/p/ - Photography » Thread #2702778

[319 / 32 / ?]

319KiB, 533x800, 5(30).jpg

Gear Thread

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 11:21:14 No.2702778 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>2702779 >>2702783 >>2704619

Gear thread

OP showing a camera actually being used edition.

If you have questions about a new camera, what lenses to buy and anything related to gear or wondering about getting into photography, post it in this thread.
Do not attempt to make a new thread for your new Rabal, broken glass and being new. You have been warned!
I repeat, ANYTHING GEAR RELATED goes in here!

And don't forget, be polite!

Previous thread: >>2700229

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 11:22:30 No.2702779 Report

Quoted By: >>2702782 >>2702964

>>2702778
PS.: See this guy in the middle of the snowy field? He set his shit up to take some photos, not caring about silly things like cold, weather or arguing about nonsense on a dubious internet forum in the warm house.
This is a photo of a man doing what he likes. Do it like him and shoot some photos!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 11:27:56 No.2702782 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702779
But I don't even like photograph I just like gear

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 11:30:38 No.2702783 Report

Quoted By: >>2702785

>>2702778
Is he using a Pentax tho?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 11:39:34 No.2702785 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702783
Yes and the lens is either a DA* 200mm or a DA* 300mm

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Bildschirmfoto-2015-11-11-um-14. (...).png, 531KiB, 700x400

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 14:41:48 No.2702826 Report

Quoted By: >>2702830 >>2703146 >>2703544

It's official. Samsung is abandoning the camera market.
Discontinuation of their flagship camera and a complete transferring of their camera engineers to other parths of the company.
The NX1 isn't even a year old and it's already discontinued ;_;

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 14:45:40 No.2702830 Report

Quoted By: >>2702831 >>2702842 >>2702855

>>2702826
Samsung is a consumer garbage producer, now Sony needs to realize how things work and up their shit or go after Samsung.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 14:46:58 No.2702831 Report

Quoted By: >>2702835

>>2702830
>Zeiss: In August Sony sold more system cameras than Canon and Nikon (on German Market).
Sony killed Samsung.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 14:50:15 No.2702835 Report

Quoted By: >>2702843 >>2702927

>>2702831
Most (90%) of those customers only need a phone camera for their snapshits, rest are amateur videographers. No professional photographers amongst the customers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 14:58:04 No.2702842 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702830
Sony is doing fine, they even are rapidly improving on flaws in their products.

The problem probably lies with you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 14:58:48 No.2702843 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702835
Sony interchangeable lens cameras outsell canon and nikon.

>HURRRRR THEY'RE NOT EVEN PHOTOGRAPHERS HURRRDURRRRRRR, THEY WANTED TO DO VIDEO SO THEY BOUGHT A HIGH MEGAPIXEL FULL-FRAME STILLS CAMERA, HURRRRRRRRRRRR

Spot the guy that's never been to Germany, they care about their photos, aesthetics and engineering there, it's no surprise Sonya re doing well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:01:46 No.2702845 Report

Quoted By: >>2702849

I for one welcome our Japanese overlords.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:02:42 No.2702849 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702845
Me too! Pentax is awesome!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO sugoi sugoi.jpg, 249KiB, 1280x720

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:10:27 No.2702855 Report

Quoted By: >>2702860

>>2702830
Sony lenses are sugoi kawaii.

For example you can put 49mm filter on the Lens.
Then you can put Lens hood on top of filter to hide it.
Then you can put 40.5mm filter on top of lens hood on top of 49mm filter.
Then you can put Len cap on top of 40.5mm filter on top of lens hood on top of 49mm filter.

This is sugoi Senpai!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:12:03 No.2702857 Report

Quoted By:

>Then you can put Len cap on top of 40.5mm filter on top of lens hood on top of 49mm filter.
Forgot link
https://youtu.be/IDgYUNCEYxM?t=180

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:13:14 No.2702860 Report

Quoted By: >>2702869 >>2702870

>>2702855
And none of this helps your AF in tracking a moving subject with your native 300mm lens on a sports event.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:22:15 No.2702869 Report

Quoted By: >>2702872 >>2702875

>>2702860
AF tracking is fine, native or adapted if you insist on using some adapted 300mm+ lens (Tamron 150-600 on LA-EA3 or something?) rather than the really extremely neat and quite light 70-200mm f/4.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:24:28 No.2702870 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702860
But it's super cute that you can stack 4 such thing onto the lens and still have a super compact system.

Kawaii desu!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:26:41 No.2702872 Report

Quoted By: >>2702873 >>2702883 >>2702885

>>2702869
>70-200
okay
>f/4
NOPE

Even Pentax has a 70-200/2.8 now. It is official, Sony has no lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:27:44 No.2702873 Report

Quoted By: >>2702880 >>2702885

>>2702872
Also 150-400. Does Sony have any long telezoom lens?
Legit question, do they?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:29:36 No.2702875 Report

Quoted By: >>2702880

>>2702869
>AF tracking is fine, native or adapted
That's the opposite of what every single review (and logic, (and an understanding of AF systems)) says.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:39:42 No.2702878 Report

Quoted By: >>2703385

So I haven't done any photography since late 2012, early 2013. I don't have a camera anymore and I've been considering getting a new one since I now have a two motorcycles to go anywhere with and enough cash to maintain a photography habit.

Should I get something a bit older but higher spec back then, such as a 40D, or a newer but lower spec camera like a 600D? How has camera technology unfolded? I've been completely out of anything related since 2013 so I have no idea.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:42:41 No.2702880 Report

Quoted By: >>2702882 >>2702884

>>2702875
Yea, no. Native is pretty much always great in pretty much every review.

LA-EA3 and Tamron 150-600mm is fine, too.

Most other lenses that work on a Metabones adapter or such (adapted from Canon) are at least enough for most situations, but IDK if they'll do sports.

>>2702873
No. If you need longer telephoto zoom or even long telephoto primes, you're better off on Canon / Nikon.

I actually don't.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:46:26 No.2702882 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702880
Still in denial. It's time to come out of the closet, brandfag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:51:20 No.2702883 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702872
> Even Pentax has a 70-200/2.8 now.
If aperture is all you need, that one wins!

Otherwise, this is just one of the best 70-200, and the Pentax can't touch it (it even matches or beats the twice as heavy Canon "L" or Nikkor f/2.8).

https://www.flickr.com/groups/2390700@N20/pool/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:51:22 No.2702884 Report

Quoted By: >>2702887 >>2702897 >>2702918

>>2702880
>Yea, no. Native is pretty much always great in pretty much every review.
Every single review says "Tracking is there, and it works well if the subject is the only thing on the plane of focus, and is large and obvious in the frame, and the light is good, most of the time, sort of"

It's just physics. on-sensor PDAF points will never be as robust or accurate as dedicated AF sensors in a DSLR. They have to come up with a better way to solve the problem, and they haven't yet. Even on the a7rmk2. It's a well established fact at this point, and there's nothing wrong with admitting it. It's a great camera, and most people don't even use tracking AF. Refusing to acknowledge obvious flaws in your camera of choice is the best way to be dismissed in an argument. There is literally no perfect camera in existence. A camera can be perfect for YOU, because its flaws match nicely with your lack of desire to use a specific feature, but that doesn't mean that the flaws don't exist.

My X-T1 doesn't track for shit, and the battery indicator is annoyingly useless. I wish the control dials were buttons you could press, and I don't like the inconsistent placement of AF lock/AE lock between the body and the grip.

It's still a great camera, and I love it, because it works well for me, and I love the files from it.

Ta-Da! Rationality!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:54:32 No.2702885 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702872
>>2702873

Why would Sony bring out long, fast, professional level lenses at the start? No wildlife or sports tog is gonna switch from their favoured brand in a hurry. Wedding togs can't afford NOT to have a big DSLR due to dumb brides thinking the size of a camera=quality of photos, so again, why would sony bring out fast, professional zooms.

The vast majority of people that will WANT to use Sony are going to be;
Travellers - F4's are lighter and work just fine
Street - 28 f2 is cheap and tiny and perfect for this
Rich White men - Zeiss are on board
videographers - good sensor, infinite lens choice

We know there's 3 f.28 zooms on their way, we know Sigma have said they will be making lenses'. Sony aren't dumb, they know what they are doing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:56:16 No.2702887 Report

Quoted By: >>2702889 >>2702891

>>2702884
>Every single review says "Tracking is there, and it works well if the subject is the only thing on the plane of focus, and is large and obvious in the frame, and the light is good, most of the time, sort of"
Lel no.

> My X-T1 doesn't track for shit
If you have a Fuji that kinda explains it. But Fuji isn't an A6000, A7 II, A7R II ...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 15:58:42 No.2702889 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702887
Sonygger in denial

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:01:38 No.2702891 Report

Quoted By: >>2702897

>>2702887
Please post two reviews where someone is using any Sony flagship mirrorless camera with a telephoto lens to shoot a sporting event, where they say that tracking and burst shooting is as good as a 5Dmk3/7Dmk2 or equivalent DSLR af system in all lighting and tracking situations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:16:06 No.2702897 Report

Quoted By: >>2702899 >>2702901 >>2702916 >>2702968

>>2702884
You conflate tracking AF and PDAF.

PDAF is fine on pretty much all native lenses, subject tracking is not reliable.

CDAF also is reliable. So basically, AF is fine, intelligent tracking modes are so far imperfect. Nothing physical.

>>2702891
Lel no, I don't need that to laugh at "every single review" thing. I'll see your many reviews showing this first.

But here's are two for you that I saw recently for the a6000, both bikes (though one is motorized and the other downhill and german - but you can see the pics in the first minutes anyways):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up8K_xd_iwU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA74uA4Ua3I

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:18:21 No.2702899 Report

Quoted By: >>2702915 >>2702916

>>2702897
One more, just in case you need the A7R II, for flagship:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxVmJh_eCT0

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:22:18 No.2702901 Report

Quoted By: >>2702913 >>2702915

>>2702897
>using wide angles on f/8 or higher to have the DoF as wide as possible. Test is invalid.
Try all this with melted OOF background with or without panning.
I myself don't care too much about reviews because most of them are biased. I am talking out of experience, having shot thousands of moving subjects, most of them on my kit telezoom. Focus was still on target. But I use a DSLR with proper AF optics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:42:20 No.2702913 Report

Quoted By: >>2702916 >>2702917 >>2702919 >>2702968

>>2702901
> using wide angles on f/8 or higher to have the DoF as wide as possible. Test is invalid.
It still focused correctly and shows the PDAF works fine. And I posted other reviews, too. I'd say you are grasping for straws.

