/p/ - Photography » Thread #2668141

[315 / 28 / ?]

77KiB, 650x488, 188228-photography-tattoos.jpg

STUPID QUESTIONS THREAD

Anonymous Sun 13 Sep 2015 23:45:14 No.2668141 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>2668142 >>2672096

New stupid questions thread. Last one is at bump limit: >>2654362

I'll start...

I picked up a Nikon D7100 and a 50mm 1.8 prime lens recently. What settings should I use if I want everything in the frame in focus?

Or rather, what's the best way to get everything in the frame in focus?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Sep 2015 23:50:22 No.2668142 Report

Quoted By: >>2668228

>>2668141
A very small aperture, and a tripod.

Look up "hyperfocal distance"

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Sep 2015 23:51:08 No.2668143 Report

Quoted By: >>2668228

set a smaller aperture

f1.8 is shallow depth of field
put it up to f8 or higher to get everything in focus but make sure the iso and shutter speed compensate a smaller aperture for the correct light exposure

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 00:17:51 No.2668148 Report

Quoted By: >>2670539 >>2670820

I have a copy of Photoshop CS 5.1. The Adobe RAW won't handle raw files from my new Canon 7D mk II. Are there stand-alone raw file editors not from Adobe which will handle them then open up in PS 5.1?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 04:39:26 No.2668225 Report

Quoted By:

what should i get next? i have a Sony DSC rx100 that i use for my hobby photography, most of my shoots are based on close ups, i´m very interested in textures and shades, i want to get a DSLR because of the manual option because the DSC really fucks up the metering and focus and i want to pplay with more settings for futher texture capture

i must mention i might go to the lowest price possibleand that ipm rather neww to the world of photography but i know the basics and most of the terms

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 04:45:10 No.2668228 Report

Quoted By: >>2668240

>>2668142
>>2668143
So in low light situations, it's just not going to be possible without taking a long exposure?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 05:13:00 No.2668240 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668228
With a 75mm equivalent, at f/1.8, hand held? No, you won't be able to do that. You'll need to be stopped down to like f/11 and focused 30 feet away.

The tripod will let you do it in any light, with a long enough exposure. For photos with everything in focus, you want a very wide lens. 15mm-25mm for instance.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tumblr_numsgixphA1qghzg0o1_1280.jpg, 81KiB, 677x853

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 07:41:12 No.2668273 Report

Quoted By: >>2668274 >>2671125

I do a question about Lightroom taken from the previous thread:

I love the software and all, but I'm not fond of its whole library management / importing workflow.
What would be the simplest way for me to just take a single raw file, open it up in LR, tweak it, then export it as if I were using Photoshop to open and work on single files for example?

Some anons mentionned using Camera Raw, is it really equivalent in terms of capabilities and/or usage?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 08:13:20 No.2668274 Report

Quoted By: >>2668275

>>2668273

It's the exact same thing.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tumblr_nucsfuq13c1qghzg0o1_1280.jpg, 639KiB, 1280x1280

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 08:16:27 No.2668275 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668274
Interesting. I'll have to try. Many thanks!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Sep 2015 23:53:31 No.2668721 Report

Quoted By: >>2668730 >>2668773 >>2668775

How do I make my pictures have that bokeh effect?

None of the guides/tutorials ever seem to go into full detail as to what to do, other than having a prime lens with a low max aperture is ideal and it's best when done in Manual or Aperture mode with your subject in front of a good light source.

Other than that they don't really do into much else. Is metering involved in the process? Is it mostly playing with the focus ring? Also how do I get the foreground blurry while having the background in focus?

Thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 00:09:11 No.2668730 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668721
Google depth of field

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO dof_lensdiagram.png, 5KiB, 475x150

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 01:30:29 No.2668773 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668721
Eeeh you need the very basic tutorials.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

To put it easy:

- bokeh shape (balls) is determined by the shape of the aperture

- bigger circle = more space for the light to go in = the light goes all weird in most directions except the part where you focused the lens. Bigger circle = faster lens, so that's why aperture has to do with it.

- LESS depth of field means MORE borkehylicious images.

- General rules:
Closer to the subject: less DOF.
Faster aperture: less DOF
Longer lens: less DOF
Smaller sensor: less DOF

The opposite is true. Longer lenses usually have a more creamy bokeh. Wide angles have bad, outlined and busy bokeh. Medium format and large format film has exceptionally pleasing and special rendition of out of focus areas.

- While bokeh helps hide distracting elements, many of the best pictures in the world have a very extensive depth of field and the photographer worked his ass off to align all the composition elements to perfection. That's what you need to strive for, not borkheyballs.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO dof_lensdiagram.png, 5KiB, 475x150

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 01:32:31 No.2668775 Report

Quoted By: >>2668790

>>2668721
Eeeh you need the very basic tutorials.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

To put it easy:

- bokeh shape (balls) is determined by the shape of the aperture

- bigger circle = more space for the light to go in = the light goes all weird in most directions except the part where you focused the lens. Bigger circle = faster lens, so that's why aperture has to do with it.

- LESS depth of field means MORE borkehylicious images.

- General rules:
Closer to the subject: less DOF.
Faster aperture: less DOF
Longer lens: less DOF
Bigger sensor: less (perceived! the lens is still projecting the same image) DOF

The opposite is true. Longer lenses usually have a more creamy bokeh. Wide angles have bad, outlined and busy bokeh. Medium format and large format film has exceptionally pleasing and special rendition of out of focus areas.

- While bokeh helps hide distracting elements, many of the best pictures in the world have a very extensive depth of field and the photographer worked his ass off to align all the composition elements to perfection. That's what you need to strive for, not borkheyballs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 01:41:49 No.2668785 Report

Quoted By: >>2668794 >>2668795 >>2672374

I've got 2 lens questions and I'm really new to this.

I have a Nikon D3200

1. What kind of lens should I get if I want to take pictures of close up things? Like bugs and details of mold.

2. I've been reading around that a 55-300mm lens with a f/5.6 is bad. Why and what f/- is good? I got one for the price difference but a lot of articles say a f/5.6 is bad but won't say why.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 01:51:47 No.2668790 Report

Quoted By: >>2668791 >>2668792

>>2668775
*cringe*

Bokeh refers to the quality of the out of focus areas, not the out of focus areas themselves, like how color is a quality of paint.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 01:54:24 No.2668791 Report

Quoted By: >>2668799

>>2668790
And?
I mean if you're asking "how to get bokeh" I guess you're completely oblivious to the concept of depth of field.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 01:55:56 No.2668792 Report

Quoted By: >>2668793

>>2668790
Oh, also, creaminess is a function of both the background and the specific lens formula used, not focal length. Short teles aren't preferred portrait lenses because of the out of focus areas, they're preferred for the perspective distortion that they give which is flattering to many facial structures (but not fatter/larger faces).

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 02:00:59 No.2668793 Report

Quoted By: >>2668800

>>2668792
I know that.
>not focal length
Not true. Wider angles have, by design, troubles creating smooth bokeh. I don't know the scientific reasons, but a superwide (28mm and wider) will never have a really creamy bokeh.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 02:04:18 No.2668794 Report

Quoted By: >>2668804

>>2668785
1) A macro lens
2) f/5.6 isn't inherently BAD, but it is relatively small, letting in much less light than a lens at f/1.8 or even f/4. I don't know anything about that specific lens, but it's possible the lens is low quality for other reasons, such as distortion or softness.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 02:05:03 No.2668795 Report

Quoted By: >>2668804

>>2668785
Something with macro in the name, or the cheaper way will be to get a 50mm 1.8 and use it with a reversing ring.

Another decent path is getting a telephoto lens (longer focal length than around 65mm, but you'll want more over 100mm) and extension tubes.

That lens isn't shitty because of the aperture (the f number), it's shitty because of how wide the zoom range is. The longer the zoom range, the more compromises that have to be made in the design. You don't want a lens that has a zoom range of over around 150mm from smallest to biggest.

Generally faster lenses (x in f/x being smaller) are better, but also a lot more expensive. Check out the price of a 50mm f/1.2 versus that of a 50mm f/1.8 (or a 24-70mm f/4 versus the f/2.8 version). Here, you basically get the best you can afford.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 02:07:44 No.2668799 Report

Quoted By: >>2668990

>>2668791
>implying I wasn't the one who posted to Google dof and was the one asking how to get it

And? And if you can't get your facts straight, keep your mouth shut. There's already enough ignorance floating around that it's better if you don't add to it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 02:12:55 No.2668800 Report

Quoted By: >>2668990

>>2668793
Go read about depth of field. Wide angles have no more or less problems with creating out of focus areas than any other group of focal lengths. The only difference is that wide angles generally have smaller apertures and require longer distances to get entirely out of focus.

Again, you don't know this topic, go away.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 02:53:36 No.2668804 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668794
Well that explains why it's a little rough at night or on cloudy days

>>2668795
I'll definitely give the reversing ring a shot before I drop $400-$700 on a lens. Thanks for the bonus lesson on zoom range. (I thought it was a good thing having such a wide range when I bought it...)

Thanks guys

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_1373.jpg, 133KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 04:44:43 No.2668846 Report

Quoted By: >>2668848

can anti-glare coating be repaired?

>>2666884

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 04:53:41 No.2668848 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668846
Not really. Not cost effectively. If it's under warranty it might be worth while to send it in and see, but probably not.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 05:24:02 No.2668858 Report

Quoted By: >>2668861 >>2670536

Please help!
What is the difference of 1080 60p and 1080 60i ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 05:29:47 No.2668861 Report

Quoted By: >>2668864 >>2670536

>>2668858
What is Google.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2413044,00.asp

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 05:43:10 No.2668864 Report

Quoted By: >>2668869

>>2668861
what is "New stupid questions thread."

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 06:01:44 No.2668869 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668864
What is, takes longer to get into p, write question, solve captcha, than to type ridiculously simple request into Google. It's not even subjective, or something that people will have differing opinions on like a lot of other questions here. It is a simple fact, found in 2 seconds flat.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 06:44:12 No.2668874 Report

Quoted By: >>2668884 >>2668949 >>2670511

Is there really any good reason for an amateur to spend 4x more on a f/1.7 prime instead of f/2.8? When the f/2.8 is about sharp as it gets.

Sigma 30mm f/2.8 EX DN vs Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17mm f/1.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 07:18:19 No.2668884 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668874
>Sigma 30mm f/2.8 EX DN vs Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17mm f/1.8
Those are massively different lenses. 17mm versus 30 look nothing alike no matter the aperture. Further, wide angle lenses are almost as a rule more expensive than normals (if you don't know the terms "wide angle", "normal", and "telephoto" then look them up) because they generally require a lot more glass.

