[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 119 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks Make sure to check your spam box!



File: 85mm.jpg (231 KB, 1140x549)
231 KB
231 KB JPG
Samyang edition

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRKpcgm-byA

This is the thread where we discuss everything related to gear.
Don't be a jerk and be polite.

Previous thread>>3444234
>>
>>3449164
That little snub nosed 85 looks like a winner! Takes me back to the old days of that canon 85 and 50 f/1.2
>>
>>3449164
Forgot to ask, any hint on how much it might cost in USD or KRW? Would also have liked to see a few portrait shots to get an idea of the sharpness in general/wide open.
>>
>>3449173
That definitely was a subtle jab at Sigma. Who could only add an extention tube to their existing DSLR lens.

This one is brand new.
It's still a little bit longer than the EF-mount version, but that's simply because EF-mount yields more room for camera, and less room for the optics.

>>3449175
700 Euro.
So 700 dollars in best case, 800 dollars in worst case.
>>
>>3449175
I think you will see this at $500 or less very soon, the sony 85 1.8 is a phenomenal performer and that extra half a stop isn't worth much on a lens you're gonna want to stop down to f2 anyway.
>>
If we're lucky this one won't have any asphericals.

Meaning 0 onion bokeh.
>>
I bought the Sigma 16mm and 30mm. Great lenses and used them now quite a bit. Then I got GAS and bought the 56mm as well, I wanted to take pictures of people and stuff but I found little use for it now. Should I return it? It was 430€ and I have three options at 50mm, the Sony 16-50, Sony 55-210 and a Canon FD 50mm.
>>
tl;dr: How do I know which 3rd party lenses fit my camera?

So here's my problem: I recently bough a Nikon D3500. I had a 50mm 1.8D lens and now I can only use it on full manual. So I found the "compatible lenses" list, and it shows the lenses that can be used in A/S priority modes (biggest issue I have is not being able to auto focus, really). Anyway, when I'm looking at third party lenses, how am I supposed to figure out which lenses are compatible with my camera? Nikon lenses have that designation thing (D, G, etc) but others do not.

Please help.
>>
>>3449194
just check if it has autofocus or not, it's that easy.
tamron, sigma, tokina, samyang etc. makes it really easy for you.
>>
>>3449195
Thanks, friendo. Let's hope for the best.
>>
>>3449202
There's some incompatability nikon has with their own lenses on the d5/3xxx series aside from not having a screwdriver autofocus mechanism but I'm pretty sure that does not apply to 3rd party lens brands.
>>
I fell for the lighting meme and bought an AD200 (even though I'm mainly a street photographer). What is the most lightweight, portable lighting accessory setup I could buy to make the most of it?
Note that I only carry a backpack and I do have a gf to work as my lighting assistant (though I'd prefer to keep her workload minimal)

sorry repost but I came in super late in last thread
>>
>>3449195
>>3449209
This is not entirely true.

For modern third party lenses, you should be fine. However, older used third-party lenses designed for Nikon cameras in the film era will probably be designed with an in-body focus motor in mind.

Unfortunately, there’s not really an easy way to be sure other than doing the research.
>>
>>3449235
I was gonna say... I checked and the f/1.8D that I own, does have "AF" on it. But it doesn't actually auto focus. So I'm not sure of anything anymore.

Too many acronyms on lenses, not enough explaining going on.
>>
>>3449164
>tfw I bought the Sony 85 1.8 for 400 dollars two weeks ago
I'm not sure if I got a good deal anymore.
>>
File: D3S_2883-side-1200.jpg (228 KB, 1200x1074)
228 KB
228 KB JPG
So I've been shooting landscapes and whatnot hiking for a couple of years now on phones and I want to make the step up to a dedicated camera. I do some easy mountaineering too so it has to be somewhat weather resistant and climbing action shots benefit from a fast camera. I'd like to keep my body budget right around $500. I've got an old manual 70-200mm Nikon lens I'd like to be able to use. I was thinking the D7000 seems like a well built quality camera for my purposes.

Thoughts and recommendations?

tl;dr need a cheapish digital camera for landscapes and climbing action shots with Nikon and weather resistance being pluses.
>>
>>3449240
You bloody well know it's worth it. That thing is like 350 grams.

The laws of Diminishing returns begin past F1,8.
Sigma's F1,4 is 1200 grams or some shit like that.
Samyang's new F1,4 is rumored to be 570 grams.
But that's still 200 grams above your lens, that is significant still.
>>
>>3449243
I guess I'll just have to wait for the Samyang's reviews and not get buyer's remorse :]
>>
The New Samyang lens confirmed free from onion rings.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7RM2
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.0.5
PhotographerChristopher Frost;Samyang
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)85 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution350 dpi
Vertical Resolution350 dpi
Image Created2019:02:28 20:26:27
Exposure Time1/40 sec
F-Numberf/1.4
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1250
Brightness-3.5 EV
Exposure Bias1.3 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length85.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width7952
Image Height5304
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastHard
SaturationHigh
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3449263
That's not how you check for rings. You need small specs.
>>
>>3449242
You should be able to get a used d7100 for under 500
>>
Anyone here try the Sigma 70-200/2.8 on a Sony body? I'd like to have that zoom range when I'm in Japan, but don't want to shell out the Gmaster shekels.
>>
>>3449294
If you needed that lens and didn't want the GM, then you should have bought into a different system in my opinion.
>>
>>3449294

Just get the F4 version if you can't get the gmaster. If you're gonna be shooting landscapes, you won't need the 2.8.

