm will be a bit long on APS-C, get something around 28-35mm too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Jul 2015 22:27:11 No.2637309 Report

Quoted By: >>2637559

>>2637288
no. wait for new fuji with new sensor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 00:26:30 No.2637399 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637233
>wanting image stabilisation in a point and shoot, that will spend 95% of its life away from a tripod, is now associated with m43s

wat

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 01:49:31 No.2637446 Report

Quoted By:

Considering getting a used Nikon D600 for around $850 from keh. I've got a 50mm 1.8 lens and a 28mm 2.8 lens from back around 2000 when I used to work as a photographer shooting film. Since then I've changed jobs and haven't had time for photography but would like to get back into it.

Also will be moving to the pacific northwest soon and would like a camera that can be used without too much worry in the wet weather they have.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 02:18:16 No.2637457 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636899
Ended up getting it. Guys at the shop were shocked it was selling so cheap. Ex demonstration model that had never been used with a 2 year warranty

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 02:50:38 No.2637467 Report

Quoted By:

Any ideas on other places to find the following used:
>GH4
>Sigma 18-35 f/1.8
>Metabones

I've been checking my local craigslist for the past few weeks, looked on adorama, keh, b&h but there doesn't seem to be much out there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 04:43:10 No.2637520 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637131
Well I wasn't asking for a specific film holder, just a pocket for like paraphernalia, and my paraphernalia just happened to be film.

But I guess I'll just get a hippy strap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 06:59:22 No.2637559 Report

Quoted By: >>2637560 >>2637571 >>2637669

>>2637294
The weather sealing in the K3 seems sweet, that and the ruggedness of the camera might make it possible to use the camera more. That being said, I don't use the current X-E1 enough as it is; weather sealing isn't the problem, inspiration is.
Although I find the X-E1s AF a little slow at times, it annoys me more and more.
But there's a REALLY sweet deal going on for the K3 currently.

>>2637303
Thanks for the answer. It and the kit lens will have to do for the moment, but I'm guessing the 50mm would be good for portraits at least.

>>2637309
That wouldn't bring me weather sealing for a reasonable cost. Don't know if I really need it though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 07:01:46 No.2637560 Report

Quoted By: >>2637572

>>2637559
Oh, and the K3 has a better video mode than the X-E1s. The X-E1s is horrendous. The K3... not great, but not bad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 07:07:19 No.2637562 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637255
Your reading comprehension is lacking
Happy to break it to you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 07:40:25 No.2637571 Report

Quoted By: >>2637580

>>2637559
get k3ii for the pixelshift full color shot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 07:41:25 No.2637572 Report

Quoted By: >>2637580

>>2637560
low bitrate.
better get a panasonic gx8.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 07:57:17 No.2637580 Report

Quoted By: >>2637603 >>2637614

>>2637571
Costs 40% more than the K3.
>>2637572
Costs 110% more than the K3.
Video isn't the primary use, although it would be nice to have better than the X-E1.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 08:52:47 No.2637603 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637580
That extra price is the integrated O-GPS1, read up on it.
If you're into astrophoto it is worth it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 09:20:03 No.2637614 Report

Quoted By: >>2637616

>>2637580
And the D3200 costs like 70% less than the K3.

Diminishing returns, but it's less quick and nice to work with worse tools - and that's the case even if those tools never are going to make money.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 09:26:35 No.2637616 Report

Quoted By: >>2637624

>>2637614
The D3200 is not the same class. If you want to compare entry level, then compare the K-50 to the D3x00 or the K-S2 to D5x00
The K-3 is more comparable to the D7200 and the 7D.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 09:41:32 No.2637624 Report

Quoted By: >>2637636

>>2637616
It's also an APS-C, with about the same image quality on equal lenses.

Even if you have more features and a far more workable video mode on a K-3, you can of course still compare them for pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:03:02 No.2637636 Report

Quoted By: >>2637637 >>2637652

>>2637624
K-3 has faster and more precise shutter, weather sealing, pentaprism, better AF with more crosstype AF points etc... Yeah, let's compare it to a cheap entry camera. Holy shit, the cheap one is cheaper!!!
Sensor and pickles is one thing, using the camera aka features is another.
K-3 is a lot of camera for it's price that definitely stands its ground in wildlife and sports, and anywhere remotely wet and dusty.
The D3200 is an entry level camera. Yes you can take pictures with both but those are two very different bodies. If you can't understand that you need to reevaluate your life.
Compare the D3200 to the K-50 or even to the K-30 if you so much want to compare charts and numbers.
Do you still want to compare the K-3 to something? Do it with the D7200, D7100 or the 7D.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:08:43 No.2637637 Report

Quoted By: >>2637647

>>2637636
>wildlife and sports, and anywhere remotely wet and dusty.
Why would I ever be in such a situation? I'm not a professional photog.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:19:41 No.2637647 Report

Quoted By: >>2637653 >>2637662

>>2637637
I'm not either but I like to hike and take photos of wild animals, birds and nature in general. I also have another hobby involving throwing $400-$1400 worth of model planes off cliffs and into the air and I sometimes take photos. A 1400mm wingspan model plane going at 120km/h in a close low-pass needs good burst rate and accurate AF, both which the K-3 has.
I'm not saying you have to do all this kind of stuff but it is there when you need it.
In a few minutes I'll dig up some plane shots, but some might need a quick processing.
Also stop being a shut-in and explore the world outside of your comfort zone. You will be amazed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:20:15 No.2637648 Report

Quoted By: >>2637651

Apart Ricoh GR and Leica Q, what other good cameras have DNG as their raw files?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:21:07 No.2637651 Report

Quoted By: >>2638220

>>2637648
All the Pentax DSLR and MF range

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:23:54 No.2637652 Report

Quoted By: >>2637659

>>2637636
Yes, in sum total, it basically has better Auto AF, 2 SD cards, weather sealing, like two extra buttons and slightly better in-camera software.