Anyway, you spend money on a faster lens (larger maximum aperture/smaller number under the "f/"), because you want to be able to shoot faster shutter speeds/lower ISO and/or you want a much thinner depth of field.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 10:24:28 No.2668939 Report

Quoted By: >>2670533

What are some good "picture of the week" type blogs that I can follow in my RSS reader for inspiration and to analyse for stuff like composition?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 10:40:04 No.2668949 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668874
people get the 1.8 for the softness.
you should get the sigma if you're on e mount and the 24mm 2.8 is supposedly to be announced soon.

get the olympus instead.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 11:26:02 No.2668966 Report

Quoted By: >>2668969 >>2668989

I need a compact interchangeable lens camera that performs well in low light and does decent video, under 1k. Any help? I work late so any photography i can do is low light on weekdays and then just trips with the wife on weekends.
Compact just so im not put off and actually carry it around with me

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 11:29:02 No.2668969 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668966
oh and it has to be quiet as i like to take upskirts and perv shots on the bus / train

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:09:54 No.2668979 Report

Quoted By: >>2670532

Can i do good photos with a standart smartphones ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:21:09 No.2668983 Report

Quoted By:

I've seen it on olympus cameras, but is there a Canon alternative to view the image as its being exposed during long exposures? Like previews?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:41:33 No.2668989 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668966
Sony A6000.

It's not the compact-est but it is thin enough and has a built in EVF, which you will need for night photography (you can stare at the back screen but it's kinda visible at night and kinda fucks with your vision.)

And the sensor is good enough for low light photography, I don't think you'll find better in the APS-C scope of things.

Then you want a fast and compact lens. Maybe the Sigma 30mm 2.8

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4203068617_ScDRPmV-O.jpg, 298KiB, 1500x1000

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:46:55 No.2668990 Report

Quoted By: >>2668992 >>2668994 >>2668995

>>2668800
>>2668799
Are you perhaps only pretending to be retarded?
Show me a wide angle (28mm or wider) that can create good bokeh. Go ahead.

protip: they can't, and if they can, they're a super expensive oddball. I think it has to do with the extreme angle at which light enters the lens on a wide angle, but anyways the final effect is that all wide angles have a very busy (outlining, messy, swirly in a bad way) and not pleasing bokeh.

Pic related, this is a sample from Canon's new 11-24mm zoom, look how disgusting is the OOF area, even in a simple scenario, it just cannot handle it. As I said, I'm not a lens technician so I don't know the exact reasons behind this, but my guess goes to the angle of light.

You should know this, stop calling people ignorant when they're trying to educate you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:54:12 No.2668992 Report

Quoted By: >>2668996

>>2668990
>protip: they can't, but they might actually, so I'm gonna put this disclaimer here

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:56:01 No.2668993 Report

Quoted By:

guys please take your shitposting elsewhere.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 12:59:24 No.2668994 Report

Quoted By: >>2668996

>>2668990
If you admit to not knowing what you're talking about, then how can you "educate" anyone?

At least the other Anon has an explanation. You're just guessing and saying you're guessing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 13:08:29 No.2668995 Report

Quoted By: >>2668996

>>2668990
>but anyways the final effect is that all wide angles have a very busy (outlining, messy, swirly in a bad way)

You're showing how little you know with this, high contrast backgrounds look terrible all of the time in OOF. Getting pleasant looking OOF is the job of the photographer and primarily accomplished through selecting what to throw out of focus and what not to. If you want examples, look up how say the Canon 85mm L (which has some of the most widely considered "good" bokeh of any modern lens) renders sunlight coming through pine trees.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 825605440_8SEuo-O.jpg, 437KiB, 1500x1000

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 13:13:12 No.2668996 Report

Quoted By: >>2669006 >>2669488

>>2668995
>>2668994
>>2668992
Holy shit you guys are retarded.
Nothing I said is wrong and can be backed by substantial facts.

This is not the thread for it, but honestly stop acting retarded and learn what you're talking about for the love of god.

>renders sunlight coming through pine trees.
1.2 lenses have other troubles with borkeh because of their extreme designs.
Similar scene as the wide angle, through that 85mm lens. Happy?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO spock.png, 362KiB, 631x473

Anonymous Tue 15 Sep 2015 13:56:10 No.2669006 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668996

>Nothing I said is wrong and can be backed by substantial facts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 01:30:43 No.2669361 Report

Quoted By: >>2669401 >>2669465 >>2671044 >>2673391

How do I become a good photographer?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 03:05:49 No.2669401 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669361
Put a tremendous amount of effort into pointing your camera at good subjects, and don't ruin your photos with shit composition.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 04:36:02 No.2669452 Report

Quoted By: >>2669466 >>2669467 >>2669492

So I have a bunch of 52mm filters, except I'm selling the lenses that fits perfectly with these filters. Now I'm stuck with lenses that are 58, 67 and 77mm. So is it best to get a step down adapter or will that cause vignetting? Or what about getting 77mm filters and buying a step up filter?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 05:07:16 No.2669465 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669361
Go into a war zone and take pictures with your camera in auto.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 05:09:36 No.2669466 Report

Quoted By: >>2669492

>>2669452
Get 77mm filters and a step up ring. Step down filters are borne out of necessity, not convenience.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 05:13:09 No.2669467 Report

Quoted By: >>2669472 >>2669492

>>2669452
Watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

I would not recommend buying filters. Use the ones that fit your lenses. If they don't fit just get rid of them. You probably don't need them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 05:22:15 No.2669472 Report

Quoted By: >>2669492 >>2669493

>>2669467
I think neutral density and circular polarizers are both highly useful depending on the situation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 06:18:56 No.2669488 Report

Quoted By: >>2669490

>>2668996
Alright, this is the last time I'm going to play with you.

You still don't understand rate of falloff when it comes to focus and depth of field and how the focal length relates to that. You're looking at photos with a slow falloff that aren't entirely out of focus and comparing them to an image with portions fully out of focus. This is simply a matter of the distance relationship between the sensor plane, the focal point, the foreground, and background. It has literally nothing to do with anything else.

But for how a lens actually renders the out of focus areas, you've got to look at the actual lens formula/design family that was used for that particular lens. Do you even know why multiple lenses are used as a rule? You can achieve any focal length you want with a single piece of glass. Why spend all of that money putting together like an eleven element in six groups design?

In a word? Sharpness. See, different wavelengths of light bend at different rates. A single element lens will not be super sharp because the different colors will separate from each other. You have to throw in other lenses to pull all of those wavelengths back together. This affects how the lens renders color in general which, you guessed it, affects how it blends together the light rays in the out of focus areas as well.

Another reason is to correct for distortion because projecting a 3D image on a 2D plane is hard, and to flatten out the focal plane, but again, realize that we're talking about bending light, which means that there will be differences in how different wavelengths react which will in turn affect everything in or out of focus.

The quality of the bokeh is only related to the background that you've thrown out of focus and the lens design itself. You may notice less than ideal OOF in wide angles because their depth of field is so great and you rarely see anyone actively setting up a shot where OOF would be evident AND...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 06:26:02 No.2669490 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669488
[continued]
there are certain lens formula/families of lenses that tend to show up a lot more in wide angle than in normal or tele (and every combination thereof).

Everything else is just mucking about with the kinds of distances you need to achieve the look.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 06:31:52 No.2669492 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669452
Listen to
>>2669466
>>2669472
They know.
>>2669467
^is stupid.

Another, but possibly more annoying alternative is to go the square 100mm/4" filters. They're neat because they do away with having to get separate GNDs, but are much, much more annoying to use than the kind of filters that attach to the lens.

Vignetting isn't normally super bad unless you've got really cheap/super thick filters (and sometimes a stepdown ring will eliminate vignetting because you're not using light from the edges of the filter).

Anyway, definitely have at least a CPL (these usually give you around 3 stops of darkness, so you only really need a separate ND if you want to darken more than that), and possibly a decent quality variable ND that you can get on your lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 06:32:48 No.2669493 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669472
They are but you don't leave them on your camera all the time. The video is about UV filters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 06:40:17 No.2669499 Report

Quoted By: >>2669502

I want a portrait lens that give me that 3d pop out effect like my sigma 35 art lens give. I brought the 85mm 1.8 before the sigma but not to happy with it. Should I jump the gun and get the 85 1.2, sigma 85mm, something else bigger than the 85mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 06:42:16 No.2669502 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669499
Post examples.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1431360798459.jpg, 119KiB, 640x960

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 16:36:34 No.2669669 Report

Quoted By:

I'm looking for a digital compact everyday camera, just something to point and shoot without having to carry much around me.

Are there cheaper alternatives to the Rico GR, or should I just save up a little?
I'm currently on Canon and was thinking about a Canon M3, which would be equally expensive ..

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 17:45:21 No.2669703 Report

Quoted By:

do any of you guys make photo books using website? if so do you have any examples for me to see?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 18:39:58 No.2669718 Report

Quoted By: >>2669731

Hey /p/, /tv/ here.

i've decided I'm gonna get off my ass and make some movies, even if they are bad I need to learn by trying.

I need to pick out my first camera, i've already decided to learn on digital even though I like the 35mm look better for simplicities sake. Is there a guide or recommendation for a first camera to practice making shorts on?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 19:08:34 No.2669731 Report

Quoted By: >>2669740

>>2669718
And really sorry if this isn't /p/ related, my first time here and I don't know if this board is for cinematography too

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 19:19:22 No.2669740 Report

Quoted By: >>2669749

>>2669731
Nope, you're in the right place. What's your budget?

For the most part, the LEAST important part of a film is the camera it was shot on. Most important is subject, actors, writing, LIGHTING, sound, and then camera.

If you can swing it, get a stable tripod/shoulder rig, a Canon T3i, and some old manual focus lenses (inexpensive, and in many cases, better for filming than new stuff). Load Magic Lantern to your memory card, and learn to use it.