Mostly, you just want a sharp lens for fast / reliable PDAF, and there are a lot of these on the Sony E-mount. One more review with more sports shots here:

https://youtu.be/IjJxnIQcJDA?t=3m

There surely are reasons why you might still not want to use a Sony, but they're probably not related to AF. Both CDAF / PDAF are really quite good; unless you needed a recent Canon 1D something or Nikon D4 something before, you should be fine - more likely than not, that AF is better than what you had before.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:46:01 No.2702915 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702901
>Try all this with melted OOF background with or without panning.
By the way, this is no problem. You can see it in the other videos, especially >>2702899 is nice and short on that one.

> Inb4 without panning, it wouldn't work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:46:07 No.2702916 Report

Quoted By: >>2702919

>>2702897
>>2702899
>>2702913

>it works well if the subject is the only thing on the plane of focus, and is large and obvious in the frame, and the light is good
Sort of like a lone motorcycle outside in the day time...

How about a herd of Nascar cars all bunched together? or football/basketball players at night, with lots going on in the frame, and erratic conflicting movement?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:47:36 No.2702917 Report

Quoted By: >>2702923

>>2702913
In this post you proved my suspicion, you don't know a single thing about AF systems. Like I told you above, try all this with tele lens and try to make a sharp photo with all the focus hesitation you will get with the shallow DoF even an f/5.6 lens gives you above 150mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:49:31 No.2702918 Report

Quoted By: >>2702920

>>2702884
>My X-T1 doesn't track for shit, and the battery indicator is annoyingly useless. I wish the control dials were buttons you could press, and I don't like the inconsistent placement of AF lock/AE lock between the body and the grip.
wow is there anything you actually like about it?
why did you buy it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:58:31 No.2702919 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702916
See shots in >>2702913, they feature bunched up subjects. Works fine.

"Erratic conflicting movement" -whatever that might mean-, will not cause PDAF to not focus whatever subject is under your AF area, and even CDAF is quite snappy for CDAF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:01:19 No.2702920 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702918
The way it fits in my hand, the lenses (Speed, price, color, contrast, quality, and focal length range), the colors, the detail, the style/setup of the other buttons and controls, the EVF, the burst rate, the support from Fuji, the style, the customization of the body itself, the overall feel and process with the camera.

I love it, and I'd buy it again. I have no use for tracking AF, I have spare batteries at all times anyway, and I've learned the button locations over time. *shrug* The cameras flaws line up well with my usage. The failings of the camera don't affect the type of shooting that I do.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO og.jpg, 62KiB, 1200x630

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:02:08 No.2702921 Report

Quoted By: >>2702922 >>2702925

Pentax full frame camera

most intriguing

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:06:03 No.2702922 Report

Quoted By: >>2702925

>>2702921
>Kit lens 24-70 f/2.8 constant aperture
Ricoh is based

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:06:49 No.2702923 Report

Quoted By: >>2702924

>>2702917
The 70-200 f/4 is a tele lens, and a zoom too, and was featured in two fucking videos doing sports, and there even were shallow DoF shots with OOF areas.

But feel free to test a 85mm Batis f/1.8 (also tele) or whatever on any of the newer A7 bodies or even the A6000, it will probably be fine.

> In this post you proved my suspicion, you don't know a single thing about AF systems.
Grand words, but you're wrong anyways.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:08:17 No.2702924 Report

Quoted By: >>2702935

>>2702923
Then tell me how phase detection autofocus optics work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:09:08 No.2702925 Report

Quoted By: >>2702926

>>2702921
Yes, but how many lenses will they have at release?

>>2702922
Yea, usually the kit lenses are quite good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:14:02 No.2702926 Report

Quoted By: >>2702928

>>2702925
>Yes, but how many lenses will they have at release?
All the most important focal lengths including telezooms with the new D FA range, some of the FF capable DA range and all the FA and F lenses plus the manual A and M film lenses including the takumars. Also with adapters the 645 and the manual 67 MF lenses.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 151110_001-1075x605.jpg, 239KiB, 1075x605

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:16:13 No.2702927 Report

Quoted By: >>2702931

>>2702835
>No professional photographers amongst the customers.
http://lenspire.zeiss.com/en/whats-in-your-camera-bag-greg/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:16:58 No.2702928 Report

Quoted By: >>2702930 >>2703147

>>2702926
Correction:
How many competitive lenses will they have at release.
Fast primes with great AF
Fast zooms with great AF and weather sealing
Ultra fast portrait primes for both body and headshots
Tilt-Shift for architecture
70-200 with no focus breathing and a good MFD, etc.

You know, the sort of stuff to make them even slightly competitive with the companies who have been offering FF cameras for 10 years now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:20:24 No.2702930 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702928
All of those lenses are highly competitive, both in IQ and price.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:21:01 No.2702931 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702927
how much did zeiss pay him?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:26:09 No.2702935 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702924
Microprisms and on-sensor wizards feeding into a microcontroller.

I understand it a little better, but this is absolutely and completely irrelevant to the fact that Sony's AF factually works independently of my understanding of its engineering details.

The "great words" part was anyways about your implied claim that you truly understand how either (PD)AF system is designed in detail when you've been wrong about Sony's actual AF performance pretty much entirely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 17:26:37 No.2702936 Report

Quoted By: >>2702968

>>2702932
It works. It just doesn't work as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:13:17 No.2702961 Report

Quoted By: >>2704611

http://kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-m/m3.htm

>The EOS M3 has the world’s best mirrorless picture quality because Canon has better color rendition than any other mirrorless brand. Canon’s real-world color rendition is far better to the critical artist than Fuji, Sony, or LEICA.

:^)

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:19:10 No.2702964 Report

Quoted By: >>2702978 >>2702980

>>2702779
I just woke up though

Alright anons, I feel it's time I moved up from my Nikon D3100

Would now be a good time to lay some cash down or should I wait for the next big camera updates and then buy used?
I only have about $2500 at the moment so I'm obviously not prepared for pro-gear equipment.
Suggestions? I do a lot of Portraits for freelance and night photography for myself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:22:31 No.2702968 Report

Quoted By: >>2702972

>>2702936
It works as well or better as everything else other than a D4S or 1D III or the like. (These were just the cameras explicitly called a little better at AF in the video reviews linked before in >>2702897 and >>2702913, but you should note how the reviewers think the difference is not big).

The AF system on newer Sonys is basically simply great with sharp native lenses. Easily capable of shooting sports or anything else in typical photography with a very high rate of hits, and a typical /p/ DSLR won't do better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:24:31 No.2702972 Report

Quoted By: >>2702980

>>2702968
No, it doesn't. It really really doesn't. Doesn't even compete with the 7D, let alone the 7Dmk2

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:27:48 No.2702978 Report

Quoted By: >>2702983

>>2702964
D7200 or Pentax K-3
Former if you are established on the Nikon lenses, latter if you want superior lenses with lower prices than the Nikon equivalents.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:29:15 No.2702980 Report

Quoted By: >>2702983 >>2702984 >>2703158

>>2702964
> I do a lot of Portraits for freelance
Lens wise, a Sigma Art on CaNikon or a Batis on Sony probably makes for a very nice upgrade to whatever you have right now.

> and night photography for myself.
Maybe an A7S? Or just make do with a D750. A D4S or A7S II unfortunately is not in the budget range.

>>2702972
It does, you can see it in the video reviews. Or simply when you try it.

Stick good lens on A6000 / A7 II / A7R II, switch to AF-C (PDAF), burst fire at running dude(s) coming at you, watch pretty much everything coming out sharp until you get really close to the minimum focusing distance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:34:07 No.2702983 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702978
>>2702980
Thanks for the suggestions, I'll look into each

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 18:37:12 No.2702984 Report

Quoted By: >>2702996

>>2702980
>it works well if the subject is the only thing on the plane of focus, and is large and obvious in the frame, and the light is good

Watch it fail at football, like we all have, on multiple reviews.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:04:01 No.2702996 Report

Quoted By: >>2703000 >>2703009

>>2702984
> it works well if the subject is the only thing on the plane of focus, and is large and obvious in the frame, and the light is good
I already picked a bunch of videos that show this is not the case. Don't feel like doing it more.

> Watch it fail at football, like we all have, on multiple reviews.
Football? Fine. Let's add more videos:
https://youtu.be/jIakt30iBGY?t=4m18s

> Inb4 this guy likes Sony cameras, his photographs are invalid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:09:23 No.2703000 Report

Quoted By: >>2703011 >>2703013

>>2702996
It's not that he likes Sony Cameras, it's that he wears a silly hat that makes him invalid.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Hasselblad_500_CM.jpg, 863KiB, 2807x2583

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:10:57 No.2703002 Report

Quoted By: >>2703011 >>2703012 >>2703013

In case the /film/ thread is dead:

I could get a Hasselblad 500cm with a 80mm f/2.8 Planar for 400EUR, it's working well, I know how to use one and would love to start medium format shooting.
I have no idea about the prices of Hasselblads though, I did some research and found everything ranging from 200-1000EUR for a used one, I guess 400EUR is still a good price, can anyone confirm this so I will have a little less buyers remorse? Thanks!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:28:16 No.2703009 Report

Quoted By: >>2703013

>>2702996
It's not his chosen brand he likes, it is the fact he is Jason Lanier is what makes him invalid.
Also he is paid by Sony for his reviews.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:28:31 No.2703011 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703000
Heh. /p/ generally should do that, if only to trigger everyone else.

>>2703002
I don't think it is dead, it's just slow.

I don't know the camera, but the Carl Zeiss Planar T* 80mm f/2 used to be a pretty nice lens. Probably still worth $300 or so on its own.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:33:06 No.2703012 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703002
Check the camera for faults, especially the shutter and the film advance mechanism. It is commonly known that the 500cm shutter gets stuck from time to time and it can jam the film advance to the point of snapping the film.
Be always super cautious operating it, no ham fistedness like what a Mamiya, Pentax or Bronica can tolerate.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:34:19 No.2703013 Report

Quoted By: >>2703015

>>2703000
Heh. /p/ generally should do that, if only to trigger everyone else.

>>2703009
> Also he is paid by Sony for his reviews.
I know he was asking for it in his probably most famous YT video, did he get his sponsorship then?

Anyhow, he probably did not bribe the NFL to play extra slow, or use a completely different set of lenses than indicated on that YT video. So that's probably irrelevant within the scope of this thread anyways.

>>2703002
I don't think it is dead, it's just slow.