Still, overall sensor quality and pickels are the same kind of thing on these two cameras. They're *not* the same on all cameras, but they are the really pretty much the same between these two specifically.

The AF on a D3200 is still better than on people's usual P&S, so with the same lens and a marginal amount of care during operation, these cameras will take almost exactly the same shot in the vast majority of situations.

Even if you absolutely needed the auto AF and features to be a bit better, you could get a Sony A58 at only the cost of a marginal loss of image quality, for just like $60 more than the D3200, still only 60% of the cost of a K-3.

Again, we're clearly seeing extremely diminishing returns here. It's not a vastly different camera, the pictures will usually turn out the same vs. a D3200 with the same lens and only slightly worse on an a58...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP6687.jpg, 285KiB, 1000x562

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:24:31 No.2637653 Report

Quoted By: >>2637655 >>2637663

>>2637647
These were made with my manual tele lens. Look on Youtube (search "T-Rex 550 3D") how hard to track these buggers.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP6692.jpg, 443KiB, 1000x665

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:27:03 No.2637655 Report

Quoted By: >>2637670

>>2637653
In this one it came down full speed inverted, stopped and went up again in a half second. I have no Idea if it is the moment before or after stopping, but I wouldn't be surprised if it went above 10G in this one maneuver.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:33:13 No.2637659 Report

Quoted By: >>2637676

>>2637652
You have never actually used a K-3, ever. Am I right? Are you getting payed by Nikon for your shills?
Yet again, K-3 is NOT an entry level camera. Are you really this stupid?
It costs as much because some parts of it cost more than what Nikon puts into an entry level plastic box. Dou you want an entry level camera? Look up K-30 orK-50 and THEN compare to the D3200.
Goddamn gearfags with their numbers and charts masturbation!
You know what, I'm not posting the rest of the shots, you don't worth the time put into converting and resizing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:37:32 No.2637662 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637647
>You will be amazed.
No I wont you fucking normie. I'll be anxious.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 10:39:06 No.2637663 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637653
Thats a boring snapsnot of a toy. Congrats.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2015_0711_15202800(2).jpg, 679KiB, 1776x1184

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 11:00:49 No.2637669 Report

Quoted By: >>2637729

>>2637559
Honestly with the kind of shooter i am I find the XE2's AF more than adequate and to be perfectly honest I usually just zone focus with the 16-50 @ 16mm f11 for street stuff.

What do you shoot mostly?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 11:01:50 No.2637670 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637655
Just shoe this video if you want to impress upon people how quick these things are:

https://youtu.be/W170zszmkWk

That said, you failed to capture any of that sense in your picture, and no the k3 doesn't have fast accurate AF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 11:11:40 No.2637676 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637659
> Yet again, K-3 is NOT an entry level camera. Are you really this stupid?
You can coat it with gold and call it a luxury class camera, but the fact remains:

Photos on equal lenses typically look the same between these, and sensor and other benchmarks show that this is not just a subjective impression.

> You know what, I'm not posting the rest of the shots, you don't worth the time put into converting and resizing.
Those were your shots? Sorry, but either is actually quite a bit out of focus.

Don't know about what lens you used, but frankly, I'd say many hobbyists could shoot this well or better on manual.

The ultimate point wouldn't be that the D3200 could do this. It'd just also fail to perform in this specific situation - you didn't pay enough extra to get pro full frame focusing accuracy and speed that you'd want here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 12:45:33 No.2637709 Report

Quoted By:

Good news everyone, I got accepted into college! Material sciences course. WOOT!

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 13:51:24 No.2637727 Report

Quoted By: >>2637811

What do you guys think about beauty dishes? I'm thinking about picking up a collapsible beauty dish

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 13:53:40 No.2637729 Report

Quoted By: >>2637736 >>2637786

>>2637669
The X-E2 has better AF than the X-E1, by quite a bit. I've got no PSAF in mine at all, trying to capture say our cat in motion is close to impossible. It is accurate though.

But you are on to something. My basic problem is not taking enough pictures as it is, lack of motivation etc. I suspect me wanting another camera might have little to do with any actual need and more to do with wanting something NEW. And there's this really sweet deal on the K3 currently...

Nice picture btw.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 14:22:12 No.2637736 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637729
x-e2 will get an autofocus firmware upgrade.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 15:43:11 No.2637758 Report

Quoted By:

>>2636484
youd be better off with an x100t if youre all about street photog, so long as you dont mind a fixed lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2015_0711_16082200.jpg, 524KiB, 1776x1184

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 16:15:52 No.2637786 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637729
Aww thanks, its nice to not get SHAT on for once on /p/. Yeah I know that, have you tried using manual lenses?

There's a lens called a Fujian 35mm 1.7 CCTV lens that costs like £20 including adapter and accessories and its a bundle of fun on the fuji

Pic related.

If you have your heart set on switching I won't stop you because I know that feeling, I just wasn't shooting at all with my Canons, they just took up so much space and didn't perform the way I needed them too.

Since I got the Fuji I have it on me whenever I'm out and about, can't wait to get the 27mm and 18mm so the things pocketable.

I literally love this camera, it makes me smile every damn time I use it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 16:36:52 No.2637811 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637727
It's a minor effect and not too easy to use without an additional assistant or suitable stand.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.jpg, 828KiB, 3264x2448

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 18:35:54 No.2637911 Report

Quoted By: >>2637952 >>2638220 >>2638238

>browsing RX1 on ebay
>accidentally buy one for $1965 thinking i hit the counteroffer button

welp! shit...

well at least it comes with the EVF and a bunch of other shit, I guess

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 19:11:39 No.2637952 Report

Quoted By: >>2637955 >>2637978

>>2637911
>spending $2000 on a camera without interchangeable lenses

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 19:18:00 No.2637955 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637952
Why not if he has the money? Not all of us are dirt eating poorfags.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 19:43:36 No.2637978 Report

Quoted By: >>2638000 >>2638179

>>2637952
I shoot at 35mm almost exclusively so I was excited to find a great full frame p&s that has an awesome sensor and lens

worst case scenario I'll sell it back on ebay for a profit

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 31 Jul 2015 20:30:20 No.2638000 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637978
>I'll sell it back on ebay for a profit
Yeah, sure.....