After a week or two of learning the camera, stop thinking about it, and start focusing on your light, and your subject.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 19:28:02 No.2669749 Report

Quoted By: >>2669750

>>2669740
$500 is the maximum i'm willing to spend

I know the camera isn't gonna make or break the movie, but i'd like a decent one to learn on. Thank you for the help.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 19:29:02 No.2669750 Report

Quoted By: >>2669758

>>2669749
Yeah, that should be plenty for a used T3i and a lens or two, with a shoulder mount or tripod. It'll at least get you started!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 19:39:49 No.2669758 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669750
Thank you very much!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1438722654882.jpg, 1023KiB, 2688x1520

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 22:55:18 No.2669836 Report

Quoted By: >>2669837 >>2669872

Hey guys.
I need help with understanding something.
I can change the F/ both on the lens and on the camera.
When should I do each? and what's the difference?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 23:05:17 No.2669837 Report

Quoted By: >>2669842

>>2669836
There's no difference. It's just to cater to both preferences.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 16 Sep 2015 23:15:26 No.2669842 Report

Quoted By: >>2669881

>>2669837
so what happen when my camera F is on 16 and my lens F is on 4?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 00:46:47 No.2669872 Report

Quoted By: >>2670031

>>2669836
If the control is available on the lens, then the control in the camera does nothing.

What is your setup in question?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 01:07:39 No.2669881 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669842
fiery death

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 01:29:53 No.2669887 Report

Quoted By: >>2669892

Hey guys what does it mean on like a compact 35-100mm equiv?

Do I want bigger numbers or smaller numbers? Equivalent to what?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 01:31:41 No.2669892 Report

Quoted By: >>2669896

>>2669887

The angle of view that the lens has is equivalent to a 35-100mm lens on a full frame camera.

Smaller numbers mean wider angle, longer number means narrower angle and higher magnification.

35-100mm means that it should cover 90% of your needs for photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 01:38:29 No.2669896 Report

Quoted By: >>2669898

>>2669892

That went way over my head but thank you for replying.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 01:42:21 No.2669898 Report

Quoted By: >>2669906 >>2669919

>>2669896
It's the level of zoom on your lens. A low number means zoomed out more. A high number means zoomed in more.

The "equivalent" thing is there because the sensor inside your compact camera is much smaller than on a "pro" camera. The size of the sensor in the camera determines the level of "zoomed in/out" that the lens can give you. It gets technical and mathematical, but they're saying that the lens on that camera gives you the same level of zoom as a 35mm-100mm zoom lens on a large sensored camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 01:49:49 No.2669906 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669898

Ohhh now I get it more now

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 02:05:13 No.2669919 Report

Quoted By: >>2669921 >>2669927

>>2669898

Wow I couldn't post for like 10 minutes, thanks ISP

But let me get this right, I'm assuming pro cameras have fixed zoom, like a 35 is stuck at 35mm, that's why if you want to zoom in you would get a 100mm

But compacts don't have lenses, so you use the zoom in/out to get your desired mm

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 02:09:56 No.2669921 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669919

Pro cameras have the option of interchangeable lenses. Some can zoom, some are fixed focal length.

There are also some "compacts" with fixed focal length lenses as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 02:13:51 No.2669924 Report

Quoted By: >>2669958

Can anyone tell me the purpose of getting a new DSLR body with the exception of very upper level work or full frame? I'm currently shooting with a D3300, and I can't really imagine having a need to go about 5fps for shots, or a shutter speed less than 1/4000, etc. I can see the need for new glass, but why would someone need a new body unless they were going FF or something?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Format-Sizes-Sundance-article2-1 (...).jpg, 251KiB, 1920x1297

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 02:16:19 No.2669927 Report

Quoted By: >>2669937

>>2669919
No, you can have zoom lenses for pro cameras too.

But the smaller the sensor is, the more "zoomed in" a certain focal length is.

So on a large sensor, such as "full frame", like something in a Canon 5D, Nikon D800, sony A7, a 35mm lens going to act like a 35mm lens. But if you have a smaller sensor (An example is an APS-C sized sensor, Like in the Canon 7D, Nikon D7000, or Sony a6000) it makes the lens seem more zoomed in. So the same 35mm lens, that looks like a 35mm lens on a 5D, will act like a 50mm lens when it's on an APS-C camera. it's more zoomed in, because the sensor is smaller.

Smaller than APS-C is Micro 4/3rds. That 35mm lens on a M4/3 camera will have the same zoom level as a 70mm lens (on a full frame sensor)

So you can take a zoom lens that goes from 24mm to 70mm, when attached to a full frame camera, and you can attach it to a M4/3 camera. the lens will still be 24-70, however, because the sensor is so much smaller, it will be more zoomed in, and it will ACT like a 48mm-140mm lens.

So when your compact camera says "35-100mm" it means it's probably ACTUALLY a lens with a measurement around 10-28mm, but the small sensor "zooms" it in to around 35mm-100mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 02:29:03 No.2669937 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669927

I can see why the other anon said it gets technical.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:07:25 No.2669953 Report

Quoted By: >>2669956

How do I get into photography?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:22:10 No.2669956 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669953
literally buy the first camera you see that is cheap af. Then shoot for a week, then see what you like or probably what you really hate then, do the same fucking thing for a month or two, get some god damn experience behind a lens. Then after all this LEARNING m8 do some research and find what you NEED.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:40:58 No.2669958 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669924
>I can see the need for new glass, but why would someone need a new body unless they were going FF or something?
You really don't need one, until your sensor becomes hopelessly outdated.
The end. Now you know why /p/ is stupid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:41:27 No.2669959 Report

Quoted By: >>2669960 >>2669964

Weird question but I have this camera that has the option to shoot in raw and JPG

But the raw's resolution isn't as big as JPG and it doesn't look like JPG (JPG looks sharper)

How come?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:44:48 No.2669960 Report

Quoted By: >>2669963

>>2669959
You may not be shooting in full-resolution RAW, and you may be sending your JPG's through some sort of in-camera processor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:52:26 No.2669963 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669960

Should I just shoot in JPG?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 03:52:42 No.2669964 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669959
Probably compression -- there are some cameras that have "raw" files that are compressed as an option. You're probably shooting in that and in basically uncompressed jpg.

As for the sharpening, that should be the case. RAW files are supposed to be flat. It's your post processing where you add sharpness/contrast/etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 07:20:50 No.2670031 Report

Quoted By: >>2670248

>>2669872
X-E2 with 18-55

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 16:07:57 No.2670182 Report

Quoted By: >>2670298

heres a stupid fucking question why the fuck does matt granger have a youtube channel for seafood?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 16:26:10 No.2670189 Report

Quoted By: >>2670219 >>2670521

okay, question here.

I want a prime lense for my nikon d5300. everywhere i look it's "50mm!!"

my question is, though.. everybody talking about 50mms, are they using DXs, thus making it 75mm(??) or are they using full frame? like what is that really good mm that people seem to enjoy, is it the 35mm it'd become with full frame or the 75mm it becomes with a dx?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 18:31:04 No.2670219 Report

Quoted By: >>2670222 >>2670371

>>2670189
>Hey guys, I'm going to go to the hardware store. i want to buy a tool. I went online and it seems like a lot of people are buying a Hex Key. there's this other guy who bought a ball peen hammer. What do you guys think I should buy?

The tools you buy should apply directly to your uses, and your needs. You should never buy things just to have them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 18:33:09 No.2670222 Report

Quoted By: >>2670225

>>2670219
But what if one day I need a ball peen hammer?

Isn't it better to have more options?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 18:36:38 No.2670224 Report

Quoted By: >>2670228

dumb question, do I need to worry about condensation getting inside my lens?
I was shooting out one night and my shitty kit lens kept fogging up and my tripod legs got all wet from condensation
I didn't dare use my good lens out of fear of possible condensation getting inside it
was this a rational fear?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 18:40:05 No.2670225 Report

Quoted By: >>2670373

>>2670222
If you don't know what lens you need, you don't need a lens. Take the money and save it. Or buy a train ticket to somewhere interesting to take photos. There is a huge variety of focal lengths available, and a large group of people who use each one, from 8mm to 800mm. You will not have a use for most of them, therefore, you are not encouraged to buy most of them.

Someone here saying "Man, I love my 8mm Rokinon!" shouldn't make you buy one, because your shooting style and goals may not have anything in common with an 8mm lens, for instance.

Conversely, I love my 400mm lens. But I would call you an idiot for buying one unless you knew ahead of time that you need it. It's a very specialized lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 18:42:25 No.2670228 Report

Quoted By: >>2670469

>>2670224
yes it's rational, but you don't really need to worry. Your lenses are designed to be used. If you're concerned about moisture, just store the lenses in a dry place when they're not in use. Toss some silica packets in your camera bag. Take reasonable precautions, but don't let it handicap you. Your equipment is much more tough than you think it is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 19:37:29 No.2670248 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670031
The 18-55 from Fuji has a ring that controls the aperture, but it isn't tied to the iris via any physical means. It's an electronic adjustment, therefore, changing the aperture on the body, or changing the aperture on the lens barrel, will have the same effect. The aperture ring on the lens will spin forever, because all it's doing is telling the camera "adjust the aperture by one click" every time you go past a click, rather than a lens with a "real" aperture ring, like the 23mm, where each click has a defined value.

I only have experience with the X-T1, but I wasn't aware you could change the aperture using any controls on the body itself?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1431151858669.gif, 1MiB, 245x184

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 21:16:46 No.2670287 Report

Quoted By: >>2670293 >>2671294

Dumb question but sorry I'm not from /p/, I might make my oown thread sometime later

I've been meaning to ask this for a while, so anyways a few months ago I got my first camera on impulse buy it was a Sony RX100 the first model, it was like 350 or something, anyways since I bought it months ago I haven't even used it, and someone on /p/ told me point on shoot cameras are bad, so now I want to sell it and get the Sony a5100

So the question is this, what's a good lens to get for it? I have no clue about lenses and I don't want to get the wrong lens

Also where do you even sell cameras?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 21:27:11 No.2670290 Report

Quoted By:

dumb question?

Where can I find some of the guides posted here?

I've been a little bored with my regular work shoots so I want to follow someones instruction for a bit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 21:32:46 No.2670293 Report

Quoted By: >>2670302

>>2670287
>and someone on /p/ told me point on shoot cameras are bad

Someone on /p/ is a moron.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 21:36:05 No.2670294 Report

Quoted By: >>2670529

Is this a good order for post processing

>Perspective correction if necessary
>Further refine white balance if necessary
>Overall Exposure, highlights, shadows, black, clarity, vibrance sliders;
>area Exposure, highlights, shadows, black, clarity, vibrance sliders
>Hue/Saturation/Luminance sliders
Photoshop touch-up if needed
>Crop, black and white conversion if needed

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 21:49:03 No.2670298 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670182

Photography tends to attract a lot of dabblers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 21:53:14 No.2670302 Report

Quoted By: >>2670306

>>2670293

So what lens should I get?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 22:05:22 No.2670306 Report

Quoted By: >>2670310 >>2670313

>>2670302
You should learn how to shoot with a point and shoot first.