I don't know the camera, but the Carl Zeiss Planar T* 80mm f/2 used to be a pretty nice lens. Probably still worth $300 or so on its own.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 19:51:07 No.2703015 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703013
>Anyhow, he probably did not bribe the NFL to play extra slow, or use a completely different set of lenses than indicated on that YT video. So that's probably irrelevant within the scope of this thread anyways.
Did he show every single photo he took to show that they're all in focus, and that tracking worked well every time? Did he maybe down-play the issue of tracking a sporadic subject when dealing with viewfinder blackout? etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 20:27:03 No.2703036 Report

Quoted By:

daily reminder even a7rii is not yet ready for prime time
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/shooting-sports.html
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5684109129/lucky-number-7-shooting-pro-sports-with-the-sony-a7r-ii

consider the following:
mirrorless af is speedy, but not necessarily bulletproof like a SLR
mirrorless af is steadily improving, i'd give it a year or two
mirrorless cameras have no pro support network
fuji cannot into af
sony cannot into wide open af and metering
mirrorless users are bandwagoners with lots of money
the fe 70-200/4 is a fine lens. 2.8 is nice, but don't pretend f4 isn't good. jack up the iso on your fancy camera, isn't that why you bought it? enjoy very sharp optics. if macro lenses with limiters had performance optimization at infinity focus, you'd see people use them for more than just macro because of the optics.
>b-b-but muh bokeh

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1444683674000_IMG_539856.jpg, 53KiB, 500x500

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 20:34:27 No.2703041 Report

Quoted By: >>2703046 >>2703783

I'm kind of Jealous of these new Zeiss leenses having rubber gasket to 150% seal the opening to the sensor.

Does anyone know if there is some third party accessories that immitates this and let me apply it to all my lenses?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 20:38:05 No.2703046 Report

Quoted By: >>2703055 >>2703069

>>2703041
That's funny, my kit lens has a gasket.
Actually my kit telezoom also has a gasket.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:36:24 No.2703055 Report

Quoted By: >>2703065 >>2703069

>>2703046
lel pentacks

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:47:50 No.2703065 Report

Quoted By: >>2703071

>>2703055
Sony BTFO

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO pentax-50-200.jpg, 19KiB, 580x397

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:51:50 No.2703069 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703046
same

>>2703055
mine is a pentacks tho

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO sugoi sugoi.jpg, 256KiB, 1280x720

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:53:56 No.2703071 Report

Quoted By: >>2703073

>>2703065
>implying implications
Sony a cute.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:56:39 No.2703073 Report

Quoted By: >>2703074

>>2703071
>magenta ghosting

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:57:43 No.2703074 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703073
It looks great against the black metal. Lens flare a Best.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 21:58:21 No.2703075 Report

Quoted By: >>2703078 >>2703094

Can someone hint me to a good tele lens for nikon cameras around the 1k€ price rate? Doesn't have to be Nikkor, I like Tamron etc. brands too. Thanks

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 22:02:26 No.2703078 Report

Quoted By: >>2703081

>>2703075
What tele range are you looking for? Portrait/event? Sports? Wildlife?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 22:05:00 No.2703081 Report

Quoted By: >>2703092 >>2703093

>>2703078
Potrait/event
I mean wildlife interests me a lot too but it's definetely secondary.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 22:13:13 No.2703092 Report

Quoted By: >>2703093 >>2703102

>>2703081
Sigma and Tamron 70/200 F2.8 are very good, very close to the Canon L lens IQ.
Dunno about the Tamron but the Sigma has IS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 22:15:21 No.2703093 Report

Quoted By: >>2703102

>>2703081
>>2703092
Oh, and if Wildlife is a secondary option then try getting a compatible TC. 2x is still forgiving on f/2.8 and gives suitable reach for birds.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 22:16:44 No.2703094 Report

Quoted By: >>2703102

>>2703075
300/4 AFS for 300mm prime
80-200/2.8D for money saving
Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC for best value

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Nov 2015 22:27:38 No.2703102 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703092
>>2703093
>>2703094
Thanks, much appreciated.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 00:33:54 No.2703146 Report

Quoted By: >>2703298

>>2702826
Read the updates to the article you faggot http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8930601010/samsung-nx1-discontinued-in-europe-rumors-say-yes

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 00:35:32 No.2703147 Report

Quoted By: >>2703162

>>2702928
I still hate how Canon is the only manufacturer with a 50mm f/1.2 with AF

>D-FA* 50mm f/1.2 never

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 00:57:20 No.2703158 Report

Quoted By: >>2703161

>>2702980

What do you mean "make do with a D750"?

I was under the impression the D750 is like the sexiest thing Nikon has ever made outside of the D4S (but who wants that buick of a camera around their neck for 5 hours?)

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 01:00:36 No.2703161 Report

Quoted By: >>2703165

>>2703158
For low light, there is nothing better than the a7s. the D750 is great, but not as good for that one thing, which was what was being discussed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 01:02:42 No.2703162 Report

Quoted By: >>2703166

>>2703147
It's an ultra specialized lens that's enormous, and expensive, and provides very very little over the f/1.4. You lust after it when you're still in your "I need a faster lens to take better photos with more bokeh" phase, but once you come to realize that bokeh doesn't make a photo any better, you start to question the lens's existence in the first place.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 01:09:19 No.2703165 Report

Quoted By: >>2703195

>>2703161

Ok fair enough. There is that one super awkward $20k canon with 2 million ISO. But I think everyone agrees that's just kinda dumb.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 01:11:45 No.2703166 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703162
I don't actually think bokeh makes a photo better or worse, rather I believe it can be used by the photographer to have a certain style or look to their works.

>Question a lens' existence
The same could be said for Canon's 50mm f/1.0 or their old 50mm f/0.95

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 02:13:25 No.2703195 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703165
just for your knowledge, that camera was made more for a security camera means that for being an actual camera.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2015-11-12 at 11.19. (...).png, 34KiB, 296x224

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 04:23:49 No.2703257 Report

Quoted By: >>2703271 >>2703663

does anyone else stay up till midnight to see the "deal zone" rollover to the next item? It's the worst symptom of gearfaggotry but it's such a nice feeling when something you need shows-up for like 80% off. I'm waiting now. 36 minutes to go.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 05:11:57 No.2703271 Report

Quoted By: >>2703273

>>2703257
No chance. Hope you're at least taking photos or something until it happens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2015-11-13 at 12.15. (...).png, 139KiB, 1011x397

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 05:17:07 No.2703273 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703271
I've found a few things on there that I've bought for super cheep (camera bag, some audio gear) but yeah, it's pretty hit-or-miss.

although today there's a good discount on some nice nocks that my /out/ friends might like

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 05:36:26 No.2703278 Report

Quoted By:

Panasonic 12-32 or 20/1.7? Looking for something compact and cost effective. Basically, zoom convenience with sharp enough sharpness, or one of the best pancake primes ever with slow AF?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 05:46:22 No.2703280 Report

Quoted By: >>2703286 >>2703379

Are there any Australian online stores that offer good deals on photography equipment? I've looked at a fair few and so far none of the prices are cheaper than what I can get from an Ebay seller in Japan.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 06:02:19 No.2703286 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703280
lolno

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 06:18:14 No.2703298 Report

Quoted By: >>2703456

>>2703146
It's a done deal.
>Those who do not read the EOSHD Forum will be unaware of the context of this article. (1) In October various South Korean news platforms claimed Samsung were conducting an internal reorganisation of the imaging department with NX staff assigned to other areas of the imaging business such as smartphones and medical.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 11:46:42 No.2703379 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703280
Remember you still need to pay tax on stuff from Japan.

Ubi !wvAYL/zaDg

Ubi !wvAYL/zaDg Fri 13 Nov 2015 12:31:19 No.2703385 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702878
What will you be using it for? Any specific type of photography? Budget? Anything you currently own?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 16:06:56 No.2703456 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703298
If it was true then you would see price drops in every market, not just at one European dealer.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled-1.jpg, 1MiB, 1600x1067

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:12:19 No.2703482 Report

Quoted By: >>2703483 >>2703491 >>2703501

See pic related. 100% crop from a shot.

I rented a 23mm for my X-E2 recently, and noticed that all the details are really muddy and look like a watercolour. Is this a problem with the lens or the sensor? I usually use M-mount lenses on it and have never noticed this before.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:13:44 No.2703483 Report

Quoted By: >>2703493

>>2703482
Shit, sorry. Thought the EXIF was in it.

>Fuji X-E2
>Fuji 23mm ƒ1.4
>ISO 400
>ƒ2.8
>1/60th

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:20:40 No.2703491 Report

Quoted By: >>2703497 >>2703498

>>2703482
because you tried to edit a fuji photo in adobe software.

Adobe never bothered to get their algortihms right for fuji raws, so you get weird swirly, soft details.

Should have bought a sony.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:22:04 No.2703493 Report

Quoted By: >>2703497

>>2703483
>>Fuji 23mm ƒ1.4
how you rike this lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:25:43 No.2703497 Report

Quoted By: >>2703507

>>2703491
So what should I be using instead?

>>2703493
I thought it was quite loud to focus, you could here it clunking as it moved, but otherwise I really can't fault it. I rented it because I was thinking of buying it, but I just don't really like the focal length. I think I'm going to get the 18mm ƒ2 instead. Works out nicely because the 18mm is less than half the price.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:27:04 No.2703498 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703491
>Should have bought a sony.
Or just used a different converter.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1447434739928_wut.jpg, 208KiB, 1200x1200

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:33:42 No.2703501 Report

Quoted By: >>2703503

>>2703482
To me it looks like noise reduction + sharpening gone full retard. Do you raw or jpg?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:35:51 No.2703503 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703501
It's a RAW, I just exported the JPEG from Lightroom without touching anything. I'm reading up on alternative programs now, going to give Photoninja a try.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:41:31 No.2703507 Report

Quoted By: >>2703514

>>2703497
>So what should I be using instead?
Photoninja, Raw The Rapee, Iridient Developer, Capture One etc., etc.

Even the Fuji/Silkypix freebie disc you got with the camera will give you better detail that Adoe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:46:34 No.2703512 Report

Quoted By: >>2703541

I have a bright spot on my shots no matter which lens I use, in the exact same spot. It isn't dark like sensor dust, is this a scratch or what the fuck is going on? D7100

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:51:09 No.2703514 Report

Quoted By: >>2703539 >>2703558

>>2703507
Thanks. Stealing PhotoNinja now. I just read Iridient Developer is the best, but I prefer the look of the PN interface. Am I right in saying I can convert the RAW to a TIFF in PhotoNinja, then use the TIFF in Lightroom to use my presets? From what I've just read, I think that would sidestep the issue I'm having.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 17:57:14 No.2703520 Report

Quoted By: >>2703600

Can you guys brief me on the Canon 10-18mm 1:4,5-5,6?
I'm considering getting it for architecture and landscape shots, already have a 24mm 2,8 for low light and street environments, is this a rational addition? Or are there any alternatives in the same price range (up to 250€)?