It's not some collectable Leica.
It's an already outdated digicam.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 02:38:36 No.2638137 Report

Quoted By: >>2638170 >>2638207

my cousin is looking to get his first DSLR.

he has his eye on the canon 70d

any good? what's the standard lens to get with canons? you know the 35mm or 50mm 1.8g equivalent?

he says he wants to get the 70d with 18-135mm bundle. thoughts?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 04:01:03 No.2638170 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638137
kit lens is just that, your basic go-to lens

if hes just getting a (crop)body however i'd recommend the 24mm f/2.8 STM

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 04:12:43 No.2638177 Report

Quoted By: >>2638211

I currently have a 600d with the current kit 18-55 is, and an older 28-105 usm ii. I'm strongly considering picking up a 24-105 f4 L from ebay secondhand for around $500. Is this dumb or not? I plan on upgrading to a better camera in the long run, I'd just like something that will stay a good lens for a long while, as well as a midrange zoom that has usm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 04:15:21 No.2638179 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637978
>worst case scenario I'll sell it back on ebay for a profit

>thinking you can make money on digishit

nah

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 04:43:42 No.2638186 Report

Quoted By: >>2638237

D7100 refurbished with 18-55mm VR II lens or new K-50 with 18-135mm WR?
I have around 750 dollars for a budget, it will be my first dslr.
Please help me /p/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 05:31:18 No.2638207 Report

Quoted By: >>2638237

>>2638137
18-135 is a good starting point, I usually tell people to start with that, try the lens out for a couple of shots on the 24/35/50/85 focal lengths and see what suites them best if they want to get a prime, but jumping right in to a prime lens would probably be a bad idea for someone just getting in to SLRs

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 05:34:16 No.2638211 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638177
The 24-105 is a decent lens, one of my favourites, good if you plan to upgrade to full frame soon, but it's not wide on crop. the 17-55 2.8 IS is a pretty good crop lens for all around, just not "L" and crop-only. But I shot with the 24-106 on a 60d as my main lens and was gernerally pretty good with it (doing mostly video)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 06:44:02 No.2638220 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637911
You could, like ... I don't know ... message the seller and say it was a mistake. Spending that much money won't make you a better photographer, taking better photos will.
>>2637651
That's it? Those are my choices? I mean I could use a DNG converter but it's less convenient. I better git gud before I even justify to myself the cost of a Leica.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 07:55:31 No.2638237 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638186
How about the K-50 with a 18-55mm or so?

>>2638207
> jumping right in to a prime lens would probably be a bad idea for someone just getting in to SLRs
Personally, I think it's not a bad idea at all.

At least if your reasons for not going with a travel or superzoom but a DSLR indicate that you actually might want a prime.

But you probably should be somewhat willing to buy more lenses if necessary.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 08:01:27 No.2638238 Report

Quoted By: >>2638239

>>2637911
You had like an hour to send a cancellation request and possibly not pay.

It's probably too late now. The seller likely will not want to cancel for free anymore. Selling shit on eBay is a decent amount of work, and costly...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 08:09:24 No.2638239 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638238
even with a cancellation charge it's not gonna be a drop in the bucket compared to 2k usd though
>2k digital p&shit
>not leica (even if leica is shit it's still valuable)

you fucked up tbh

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 21:09:27 No.2638535 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638440
A6000
EM10
RX100 3 or 4
Used XE1, XE2

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 21:13:33 No.2638536 Report

Quoted By: >>2638578 >>2638612

My brother needs a new camera since his old shitty nikon dslr has given up.

I was thinking about a compact one for them but I know jack shit about 4:3 cameras.

They just need something lightweight, interchangeable lenses and not cheap shit.

If there are 3:2 ratio ones that's even better.

And .raw files is a huge plus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 22:23:27 No.2638578 Report

Quoted By: >>2638618 >>2638827

>>2638536
canon sl1

the 18-55 that comes with it is actually pretty good and has IS

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 23:25:51 No.2638612 Report

Quoted By: >>2638827

>>2638536
sony a6000

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Aug 2015 23:41:28 No.2638618 Report

Quoted By: >>2638827

>>2638578
Don't do this. It's a huge down-grade if he's used to a Nikon SLR.

What's your budget.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.jpg, 228KiB, 1500x1500

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 03:08:16 No.2638702 Report

Quoted By: >>2640420

So I shot with a cf card today and went to download shots. I tryed with bridge and got an error. I tryed copying all the files straight from the card and got a error. Copy 20 photos at a time and they all download except the vey first file. How does one file go bad? Is this a sign of a bad card and I just got lucky I didn't lose all my files or should I just format it more?

Tldr: how can you tell when a cf card goes bad?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1366659749309.png, 441KiB, 300x900

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 04:44:26 No.2638730 Report

Quoted By: >>2638731

I just bought a bunch of old lenses, but I'm paranoid about Fungus.

What should I do?
Should I fill up my camera bags with Silica Gel bags?
Perhaps I should fill up my entire house with Silica gel bags.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 04:50:44 No.2638731 Report

Quoted By: >>2638734

>>2638730
Silica gel will help prevent fungus from starting by absorbing water. If you already have fungus, it won't do anything. Inspect the lenses closely by shining a light through them backwards. If you see anything weird, or if you're just paranoid, leave them out in the sun for a day or two, so the UV light shining through can kill spores before they spread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 04:55:43 No.2638734 Report

Quoted By: >>2638735

>>2638731
I actually have a UV light bulb in my house.
It's a Fluorescent type, but it's only 20 watt dispersed on a long pipe.

Will if be enough to kill fungus?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 04:56:44 No.2638735 Report

Quoted By: >>2638737

>>2638734
Are you... afraid of the sun? or...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 04:59:42 No.2638737 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638735
It's just very cloudy outside, and I would need to place them at right angles, or else some fungus might survive.

