/p/ - Photography » Thread #3071088

[21 / 5 / ?]

37KiB, 640x382, image.jpg

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 00:51:27 No.3071088 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3071135 >>3071253 >>3071348 >>3071751 >>3071753 >>3071764 >>3072705 >>3072744

If I want to take great photographs, do I need a DSLR or can I get away with paying $150-$200 for something like a Nikon Coolpix L340?

I'm looking for a camera that can replicate what the eye sees, which is not something a phone camera for instance is capable of. If I take a picture of the moon with my phone for instance, all I'll see is a blurry white dot. What sort of camera can pass this moon test?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 02:17:34 No.3071135 Report

Quoted By: >>3071236

>>3071088
You don't know what you want or need, or if what you think you want even exists. If you think you do, you fucked up before you even started.

read the sticky before posting

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 04:53:59 No.3071236 Report

Quoted By: >>3071809

>>3071135
That doesn't answer my question and I'll thank you not to shitpost in my thread.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1480771026141.jpg, 330KiB, 889x874

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 05:34:59 No.3071253 Report

Quoted By: >>3071647 >>3071755

>>3071088
>I'm looking for a camera that can replicate what the eye sees
Doesn't exist. What is close to it is a Sony A7s with a Stanley Kubrick's 50mm f/0.7 lens.

>What sort of camera can pass this moon test?
Any camera with a 15000mm lens (24x36 equ.)

>Nikon Coolpix L340?
Aahaaahhaaa. No.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 08:50:50 No.3071348 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071088
You can take "artistically" great (at least to many) photographs with a smartphone. Or tits or cute kittens, they'll get even more views more easily.

Great in terms of technologically great (good image reproduction with good color accuracy, fast shooting speeds, and a lot more things) are all basically on MILC / DSLR and professional film cameras with matching lenses.

Ideally you'd take a higher end camera setup for ~$5k-7k or so even just for the "eye" sight. [Good photos of moon is 1-3 times as much again for a decent to great telescope.]

Plus then upgrades to your PC, storage, backup, printers, software expenses... at least it's pretty cheap as compared to how early photography was like, it's not throwaway expenses for most people.

Arguably, I figure like many here you'll have not enough motivation and will -if you buy anything- get some MFT or APS-C or low end FF DSLR/MILC somewhere under $2000 as a compromise. Maybe even somewhere under $800.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 19:08:17 No.3071647 Report

Quoted By: >>3071745

>>3071253
You realise the eye has a 2.0 equivalent aperture,right? We see better in the dark because our visual processing is so good, not pure light gathering.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 21:47:04 No.3071745 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071647
We see so good in the dark because we have individual ISO in every receptor and the way it detects light makes noise low and DR high.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 21:52:48 No.3071751 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071088
You're always going to have to interpret reality using good knowledge of your gear. The brain is able to isolate and interpret what the eyes see in a way that a camera just isn't smart enough to do.

Get a decent entry to mid-level DSLR or mirrorless with manual controls and learn to use it. Point-and-shoots and bridge cameras are going to limit how well you can interpret what you see and will try to interpret things their own way with automatic settings etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 21:57:01 No.3071753 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071088
>which is not something a phone camera for instance is capable of. If I take a picture of the moon with my phone for instance, all I'll see is a blurry white dot.

That's because the phone is over exposing.

Any decent phone camera will let you change the exposure or at least spot meter on the focus point.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Sony-A7s-Light-Sensitivity.jpg, 150KiB, 700x350

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 22:01:26 No.3071755 Report

Quoted By: >>3071760

>>3071253
>cameras can't see well in the dark.

Not even a Sony shill but god damn.

And that's just video, if you take stills you can use a slower shutter and get even better low light pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 22:10:52 No.3071760 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071755
>not a Sony shill

Then what kinda eyes you got, compadre?!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 22:18:39 No.3071764 Report

Quoted By: >>3071828

>>3071088
>I want to take great photographs
Buy the cheapest DSLR you can find ($75).

When you start taking great photographs think of upgrading.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 07 May 2017 23:25:09 No.3071809 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071236
already fucked up you are, my dude

warned you and everything

Michigan !5B1.wtYSfM

Michigan !5B1.wtYSfM Sun 07 May 2017 23:59:58 No.3071828 Report

Quoted By: >>3071898

>>3071764
This. Amazon's got a used Nikon D80 for $100.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 08 May 2017 00:58:24 No.3071846 Report

Quoted By:

>my eye lense is in the$150-$200 range
feels bad mang

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO demon_pepe.jpg, 47KiB, 470x595

Anonymous Mon 08 May 2017 02:29:30 No.3071898 Report

Quoted By:

>>3071828
>mfw I still use my D80 since 2007 and haven't upgraded yet

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 May 2017 06:32:10 No.3072705 Report

Quoted By: >>3072744

>>3071088
Taking a picture of the moon involves a tripod and a very fast aperture. Here are some ideas, but you can also find other tutorials. https://photographylife.com/how-to-photograph-moon/
However it will be better if you take a DSLR, doesn't have to be the latest stuff but you need at least something that starts at 200 ISO, or best 100.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 09 May 2017 08:30:33 No.3072744 Report

Quoted By: >>3075513

>>3072705
>>3071088

Depends on the moon phase.

Full moon can be done with a slow lens because it's a huge light source in the sky when fully illuminated. Just need really long reach, preferably around 400mm or higher. Tripod is definitely a must.

I have seen a friend take someone's telescope and use their iphone on it to take the moon though. So there is always that option.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 13 May 2017 19:31:17 No.3075513 Report

Quoted By:

>>3072744
That's true, i've heard the smartphone on telescope can work somehow.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0452[1].jpg, 1MiB, 4608x3456

Anonymous Sun 14 May 2017 05:42:06 No.3075755 Report

Quoted By: >>3075831

This is what I could get out of a Canon Powershot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 May 2017 08:41:54 No.3075831 Report

Quoted By:

>>3075755
Looks fucking terrible lmao

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