Body is a 600D.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:16:36 No.2703537 Report

Quoted By:

Recently got a fuji X-E1 as well as a MD to FX adapter so I can use my old minolta lenses. Wanted to try out some macro photography but it seems that the MD mount is pretty much limited to the 50mm f/3.5 or the 100mm f/4. Anyone got any experience with those lenses? Also not really experienced with macro photography but wouldn't I normally want as much light as possible? Kind of concerned with the relatively low f stop number there.

Are there any good manual glass alternatives for other mounts maybe (m42, FD etc.?)

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:18:30 No.2703539 Report

Quoted By: >>2703558

>>2703514
Yes, that's possible.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _DSC6890.jpg, 1MiB, 2000x1333

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:19:02 No.2703541 Report

Quoted By: >>2703542 >>2703548

>>2703512

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _DSC6741.jpg, 571KiB, 2000x1333

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:20:05 No.2703542 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703541

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:25:38 No.2703544 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702826
Time for firesale? I'll take it if I can get the NX1, 16-50 f/2-f/2.8, and 50-150 f/2.8 for $2500 or less.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:31:02 No.2703548 Report

Quoted By: >>2703566

>>2703541
clean your sensor, pay a professional or use a sensor loupe.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2015-11-13 at 18.25.47.png, 53KiB, 607x297

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:44:52 No.2703558 Report

Quoted By: >>2703565

>>2703514
>>2703539
Every time I open a Fuji RAW. Canon and Sony RAW's are fine; crashes every time I open a Fuji.

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:53:49 No.2703565 Report

Quoted By: >>2703587

>>2703558
This is a pirated copy, right? What OS, what version, etc?

I use the portable version that's floating around out there, if you wanna try a different file. Mines 1.2, but I honestly don't even know what it's up to these days. I'm happy with this copy I've had forever.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:55:20 No.2703566 Report

Quoted By: >>2703573 >>2703585

>>2703548
I have used rocket air and wet cleaned my sensor twice and the bright spot is still there. It also flares up like a mother fucker with backlighting, which sensor dust doesn't, to my knowledge.

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Fri 13 Nov 2015 18:57:58 No.2703573 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703566
That definitely sounds like a (deep) scratch on the sensors glass. If you lock the mirror up and move it around in direct sunlight you'll probably see it. I suppose it could also be some bright white debris of some kind, but that seems less likely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:19:51 No.2703585 Report

Quoted By: >>2703648

>>2703566
Did you look through a loupe like I suggested?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:24:20 No.2703587 Report

Quoted By: >>2703591

>>2703565
Yeah, pirated. I suspect that's the problem.

I'm on OS X 10.9.5, and I downloaded v1.0.5. If you have an OS X version, I'll give it a try! All I really want to do is convert the files to TIFF so I can use them in LR.

isi !QyKYlWUTgk

isi !QyKYlWUTgk Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:32:58 No.2703591 Report

Quoted By: >>2703604

>>2703587
I doubt the portable version I use is OS X compatible, but yeah I'd look for another file, ideally a newer version since, if I've had 1.2 for like 1.5 years, who knows how old 1.0.5 is?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO leica-camera-copyright-yukio-miy (...).jpg, 68KiB, 400x250

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:35:11 No.2703592 Report

Quoted By: >>2703594 >>2703604 >>2707965

Can you recomend me analog rangefinder. It must be:
-under 200$
-with light meter
-with changeble lenses or nice prime

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:38:18 No.2703594 Report

Quoted By: >>2703595

>>2703592
olympus xa

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:41:21 No.2703595 Report

Quoted By: >>2703602

>>2703594
and something with metal body

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:45:42 No.2703600 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703520
Guys?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:51:05 No.2703602 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703595
...olympus xa.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 19:55:05 No.2703604 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703592
Look at the Olympus 35- range. The 35-SP is the top of the range, there's also a 35-RC which is smaller with a slower lens and I think there are some others, too. They're brilliant cameras. The 35-SP has a stunning lens. I'm thinking of getting it converted to M mount.

>>2703591
Thanks, isi. I couldn't find anything newer than 1.0.5 for OS X but I'll dig a little deeper.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 22:49:52 No.2703643 Report

Quoted By: >>2703646

hello /p/

looking to pick up photography as a hobby when I move to my co-op position. interested in night shots playing around with different exposures and pov's.

was thinking about waiting for black friday to find a good deal.
any ideas on what I should be steering away from or focusing on? Price range is max 1000

thanks

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 22:58:32 No.2703646 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703643
>>1971605

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 23:02:31 No.2703648 Report

Quoted By: >>2703651 >>2703653

>>2703585
I think I may have found something with the loupe but I also see a bunch of other shit just like it that isn't causing any issues, so I'm still confused. Contacted Nikon and they wouldn't say what it was, just that it would cost $150-280 to replace. camera is worth $400 used, guess it's upgrade time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 23:14:44 No.2703651 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703648
so you confirmed your sensor was dirty as shit, decided not to clean it to see if it helps and call the camera a write off. Have you even tried a different lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 23:15:20 No.2703653 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703648
Yes, it's not sensor dust.
Dust will always show up darker, never brighter.

I have no idea what it is.
But one thing you could do is correct it in Lightroom, save it as a preset and apply it on every picture on import.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 23:57:16 No.2703661 Report

Quoted By: >>2703675 >>2703681

So Gearfags,

i just traded my A6000 for a 1dsNK II because muh fullframe and because i didnt really like the A6000

need lens advise, i shoot mostly portrait. i am poor. i am not a bokeh whore.

nifty fifty + 85 1.8 ?
or
nifty fifty + 70-200 f4 no is ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Nov 2015 23:57:39 No.2703663 Report

Quoted By: >>2703667

>>2703257
Youre wasting your life.

Go out and shoot instead

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Empty Pockets.jpg, 142KiB, 590x840

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 00:19:15 No.2703667 Report

Quoted By: >>2703688

>>2703663
i most certainly am NOT wasting my life anon. I have a real job, and a freelance business, neither of which is photography. i do my togging for fun and with friends in my spare time. i don't sit around all day on the internet or waiting for the "deal zone" to rollover. I just am usually doing my evening unwind/cuppa tea around midnight so out of habit i check to see what the new deal is after 12. i do the same with musician's friend's "stupid deal of the day" sometimes too. most of what i keep an eye out for is good deals on audio gear, but there are a few togging accessories i'd buy if they were super discounted as well. it's prudent to check for deals sometimes when you have an expensive hobby or profession is all

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 00:29:05 No.2703675 Report

Quoted By: >>2703684

>>2703661
Nifty fifty and Tamron 70-200mm VC

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 00:46:18 No.2703681 Report

Quoted By: >>2703684

>>2703661
> i just traded my A6000 for a 1dsNK II because muh fullframe and because i didnt really like the A6000
You are an odd one.

> nifty fifty + 85 1.8 ?
Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 AS IF UMC

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 01:05:23 No.2703684 Report

Quoted By: >>2703724

>>2703681

No MF Lenses for me, thats the only point where the A6000 was good.
I also already have a nikkor 105 2.5 AI i could adapt instead of buying a korean plastic lens.

>>2703675
Tamron pls go. i want original canon glass, that is readily available used.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 01:17:00 No.2703688 Report

Quoted By: >>2703692

>>2703667
>togging
christ, fuck off back to erickim.com why don't you

#streettog #instagood #filmisnotdead

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 01:21:39 No.2703692 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703688
>erickim.com
never heard of it

>#filmisnotdead
i've never shot on film and have no interest thereto.

i'm perfectly happy to continue with my digital walkin' and toggin' thank-you-very-much. also i like it here, i think i'ma get cumpfy and stay awhile ^_^

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 02:51:15 No.2703724 Report

Quoted By: >>2703828

>>2703684
70-200/4 > 85, unless you don't actually ever use telephotos for telephoto things, in which case, 85.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 07:14:53 No.2703778 Report

Quoted By: >>2703780

A question of interest:

I'm planning on moving to Sony A6000 and use my current Canon lenses. Will the image stabilization on my 24-105 work if I get an electronic adapter?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 07:18:35 No.2703780 Report

Quoted By: >>2703781

>>2703778
I think support is still sometimes dependent on which adapter specifically.

You can see the compatibility of the Metabones options here:

http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB-EF-E-BT4

http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-E-BT2

Answer in this case is yes, IS works.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 07:19:26 No.2703781 Report

Quoted By: >>2703784 >>2704302

>>2703780
Huh. What about the Commlite adapters though? I was planning on getting one of those because the Metabones adapters cost nearly as much as a native lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 07:27:30 No.2703783 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703041
how much sealing does 150% provide

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 07:34:41 No.2703784 Report

Quoted By: >>2703785

>>2703781
Dunno, sorry. You'll have to look it up yourself.

I think there also were Viltrox & Fotga and some more ...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 07:46:46 No.2703785 Report

Quoted By: >>2703792

>>2703784
There's also Techart, Yongnuo, and Fotodiox, and some off brand ones, I'm really irked by how they only support Canon-made Canon glass and not the other manufacturers

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 08:17:55 No.2703792 Report

Quoted By: >>2703934

>>2703785
I think the first Nikon one has been presented recently, no? And of course they made lots of simple adapters for a lot of systems.

I guess it was perhaps maybe primarily Canon because they best understood how to reverse engineer that (or reverse engineered the adapter that managed to do it)?