A camera isn't going to make your photos good.

A good photographer makes good photos. It doesn't matter what kind of camera they use.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 22:15:26 No.2670310 Report

Quoted By: >>2670312 >>2670313

>>2670306

I just want to know what lens to get Anonymous.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 22:17:52 No.2670312 Report

Quoted By: >>2670323

>>2670310
Depends on what you are shooting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 22:20:23 No.2670313 Report

Quoted By: >>2670323 >>2670324

>>2670306
A point and shoot gives next to zero creative control over anything except composition. You can get a completely capable used DSLR for the price of a high quality point and shoot camera, and have tons more opportunities to control what goes into your photo.

>>2670310
Get the kit lens. It zooms from wide to short tele, and is good for most normal day to day things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 22:50:43 No.2670323 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670312
Uh everything I guess, what do you mean?

>>2670313
Cool thanks anon, do you know where I can sell my camera?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 22:50:50 No.2670324 Report

Quoted By: >>2670337

>>2670313
>A point and shoot gives next to zero creative control over anything except composition.
Plenty of point and shoots would like to have a word with you...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 23:27:31 No.2670337 Report

Quoted By: >>2670338

>>2670324
Like?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 17 Sep 2015 23:29:58 No.2670338 Report

Quoted By: >>2670367

>>2670337
Ricoh GR, Fuji X30, Lumix LX100 to name a few. All have manual controls. All are "point and shoot."

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 00:53:22 No.2670367 Report

Quoted By: >>2670372

>>2670338
"point and shoot" generally means no manual controls. My 1Dx is "point and shoot" technically.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 00:56:43 No.2670371 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670219

i get what you're saying, but i honestly don't know the difference between a hex key and a ball peen hammer and what their uses are, in what situations one is good and the other is bad or even how they affect what I am building(?) so that's why i ask.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 00:58:20 No.2670372 Report

Quoted By: >>2670379 >>2670389

>>2670367
I'm under the impression point and shoot means no interchangeable lenses.

RX100 is marketed as a point and shoot, no? But it has manual controls.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 01:00:27 No.2670373 Report

Quoted By: >>2670514

>>2670225

i again, see what you're saying here so how about this.

i like to take photos as i'm walking around the city. nature can be interesting to me, but it's not really a 'thing' for me as much as buildings, streets, lights, people etc. are.

so for such a job, what tools would i need? right now i just have a 14-140, which is.... convenient, i suppose. but i know that a prime would enable me to take photos when it's darker due to the light intake(?) and since i like doing that, i figured i'd get myself a prime, i just don't know which one to get.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 01:21:35 No.2670379 Report

Quoted By: >>2670383

>>2670372
Rx100 has manual controls?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 01:26:14 No.2670383 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670379
Yes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 01:58:46 No.2670389 Report

Quoted By: >>2670393

>>2670372
>I'm under the impression point and shoot means no interchangeable lenses.
No, that's "fixed lens"

Point and shoot means exactly that. There are no crazy settings, there are no crazy features, you don't need to learn anything, you just point it, and shoot it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 02:03:57 No.2670393 Report

Quoted By: >>2670395

>>2670389
>you don't need to learn anything, you just point it, and shoot it.
I mean you can say the same thing about DSLRs. What camera doesn't have an auto mode these days?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 02:04:56 No.2670395 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670393
Yes, but point and shoots ONLY have auto mode. All you can do is point them and shoot them. This is the point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 06:55:13 No.2670460 Report

Quoted By: >>2670524

Hey guys is shooting in raw + jpg slower than shooting in only raw or jpg?

Like does either option slow down how fast it can ready the next shot? And raw + jpg the slowest

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 07:35:54 No.2670469 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670228
Cool, thanks. Now to hope it isn't cloudy during the super moon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 09:38:09 No.2670511 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668874
Get the 1.8 but be sure to get it in black as the silver is made in a different factory to lower standards

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 10:04:15 No.2670514 Report

Quoted By: >>2670654

>>2670373
Put your zoom lens to 50mm and go around shooting it like that, then put it at 35mm, then put it at 24mm. See which one you are most comfortable with. I personally shoot all my shots at either 90mm or 35mm; 90mm for people and portraits and 35mm for scenery and places. I don't really like the 50mm equivalent as I find its not quite good enough at either end of the scale, same for 75mm. You should experiment with both and see what you think. Also definitely consider a 20-24mm equivalent as I really enjoy my 35mm

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 10:47:35 No.2670521 Report

Quoted By: >>2670564

>>2670189
50mm is always 50mm. Always! It's your sensor which makes a crop (or not).

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 10:50:44 No.2670524 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670460
The more work the slower the process. But which is slower depends on your cam. Raw means lot of writing. JPEG means lot of computing. Most cams can compute faster than write.
But in any way the slowest option have always to be, when the cam have to do both.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 10:59:35 No.2670529 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670294
sounds sane. though there are more steps you could do. like sharpening, noise etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 11:05:06 No.2670532 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668979
yes .. maybe not you, but yes

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 11:06:19 No.2670533 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668939
google for photography blogs

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 11:08:34 No.2670536 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668858
p=progressive
i=interlaced

then
>>2668861

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 11:14:06 No.2670539 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668148
as for linux I can recommend 'ufraw'. Doubt they made a win version, though.. maybe mac.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 13:20:22 No.2670559 Report

Quoted By: >>2670566

So what is the advantage of an optical viewfinder? I borrowed my friends OVF camera today and I am used to a EVF, so I missed out on a few shots purely because I'm used to the viewfinder showing me what the sensor is seeing...

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 13:40:42 No.2670564 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670521
If you're going to be pedantic, at least be useful. You know exactly what he means.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 13:43:36 No.2670566 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670559
All the dynamic range of your eye, faster, no feeling of staring at a TV, much better battery life.

EVF has a lot more features, there's not much argument there, but some people just prefer what they're used to.

If you've only shot (or primarily shoot) with an OVF, you don't really rely on the WYSIWYG EVF stuff, because you know what your camera is going to give you without having to see it. Much like people who only use film are much more aware of what their final negative will look like than people who shoot digital and then jump to film occasionally.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 13:59:34 No.2670584 Report

Quoted By:

How bad are RawTherapee and Darktable (Linux RAW editors) compared to Windows editors like Lightroom?

How to fix exposure in some particular area using RawTherapee or Darktable?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 15:08:26 No.2670622 Report

Quoted By: >>2670623 >>2670720

Should I shoot in raw or jpg?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 15:15:54 No.2670623 Report

Quoted By: >>2670649

>>2670622
Are you planning to edit your photos? Do you frequently miss your exposure by more than a stop? You should shoot raw.

Are you shooting for memories, or moments, and don't plan to do any medium/heavy edits? Do you expose well almost every time? jpg is fine.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 16:07:46 No.2670649 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670623
I don't know how to edit photos or what exposure is, I am taking photos for memories thoufh

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 16:25:33 No.2670654 Report

Quoted By: >>2670721 >>2670748

>>2670514

i considered doing that, but you can just do that? it works just like that? i tried 50 but i honestly just thought that it wouldn't be like using an actual prime for whatever reason (i know it isn't exactly in terms of light and such but i thought in terms of zoom)

i'll try that, thanks. i have a question though: if i put it on 50, as in it says "50" on my lense. am i actually looking at 75mm or is it 50? i don't know if i'm explaining it right. i mean like say if i put it on 50 so the lens shows that, i like it a lot, perfect for me. do i got out and buy a 50 prime or a 35 prime?

thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 18:37:09 No.2670720 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670622
Shoot raw and use a raw editor. Always shoot in raw!

You can shoot JPEG if you want a challenge of getting it right in camera, but you want the benefits of using a raw image.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 18:38:04 No.2670721 Report

Quoted By: >>2670782

>>2670654

You go buy a 50mm prime.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 18:38:27 No.2670722 Report

Quoted By: >>2670749 >>2670821

How can I shoot with agency models if I don't have much of a budget? Will agents let me shoot with their models for free if they like my 'folio?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 19:27:15 No.2670748 Report

Quoted By: >>2670760 >>2670782

>>2670654
>it says "50" on my lense. am i actually looking at 75mm or is it 50?
The "mm" number on the lens is a measurement of the distance between the optical center of the lens, to the focal plane (which is the sensor). So a 50mm lens on a cell phone is the same 50 milometers as a 50mm on a large format camera. The difference is, the portion of the image circle that is captured by the sensor.

If you have a 50mm lens on an APS-C camera, it's still a 50mm lens, however, the sensor is only capturing the field of view that would be the equivalent of a 75mm lens on a full frame camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 19:28:15 No.2670749 Report

Quoted By: >>2670756 >>2670780

>>2670722
Will a gas station let you use their gas for free if they like your car?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 19:37:01 No.2670756 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670749
Kek. Also accurate - good luck Anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 19:52:33 No.2670760 Report

Quoted By: >>2670762

>>2670748
You lost me

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 19:56:14 No.2670762 Report

Quoted By: >>2670763 >>2670788

>>2670760
Which part? I don't mind clarifying.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 19:59:19 No.2670763 Report

Quoted By: >>2670764

>>2670762

No offense, buddy, but clarifying doesn't seem to be your specialty.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:01:29 No.2670764 Report

Quoted By: >>2670766

>>2670763
*shrug* Okay then I won't. Not really a problem for me. Sorry you aren't pleased with the free service you were provided.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:06:28 No.2670766 Report

Quoted By: >>2670767

>>2670764

Oh, I'm not the guy who needed clarification. I'm just saying that you suck at explaining simple concepts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:08:51 No.2670767 Report

Quoted By: >>2670777

>>2670766
And in stead of stepping in to help the confused guy, you step in to insult the other guy who tried to help him. Who's worse? The guy who makes a crappy sand castle? Or the guy who runs up and knocks it down for fun?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:24:12 No.2670777 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670767

I would say the guy who comes in with childish false analogies is probably the worst.

I'm the guy who stepped in to stop one guy from needlessly confusing a newbie with his convoluted jargon the he himself only half-understands. If anything, I'm a hero.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:27:47 No.2670780 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670749
Makes sense. I could try to pitch something, but I better start saving up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:29:15 No.2670782 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670721

thanks.