Or maybe I would make my lens susceptible to more fungus by resting them outside?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 06:50:41 No.2638776 Report

Quoted By: >>2638779

>>2636264
why is a lens asking for my iso and mode

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 06:54:11 No.2638779 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638776
Is it a lens? I thought it was a Mars or Moon habitat from Nasa

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1.jpg, 66KiB, 427x279

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 07:39:46 No.2638790 Report

Quoted By: >>2638793 >>2639035 >>2639315

Does anyone know what the difference between these two lenses are?

They are both 24mm A-mount with Autofocus, but their designs looks so different.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 07:53:38 No.2638793 Report

Quoted By: >>2638794

>>2638790
the I.
it's probably minor upgrades.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 07:55:16 No.2638794 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638793
Ah, so the one to the right is an upgrade?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO $_12.jpg, 62KiB, 475x500

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 08:11:25 No.2638800 Report

Quoted By: >>2638801

Is this some form of fungus?

Or just dust?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 08:14:35 No.2638801 Report

Quoted By: >>2638802

>>2638800
that's a lens cap numbnut.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 08:15:26 No.2638802 Report

Quoted By: >>2638804 >>2638878

>>2638801
But what it's it's fungus that's attacked the lens cap and might spread into the glass? ;_;

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 08:27:05 No.2638804 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638802
just clean it.
stop being brain dead hipster.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 09:06:12 No.2638810 Report

Quoted By:

Does anyone know where I can buy a cheap LAEA3 adaptor?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 10:28:02 No.2638827 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638578
>>2638618
Yeah no the 100D and similar is not an option.

It obviously has to be better than a smartphone and point and shit, and 100D tiers.

Budget.. Well around 700 for camera and an extra lens.

>>2638612
Is that the successor of the NEX series? It's something like this I've been looking at but there's so many of them.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Animation_polariseur_2.gif, 223KiB, 260x195

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 11:43:11 No.2638841 Report

Quoted By: >>2638855

Looking to buy filters from scratch.

Which filters are must have (landscape)?. Which i could live without?. Recommendations anyone...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 12:13:16 No.2638855 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638841
polarizer and gradient

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4L_taSIwKkP.jpg, 979KiB, 3264x2448

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 13:13:18 No.2638876 Report

Quoted By: >>2638882 >>2638894 >>2638923

Know of any lens converters? I've looked on Amazon, etc just none of them specify "Minolta xg-m to d5200" so I've been too bitchy to buy any. Also I know it's pretty much standard but the ones with the least amount of distortion/quality loss are preferred.

Thanks in advanced

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 13:15:39 No.2638878 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638802
Just mold and shit. Found my dads old slr with that shit everywhere the shutter wouldn't even depress. Just scraped it off and used a cotton swab with some alcohol and it all came off. Never came back

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 13:25:01 No.2638882 Report

Quoted By: >>2638886

>>2638876
When searching for adapters, you don't search camera to camera, you search mount to mount.

In this case, it's MD to F mount

http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Adapter-Minolta-F-Mount-Camera/dp/B003EDYIM6/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1438521778&sr=1-3&keywords=MD+to+F+adapter

For this, you'll need an adapter with a glass element in it, and so you're going to either pay a LOT or deal with loss of image quality.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 13:50:00 No.2638886 Report

Quoted By: >>2638888

>>2638882
Thanks man. Idk if that one is considered the "expensive" kind but even that got bad quality reviews.

Such a shame. i have a 50mm, 52 fisheye, and 80-205 and I'm used to them all. They're all better than the shit kit 18-55

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 13:53:12 No.2638888 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638886
No, that's one of the cheap ones, I just couldn't be bothered to keep digging after finding it. The expensive ones will be $300-400

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 14:20:26 No.2638894 Report

Quoted By: >>2638897

>>2638876
I wouldn't bother putting Minolta lenses on a Nikon body.

When the new camera has a shorter flange distance (=distance between the sensor and the mount) an adapter can simply be a metal ring to bridge the gap and convert the mounts.

But when it's the other way around you have to fuck about with corrective lenses so you;re better off just selling your old lenses and buying replacements in the appropriate mount.

Unfortunately Nikon has one of the longest flange distances, so Nikon cameras really only take native lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 14:30:05 No.2638897 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638894
Yea I understand you need the extra lens in the converter. I still use the Minolta and those lenses so I'm not gunna sell them just thought it would be super handy if I can use them for both instead of buying practically the same lenses all over again cuz they're all I really need. Cover basically everything except a 35 and 200-beyond for space pics

Thanks for the replies guys

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 61MNSZ5jpvL._SL1320_.jpg, 77KiB, 1320x1320

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 15:10:47 No.2638911 Report

Quoted By:

Oh wow. the LAEA3 adaptor is actually far cheaper in German Amazon than anywhere else in USA.

That's the first time I've ever seen this happen.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 11800887_691367831006686_2446543 (...).jpg, 67KiB, 1080x790

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 15:25:38 No.2638919 Report

Quoted By: >>2638952

About to get a Praktica for free(pic related). Anything I should look out for? Any lenses I should buy?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 15:30:57 No.2638923 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638876
don't bother. you'll lose infinity focus or it will look shit.
i suggest getting an olympus ep1 for $60 and md to m43 adapter. use the lens with that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:16:49 No.2638937 Report

Quoted By: >>2638939

The Black Rapid and a Joey. Its a bit expensive but I carry 2 extra batteries, memory cards and business cards and it is good to go.

On topic, I do a lot of people and scenery photography, so I have the issue of either lens swapping or taking a lot of time for shots. I'm looking into a decent mirrorless solution for my secondary camera. I could A: keep my canon ecosystem and buy an EOS-M and use that, keep my old 40D as the side camera when I get my 7D MK2, or look into something else.

(If I get a mirrorless solution, it would end up going to a huge Africa research trip, so that's the plus of a mirrorless solution).