It's not exactly an industry of open standards...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 10:31:52 No.2703817 Report

Quoted By: >>2703930 >>2704072

I think I'm going to grab a D7200 due to advice from another anon - it'll be an upgrade from my D3200

Any final concerns? I've been looking up reviews a ton but I honestly trust anon a little more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 11:25:51 No.2703828 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703724

i want to use telephoto also for telephoto things like squirrels and far away stuff.

so nifty fifty and 80-200 it is

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 12173092853_a72688af72_b.jpg, 176KiB, 1024x586

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 15:00:25 No.2703874 Report

Quoted By: >>2703876 >>2703877 >>2703894 >>2703930

hey /p/
is the 18-105 3.5-5.6 a shit tier lens, cuz any pictures i take with it, come out soft and sometimes blurry. could it be the D7000 or should I get new lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 15:06:38 No.2703876 Report

Quoted By: >>2703880

>>2703874
Lens should be sharp enough

Are you new? Plenty of common beginners' mistakes giveblurry photos
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2014/12/02/10-reasons-your-photos-are-blurry/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 15:08:45 No.2703877 Report

Quoted By: >>2703880 >>2703885 >>2703886

>>2703874
It's shit but it's probably mostly you, good news is that you get to learn a bunch of technique and the payoff will be glorious. Slap it on a tripod, ISO 200, slow shutter speed, put it in 10s timer mode, and stop down to F8 or so just to see how sharp it can be.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 15:16:16 No.2703880 Report

Quoted By: >>2703886

>>2703876
>>2703877
yeah i've looking into all the stuff. tripods, remote releases, you name it. I end up really pumping up the sharpness in post, but its results are less than par.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 15:30:20 No.2703885 Report

Quoted By: >>2703886

>>2703877
>Slap it on a tripod, ISO 200, slow shutter speed, put it in 10s timer mode

Eh?

He should just go OUTSIDE (hard, I know).
Shutter around 1/1000s will eliminate any motion blur.

Alternatively use flash.

A long shutter on a shitty tripod will always be a bit blurry due to wobble.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 15:32:44 No.2703886 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703877
>>2703880
>>2703885
Im thinking of getting a fast 50. 1.4 probably, if I find one cheap

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 16:13:05 No.2703894 Report

Quoted By: >>2703895

>>2703874
It is a bad lens if you ask me, but my standards are high.

Get a Sigma Art 18-35mm or a Sigma Art prime or something. Much better lenses.

That said, "sometimes blurry" is probably more a case for a tripod or shorter exposures & stabilization, because that's usually you shaking your hands when it's not clearly subject motion blur.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_1401.jpg, 3MiB, 4928x3264

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 16:18:13 No.2703895 Report

Quoted By: >>2703899 >>2703904 >>2703930

>>2703894
i guess, but see for yourself. I took this with a tripod, and a timer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 16:54:43 No.2703899 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703895
Yes, that is very likely the lens that can't quite resolve like the sensor, and of course regular out of focus areas in the foreground...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 17:06:28 No.2703904 Report

Quoted By: >>2703997

>>2703895
"It as sharp as a butter knife" - Kai #2

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO manfrotto_mkcompactadv_bk_compac (...).jpg, 219KiB, 2500x2500

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 17:15:18 No.2703909 Report

Quoted By: >>2703916

OK, I would like to ask for some advice. I want to make shots of various PCBs. Game consoles, PC motherboards, etc. Since this needs the camera to be pointing downwards, I figure I need either a camera stand that can either
- flip the center column upside down, or
- tilt the entire center column at 90 degrees.
The latter is unreasonably expensive for my budget (around $100), so instead I'll be going with a huge tripod standing above the things I want to shoot.

I'm using an old Canon EOS 450D (aka Rebel XSi), with the EF 50mm 1:1.8 II lens. I also have a EFS 18-55mm IS lens, but I like the prime lens better. Obviously this will mean adjusting the camera height often, depending on the size of what I'm shooting.

What camera stand would be the most ideal for this? I'm looking at the Manfrotto Compact Advanced as being the best choice for my purposes. It can do what I need, and it is very cheap. It also comes with a normal head, not one of those ball-joint free moving ones. Those don't strike me as less precise (since you adjust everything freely, instead of being able to manually adjust each rotation axis).

My other question is, what settings would be the most ideal to achieve a high depth of field? From what I've read (and experimented), I'd need a high F-number, and either good lightning + low shutter speed or high shutter speed in bad lightning (since high f-number means less light comes through the closed lens). I figure with a tripod and an improvised lightbox with 2-3 light sources, I can use high F numbers comfortably, since neither lightning nor stability will be a problem.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DiC-MiC-E302C.jpg, 135KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 17:37:38 No.2703916 Report

Quoted By: >>2703924

>>2703909
> What camera stand would be the most ideal for this?
Dic&Mic E302 or E302C surely would work.

As would pretty much every high enough Benro or Sirui or such that has an invertible column..

> It also comes with a normal head, not one of those ball-joint free moving ones. Those don't strike me as less precise (since you adjust everything freely, instead of being able to manually adjust each rotation axis).
No, pan-tilt heads are pretty shit, ball heads are much more useful.

And I also don't like the proprietary manfrotto plates. And I started with them, RC5 and RC2 specifically. Arca swiss standard plates, all the way.

> I'd need a high F-number
Yes, increases your DoF

> and either good lightning + low shutter speed or high shutter speed in bad lightning
If low means fast and high means slow... maybe?

Though at high f-stops you generally just need good lighting AND high ISO sensitivity and/or long exposures (slow shutter speed).

> I figure with a tripod and an improvised lightbox with 2-3 light sources, I can use high F numbers comfortably, since neither lightning nor stability will be a problem.
"Comfortably" is mostly about whether you have a flashlight or *extremely* strong continuous light.

Having 2-3 light sources is more about getting more even / interesting lighting than total light output.

I'd advise primarily using big-ish diffusers on the lights. Light box only as-needed. Faster and more flexible to work with.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 18:03:17 No.2703924 Report

Quoted By: >>2703928

>>2703916
>Dic&Mic E302 or E302C surely would work.

Unfortunately not available where I live... however, my other choice, the Hama Traveller Premium Duo 146, seems to be the EXACT SAME stand.

I wanted to go with either that, or the Manfretto, or perhaps one of the Vanguards. The Manfretto was on sale so I looked at that, but the more I read about it, the more I dislike it (no bubble meter, levers can get in the way in macro modes, etc).

>No, pan-tilt heads are pretty shit, ball heads are much more useful.

My concern is that I want the camera to be perfectly aligned to the ground, so it is not "tilted". I thought that was easier with pan-tilt heads? But if the ball heads have a bubble meter on them, then I guess they can be just as good.

>If low means fast and high means slow... maybe?

ahaha, yes, my fault there. by "low shutter speed" I meant that having the shutter set to a lower time, making it work faster (and allowing less light to come through).

I'm still not comfortable with all the terminology. I'm new at using professional cameras. But my old disposable camera was not good enough for the type of photos I want to make (too many things are "automatic" on it).

>Having 2-3 light sources is more about getting more even / interesting lighting than total light output.

Yup, that's what I'd want. I have 2 or 3 ~40w bulbs in front of transparent sheets to diffuse the light. All home made cause I'm a poor bastard. Requires a lot of fucking around, but it gets the job done.

I think I might put the diffusers on top of the cameras instead, so they work like umbrellas. That way I wouldn't have to work in the confines of a stupid shitty box.

Thanks for the advice. I'll look into it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 18:18:20 No.2703928 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703924
>Unfortunately not available where I live
I did not expect it to be, and it is not available domestically here either. I just ordered it from China, shipping is included in the $90 (alu) / $120 (carbon) price.

> the Hama Traveller Premium Duo 146, seems to be the EXACT SAME stand
No, the additional lock on the center column is missing and the head is different too. As are other details, such as the weight and (extremely much) the load rating.

Not to say it might not be the same company or something (there are also MeFoto, Horusbennu and so on that look pretty comparable), but it's not the same tripod.

> I thought that was easier with pan-tilt heads?
It is easier with somewhat decent ball heads because you can precisely operate and lock them in place, and they'll also be easier for many other shooting situations (which I imagine might happen at some point).

> Yup, that's what I'd want. I have 2 or 3 ~40w bulbs in front of transparent sheets to diffuse the light. All home made cause I'm a poor bastard. Requires a lot of fucking around, but it gets the job done.
Speedlights are like 200+ times brighter, even though just for a short moment.

If your constant lights turn out to be a problem, I'd just get one or more YN560 III / IV.

> I think I might put the diffusers on top of the cameras instead, so they work like umbrellas.
Dunno why they need to be on top of the camera? Also, actual umbrellas are like $3-5 each in China.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 18:19:59 No.2703930 Report

Quoted By: >>2704056

>>2703817
>trusting anon
If you can live with shadow banding and small buffers, D7100s are cheap. $500 refurbs from Cameta through Newegg, <$600 average used price. D7200 is $900 grey market (no warranty), $1200 US market.

That's the difference of a 35/1.8DX right there.

>>2703874
>>2703895
That's really strange; there's no detail at all in the photo. Try something indoors, with detail. The good ol' brick wall always work. I want to say that picture is subject to haze, but it shouldn't be that bad.

Try AF fine tuning with the D7000.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 18:21:01 No.2703931 Report

Quoted By: >>2703944 >>2703946

I'm selling all my gear, (5DIII, 24-105L, 50 1.4, 70-300 4-5.6 Tamron), and looking for a pocket sized camera with best image quality under $1200

Looking at the sony RX100 IV, any other small cameras I should be looking at?

full frame is a plus
I'd like good dynamic range, good low light performance, decent zoom range w/ fast lens if lens is fixed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 18:32:53 No.2703934 Report

Quoted By: >>2703954

>>2703792
Thing is, the new Nikon smart adapters only support AF-S lenses, meaning that you won't get AF if you're using older AF or AF-D lenses, and what sucks is that the LA-EA2, and LA-EA4 are the only smart adapters with screw drive motors

And by other manufacturers I meant Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron, all of whom make Canon mount lenses, that don't work with smart adapters

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 18:55:08 No.2703944 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703931
LX100

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 19:02:50 No.2703946 Report

Quoted By: >>2704059

>>2703931
>pocket sized cameras
>full frame

The RX100 is your only choice. The next closest would be X100, LX100, and RX1R II. None of which are pocketable in anything but a large jacket pocket.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 19:21:45 No.2703954 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703934
> Thing is, the new Nikon smart adapters only support AF-S lenses, meaning that you won't get AF if you're using older AF or AF-D lenses
Maybe it'll still happen at some point, but sure support for Nikon lenses is only starting to get developed.

Arguably, I can't even think of much AF / AF-D glass that I'd rather use than E-mount glass, though, even if it were perfectly supported...

> And by other manufacturers I meant Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron, all of whom make Canon mount lenses, that don't work with smart adapters
I am pretty sure I saw someone use a Commlite + Tamron zoom lens somewhere, but I guess support for 3rd party lenses is more sparse than for Canon's own lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Nov 2015 22:04:50 No.2703997 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703904
ayy lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 01:23:08 No.2704056 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703930
Thanks a bunch for the help anons this was my first time posting on /p/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 01:38:55 No.2704059 Report

Quoted By: >>2704067

>>2703946

but the rx100 isn't full frame either

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO TaxiSquad.jpg, 251KiB, 616x786

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 01:57:49 No.2704065 Report

Quoted By: >>2704070 >>2704121

Gentlemen.