>>2670748

yeah, that's basically what i knew as well, i didn't know exactly why, but i suppose i do now, thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:33:35 No.2670788 Report

Quoted By: >>2670881

>>2670762
The second half with the different sensors capture different fields of view regardless if they have the same lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 20:57:36 No.2670805 Report

Quoted By: >>2670812 >>2670878

Okay guys please don't kill me but what determines how fast you can take a shot? Like are some cameras faster than others? Is it the lens or the camera that determines how quickly it can get ready for the next shutter press? Or is it like camera settings?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 21:08:26 No.2670812 Report

Quoted By: >>2670901

>>2670805
What do you mean how fast you can take a shot?

The shutter speed determines how long the shutter is open to allow light in when taking a shot.

If you want to freeze motion, you want to take something at a really fast speed so like 1/1000 of a second which means you need to compensate for the lack of light the shutter is letting light in by adjusting the ISO and aperture.

Another good rule of thumb to avoid camera shake/blur is to use a shutter speed that is higher than your focal length.

For example, if your focal length if 50mm, you don't want to use a shutter speed of less than 1/60 of a second.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 21:24:50 No.2670819 Report

Quoted By: >>2670874

Asking again:
How bad are RawTherapee and Darktable (Linux RAW editors) compared to Windows editors like Lightroom?

How to fix exposure in some particular area using RawTherapee or Darktable?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 21:26:49 No.2670820 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668148
Just update ACR you idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 21:31:01 No.2670821 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670722
Yes, it depends however. First you'll most likely be working with their "Development Models" usually you pick a few so if one gets called to a paid shoot you'll have a filler.

You begin by emailing them to say you're interested in working with one of their dev models, then you usually show your portfolio, inspirational photo, and outline your idea of the shoot and the purpose (magazine submission, fitting, personal, etc).

All things considered if you have a shit portfolio they might flat out reject you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 22:47:33 No.2670852 Report

Quoted By:

Check out Pixit on the AppStore
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pixit-pixel-editor/id1039054928?ls=1&mt=8

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 23:32:27 No.2670867 Report

Quoted By: >>2670872

Is the T5i a good camera for someone just starting out?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 23:38:43 No.2670872 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670867
It's a pretty good camera. More than enough for a noobie.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 23:49:14 No.2670874 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670819
If you think "windows editors" like lightroom are the top of evolution, you better should stop making photos at all.

Generally it's more a question of skills, not software (..as long as it works internally with 32bit floating point).

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 18 Sep 2015 23:52:25 No.2670878 Report

Quoted By: >>2670901

>>2670805
Every aspect of the "Exposure Triangle", which consist of ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, determine motion blur and 'brightness'

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 00:02:21 No.2670881 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670788
a "Crop Sensor" (should be mentioned somewhere in the camera specs) means any lens you use with it will be "zoomed in" by a percentage. Most lower end cameras will have this. "Full Frame" means it's a full sensor size equivalent to film era sizes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 00:07:54 No.2670883 Report

Quoted By:

im trying to decide between a ricoh gr or a x100t? the money isnt an issue, ive just heard that for all intents and purposes the GR is a hell of a camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 00:38:16 No.2670901 Report

Quoted By: >>2670911

>>2670812
>>2670878

I mean like how physically fast can I take the shots. Like if I wanted to just press the shutter like a machine gun what determines how many times it snaps a photo or how its ready

Are all cameras the same?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 00:49:57 No.2670903 Report

Quoted By: >>2670926

Hey guys is a mirror less camera a good beginners camera? Or should I just go all out and grab a DSLR?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 01:12:27 No.2670911 Report

Quoted By: >>2670928

>>2670901

No, not all cameras are the same. There are two components to your question. One is burst rate, which determines how many frames your camera can shoot per minute. More expensive cameras have a higher burst rate, up to 12 frames per second, while entry level cameras chug along at a measly 3-5.

The second component is shutter lag, which is the time that it takes the shutter to fire after you press the button. Again, the more expensive the camera, the less shutter lag you experience.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 02:08:18 No.2670924 Report

Quoted By:

What older (fair priced) lens series should I get for my EOS?

Being the idiot I am, I researched everything except the fact that FD lenses don't mix well with the new EOS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 02:18:16 No.2670926 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670903
Mirrorless cameras aren't cheaper or worse than DSLR nowadays - you can't really go "all out" with a DSLR.

Also, being a beginner has nothing much to do with what typical lens or digital camera you can operate. They're generally fairly easy to work with. Get the best lens (and maybe the best camera body) you can / want to afford for the purpose you have in mind...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 02:55:03 No.2670928 Report

Quoted By: >>2670929

>>2670911
Thanks anon

Does it say on the camera the shutter lag? And burst rate?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 03:01:02 No.2670929 Report

Quoted By: >>2670949

>>2670928

Burst rate, yes. Shutter lag, no.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 04:02:12 No.2670949 Report

Quoted By: >>2670986

>>2670929
How come they don't put shutter lag?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 05:47:55 No.2670972 Report

Quoted By: >>2671010

Hey guys, where can I sell my camera?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 08:06:39 No.2670986 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670949

It's not a great selling point for entry level cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 10:48:00 No.2671010 Report

Quoted By:

>>2670972
Keh.com

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 12:25:25 No.2671044 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669361
get off /p/
never come on 4chan or anything like it ever again

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 14:48:46 No.2671073 Report

Quoted By:

does a logo thread somewhere exist on 4chan? am i on the right board?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 17:52:50 No.2671102 Report

Quoted By: >>2671105

What's more important in regards to low light shots?
Sensor size?
Or a faster max apeture?

Eg. Comparing the Ricoh GR vs the Sony RX100m3/4.

The GR has a significantly larger sensor, but max f/2.8 in aperture.

The Sony has a faster lens, f/1.8, but the sensor is only a 1" sensor/1" stacked sensor (whatever the hell difference that may make to).

Anyone use either of these and can comment on lower light shots?

Anyone have a preference between the two?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 17:59:39 No.2671105 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671102
Big sensor, big aperture.

My Ricoh does pretty well in low light situations. Can't speak for the RX100. Never used one, but obviously my Nikon D7100 with a 35mm 1.8 out performs my Ricoh.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 18:04:41 No.2671107 Report

Quoted By: >>2671110

What's the point of a viewfinder? Like isn't that why there's a screen? And is there a major difference between an electric viewfinder and an optical one?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 18:15:02 No.2671109 Report

Quoted By:

If I buy a Nikon lens from South Korea, will it work on my Nikon 'Murican body?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 18:20:38 No.2671110 Report

Quoted By: >>2671116 >>2671123

>>2671107
There's a lag between what's shown on the EVF versus the OVF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 18:38:27 No.2671116 Report

Quoted By: >>2671123

>>2671110
Not really.

You must have used a shit camera

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:08:39 No.2671123 Report

Quoted By: >>2671126

>>2671110
>>2671116

But what's the point when there are LCD screens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:15:04 No.2671125 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668273
Open lightroom > import photo > export > don't back up/create catalog
Then just delete from lightroom when done.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:17:31 No.2671126 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671123
sometimes it's too bright to see the screen
like on sunny days
viewfinder can be helpful then

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1442055267288.jpg, 1MiB, 2048x1357

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:19:41 No.2671127 Report

Quoted By: >>2671129

I only want to take pictures like this, this quality. nothing better. ppl seem to like this stuff more and respond to it more than wha most photographers would consider great photos

what should i use to take shots like that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:27:47 No.2671129 Report

Quoted By: >>2671130

>>2671127
Do you have a phone with a camera?
Get vsco for mobile and go apeshit with filters.

Or you could actually go about the arduous process of selecting and learning how to use camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:29:09 No.2671130 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671129
i want to do the arduous process of learning camera, but with pics like that the result

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 19 Sep 2015 19:31:04 No.2671131 Report

Quoted By:

Film: Do you store it in a fridge or a freezer?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tmp_15083-FB_IMG_1442708980415-1 (...).jpg, 92KiB, 1080x720

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 01:12:24 No.2671283 Report

Quoted By: >>2671500 >>2672361

What causes the streaks in film photography? Is it light leaks?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 01:25:41 No.2671294 Report

Quoted By: >>2671341

>>2670287
Rx100 series is fantastic. He probably meant low level point and shoots like the ones your mom had in 2006.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 02:38:17 No.2671341 Report

Quoted By: >>2671348

>>>>2671294
But know I want something with lenses, like the a5100 or a6000

I mean I need a prime lens or something no?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 02:51:22 No.2671348 Report

Quoted By: >>2671387 >>2671475

>>2671341
you dont need a prime lens some people just prefer prime lenses. zoom lenses like the one on the rx100 are much more versatile. believe me the rx100 is great little camera. the lens is by carl zeiss which is a pretty revered name in photography because they make great lenses. you don't need to change cameras but if you want to be able to switch the different lenses then sure go for the a6000.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 03:34:24 No.2671387 Report

Quoted By: >>2671392

>>2671348
So I should just keep this one? This is my first camera, I can take capable shots with it? Some people tell me I should first learn everything about photo taking and that I'm fine like you said with the rx100

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 03:38:38 No.2671392 Report

Quoted By: >>2671396

>>2671387
absolutely
I started out just taking pictures on my cell phone camera and your camera is way better than that.
honestly you have a sweet camera. just go out and take pictures and have fun and read up on stuff. look at a lot of photographs, its a good way to learn. read about shot composition too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 03:46:23 No.2671396 Report

Quoted By: >>2671401

>>2671392
Okay anon, you've talked me out of making another purchase. Might as well learn first.

You mean like look up photos in books and blogs right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 03:49:42 No.2671401 Report

Quoted By: >>2671415

>>2671396
go to "recent photos or flickr/tumblr threads an see what you like.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 04:04:20 No.2671415 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671401
Thanks anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 08:02:14 No.2671475 Report

Quoted By: >>2671794 >>2671864

>>2671348
>the lens is by carl zeiss
not quite
but whatever

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 22892076.gif, 779KiB, 500x245

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 08:49:12 No.2671493 Report

Quoted By: >>2671496 >>2671498

I have 7-8 near identical photos I want to make into a cinemagraph.

In light room how to I apply the exact same changes to each photo?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 08:57:48 No.2671496 Report

Quoted By: >>2671506

>>2671493
Right click on the thumbnail on the little photo strip at the bottom of the screen, go to "develop settings", then "copy settings". Do exactly the same to the photo you want to copy the settings too, but for the last step do "paste settings".