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:20:06 No.2638939 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638937
Ah, this was to
>>2637129

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1279245130542.jpg, 33KiB, 310x317

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:28:21 No.2638944 Report

Quoted By:

Just bought an LAEA3 adaptor for 130 Euro ~ 143 dollars.

It's going to feel so good to have all that delicious Minolta glass with fast Phase detection autofocus + in body image stabilisation.

Thank you based Sony, thank you based technological progression.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:35:07 No.2638952 Report

Quoted By: >>2638958

>>2638919
>Anything I should look out for?
All you need to know.
https://youtu.be/ow4GAMUFHVE

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:41:16 No.2638958 Report

Quoted By: >>2638970

>>2638952
So I need to take acid while shooting?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:46:16 No.2638966 Report

Quoted By: >>2638980 >>2638985

Really liking the images by the Ricoh GR on fredmiranda.com. Are there any other small cameras that take similar high quality pictures that also come with a non-fixed lens? Looked at the RX100 photo thread and was less impressed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:49:56 No.2638970 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638958
No, only Pentax users get into acid.
https://youtu.be/0gWDewkkkAI

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 16:55:54 No.2638980 Report

Quoted By: >>2638985 >>2638995

>>2638966
The Sony alpha lineup, for instance. The A7R (II) are actually probably a class above the Ricoh GR.

Or just CaNikon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:00:43 No.2638985 Report

Quoted By: >>2638997 >>2639012 >>2639014

>>2638966
Panasonic LX100.
>>2638980
>small
don't kid yourself, A7 anything is not anywhere near portable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:08:21 No.2638995 Report

Quoted By: >>2639000 >>2639001 >>2639015 >>2639016

>>2638980
Tried a Sony A6000 at the local best buy and liked it a lot. It was small and focused fast. My only worry was lack of lens selection and that Sony hasn't made a new lens for it in a few years. Plus the lenses they do have are fairly slow. Not too many affordable 2.8 or faster lenses. But overall it looks like a good compromise. Was also looking at the Fuji XE-1 with kit lens for about $100 less. But the Fuji pictures are just missing something special that I'm seeing from the Ricoh GR thread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:09:27 No.2638997 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638985
>Panasonic LX100
That might be good too. Will take a look. Thanks!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:11:58 No.2639000 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638995
I'm pretty hyped about A7000 myself.

If it has the same sensor construction as RX100iv and A7Rii, then it's going to be able to use Minolta AF lens, Canon lens, Nikon lens, all with PDAF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:13:58 No.2639001 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638995
it's the wide depth of field mixed with the blue processing. Both can be reproduced with pretty much every other camera out there, but SOOC, the GR has a distinct look to it, yes. There isn't anything else out there that gives it to you without processing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:35:44 No.2639012 Report

Quoted By: >>2639018

>>2638985
>don't kid yourself, A7 anything is not anywhere near portable.
A hobbit could carry a small camera like that anywhere.

But well, feel free to get a smaller camera if you prefer to.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:37:28 No.2639014 Report

Quoted By: >>2639018

>>2638985
>don't kid yourself, A7 anything is not anywhere near portable.
What the fuck are you fucking talking about????

If a D4 and 70-200 is portable (it is. It 100% is) then an a7 is portable. How retarded are you?

Truth time: Have you ever actually held one?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:39:39 No.2639015 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638995
Wait for a7000.
Sigma 30 2.8 is cheap and sharp.
Sony 35 1.8 is a little expensive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:41:44 No.2639016 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638995
Xe1 is slow.
Fuji lenses are expensive.
If you can find one for $200, do it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:43:05 No.2639017 Report

Quoted By: >>2639019 >>2639119 >>2639122

Guys, am I being a hoarding faggot if I buy all these 4 lenses:
24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm.
?

I know most of you will recommend me to drop the 28mm, but let's say it's actually the cheapest of the bunch. What should I do?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20150803_024012.jpg, 1MiB, 1584x2816

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:43:33 No.2639018 Report

Quoted By: >>2639022 >>2639025 >>2639275

>>2639014
>>2639012
>is that an A7 or are you just happy to see me?
guys seriously, stop it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:43:51 No.2639019 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639017
yes, you are. Get a zoom, or the 24 and 50.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO voigt_s_vmcu_A7_SP_01.jpg, 146KiB, 665x444

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:45:47 No.2639022 Report

Quoted By: >>2639028 >>2639036

>>2639018
Looks like it's being carried by hand to me... seems like it fits the definition of portable pretty well... Also, you may not be aware, but it's an INTERCHANGEABLE lens camera, so you can put tiny lenses on it any time you like.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 11017544545_d088df15df_b.jpg, 361KiB, 1024x518

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:47:30 No.2639025 Report

Quoted By: >>2639036

>>2639018
>not anywhere near portable

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:49:50 No.2639028 Report

Quoted By: >>2639038

>>2639022
it's still bulging massively with the 35mm, which is the smallest available. full frame does no go well with small lenses.
A telescope can also be carried by hand.
It can't get into my pocket. It's a pain to get into my EDC bag. Not portable. I get by with it, but stop thinking it's small enough to be compared to compact cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:55:30 No.2639035 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638790
The differences are probably just the coating and the focusing ring

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:57:15 No.2639036 Report

Quoted By: >>2639040

>>2639025
>>2639022
When I think portable I don't think about putting it in a bag or carrying it around 24/7 with my hand. You guys are being picky, maybe he meant portable enough to be pocketable. You know, like a GR.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 17:58:27 No.2639038 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639028
If your definition of portable is something that fits in your pocket, you're going to claim that my backpack isn't portable? That my laptop isn't portable?

better go buy yourself a casio exilim and call it a day then. And maybe take the money you save and invest it in some freeweights. Just a suggestion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:02:07 No.2639040 Report

Quoted By: >>2639043 >>2639044

>>2639036
My Pentax K-3 is portable, with three additional lenses. This is why people buy bags and backpacks.
All this "mirrorless are more portable" bullshit is a scam.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:07:20 No.2639043 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639040
By that standard any camera, sans large format, is portable. I can fit a hassy 500m and 4 lenses for it and 3 backs into a bag. Bam, portable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:07:45 No.2639044 Report

Quoted By: >>2639045

>>2639040
Pentax please go. Mirrorless is the future.