Recently purchased a 750d as my first DSLR and with it the 50mm (1.8). Been doing mostly street and it's fairly adequate. But i've been considering getting a prime with shorter focal length as the 18-55mm it came with is garbage. Something with a decent f. , had a look at the ef-s 24mm but wasn't overwhelmed, but i can't justify (or afford) the red ring range.

Just wondered if anyone knew of anything else, not specifically Canon, maybe Sigma idk. Anything that someone's had experience with?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 02:06:40 No.2704067 Report

Quoted By: >>2704104

>>2704059
Not saying it was, rather I was implying
>pocketable
>full frame
>get out

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 02:15:45 No.2704070 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704065
Tamron 35mm 1.8
Or the Sigma 18-35 1.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 02:25:24 No.2704072 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703817
i just upgraded from a d3200 to a d7200. you'll definitely appreciate the increased af points/coverage, af motor, and 1080p60 recording

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 02:55:43 No.2704081 Report

Quoted By:

I want to invest into a nice set of ND filters, where should I be looking?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 04:06:17 No.2704104 Report

Quoted By: >>2704105

>>2704067
>What is the rx1

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 04:09:22 No.2704105 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704104
>rx1
>pocketable

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 04:47:30 No.2704121 Report

Quoted By: >>2704129

>>2704065
I have a 70D, and Sigma 18-35 1.8

Shit is amazeballs

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 05:18:15 No.2704129 Report

Quoted By: >>2704131

>>2704121
>amazeballs
Kill yourself

On a serious note though, how much do you like the 18-35mm? Also why is the 18-35mm on the 70D considered so good? I've heard a fair few people say the same thing but I'm not sure why.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 05:29:17 No.2704131 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704129
I like it enough to recommend it for anyone using an APSC body who wants a wide-normal zoom, and would recommend it over any prime in that range

I don't know specifically about other brand bodies but at release the 70D offered a massive improvement in video AF over anything else Canon offered at that price point. The Sigma is an excellent choice for videography on an APSC body.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 06:30:23 No.2704144 Report

Quoted By:

Canon EF-S 10-22mm 1:3,5-4,5 USM

yay or nay?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 06:43:45 No.2704149 Report

Quoted By: >>2704185

How does the rx100 fare against the later variants? I heard they're all the same image quality wise except for low light performance. Before I grab a mk1, how true is that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 09:36:58 No.2704184 Report

Quoted By: >>2704257

my eos m at iso 6400 looks better than a6000 at iso 3200.
just saying.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 09:39:19 No.2704185 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704149
the ii have bsi sensor. slightly better iso performance. the iv is the same bsi with stacked ram. so it can shoot fast now. iso is the same.

the iii and iv have better lens but shorter telephoto.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 10:21:33 No.2704195 Report

Quoted By: >>2704198 >>2704199 >>2704411

I dont know to much about weather resistance in cameras, which ones are more capable? Which ones are full frame? etc etc. wat do

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 10:39:32 No.2704198 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704195
bentacks k3ii.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 10:51:24 No.2704199 Report

Quoted By: >>2704445

>>2704195
Anything Pentax except K500 and K-S1.
K-30/50 are budget tier
K-5/5II/5IIs are cheap pro tier
K-3/3II are pro tier

All have better weather resistance than a 5DMkIII

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 14:20:30 No.2704252 Report

Quoted By: >>2704254 >>2704255 >>2704259

I could buy a DSLR from a guy i know, but not sure - right now I'm still using compact (rx100ii)

It's a Pentax K-x with a 18-55 and 50-200 lens, i think they're both kit lenses from a double zoom kit or something. i'd get that for 150€ so roughly $160. worth it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 14:27:21 No.2704254 Report

Quoted By: >>2704255 >>2704261

>>2704252
I have the WR variant of the 50-200, is pretty good for a kit telezoom
Both of those lenses are much better than Canikony kit lenses
sharper, more contrast etc...
Definitely worth the €150

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 14:28:26 No.2704255 Report

Quoted By: >>2704261

>>2704254
>>2704252
Also get the 35mm f/2.4 too, pretty cheap and sharp as fuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 14:33:14 No.2704257 Report

Quoted By: >>2704561

>>2704184
No it doesn't
The Canon has better jpg profiles, but I don't think anyone around here doesn't go straight into raw editing.

Well apart from isi because she's a Talentless hack, that insists "fuji jpgs" are amazing, they are amazing compared to the shit she comes out with that she tries to edit herself. But you shouldn't use someone else's complete lack of skill as a yardstick.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 14:34:53 No.2704259 Report

Quoted By: >>2704261

>>2704252
For $160 yes it is worth it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 15:01:40 No.2704261 Report

Quoted By: >>2704264

>>2704254
>>2704255
>>2704259

Thanks for the advice. I really consider buying it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 15:07:54 No.2704264 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704261
Don't consider it, buy it and start shooting. Later when you are ready to move on to a used K-5IIs or K-3 you will already have a decent set of lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 16:28:55 No.2704289 Report

Quoted By: >>2704290 >>2704312

Has anyone had any experience with the canon 85mm 1.8? I've had the 50mm for a while but the auto focus leaves a lot to be desired. I'd go for the 1.2 but...yeah i don't want to have to sell my organs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 16:34:42 No.2704290 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704289
Its fast, its a great lens. I prefer how the rokinon 85mm f1.4 renders colors but it has more chromatic aberration at f1.4 and is manual.

While the canon is pretty much fucking fast.

Anonymous !!uPiHYFPeJke

Anonymous !!uPiHYFPeJke Sun 15 Nov 2015 17:12:03 No.2704302 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703781
I've been using the Viltroy one for some time now and the IS support works like a charm. Haven't had any issues with it yet.

Also, aren't the Viltrox/Commlite adapters the same thing?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1447517564278.jpg, 26KiB, 468x600

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 17:31:45 No.2704307 Report

Quoted By: >>2704310

/old/ is dead, can /gear/ help?

What's a compact flash for a Zenit 11? Google isn't very helpful and I'm not very smart.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 17:37:55 No.2704310 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704307
Look for Helios flash units, 228 or 38 are what I found with a 10 second google search

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 17:39:14 No.2704312 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704289
I've got one. It's great. AF is fast and accurate, lens is durable and photos look great. Lots of purple/green fringing wide open with reflections, but stopped down a little, it's fantastic.

AF is actually fast enough that I use it on a 7D for concerts sometimes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 19:59:11 No.2704381 Report

Quoted By: >>2704388 >>2704389 >>2704408 >>2704437

I've been saving for an A6000 (poor college kid) for a while and I'm wondering if I should use the sel1855 lens I currently have with it. Does anyone have any recommendations for a similarly priced e-mount zoom lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:08:24 No.2704388 Report

Quoted By: >>2704396 >>2704550

>>2704381
Get a nifty 35.
Those are cheap and much more capable than your kit lens.
Also the a6000 is not that much different from the NEX 6 or 7, you can find them much cheaper used

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:09:27 No.2704389 Report

Quoted By: >>2704550

>>2704381
>I currently have
Use it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:20:11 No.2704396 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704388
you get pick up a sigma 30mm for like 100ish

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 25468_D7000_left.png, 146KiB, 700x595

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:53:25 No.2704407 Report

Quoted By: >>2704413 >>2704418

friendly reminder that if we replaced every gear thread with "buy a second-hand D7000 and figure the rest out yourself" our fellow anons would have far more time, money and dignity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:54:27 No.2704408 Report

Quoted By: >>2704550

>>2704381
>poor college kid
>spending money on a camera for no actual benefit

you're making poor life choices anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:56:43 No.2704411 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704195
7D2 is very heavily sealed as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 20:58:55 No.2704413 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704407
>not getting a D7100 and dealing with the banding by not pushing shadows 5 stops in return for better AF and processor, all for maybe $100 more

But you're right tho senpai

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 21:12:11 No.2704418 Report

Quoted By: >>2704421 >>2704432 >>2704438 >>2704710

>>2704407
>not getting Pentax with it's superior weather sealing and multi-purpose sensor shift stabilization
It's like you don't want people to have fun with photography

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO hi_five_pentax.png, 16KiB, 493x402

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 21:16:23 No.2704421 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704418
this

https://youtu.be/sXv2HTQCK6k

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 21:37:12 No.2704432 Report

Quoted By: >>2704434

>>2704418
>implying the D7100 doesn't have pro-level weather sealing
Or I guess people with D300s and D800s are all wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 21:40:19 No.2704434 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704432
>implying the D7100 has a buffer

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 21:56:46 No.2704437 Report

Quoted By: >>2704550

>>2704381
Sure. Use the 1855.

> Does anyone have any recommendations for a similarly priced e-mount zoom lens?
The 55-210 f/4.5-6.3 that is also in the two lens a6000 kit is quite decent for its price. Might be a good addition to your 18-55.

But I actually generally shoot with primes. You could add a Sigma Art 30 or 60mm f/2.8 or something like that to augment your 18-55.

The 60mm might be a little long depending on what you do, but it's really good if you need really sharp shots. One of the cheapest lenses that is this sharp that I'm aware of.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 21:59:20 No.2704438 Report

Quoted By: >>2704439

>>2704418
I have been using an unsealed 5Dmk2 since a month after it was released. I have never once had it ruined by water. In fact, I don't know of a single photographer who has had a camera broken by rain, snow, or any other sort of thing that weather sealing protects from.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 22:01:40 No.2704439 Report

Quoted By: >>2704441

>>2704438
gimme a break friendo

https://youtu.be/Eo61t5fH6Qw

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 22:11:11 No.2704441 Report

Quoted By: >>2704443 >>2704446

>>2704439
gimme a break friendo

not that I don't think Pentax lives up to its reputation for sealed cameras, but that's hardly a test. No usage of the zoom rings to get the dust and water into the moving parts, and certainly not an endurance test which would be a real test of the weather sealing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 22:15:29 No.2704443 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704441
fair enough but i doubt he would damage his cameras just to pull a fast one on the youtubes

"ha ha joke's on you i actually wrecked my fucking lenses lel"

not bloody likely! also i will give you a break. we're now even on break-givings and we can agree to disagree i spose

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 22:20:46 No.2704445 Report

Quoted By: >>2704448

>>2704199
>tfw K-3 mark iii will never get video with the K-5's bitrates

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 22:21:48 No.2704446 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704441
I did a whole day shooting in torrential rain.
Even the kit lenses stood right up to the reputation. Pentax cameras and lenses are beasts when it comes to weather.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Nov 2015 22:24:40 No.2704448 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704445
Who cares about video? Pentax makes cameras primarily for outdoor stills.
I don't want a do all camera. You know, jack of all trades master of none? I want my camera to be masterful in stills no matter where I go.
If I wanted a stupid video camera I probably went for a Panasonic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 00:10:38 No.2704493 Report

Quoted By: >>2704496 >>2704546

>Current situation

T2i + kit lens + Canon 1.8 50mm , old and trusty. Somehow I've made it through a couple of jobs as an on site photog, and a lot of video work, even with meager equipment.