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen-Shot-2015-04-17-at-3.30.0 (...).png, 654KiB, 1000x625

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 09:02:14 No.2671498 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671493

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 09:04:28 No.2671500 Report

Quoted By: >>2672361

>>2671283

I bielvie that it is the shutter stopping and starting and the exposure is made so some areas of the image more or less exposure

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 09:27:02 No.2671506 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671496
Thanks!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 19:10:10 No.2671732 Report

Quoted By:

How to fix exposure/saturation in a particular area? What soft?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 20 Sep 2015 21:46:51 No.2671794 Report

Quoted By: >>2671898

>>2671475
Not quite?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 00:29:10 No.2671864 Report

Quoted By: >>2671898

>>2671475
it is absolutely a zeiss lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 02:00:37 No.2671898 Report

Quoted By: >>2671924

>>2671794
>>2671864
Dunno what his hang ups are, but from what I've read:

>"There`s no Zeiss glass in the RX100, like all Sony P&S cams with the Zeiss name on, the RX100 has a Sony lens with a Zeiss badge on"

>The Zeiss optical engineers I know all think it is quite funny how English speaking peoples seem to think the Zeiss name means Zeiss glass, or Zeiss designed glass. They tell me it is the coatings that are licensed from a Zeiss patent. (I learned that at a trade show when I pulled out my Sony P&S and mentioned it had the Zeiss name on the ring around the lens)

same shit with panasonic and leica

>marketing

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 02:59:30 No.2671924 Report

Quoted By: >>2671932 >>2671956 >>2672040

>>2671898
i knew about panasonic and leica but i thought the sony lenses were made with zeiss glass. they are still zeiss designed however

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 03:12:29 No.2671932 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671924
>they are still zeiss designed however

keep clinging to that dream.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 03:27:32 No.2671938 Report

Quoted By:

I'm not from /p/ so this might seem dumb but I work at an auction and wound up buying an old Ricoh 35s off someone for $2. I was intending on selling it online (or maybe changing my mind if i like it) but I was wondering if there's anything important I should check to figure out what kind of condition it's in.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO query.jpg, 25KiB, 292x227

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 04:32:02 No.2671951 Report

Quoted By: >>2671958 >>2671961

A'ight, I have a few serious inquiries:

>Why don't you niggas watermark your shiz?
Niggas gon' steal the good stuff.

>Why do you niggas use computers and post-processing?
It ain't actually be what it is; pictures be photoshopped and therefore fake AF, bruh.

>I got three-thou saved up from my grind. Sell me on a DSLR, Fam.
I'm finna get in the game.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 04:37:35 No.2671953 Report

Quoted By:

What do people of the Sony nex 5? Was offered one for a pretty good price from a friend who doesn't really use it anymore. Will probs get it anyway, but want to hear what /p has experienced with it

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 04:47:51 No.2671956 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671924
I'm more inclined to believe that it is just the usual advertising tricks. I figure that if it was truly a zeiss lens though and though the camera would cost a whole lot more. And besides, this kind of marketing bs is all too common for it to be improbable or unlikely in this case.

Whatever, even if it's not a zeiss made or designed lens, even if it's only the use of some zeiss proprietary coating that allows it to cling to the name, does it really matter in the end?

It's still a nice lens for a compact of that size and is very capable for what it is. Sample pics attest to that.

Some name randomly stuck on shouldn't however take any precedence in someone's purchasing decision, especially if there is no incontrovertible proof as to its veracity to say otherwise, as it could in fact be just bullshit.

Look at sample pics and decide for yourself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 05:07:19 No.2671958 Report

Quoted By: >>2672181 >>2672267

>>2671951

1) Watermarks are more often than not obnoxious as fuck and detract from the image. You're also seen as someone who thinks perhaps more highly of themselves than they should. Also, if someone's going to steal your image, they're going to steal your image. Hell, they'll watermark right over your watermark. Just look at 9gag.

2) It's best to think of a photograph as two totally distinct entities: the negative, and the print. A negative on its own is rarely a good photograph, and you always need the print to bring out the essence of the photograph. The print has been a part of photography since the very first day, and it will be into the foreseeable future. That's what post-processing is in digital terms: the print. Also, you need to get the idea that "photo = truth" out of your head as quickly as possible. Photography is interpretative.

3) For three grand, your choices are wide open. Keep in mind that often, the camera is the least important part of the equation. Lenses and lighting are both far more important. What kind of photography are you trying to get into? That will dictate your spending. For instance, if you're trying to get into fashion/portraiture, it would be prudent to spend up to half of your budget on a good lighting setup. If you want to do landscape, a good tripod is a necessary purchase.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 05:40:08 No.2671961 Report

Quoted By: >>2672181 >>2672267

>>2671951
>It ain't actually be what it is
Thing is, it never was.
With film your negatives had to be developed before printing. You'd take them to a chemist and they'd develop and print them for you. Whilst in the darkroom, they'd make all sorts of adjustments and tweaks based on their own judgment. So you surrendered a degree of control over your images of you didn't do all of this yourself.

Proper digi cams today produce two file types.
1) the digital "print" (jpeg) that the cam's processor (the chemist) generates for you, all set and done, based on certain parameters that you can adjust to an extent.

2) the digital negative (RAW file) that NEEDS further adjusting. It's the unadulterated recording of light by the cams sensor, with all the myriad distortions and optical aberrations that entails. You have to correct this manually on comp, but you retain a significantly greater degree of control over your images this way. Also, images that would normally be discarded as bad on jpeg can be, to an extent, salvaged with some minor tweaks a raw file. Don't let that be a crutch or license to take badly exposed pics in the first place though.

And just as not all chemists were equal, some jpeg engines are better than others.

Adding something that wasn't there at all via ps is more digital art rather than digital photography.

Alternatively you might be referring to HDR images , of which 99% are total shit due to ignorance of proper implementation of the process. It's a form of digital autism you'd do best to avoid, or at least grow out of asap.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20150921_100737.jpg, 208KiB, 750x1000

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 08:14:29 No.2671993 Report

Quoted By: >>2672022

The lens on my GX7 is stuck. Any ideas for removal? The lens mount button doesn't make the little click when i press it either. I've tried moderate force, but I'm worried about breaking things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 10:14:00 No.2672022 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671993
send it to panasonic for a fix.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 11:14:36 No.2672038 Report

Quoted By: >>2672039

Can I use makro lenses for "normal" photos? Can those focus infinity?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 11:18:06 No.2672039 Report

Quoted By: >>2672067

>>2672038
yes and yes. Focus might be a tad slower than on comparable non-macro lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 11:24:11 No.2672040 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671924
Computers design lenses these days, the quality of sonys recent lenses has been on a par with the very best.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 12:50:16 No.2672067 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672039
so the only difference is, that makros can focus very close? .. why is then not every lens a makro?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 13:17:47 No.2672077 Report

Quoted By: >>2672091 >>2673497

Not sure what to get to move from my standard kit lens. What focal length and f stop is best for an everyday carry lens, any recommendations? Mostly interested in street and nature photography. I was thinking maybe a wide angle?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 13:32:58 No.2672087 Report

Quoted By: >>2672106

What's the point of a zoom lens that ranges between 35-70mm? I understand wide angle and telephoto lens, but I don't get midrange ones except just for it to be there as an option. What situation calls for it at that range that isn't already covered by a superior prime lens at 50, 55, and 85mm?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 13:47:09 No.2672091 Report

Quoted By: >>2672101

>>2672077
Well, first things first. Do you actually need to upgrade? If you're looking to take photos of wildlife then a longer focal length will be very helpful. Otherwise, depending on what your kit lens is, you may have no need to upgrade. Otherwise I use my nifty fifty a whole lot of the time. I don't often try to photograph birds or anything though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 13:47:57 No.2672092 Report

Quoted By: >>2672220

Can anyone recommend cheap lamps and a light box for simple product photos? I made a thread here not realizing that you guys had a stupid questions thread: >>2672082

thanks bros, I appreciate any advice

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 13:53:51 No.2672096 Report

Quoted By:

>>2668141
if you want everything in focus use your phone

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 14:00:15 No.2672101 Report

Quoted By: >>2672131

>>2672091
I was thinking of grabbing a wide angle and maybe a telephoto for wildlife but I'm a little anxious about the telephoto, is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L all its cracked up to be? Its out of my price range but I'm curious. A 50mm 1.8 looks like it might be a good everyday carry. Also as the other anon said whats the purpose of the 35-70mm lenses?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 14:15:53 No.2672106 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672087
The average photo for most photographers happen in the range between 24mm and 85mm. You can change your lens a lot between three or four primes, or you can have one zoom lens that covers all of them, depending on your needs and preferences. What is the confusion?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 15:07:53 No.2672131 Report

Quoted By: >>2672133

>>2672101
the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is spectacular but they also have a 100-400 L IS II that's around the same price and may be more useful. There's absolutely no rush; buy one when you're sure you have a use for it. Do you have a semi-decent flash and tripod?

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is very cheap but it's also a bit shit. The Yongnuo might actually be better, surprising and all as that is. A 50mm on an APS-C sensor would be too tight for general everyday use; if you wanted to use a prime for everything you'd be better off with something around 24mm.

Your kit lens is fine though, if I were you I'd just stick with it unless it breaks. A 17-50 f/2.8, nice as it would be, wouldn't suddenly let you use fast shutter speeds in the dark, f/2.8 isn't THAT fast. For indoor stuff a decent flash used properly would be a lot more useful than a replacement for the kit lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 15:09:48 No.2672133 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672131
Thanks for the help bud, I don't currently have a flash so I'll take a look at them instead.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO L_cycling-12.jpg, 57KiB, 700x466

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 16:23:53 No.2672161 Report

Quoted By: >>2672165

How do I take pictures like this?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 16:28:42 No.2672165 Report

Quoted By: >>2673402

>>2672161
Pan your camera and keep your focus on the biker while you pan. If you do it right, it'll keep the biker in focus while blurring the background. It takes a bit of practice to get it right.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO bladerunner.jpg, 21KiB, 640x360

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 17:10:48 No.2672181 Report

Quoted By: >>2672209

>>2671958
>1)
Ah, yea. Thanks for the reply. The 9gag bit is a good example bruh.
>2)
I don't get the bit about photo != truth, man. I see it like: what you see with yo eyes is true.... I guess you could get all philosophical and debate that but, to me, what your eyes see is humanity's truth. Photos should freeze that truth in time, ya dig? All this photoshop is whack unless it can just make it more like what it truly looked like. I see niggas on here adding shit on and making their photos "artsy". I ain't about art nigga, I'm about this world.
>3)
I'mma take pictures of my world (city/buildings/streets/people/etc.) but my girl like traveling so I'mma take her places and so I'll take pictures. Bitch loves nature and I love the mountains so, yeah, def some macro shit because I like plants... but also ya know, like scenery and all that too. I am thinking like 3G for everything ya know? Maybe $1-1.5G for the camera.