The GR alone is more popular than the entire Pantax lineup combined.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:08:25 No.2639045 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639044
HA

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:19:55 No.2639058 Report

Quoted By: >>2639095 >>2639111

Question:
I am mostly shooting wildlife (birds) and technical sports. I'll need new lens but I can only afford one from the budget bin.
Which would be better, Sigma 150-500/4-5.6 (or 140-400), or Tamron 70-200/2.8 plus a 1.4x TC or 2x TC if I can find one. Former is cheaper, but the other is Tamron. I am baffled, what do you think /p/? Which one would you choose and why?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:37:04 No.2639072 Report

Quoted By: >>2639076 >>2639077 >>2639080 >>2639083

A 50mm f/1.4 lens costs 90 dollars
A 50mm f/1.2 lens costs 400 dollars

Would you say the upgrade from f/1.4 to f/1.2 worth the increased price?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:39:36 No.2639076 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639072
no

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:40:27 No.2639077 Report

Quoted By: >>2639079

>>2639072
Yes if you really need the additional light

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:41:40 No.2639079 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639077
>the additional light
Laughter

You might want to do some math there, and then google T Stops.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:42:49 No.2639080 Report

Quoted By: >>2639084

>>2639072
you often pay for better build quality and higher image quality as well. in the case of old lenses, it's just a premium for the rarer smaller number.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:49:09 No.2639083 Report

Quoted By: >>2639084

>>2639072
The bigger aperture alone isn't worth it.

But if the f/1.2 also performs better it might be worth it.
So it really depends on the exact models.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 18:51:16 No.2639084 Report

Quoted By: >>2639097

>>2639080
>>2639083
It's an old Minolta manual lens. So I'm suspecting the build quality to be the same.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:02:53 No.2639095 Report

Quoted By: >>2639103

>>2639058
sigma 70-200 2.8 with a 2x extender

just keep in mind the extenders limit the aperture to 5.6. but you'll get better image quality for cheaper, not to mention a normal tele when you dont need the extra distance.

sigma is worth the extra price over tamron. i have the tamron 17-70 and theres no question that the build quality is much worse than my sigma 70-200

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:03:52 No.2639097 Report

Quoted By: >>2639105

>>2639084
But I doubt the optical quality will be the same.

Faster lenses generally have more elements to get decent results wide open.
But then Canon proves the opposite can be true as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:08:13 No.2639103 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639095
another note. almost every situation, the shorter focal length distance difference in zooms (say a 70-200 to a 28-200), the 70-200 will have better pictures.

and constant apertures are much better than dealing with 2.8-4 apertures, even if its just a constant 4. its just a pain in the ass to deal with.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:08:44 No.2639105 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639097
Those extra lenses aren't really for getting better optical quality, they're for trying to correct the issues that crop up when you increase the max aperture more. Vignetting, aberrations, etc. You don't buy an f/1.2 lens for better image quality, you buy an f/1.2 lens for DIFFERENT image quality, that's usually worse, TECHNICALLY, but unique.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:15:06 No.2639110 Report

Quoted By: >>2639127

What are decent rivals to the sony a5100? I'm looking for a camera in the same budget range ($600) but doesnt have to be mirrorless. All online reviews I can find on this product seem to be pretty good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:15:47 No.2639111 Report

Quoted By: >>2639114

>>2639058
Using 2X teleconverters hardly ever gives you better result than just cropping.

A lens needs to be incredibly sharp in the center to benefit from a 2X.

Tamron makes a new 'VC' version of the 70-200/2.8 that is very sharp.
But I assume you are talking about the older non-VC version, which is still alright but I wouldn't use it with a 2X TC, only with a 1.4X TC and probably only stopped down.

You'll have to read reviews but my guess is the Sigma will be sharper at 500mm than the Tamron with TC and additional cropping to 500mm equivalent.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:18:10 No.2639114 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639111
>Using 2X teleconverters hardly ever gives you better result than just cropping.

Meant to say: better results than a 1.4X TC plus additional cropping.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:20:21 No.2639116 Report

Quoted By: >>2639123 >>2639129

Compact or lightweight apsc sensor available with 18-200ish zoom lens for around 600usd for a family?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:21:45 No.2639119 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639017
i have all except 28mm because they're usually soft on the edges.
50mm is probably cheaper because they're really plentiful.
i'm talking about vintage lenses.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4205988566_6fe04c5208_m.jpg, 28KiB, 240x166

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:23:51 No.2639121 Report

Quoted By: >>2639124 >>2639128 >>2639130 >>2639133

I want a smallish good point and shoot film camera under 200. What are my options? I want to have this thing on me always in my pocket when I go out so portability is a key.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:23:52 No.2639122 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639017
If you want to collect then do it. if not, drop the 28mm.
I currently hoard too; 17mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 55mm, 70mm, 135mm

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:23:59 No.2639123 Report

Quoted By: >>2639126

>>2639116
Don't get a superzoom.
They are without exception utter shit.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 3-26-2015.jpg, 119KiB, 1024x576

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:25:22 No.2639124 Report

Quoted By: >>2639128

>>2639121
I carry a konica pop, but its on the larger side. I love it tbh.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:25:56 No.2639126 Report

Quoted By: >>2639130 >>2639185 >>2639191

>>2639123
Yeah I'm aware of that, but for a family with 2 kids to carry around more than 1 lens is an issue.

I'd love for them to have a 70-200 + 18-35mm combo, but the price goes up and so does the weight.