>>3449298

Everyone "wants" the GM, but not everyone can afford it. I think people look at these things and just assume they buy $2400 lenses to take snapshits of their cats, but when you get into that price range you should at least be attempting to make some of that money back.
>>
File: 1539651845791.png (1.83 MB, 1920x1080)
1.83 MB
1.83 MB PNG
>>3449302
>Just get the F4 version

The Sigma is 2.8 and costs the same as Sony's F4 version. Sure you'll probably spend like $300 more on the Sigma if you don't already have the MC-11 adapter, but it still beats the alternative.
>>
>>3449292
Is it better?
>>
>>3449242
For 500$ you should get a new Pentax K-s2 and an adapting ring. Pluses are, you'll get a new and tropicalized DLSR with some other bonuses
>>
>>3449333
not him but having owned/used both, fuck yes but not substantially
the d7100 improvements over the d7000
>24MP
>better feeling body and layout
>tons QOL changes
>better af
>slightly better sensor
not too different but it's worth considering getting the d7100 instead of the d7000 just for that.
the d7100 is nikons second best built APS-C camera after the d500 and the successor didn't really add anything other than more QOL and a new processor I belive?
and this is coming from personal use, the d7100 can handle extreme colds without shutting down, not as good as pentax >>3449344 mind you but still extremely good weather sealing, that goes for both the d7000 and d7100.

d7000 = $300
d7100 = $500
take your pick.
>>
>>3449294
While we're asking about 70-200, was there any truth to that rumor about a new Tamron 70-200 2.8 for Sony? I last heard about it back in November/December then nothing. If it drops with same good quality as thr 28-75 2.8 I'd jump on it. Def can't justify the GM myself
>>
>>3449372
It's bound to happen eventually.

"How soon" will depend on how forward thinking Tamron is.
>>
>>3449242
D7000 is a great value used.
$300ish is not uncommon
>>
m50 or gx85 for youtubefagging? both can be had for $500 rn, with the gx85 coming with 2 lenses and the m50 with 1
>>
>>3449226
Can confirm this is portable.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Godox-Multi-functional-Umbrella-Softbox-WITSTRO/dp/B00SYC4ZH0
>>
>>3449384
gx85
better vid
>>
noob question, what's the micro 4/3 equivalent of the 50mm 1.8?
>>
>>3449395
Panny 25mm 1.7
>>
>>3449395
A complete equivalent (as in, same images in same conditions) would be Voigtlander 25/0.95, but it's kinda heavy, expensive, and manual. If you aren't trying to replicate full frame with a quarter frame sensor and just want a "nifty fifty", there's Olympus 25/1.8 and Panasonic 25/1.7, they're more or less the same so get whatever you can find cheaper.
>>
>>3449390
GX85 has no mic input. That can be a deal-breaker.
>>
>>3449384
>>3449390
A G7 or G80/85 would be better
>>
>>3449395
vogtlander f0.9, m.zuiko f1.2, m.zuiko f1.8, panaleica f1.4, pana f1.7, kowa f1.8

meike 28 f2.8, 30mm f1.4 sigma, and two 30mm macros if you're stretching it a bit.
>>
>>3449411
desu I'm planning to record audio externally anyway

>>3449413
honestly I want the smallest camera I can get away with, just cause I also want to carry it on me every single day
it looks like I could put the gx85 with a small prime lens in my jacket pocket easily, not so much with the g7
plus that stabilization
I don't like how the gx85 doesn't have a flip out screen but I was planning to repurpose one of my old android phones to mount under the camera and display a feed through the wi-fi app, could be a neat little project if I wanted to vlog in the future
>>
>>3449384
m50, you want the better autofocus, flip screen and less noise from bigger sensor over ibis, a lens optical stabilization plus some digital stabilization is more than enough for youtube faggotry.
m50 is pretty close to the perfect budget youtube camera.
>>
>>3449423
That's silly advice.
>optical stabilizaton over ibis
>crop video
I love that cam otherwise. But cam with crop vid is not something you'd advise to someone planning on primarily making video with it.
Ibis is also vastly superior to optical stab when shooting video. That said, the one in gx85 is still of older Panasonic design when they were quite a bit behind Olympus.
>>
>>3449239
D lenses are the ones preceeding the G, so they'll all need a screwdrive to focus properly. Same with every other D lens you'll find.
>>
>>3449164
Not strictly gear related, but how does one become a shill/influencer? Can you just send an email to sony/canon/nikon once I have enough followers or do they approach me? I see so many "photographers" who get to travel anywhere and get all the latest gear and all they do is post generic landscapes and shit like straight up holding up a product in front of a waterfall, or shots of their shoes on a rock or whatever with extremely generic descriptions and a Lightroom preset.
Like this guy https://instagram.com/shortstache?utm_source=ig_profile_share&igshid=13mfh61l3tvp0
and this guy https://instagram.com/cassheridan?utm_source=ig_profile_share&igshid=1c3scdwogbufg
They travel together and use the exact same LR preset, 20% of their shots are ads, 20% shots of their hands/feet, half of the rest are tourist snapshits of prominent buildings and the rest is like wildlife and landscape.
This looks so easy and comfy, I want in. do I have to spend heaps on travelling and bot accounts and wait for someone to reach out to me or can I just build a portfolio and mail it to the advertising department?
>>
File: four stops.webm (1.75 MB, 1280x720)
1.75 MB
1.75 MB WEBM
>>3449294