>>2671961
I'm about that RAW, dog. I wanna immortalize what I see with my biological cameras. I wanna see that shit just like it fucking was with my eyes. You saying you can adjust it to make it like that? Then I am down with that. A nigga wanna get into some fucking digital art because he thinks he can make it look "better" than what he actually saw? Nah, fuck that nigga. It's wrong.

Yeah, I know about HDR too; shit is for iPhone hipsters, woe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 18:03:02 No.2672209 Report

Quoted By: >>2672224 >>2672267

>>2672181

Your affected writing style is painful and trite. Drop it.

Your camera is not your eyes. It is not an objective recording device (neither are your eyes, but that's another discussion). The nature of composition and framing means that you are always excluding something from the scene. Hell, you're there, aren't you? How many times do you see a photo with the photographer also in the scene?

The extremely short duration of the shutter burst means that you are only capturing a minute fraction of the time that will pass in that scene. Exposing for 1/1000th of a second out of 86,400 seconds in a day means that you are ignoring 86 million other possible frames that day.

It's obvious that black and white is a lie, but even if you shoot in color, the truth is twisted. Camera profiles and raw converters present an imperfect representation of reality. So do sensors, film and lenses.

The point is, the sooner you disabuse yourself of the idea that photography is a recording medium and NOT an interpretative art, the better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 18:18:21 No.2672220 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672092
> Cheap lamps
Try Yongnuo YN-300 or 560 III / IV. They are very cheap for what they can do.

If that's too much, try to make do with 5500k to 6500k white LED bulbs... but their color reproduction may not be as good.

> a light box
Buy any you want - presumably from China as well, if you're looking for a deal. Or improvise your own.

The goal is to get diffuse light, so any kind of nearly completely white matte plastic / tightly woven white fabric / white walls or other surfaces (a bit further back) can act as light box substitutes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 18:26:10 No.2672224 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672209
>Your affected writing style is painful and trite. Drop it.
This please.
It's like some 40 year old typing on the net trying to "fit in" with all the young dudes.

I don't think people ever talked like that, even IRL.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 20:19:55 No.2672267 Report

Quoted By: >>2672268 >>2672287 >>2672292

>>2671961
>>2671958
>>2672209

I'm not vanilla ice that made the original question but I had similar sentiments. Like the reason I want to start taking pictures is to record stuff.

Like I know there are artsy photos but from the beginning I'm planning on taking bland photos. I know Google Maps basically beat me to the punchline by photographing every street but I still want to do it.

What's wrong with taking photos just for archiving purposes?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 20:28:28 No.2672268 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672267
>What's wrong with taking photos just for archiving purposes?

Nothing at all. Eugene Atget is one of my favorite early photographers and all he did was walk around Paris and take photos of storefronts and facades.

I'm just saying, don't go into it with the assumption that even "bland" photos are an objective record. You need to know that even "bland" is your own subjective interpretation. You're already imprinting your aesthetic onto the scene.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 21:00:20 No.2672287 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672267
Another anon here, there is nothing wrong with it. BUT 99.99% of the photos are edited. Your phone edit shit for you, your point and shoot does it. Even fucking film pre edited, thats why people buy different rolls for different occasions, even with the same iso. Some will guve you mire blue, others more yellow. Even when developing you can change stuff without knowing, thats why people search for specifix labs or give specific instructions when developing. Even video is like that. What you can do is save a lot of raws, so everybody can have their own vision of the world. Or you edit the photo as close as you remember how it was

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 21:28:08 No.2672292 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672267
There's also a difference between photography and photojournalism. If you're looking to capture the world as is, you should look into the latter, not the former.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Sep 2015 23:30:20 No.2672332 Report

Quoted By: >>2672418

I understand that the Canon AE-1 only have P, shutter and manual mode. But what happens if I let the shutter stay in program, but take the aperture out of A? The camera fires, but is it at a fixed shutter speed?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 01:28:17 No.2672361 Report

Quoted By:

>>2671283
>>2671500
don't listen to that anon, it's definitely lightleaks check the seals of your camera back

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 02:12:34 No.2672374 Report

Quoted By: >>2672614

>>2668785
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/810414-USA/Nikon_2200_40_mm_f_2_8G_AF_S.html/prm/alsVwDtl

Good cheap macro lens for the d3200

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 04:05:19 No.2672418 Report

Quoted By: >>2672620

>>2672332
you'll be shooting in aperture priority meaning the camera will determine the best shutter speed based on your aperture

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 05:59:21 No.2672443 Report

Quoted By: >>2672589

Okay so I went to some event and its over now but I used auto. I want to know what settings I should have used because everything came out bad. I'm not from /p/ anyways the event was like at night really dark and we were always moving at walking speed

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 13:43:03 No.2672589 Report

Quoted By: >>2672987

>>2672443
probably too high ISO and too slow shutter speed
you would've probably needed a tripod or a good flash to get good pictures

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 15:03:40 No.2672614 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672374
I have the 40mm micro and I like it very much. It is a little short for 'action' macro work, but it it is very capable in a controlled environment. Also it doubles as a sharp distortion-free (long) standard prime.
Would recommend.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 15:14:13 No.2672620 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672418
AE-1 does not have aperture mode.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4353164024_c98c6590fb.jpg, 84KiB, 500x334

Anonymous Tue 22 Sep 2015 15:45:16 No.2672628 Report

Quoted By:

I just bought me one of these. Should arrive some time next week. What can I expect? I hear the Helios 44-4 is an amazing bokeh lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 03:51:26 No.2672987 Report

Quoted By: >>2672989 >>2673516

>>2672589

I couldn't use a tripod OR flash.

And it seems like increasing shutter speed also means you have to go up in aperture making everything darker.

Can you crank up the ISO to compensate for all that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 03:52:53 No.2672989 Report

Quoted By: >>2673516

>>2672987

Whoops, I left out a bit in my post.

Meant to say, I've been trying to understand my camera more and started looking up some photography articles. Should I have used shutter priority mode?

^ That should have gone first and then the rest of my sentence.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 04:27:24 No.2672997 Report

Quoted By: >>2672999 >>2673003 >>2673007

Samsung Galaxy S6 has a f/1.9 lens. Does this mean that it captures more light and is faster than my DSLR f/2.8? Outside sharpness and distortion, is the mobile phone better option?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 04:40:43 No.2672999 Report

Quoted By: >>2673000 >>2673003

>>2672997

I'm not from /p/ but when did phone cameras get so good?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 04:42:36 No.2673000 Report

Quoted By: >>2673003

>>2672999
You can even shoot RAW with Android 5.0.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 04:46:52 No.2673002 Report

Quoted By:

I have a Sony a6000

I only have the kit lens. What should my next lens be? I want one for all around usage. Good quality etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 04:48:10 No.2673003 Report

Quoted By: >>2673005

>>2672997
>>2672999
>>2673000
It's like phone manufacturers care more about photography than camera manufacturers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 04:52:18 No.2673005 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673003

How surreal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 05:00:46 No.2673007 Report

Quoted By: >>2673018

>>2672997
>Outside sharpness and distortion, is the mobile phone better option?

No, that's retarded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 05:41:36 No.2673018 Report

Quoted By: >>2673020 >>2673027

>>2673007
As this is the stupid questions thread, could you elaborate why?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 05:45:58 No.2673020 Report

Quoted By: >>2673027

>>2673018
Tryinig to google this myself it would seem the phone camera is 6x crop, so if I would have a f/1.9 in the camera that would be equivalent of f/5.7 on a 2x crop micro four thirds?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 06:13:09 No.2673027 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673018
>>2673020

You're on the right track.

While an f/1.9 lens will let you use faster shutter speeds in darker situations compared to a slower lens on the same sensor, it has practically no benefit compared to a slower lens on a large sensor.

The camera will be able to:

>use a higher iso than the phone without turning into smeary junk, thus negating the difference in aperture
>isolate the subject with narrow depth of field more at f/2.8 than a phone could at f/1.9
>produce much higher quality files with less noise reduction and more per-pixel sharpness, color fidelity, etc

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Sep 2015 06:21:04 No.2673029 Report

Quoted By:

Do I need an aftermarket intervalometer if my D610 already comes with one?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Pretty-girl-with-camera.jpg, 55KiB, 500x334

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 00:48:00 No.2673352 Report

Quoted By: >>2673369

How does a poorfag get into photography?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 01:24:46 No.2673369 Report

Quoted By: >>2673375

>>2673352
use your smartphone

alternatively look in pawn shops & goodwill for cameras though the cheap prices come with no garuntee of reliability. If you want some decent sense of reliability shop for used cameras/lenses at keh.com

you can get a Rebel XT and kit lens for around $120

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 01:29:32 No.2673375 Report

Quoted By: >>2673453

>>2673369
>use your smartphone
never considered that, Ill try it out
>alternatively look in pawn shops & goodwill for cameras though the cheap prices come with no garuntee of reliability. If you want some decent sense of reliability shop for used cameras/lenses at keh.com
Awesome Ill check it out
>you can get a Rebel XT and kit lens for around $120
seems within my price range. Thanks again!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 01:39:12 No.2673379 Report

Quoted By:

can someone kindly post that weather infographic

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 01:48:07 No.2673383 Report

Quoted By: >>2673452

Should I buy the Sony a6000 with the kit lens or without and invest in a decent one?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 02:05:05 No.2673391 Report

Quoted By:

>>2669361
Spend time taking photos, but don't just take a lot of photos. Think about what photos you want to take, and what you need to do to take them. Then look at your photos and really consider: 1) whether they're good, 2) why they are good or not, and 3) what you would do differently if you were shooting them again.

If there are specific kinds of photography you want to do, there are lots of resources out there to help you. Whether you want to shoot portraits, action sports, candid street photography, architecture, landscapes, macro, babies, pets, wildlife, or concert photography, there are plenty of people out there who can offer advice (some of it good, some of it bad).

Know your technical considerations. This starts with knowing exposure, and how shutter speed, f stops, and ISO work together. Depth of field. If you want to do portraits, you'll definitely want to know lighting.