Then again they would survive with a 18-50mm only.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:26:20 No.2639127 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639110
coolpix a

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:26:43 No.2639128 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639121
>>2639124
Was thinking along the lines of like a Ricoh GR

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:27:40 No.2639129 Report

Quoted By: >>2639138

>>2639116
Nikon D3200 body only and Tamron 18-270mm travel zoom lens or same body with Nikon 18-200mm DX lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:27:47 No.2639130 Report

Quoted By: >>2639138

>>2639121
use your phone. Image quality will be better.

>>2639126
No matter how small your camera is, a zuper-zoom lens on the front is going to blow it back up to the size of a small telescope.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:28:49 No.2639133 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639121
the Olympus XA (+ the whole XA series) is a rangefinder, but definitely compact and great to use

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 19:32:00 No.2639138 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639129
Yeah this seems reasonable.

Thanks.

>>2639130
True that, but it's a family we are talking about, the kids will be running around long distances so having the huge range available won't have them miss a shot because they are in the middle of changing lens.

The main reason is for it to be a travel camera. Lens upgrade can be dealt with later.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:14:28 No.2639185 Report

Quoted By: >>2639199

>>2639126
>giving kids $1000 lens
it's like you like to burn money.
a6000 + kit lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:22:09 No.2639191 Report

Quoted By: >>2639195

>>2639126
A fast prime is way more useful than a telephoto lens.

So many family photos are taking in low light.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:24:56 No.2639195 Report

Quoted By: >>2639218

>>2639191
>A fast prime is way more useful than a telephoto lens for the photos that I take, in the exact way that I take them. Your priorities and goals don't matter. You are wrong, unless you are literally me. I can't even figure out why they make zoom lenses. Clearly it's a mistake in manufacturing. I expect them to correct the error any day now

Translated by Bing!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:28:06 No.2639199 Report

Quoted By: >>2639200

>>2639185
No no, that's not what i meant. The kids will never hold that shit.

It's making sure you don't miss the moments.

I see the a6000 mentioned a lot in this thread.

But holy shit the lenses cost more than the god damn body.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:29:49 No.2639200 Report

Quoted By: >>2639204

>>2639199
Lenses usually cost more than the body.
Unless you go for the cheapo kit lenses and allround travel zooms. They are not press and art quality but perfectly usable for family stuff.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:32:50 No.2639204 Report

Quoted By: >>2639207 >>2639214

>>2639200
Well yes, but none of the 18-200~ lenses are below 600usd here.

I'm not located in america btw.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:33:41 No.2639207 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639204
Buy used you moron.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:41:35 No.2639214 Report

Quoted By: >>2639224

>>2639204
for e mount, there's 2 version of 18-200, one from sony and one from tampon.
they're both crap. if you really want a good zoom you have to go for the 16-70 f4.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:48:26 No.2639218 Report

Quoted By: >>2639224

>>2639195
They make superzooms because normals think "moar zooms = better".

But go ahead, buy that shit lens I don't care.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:58:01 No.2639224 Report

Quoted By: >>2639229 >>2639238

>>2639214
>>2639218
Goddamn you idiots, it is for a family to make photos of kids doing kid things. They don't need "good" lens, they don't even know what they are or how to use them. They need a simple camera with Auto mode and a lens with good zoom range.
This is a dirty job so swallow your pride, they need a good suggestion on the cheap crap side.
Any cheap entry level DSLR and the 18-105/135/200 offered with them will be more than enough.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 20:59:42 No.2639229 Report

Quoted By: >>2639234

>>2639224
If I could shake your hand, I would. thank you for being here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:15:38 No.2639234 Report

Quoted By: >>2639248

>>2639229
Okay, I got some more suggestions.
Canon 1100D with 18-55 IS lens kit
Same body with 18-135 IS kit
Nikon D3200 with 18-55 VR kit
Same body with 18-105 VR kit

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:20:33 No.2639238 Report

Quoted By: >>2639241

>>2639224
why are you mad like a faggot?
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CPLPO4Y/

now GTFO.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:23:20 No.2639241 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639238
Simply disgusting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:28:13 No.2639248 Report

Quoted By: >>2639253

>>2639234
>2015
>buying canun
>buying dslr

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:30:29 No.2639253 Report

Quoted By: >>2639254

>>2639248
>2015
>still believing marketing propaganda

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:33:35 No.2639254 Report

Quoted By: >>2639258 >>2639283

>>2639253
What?

Need to shoot photos? Nikon/Sony/Fuji is better
Need to shoot video? Sony is better
Need a small but great kit? Sony/Fuji is better
Need a budget kit? Pentax is better

Canon is better at one thing, and one thing only: Long telephoto lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 21:37:33 No.2639258 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639254
>Canon is better at one thing, and one thing only: Long telephoto lenses.
Pentax is releasing the new F DA line. Things are changing and not in Canons favor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:05:38 No.2639275 Report

Quoted By: >>2639277

>>2639018
>using the shit kit for the A7
Why?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:08:05 No.2639277 Report

Quoted By: >>2639280 >>2639523

>>2639275
Because not having enough money to buy better lenses after going fool frame. That is the usual cause.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:10:40 No.2639280 Report

Quoted By: >>2639523

>>2639277
Ok I have lurked this board for a bit, and besides the clear non American posting here, what the fuck is with this 'fool frame' meme. I mean are you serious, or fucking trolling, because your shitposting is a cancer (and yes I am taking the bait).

Also, what's wrong with the A7 kit lens anyway, and go back to South America or whatever shithole you came from.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:14:06 No.2639283 Report

Quoted By: >>2639284 >>2639285 >>2639524

>>2639254
>need to shoot video? sony is better

canon is still king in this regard. c100-500, 5Dmkii and iii, 70D are far better for video than anything sony has out.

Canon has the best ergonomics and usability by a large margin as well. But yeah, their sensor game has been shit for the past 5 years and so photo quality has stagnated

Canon employee btw

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:15:57 No.2639284 Report

Quoted By: >>2639675

>>2639283
Untrue. Sony is now starting to use a better codec which puts Canon to shame.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:16:12 No.2639285 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639283
The fact that for budget film shooting, the 5dmk2 is the current king, because everyone is dumping them (to buy mk3s), it might kill sales of the 60D which is hilarious.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Aug 2015 22:52:17 No.2639315 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638790
It is the year of manufacturing, the one in the right is from the 80's and the other is from the 90's.