I also use it for travelling and street.

Lately I've found myself taking less and less pictures since I don't want to carry the camera and bag all day with me. My phone is already there.

>Looking at

Selling it, and getting an a6000. The problem is that I love the amount of control my t2i (plus magic lantern) gives me, and I am having second thoughts about buying a camera on a whole other lens system. I think that canon glass (EF mount) is much more versatile, specially for video.

What do? What glass should I get for the a6000? I can only get the body plus a lens at first.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 00:16:52 No.2704496 Report

Quoted By: >>2704507

>>2704493
Are you still using it for money? Stay with Canon.

Do you want something light and small for travel? A6000 and SEL2028 and 55-200 in the bag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 00:25:21 No.2704500 Report

Quoted By: >>2704546

Is it just me, or are some of the most compact and sharpest lenses for M43 Panasonics? 12-32 is tiny when not in use and sharp for a kit lens, 20/1.7 is old but very sharp and tiny, 14/2.5 is tiny and gud, 35-100/4-5.6 collapses to a size barely larger than a FF 50mm prime.

>muh matching aesthetics with olympus bodies tho

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 01:15:53 No.2704507 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704496

While not something permanent, I do get a job everyonce in a while htat requires a proper DSLR

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 01:57:06 No.2704510 Report

Quoted By: >>2704511 >>2704546

Alright /p/, I've scrounged myself 2000 dollars. What does /p/ recommend? I'm upgrading from a Canon T2i with the kit lens and a 24mm prime, but I don't want to get more lenses for it if I'm going to switch.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 01:58:12 No.2704511 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704510
I should also add I'm going to use the camera more as a jack-of-all-trades, not specific for much of anything.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 03:25:37 No.2704546 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704493
> I think that canon glass (EF mount) is much more versatile, specially for video.
I don't feel the glass is the problem. You can get quite a bunch of that, and also use a bunch on adapters.

But the a6000 isn't a particularly strong camera for video. Rolling shutter, 30m recording restriction, and so on...

A Panasonic GH4 or a better Canon might be a better decision if you need a video-focused combination.

> What glass should I get for the a6000?
A really good prime? Dunno what you like, though.

>>2704500
Sharpest lenses are currently for Sony E-mount, overall.

But Panasonic is surely doing quite good for compact lenses.

>>2704510
I like the Sonys. Have a look at the A6000, A7 II, A7S.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:18:46 No.2704550 Report

Quoted By: >>2704553 >>2704559

>>2704388
I'm kind of used to zoom lens since the cameras that I've used in the past have had them, will consider it though.
>>2704389
Figured
>>2704408
I like taking photos and editing them, and this won't be putting me too far back monetarily.
>>2704437
Regarding the 55-210, I'm seeing prices for it that are almost $100 less than what I originally spent on my 18-55, is it as good? Also I've never used a prime lens before, but if I have the money I'll check out the lenses you mentioned.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:23:02 No.2704553 Report

Quoted By: >>2704555

>>2704550
No, it's shit (acceptably so), but also the only E-mount telephoto option.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:30:00 No.2704555 Report

Quoted By: >>2704557

>>2704553
>only E-mount telephoto option
What do you mean? There are other more expensive ones, unless you were referring to the price range.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:44:34 No.2704557 Report

Quoted By: >>2704560

>>2704555
Like what? Nobody's lugging a 70-200/4G around, certainly not on an A6000. And then there's the...

That's it. Superzooms don't count, adapted lenses don't count.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:46:21 No.2704559 Report

Quoted By: >>2704565

>>2704550
>Regarding the 55-210, I'm seeing prices for it that are almost $100 less than what I originally spent on my 18-55, is it as good?
It's also kinda kit lens-y. I'd call them about equal overall.

Here are some general shots:
https://pixelpeeper.com/lenses/?lens=13241

Here's what it will do with an achromat close-up filter lens:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3453401

> but if I have the money I'll check out the lenses you mentioned.
The good thing about these are that they should be cheap. ~$150 new in some places, maybe ~$200 in the USA.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma60f28dn/pool/

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:49:54 No.2704560 Report

Quoted By: >>2704570

>>2704557
> Nobody's lugging a 70-200/4G around, certainly not on an A6000
I'm lugging a 90mm FE macro around on an A6000 quite often, and I'd do it with a 70-200/4G too, if that interested me.

> And then there's the...
Various vario-tessars? 18-105? 18-200? A bunch more I don't remember??

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:50:04 No.2704561 Report

Quoted By: >>2704707

>>2704257
yes it does.
i never said the raw has less noise.
it's the grain patterns.
on sony it looks horrible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:53:31 No.2704563 Report

Quoted By: >>2704568

So /p/ I was after a compact camera and wondered what you guys recommend
these are the cameras I have been considering so far lx100, rx100iv,rx100iii and g7x

I would really like one that is good in low light

also other camera recommendations welcome

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:54:21 No.2704565 Report

Quoted By: >>2704595

>>2704559
Alright, thanks for the suggestions and examples. Generally I was happy with the quality coming from the 18-55 mounted on a Nex-3n, I'm assuming I'll be happy with it on the 6000 as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 04:59:15 No.2704568 Report

Quoted By: >>2704574

>>2704563
> I would really like one that is good in low light
Get an A7S.

No, it's not entirely compact, but it's at least actually good in low light.

The RX100 IV and G7X are only relatively good for their size, but ultimately they'll start to trouble you quite much already in conditions where your eyeballs are doing okay.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO a6000.jpg, 53KiB, 1024x507

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 05:02:24 No.2704570 Report

Quoted By: >>2704595 >>2704643 >>2704912

>>2704560
I'm of the opinion that mirrorless cameras should hold to being compact. Yeah, you can use your big telephoto, but I personally wouldn't bother with anything approaching this big.

The 90mm macro is gud, but with macro lens AF speeds.

Both options are over $1000.

The 18-xx are all super zooms. I'd rather carry the 20/2.8 and the 55-210 than a super zoom.

>Sony really needs to step it up on E-mount

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 05:04:18 No.2704574 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704568
Thanks for the suggestion will look into it

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 05:50:44 No.2704590 Report

Quoted By: >>2704593 >>2704597 >>2704602 >>2704706

So I'm thinking of jumping on the mirrorless bandwagon because I don't shoot enough nowadays, except when touristing.

I have a Canon EOS 6D a few primes and a 24-70mm f/2.8 VC USD, which is my favorite lens.

Is the a7 a good enough replacement or should I pony up an extra $1,500 for the a7II?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 05:54:18 No.2704592 Report

Quoted By:

Looking to purchase my first real camera to get in to photography. I've been looking in to it for a couple weeks now and just would like to hear your guys' suggestions. I got a few photography books from the library on Friday and have begun familiarizing myself to different concepts.

Ideally I would like something relatively portable, and I plan on doing architectural photography and possibly wildlife if I can find time off work. The Sony A6000 has caught my eye but I would like a second opinion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 05:54:33 No.2704593 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704590
>Is the a7 a good enough replacement
For a camera you don't use? Sure it is! You could also just try not using the camera on your cell phone to not take pictures!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 05:59:45 No.2704595 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704565
Yea, I'd think so, too.

>>2704570
>The 90mm macro is gud, but with macro lens AF speeds.
It is quite fast for a macro lens, as far as I'm concerned.

In day- or studio light and when using the focus limiter at 0.5m - infinity, you can almost always get focus in 0.5s or under, and refocusing nearby is basically instant. Macro might be three times longer in the worst case that is still well lit, but I can take that too.

It does get much slower in low light, though. Takes maybe 6 times as long then.

> I'm of the opinion that mirrorless cameras should hold to being compact.
I'm of the opinion that it is just a good APS-C, and got it for that reason.

> Both options are over $1000.
Sure, a lot of options are. Just pointing out they exist too, not just the 70-200 f/4.

> Sony really needs to step it up on E-mount
They might have to in order to get you as customer, perhaps. I'm not leaving the system as things are, they're doing really great in terms of both cameras and bodies as far as I'm concerned.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:01:36 No.2704597 Report

Quoted By: >>2704598

>>2704590
I'd get the A7 II, or A7S.

> I'm thinking of jumping on the mirrorless bandwagon because I don't shoot enough nowadays, except when touristing.
... this is however a weird justification. Oh, they're *very* nice cameras, but what makes you think you will use them when you almost never used the 6D?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:05:42 No.2704598 Report

Quoted By: >>2704605

>>2704597
Just a tad easier to lug around when touristing. Planning to go back tp Japan, Europe and a bit of America all next year.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:14:37 No.2704602 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704590
used a7 + 28mm f2

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:23:07 No.2704605 Report

Quoted By: >>2704608 >>2704609

>>2704598
Hm, probably get the A7 then, and some great lens(es).

Sure, the A7 II would still be nicer for multiple reasons, but I'd personally not take it over the A7 on a small world trip if it budget wise got in the way of buying another great native lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:36:33 No.2704608 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704605
a7 for native lens.
a7ii for clusterfuck. new firmware will pdaf with 3rd party lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:38:54 No.2704609 Report

Quoted By: >>2704614

>>2704605
I'm guessing I can do a straight swap/trade for an a7 with my 6D and I should be able to get some money for my Canon and Tamron 24-70mm lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:49:59 No.2704611 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702961
>tfw just switched from an M3 to an X-E1
>tfw switched because I preferred the quality from the Fuji and the colours
>tfw Ken gave the X-E1 a ridiculous review.
And I love colors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 06:52:41 No.2704614 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704609
> and I should be able to get some money for my Canon and Tamron 24-70mm lenses.
You'll have to consider if there aren't any you'd still use on an adapter - but overall, it might be a plan.

Personally I don't think I'd bring much more than a 25mm Batis f/2 or 28mm f/2, 55mm Sonnar F/1.8, and a 70-200 f/4. (Consider some of these, as relatively expensive as they are, you might quite probably like them.)