Don't worry about being a good photographer. Just try to be a better photographer than you were the day before, and you'll get there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 02:47:34 No.2673402 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672165
Follow-up (from someone else): when panning shooting things that are only moving laterally, no up or down, is a monopod a good idea or a bad one?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 04:14:12 No.2673452 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673383
a6000 kit lens is shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 04:15:23 No.2673453 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673375
i really got into photography when i first got a smart phone. I thought hey i have a camera why not just atke pictures. taking pictures is super fun, im almost done saving for an x100t, i cant wait.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 04:29:02 No.2673463 Report

Quoted By:

Shooting soccer games - any tips or advice?
I'm slightly ill-equipped but doing it for fun.

agnotologist !!3bh6rEvuARt

agnotologist !!3bh6rEvuARt Thu 24 Sep 2015 05:19:53 No.2673497 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672077

Street and nature photography are two very different things, but the fun thing about a kit lens is that it can actually do both competently:

- You're usually going to stop down a lot, so the small maximum aperture doesn't matter;
- It's in a range of focal lengths well-suited to both street and nature;
- Depending on what model it is, it can be very compact; and
- Almost universally except for full frame kit lenses, they're very light

That being said, you should be looking to see if there's a job your kit lens cannot perform, then grabbing the right tool for the job. Grabbing a tool (wide angle lens) and finding a job for it is perverse or what we might call excessively gearfaggy. Do you ever zoom all the way out and find yourself frustrated by not being able to go wider? That's when you'd want a wide angle lens. Do you shoot in very low light environments where your ISO maxes out, but your shutter speed is still too low? Then maybe you should look at fast primes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 07:00:11 No.2673516 Report

Quoted By:

>>2672989
>>2672987
Would this have worked guys? I really want to know what the proper settings should have been

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 13:40:49 No.2673601 Report

Quoted By: >>2673607

Ok what the fuck.

I was trying out my continuous lights and put my cam on auto because I just wanted to check fast.

Check pic, shows me it was shot on ISO 320.

Manually I only have 100, 200, 400 etc? So why the fuck can't I choose 320 or 640 for example?

Shitty 1000d is the reason? What the hell.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 14:05:32 No.2673607 Report

Quoted By: >>2673644

>>2673601
In your camera settings, you can choose whether you want full stops or third stops available. You have currently selected full stops. Auto mode isn't held to that constraint.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 15:46:52 No.2673644 Report

Quoted By: >>2673693

>>2673607
It is on third stops. Always been. In my custom functions I also have a half stop options. Weird and stupid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 17:45:50 No.2673677 Report

Quoted By:

What's a fair price for Olympus OM-1 MD with 50mm f1.8 lens in supposedly great condition?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 18:13:01 No.2673693 Report

Quoted By: >>2673709

>>2673644
If your ISO was set for Third stop increments you'd be able to choose iso 320

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 18:49:20 No.2673709 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673693
Well, I can't. So fuck my 1000D. It's a shit cam anyway.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.png, 2MiB, 1664x1206

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 20:16:02 No.2673732 Report

Quoted By: >>2673733

Can somebody identify this lens?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.png, 2MiB, 1594x1180

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 20:17:08 No.2673733 Report

Quoted By: >>2673736

>>2673732

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 20:18:34 No.2673736 Report

Quoted By: >>2673737

>>2673733
What does it say under the lens cap?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 20:20:51 No.2673737 Report

Quoted By: >>2673740

>>2673736
Don't know, these are pictures off of ebay and the seller hasn't responded yet. I'm a complete noob when it comes to these old lenses and I have no idea where to start searching.
The lens comes with a Zenit 11, is this just the kit lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 20:29:54 No.2673740 Report

Quoted By: >>2673744

>>2673737

It's a Helios 58mm.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zenit_11_y_Helios_58mm_f2_montura_rosca_M42_vista_superior.JPG

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 20:39:43 No.2673744 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673740
Thank you very much

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 21:05:56 No.2673762 Report

Quoted By: >>2673765

This seams to be the right place to post my question, I'm about to buy my first dslr, nothing fancy as I do not have a lot of cash, I've been looking at Nikon d70s kits, secondhand, obvious. What am I supposed to look out for? is there any better alternative in the same price range?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 21:10:04 No.2673765 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673762
If you're trying to get into photography for $75, you should just use your cell phone, and save up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 21:17:40 No.2673766 Report

Quoted By: >>2673768

I have all the kit I need, I know how my camera works... but.... but..... how do I find things to shoot?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 21:18:46 No.2673767 Report

Quoted By: >>2673768 >>2673804 >>2673816

I feel I might be a gearfag, what are the symptoms and what's the cure?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 21:21:10 No.2673768 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673766
What photos interest you?
Where do things like those photos happen?
Go there.
Take photos.

>>2673767
There is no cure. It's terminal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 22:46:45 No.2673804 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673767
What's a gearfag?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 23:09:39 No.2673816 Report

Quoted By: >>2673820

>>2673767
No cure.
50 years old.
Full frame, APS-C, Micro 4/3, Q, Phone.
Tripods, monopods, mini-pods, clamps, filters, flashes, more tripod heads than i can count, motorized time-lapse mounts, bags, slings, backpacks, cases, meters, levels, adapters, hoods, underwater housings and that's just for the digital interchangeable lens cameras.
Film camera's, 35mm, 110, 220, medium format, large format, pinhole.
Add to the above almost 300 lenses.
I am fortunate to have a great job, so my obsession is no more financially disruptive to my life than any other "normal" hobby.
Even built a "second" garage as a studio, storage location for everything.
Put all the equipment into a trust, my pre-nup will kept it out of the hands of my now-wife's worthless son.

Hello, my name is Calvin, I have an illness. I am a gearfag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 23:16:02 No.2673820 Report

Quoted By: >>2673825

>>2673816
You hate you

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 23:19:06 No.2673825 Report

Quoted By: >>2673837

>>2673820
Meant to say your son?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 24 Sep 2015 23:38:26 No.2673837 Report

Quoted By: >>2673847

>>2673825
Second wife.
Her adult son.
She was 14 when he was born.
His father had total custody of him.
Made him into a copy of himself.
He is not allowed on or in my property.
He is a drug user, in and out of jail, completely, utterly worthless.
Had to get a restraining order to keep him from threatening his mother.
Even my wife hates his sorry ass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 00:09:37 No.2673847 Report

Quoted By:

>>2673837
>>2673837

Hello Calvin, if you have a manual 24mm lens and or some Minolta 4000 AF Speedlights to spare please contact me. My Flickr is:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/reverendsony/

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 06:33:35 No.2674016 Report

Quoted By: >>2674149

What's a gearfag??

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 13:41:21 No.2674149 Report

Quoted By:

>>2674016
A miserable little pile of secrets.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 16:45:54 No.2674252 Report

Quoted By: >>2674314

Okay so I don't know anything about photography but I have this fear that once I start learning more and more about what makes a good photo that I'll become extremely critical of my own snaps because I'll see so much wrong, that I'll just stop taking pictures because I'll never be satisfied unlike when I was ignorant.

That doesn't happen though right guys?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 19:12:40 No.2674314 Report

Quoted By: >>2674315 >>2674344

>>2674252
>That doesn't happen though right guys?
Of course it does.
If you're an autiste artiste.

Normal people say "fuck it; that'll do" and go and have dinner and call it a day.

Normal people who don't make a living with this shit because it's just a side hobby amongst a list of side hobbies that help to0 dull that sharp edge of dullness that is our realit of the daily drudge and toil.

If you're the former, there is no hope. If you get paid lost for it in some way, you're perhaps not as much of an austiste.

If you're the latter this won't happen to you because you'll soon tire of the exercise and, perhaps in the best case scenario, begin to adopt better practices that will help to increase the quality of your shots in an incremental fashion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 19:13:43 No.2674315 Report

Quoted By:

>>2674314
fuck you fucking tablet keyboard fuck off shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Sep 2015 20:11:49 No.2674344 Report

Quoted By:

>>2674314
What are your hobbies anon?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Sep 2015 07:12:13 No.2674583 Report

Quoted By: >>2674590

Why is it called a mirror less camera?

Which is better anyways? A DSLR or a mirror less camera assuming they have the same sensor and lenses

In image quality

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Bildschirmfoto 2015-09-26 um 09. (...).png, 94KiB, 542x454

Anonymous Sat 26 Sep 2015 08:02:43 No.2674590 Report

Quoted By: >>2674709

>>2674583
>Why is it called a mirror less camera?
Pic related is the build of a DSLR, you look though your viewfinder and you'll see though your lens. The orange arrow is where your mirror is located, if you take a picture, the mirror flips up and the blue arrow can get to your sensor, exposing your picture. That's why there is a little moment of not seeing anything though your viewfinder when you take a picture (parallax error).
A mirrorless does not have the mirror obviously, the image you'll see though your viewfinder is a digital image. Without the image they can be build smaller than DSLRs, the digital viewfinder will eat your battery faster though.

>same sensor and lenses. In image quality
I can't think of any difference you'd have in terms of image quality, as the sensor and the lens are the defining stuff when it comes to image quality. The mirror has nothing to do with that.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 41RJKGPP9PL._AA160_.jpg, 5KiB, 160x160

Anonymous Sat 26 Sep 2015 08:15:34 No.2674595 Report

Quoted By:

I just bought my first film camera (Zenit 11) and was looking for a good film to start with. I have no idea what I'm doing unfortunately.
I'll shoot most of my stuff at night, so I think the Kodak TMax could be a good choice. When I go to Amazon I have the choice between
>Kodak T-Max 400-36
>Kodak T-Max 400 -120
>Kodak T-Max (35mm)
Which one is the correct version, where is the difference?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Sep 2015 15:38:15 No.2674709 Report

Quoted By:

>>2674590
Sobthen what's the point of a DSLR? They don't have any advantage?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO shitfuck.jpg, 183KiB, 800x1000

Anonymous Mon 28 Sep 2015 22:14:17 No.2676235 Report

Quoted By: >>2676249

Does anybody know why I'm getting this banding in my images? All setting in Photoshop and Bridge are stock (I reset them using the key combinations while opening).

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Sep 2015 22:32:34 No.2676249 Report

Quoted By:

>>2676235
Tried changing it to LAB mode, 8 bit, 16 bit, black and white, and basically every image mode. Still nothing.

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

STUPID QUESTIONS THREAD