Digipleb

Digipleb Sun 02 Aug 2015 23:00:02 No.2639328 Report

Quoted By: >>2639478

Hi, I want to try film, but still use my alpha minolta lenses. Does some one knows a good minolta analog camera?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO nikon_sb500.jpg, 49KiB, 700x550

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 00:04:25 No.2639374 Report

Quoted By:

How does Nikon SB-500 perform as CLS commander or would a Debao SU-800 be better?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 00:18:54 No.2639383 Report

Quoted By: >>2639398

Gear thread, film edition. Fed 3a: good or wack? Already shooting a Fed 2 and a Zorki 1, have m39 lenses. Fuckin' love both.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 00:50:17 No.2639398 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639383
So what? You're going to buy it no matter what we say.
Generally speaking russian cameras often had timing problems, so having more is always better.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1.jpg, 88KiB, 432x378

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 03:48:11 No.2639475 Report

Quoted By: >>2639479 >>2639481

Man, these old 35mm Minolta lens must be good as hell.

They kept a high value despite being so old. I'm a bit hesitant about dropping 350 dollars on an old manual lens though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:03:03 No.2639478 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639328
put old lenses on mirrorless camera.
shoot raw.
edit raw with vsco.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:04:37 No.2639479 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639475
anything that is not 50mm and below f2.8 is expensive.
you could try the 35mm f2.8. pretty sharp.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:11:02 No.2639481 Report

Quoted By: >>2639497

>>2639475
They autofocus on the Sony A7 with the LAEA4. Really fucking fast.

That's why.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:16:14 No.2639487 Report

Quoted By:

Does the old Minolta Autofocus lens have hard stops on the Focus ring, or do they spin infinitely?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PENTAX.jpg, 293KiB, 2259x1094

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:17:25 No.2639488 Report

Quoted By: >>2639540

It's time to replace my 10 year old camera and even older lenses. I need alternatives to consider for the items in my shitting list.

K3 II

16-85 for hiking and general amazing WR things

Rokinon/Samyang 24 3.5 tilt shit for shitting and tilting

Sigma 35mm 1.4 art for low light and making the biggest prints

Tamron 70-200 2.8 for portraits, objects, distant landscapes, and other 70-200 2.8 needs. You don't just not buy one.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1.jpg, 41KiB, 223x372

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:30:59 No.2639497 Report

Quoted By: >>2639500

>>2639481
Do you think there is something wrong with this lens then?

It's f/1.8 with autofocus, yet it seems suspiciously cheap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 04:46:50 No.2639500 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639497
It's only for aps-c sized sensors. It doesn't work on full frame film or A7 series.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 05:39:13 No.2639523 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639280
It's a shit lens, you'd be better off buying a prime in your preferred focal length or saving up to buy a decent lens like the 24-70 f4. If you're buying into full frame but you're too poor to afford the lenses, you're no prioritizing properly. Also, idk about this anon >>2639277, but unless SoCal is South America, I don't think I'm not American.
Lastly,
>not knowing the fool frame meme
Lurk moar kiddo, if you think it's shitposting you've not been here long enough.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 05:43:16 No.2639524 Report

Quoted By: >>2639675

>>2639283
>canon is still king in this regard
No, no it's not. There are far better options at the equivalent price points for each of those cameras. Canon video has always been average, the codec is average, the bitrates are barely sufficient, and the dynamic range suffers compared to sony sensor video. The only thing Canon has going for it is the sooc color and the ergonomics of the C series for run and gun shooting as well as quick narrative and doc. Other than that, unless you've a raging hard on for Canon, there's no reason to give them your shekels for video.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1.png, 24KiB, 538x436

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 06:31:20 No.2639534 Report

Quoted By: >>2642644

Is there something particularly special about the 28mm Focal Length?

It seems like they are always the most cost effective Focal Length in terms of bang for the buck.
The old Minolta 28mm AF lens was very cheap compared to their 35mm and 24mm.
The new E-mount 28mm seems to be cheap compared to the 35mm lens as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 06:49:13 No.2639540 Report

Quoted By: >>2639709

>>2639488
Consider the Sigma version of the 70-200/2.8
Better build quality and the optical stabilization is better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 07:44:46 No.2639573 Report

Quoted By:

>>2637174
Get a canon s120
or sony a5100

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 11:05:33 No.2639675 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639284
>>2639524
if you like a shit ton of moire and dull colors, the sharpness and dr given by sony sensors could be worth it, I guess.

Sony is better on a bare technical sharpness level, but it still feels like shit holding and operating a sony camera. when people bitch about that with photography, its 10x more important with video.

Canon needs to step up their game but yeah, no, video still reigns with them for the points mentioned.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 12:31:10 No.2639709 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639540
neither Pentax version include stabilization because the bodies all have ibis

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Aug 2015 13:11:55 No.2639718 Report

Quoted By:

EM-10 or EPL-7?
Is there any difference besides one having EVF and one having a flippy-downy screen? Are the extra buttons and dial on the EM10 all that useful?

http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-14-42mm/dp/B00HPQ0A16/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1438604202&sr=8-1&keywords=olympus+omd

http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-14-42mm/dp/B00MCWSZ88/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1438604543&sr=8-2&keywords=olympus+epl

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Aug 2015 15:30:51 No.2640420 Report

Quoted By:

>>2638702
Any answers to this plz?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Aug 2015 07:27:52 No.2642644 Report

Quoted By:

>>2639534
Yeah, it's a hateful focal length, that's what. Not wide enough to be interesting, not 35 enough to be awesome. It's the bastard child of wides, and there is seldom an actual "good" 28mm (like the one you're talking about).

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Gear Thread