Makes about 2kg of equipment on camera and lenses, plus batteries & travel tripod.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 108_1023929364.jpg, 18KiB, 605x368

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 07:09:27 No.2704619 Report

Quoted By:

>>2702778
found this for 18€, should i just buy them
also selling
15 x Ektrachrome 64x Professional for 45€
good deal ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 08:53:56 No.2704643 Report

Quoted By: >>2704663

>>2704570
>70-200 f/4 that is both the size and costs as much as the competitor's 70-200 f/2.8s

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 11:02:29 No.2704663 Report

Quoted By: >>2704978

>>2704643
Has a lower weight at 850g rather than ~1.5kg, and marginally better IQ overall than those f/2.8.

It should be noticeably cheaper than the f/2.8, too.
Very comparable to a Nikon f/4G of the same FL in terms of price and weight, actually.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 11:26:24 No.2704668 Report

Quoted By: >>2704839

Don't know much about analog photography gear.
I have a Nikon FE2 and I am looking for a good 35mm lens.
Any recommendations?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 12:32:38 No.2704689 Report

Quoted By: >>2704697 >>2704698

Gf and me want to get into macro photography. She has a 550D and I have a 6D, tripod and a speedlite.

Can you recommend a good lens which fits for both bodys and is there something else we need for macro photography?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 12:51:42 No.2704697 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704689
that new F2.8 65mm macro lens
goes up to 5:1 ratio

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 12:52:26 No.2704698 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704689
> Can you recommend a good lens which fits for both bodys
Maybe a Canon EF 100mm F2.8 L IS USM? Or some 200mm.

You could also get some extension tubes and achromat close-up filter lens & adapter rings in case the other person wants to shoot something macro with their telezoom or whatever at the same time. Not as good as a macro lens, but not too bad either.

> is there something else we need for macro photography?
Not really.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 13:26:06 No.2704706 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704590
I use an a7 and been incredibly happy. Notice how fast prices drop on second hand sony bodies (due to constantly releasing new models). Once the a7iii is out the a7ii will go under $1k.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 13:29:17 No.2704707 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704561
Jesus fucking Christ you're a moron

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 13:37:20 No.2704710 Report

Quoted By: >>2704715

>>2704418
If you're not rich you should get a Nikon or Canon so you can buy used lenses

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 13:47:15 No.2704715 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704710
troll/10

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 16:49:47 No.2704799 Report

Quoted By: >>2704839 >>2704848

Is a Nikon D5300 good entry level camera?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 18:23:21 No.2704838 Report

Quoted By: >>2704848 >>2704857 >>2704860

Which lens would have more bokeh for portrait photography, 85mm f1.2 or a 70-200mm f2.8? Also, does anyone have some kind of graph that shows how far back you'd have to stand to frame the same subject at different focal lengths?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 18:24:20 No.2704839 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704668
Nikkor 35/2 AIs. not like you have choices. you have the positively pedestrian 35/2.8, and the abtastic 35/1.4. the 35/2 is pretty sharp in the center, falls off to the sides faster than a modern lens.

>>2704799
yes, if you get the body under$500

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 18:57:00 No.2704848 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704838
85mm f/1.2.

Maybe give a Sigma Art 50mm also some thought too.

>Also, does anyone have some kind of graph that shows how far back you'd have to stand to frame the same subject at different focal lengths?
It depends on the camera?

But once you know one setting its simply linear. Basically, if your 20mm exactly frames the subject in that camera orientation at ten meters, a 40mm would frame it exactly at twenty meters. Doesn't really need a chart.

>>2704799
Depends on what you want to shoot, and with what glass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 19:34:18 No.2704857 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704838
Search depth of field calculator in your favorite search engine.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 19:36:35 No.2704860 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704838
Also you mean which lens will give the shallowest depth of field. Bokeh is the characteristics of the out-of-focus elements of the image. You can have good or bad boked, not more or less.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 19:50:18 No.2704872 Report

Quoted By:

Hey /p/ I'm looking to buy a compact digital for travelling and just general photo taking when going places. I've done some research and now turn to you for advice.

I've shortlisted two cameras, the Sony HX60 and the Panasonic TZ70. Just wondering if anyone had any feedback on either of them? Or maybe suggestions for other models I've overlooked.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 19:56:24 No.2704877 Report

Quoted By: >>2704878

If I wanted to take pictures of something outside through a window from inside at night, would I be able to use a CPL to take a photo of the outside without seeing a reflection on the window?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 19:58:45 No.2704878 Report

Quoted By: >>2704883

>>2704877
A commercial pilot license will make no difference for your pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 20:04:59 No.2704883 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704878
http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/accidents/pilots-personal-camera-nearly-causes-crash

I bet some of this guy's shots were amazing

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 795665322_e5D5Z-S.jpg, 37KiB, 400x267

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 21:33:08 No.2704912 Report

Quoted By: >>2704923

>>2704570
Why did Sony have to make it white though? Same shit with the silver 1st gen 70-400 for A-Mount. Looks ugly as hell.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 21:44:41 No.2704923 Report

Quoted By: >>2704934

>>2704912
Pro lenses has to be white, you didn't know?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 22:03:11 No.2704934 Report

Quoted By: >>2704942

>>2704923
but then why was the 70-400 silver?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 22:09:26 No.2704942 Report

Quoted By: >>2704945

>>2704934
silver is white-ish at certain angles
also Sony trying to be different
that's how they become fags

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 22:10:49 No.2704945 Report

Quoted By: >>2704952 >>2704954

>>2704942
Silver is the tackiest color for plastic.
Truly disgusting.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Canon-EOS-400D-Digital-Rebel-XTi (...).jpg, 30KiB, 347x300

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 22:21:33 No.2704952 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704945
Agreed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 22:23:13 No.2704954 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704945
silver, high gloss chrome, and gold are the tackiest colors for anything, period.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:21:20 No.2704975 Report

Quoted By: >>2704979

I'm in the market for a good tripod that can fit rucksack. Any suggestions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:22:40 No.2704978 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704663
>Sony has a fetish for f/4 zooms
>4 is an unlucky number in Japanese Culture

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:23:04 No.2704979 Report

Quoted By: >>2704983

>>2704975
Benro, Dic&Mic

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:28:11 No.2704983 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704979
thanks bro

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2015-11-16-15-30-17.png, 148KiB, 1080x1920

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:31:11 No.2704984 Report

Quoted By: >>2704985

What possible scam is this?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:33:28 No.2704985 Report

Quoted By: >>2704989 >>2704993 >>2705117

>>2704984
Nikons are trash, that is the actual value of that package

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:47:16 No.2704989 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704985
Doesn't matter now. Someone snatched that up real quick. Still wonder if it was a scam or not. User joined this month and has zero feedback

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Nikon_D5100.jpg, 176KiB, 1500x1125

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:49:05 No.2704991 Report

Quoted By: >>2704992 >>2704994 >>2705004

I'm getting into photography, but photography on the go is though because the only legitimate digital camera I have is a Nikon D5100. I'm torn between the Nikon COOLPIX S7000, Fujifilm XF1, and Samsung WB350F. I have a budget of about $250.
>thank

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:49:49 No.2704992 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704991
>Samsung

Great idea anon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:50:50 No.2704993 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704985
>hurr durr

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:51:31 No.2704994 Report

Quoted By: >>2704995

>>2704991
Get a pancake lens or a 35mm for the DSLR
Best on th go combo for everything.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:53:28 No.2704995 Report

Quoted By: >>2704996 >>2704999 >>2705002

>>2704994
The weight of the body is what is keeping me from taking it places. it makes my purse heavier than what I'd like it to be. The other cameras I listed are are pretty light in comparison.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:54:55 No.2704996 Report

Quoted By: >>2705000

>>2704995
RICOH GR
I
C
O
H

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:56:58 No.2704999 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704995
Try the gym fäm

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:57:03 No.2705000 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704996
$250 BUDGET
2
5
0

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:57:23 No.2705002 Report

Quoted By: >>2705003

>>2704995
you use your phone

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:58:40 No.2705003 Report

Quoted By: >>2705006

>>2705002
I have a lower end Windows phone. The camera isn't that great.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Nov 2015 23:59:01 No.2705004 Report

Quoted By: >>2705008

>>2704991
what about a nikon 1? Small but still interchangeable lenses. The older models aren't that expensive used.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:00:02 No.2705006 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705003
Get a better phone

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:00:16 No.2705007 Report

Quoted By: >>2705009 >>2705011

So if I'm looking to get into photography would a used/refrib Pentax K-50 be a good place to start?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:00:59 No.2705008 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705004
Good suggestion, but I'm looking for a non-interchangeable lens camera. Thank you, though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:01:31 No.2705009 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705007
At which price?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:01:49 No.2705011 Report

Quoted By: >>2705017 >>2705020

>>2705007
Yes. Actually it is the best bang for buck after a used K-5II
Google O-GPS1 for it

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:10:09 No.2705017 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705011
Sweet thanks

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:16:37 No.2705020 Report

Quoted By: >>2705024 >>2705027

>>2705011
oh and what kind of lenses should I be looking at? Kind of at a loss here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:23:45 No.2705024 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705020
The kit lenses both the standard and the telezoom are nice. If you are getting with the standard kit I suggest you get the 35mm/2.4 or 50mm/1.8 primes and the 55-300mm telezoom
If without the kit lens, then get a 16-45mm or a 16-85mm and the above mentioned. You don't have to buy them all at once, just one at a time, but get the primes as soon as you can. They make a lot of difference compared to the standard kit lenses.
Also get a adapter, remove the spring and you can use the cheap old M42 lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 00:28:05 No.2705027 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705020
also see http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/ and http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 03:36:48 No.2705117 Report

Quoted By:

>>2704985
You are one retarded cunt

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 19:13:22 No.2705459 Report

Quoted By: >>2705485

I currently have a Nikon D40 and am looking to upgrade to the D5500. I currently get it for $530 new. Does /p/ anticipate any sales for this model during Black Friday or Cyber Monday that will see the price go below $530?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 17 Nov 2015 20:08:56 No.2705485 Report

Quoted By:

>>2705459

As soon as you swipe your credit card whatever it is that you just bought will immediately go on sale. Such is life. Drown tears by enjoying new camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 22 Nov 2015 12:11:54 No.2707965 Report

Quoted By:

>>2703592
I just bought a Minolta 7 S II, it has a 40mm f/1.7 lens that can resolve individual power lines at 200mm.

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

On these archives

Your latest searches

Gear Thread