This guy on the FM forums did a pretty good review of it on the a7riii. I'd say it's worth it:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1580765/0
>>
what's a good, cheap wide FX lens? Right now I have a 50mm 1.8, a 105mm 2.5, and 70-300, but I could use something wide that doesn't break the bank. 35mm 1.8s are pretty reasonably priced, but I worry that it's not different enough from 50 to be worth it. I'm perfectly fine with old, manual focus, or third party lenses so long as the optical quality is decent
>>
>>3449497
D610 if that matters (I don't see why it would, since I'm willing to convert a non-AI lens if necessary)
>>
>>3449344
It seems more like an entry level camera
>>
File: 123.jpg (332 KB, 2000x1333)
332 KB
332 KB JPG
KMZ announced Zenitar 50mm f/0.95 for Sony E. 1200g, 14 diaphragm blades. Price will be around 50k RUB, which is ~770$ at the current exchange rate.

https://prophotos.ru/news/21059-zenitar-0-95-50-dlya-sony-e-anons-i-pervye-fotografii

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-6400
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)82 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:03:15 18:38:24
Exposure Time1/100 sec
F-Numberf/3.5
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating2500
Lens Aperturef/3.5
Brightness0.2 EV
Exposure Bias-0.7 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length55.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2000
Image Height1333
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3449434
with the gx85 you get a permanently cropped sensor.
ibis is overrated unless you are doing vlogging or some other dumb shit where you cant hold the camera properly.
>>
>>3449555
Just last week I was researching options for f/0.95 and saw the mitakon speedmaster 50mm and a few others. I couldn't help but wonder if they'll ever make one of them with an AF drive? Would it considerably jack up prices and weight then? If not, should I just cave in and try something like the mitakon speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 and a Fotodiox/Techart adapter (for Sony). For once I would just like to see what it's like first hand to shoot that shallow DOF. The most I own is a 1.8
>>
>>3449563
The AF motor would constantly be working at full crank back and forth to keep anything in focus at f/0.95, given that the DOF is so shallow. Even the upcoming Nikon f/0.95 noct is manual.
If you cant even be bothered to manually focus stick to a normal lens.
>>
File: original.jpg (2.22 MB, 4000x6000)
2.22 MB
2.22 MB JPG
>>3449555
Dang. The lenses keep rolling in.

I think the launch of Z-mount and RF-mount strengthened the resolve of all the lens makers to push for mirrorless.
And now they are pouring in designs for E-mount to begin with.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7M3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2 (Macintosh)
PhotographerAndrey Zhukov
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:03:15 18:30:45
Exposure Time1/160 sec
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating100
Brightness2.4 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3449423
Nigga what

>less noise from bigger sensor
The sensor is *smaller*. In video mode M50 has 2.56x crop while GX85 has 2.2x.

>a lens optical stabilization
GX85 also has lens optical stabilization.
>>
>>3449563
>should I just cave in and try something like the mitakon speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 and a Fotodiox/Techart adapter
Huh?

The Mitakon lens is native E-mount. So is this new Zenit lens.
>>
>>3449497
>>3449498
28/2 ai-s. Absolute kino focal length. I exclusively use it, the 50/1.4 and the 135/2 DC. Only three lenses you'll ever need if you don't mind manually focusing. 35mm is a wishy washy middle ground focal length, not wide and -cinematic- like 28 and not tight and personal like 50.
Not sure how well a MF lens would work on your d610 though, you pretty much have to use the lcd screen at 100% to find perfect focus.
>>
File: 50mm F1,1.jpg (316 KB, 2000x2000)
316 KB
316 KB JPG
>>3449555
I want to see a review to a T-stop battle between this, the Mitakon, and the SLR-Magic
It should be interesting to see who has the T-Stop crown.

For reference we know the SLR-Magic is T/1,2. Since they have it ported to a Cine-housing.

>>3449563
>Just last week I was researching options for f/0.95
There is also this one. It's decently fast as well, and a whole lot lighter I imagine.
>>
>>3449164
I love the way they’ve matched their orange ring with the one on the mount.
The 35 1.4 is awesome as well.
>>
File: canonsmall-1.jpg (960 KB, 1800x1200)
960 KB
960 KB JPG
>>3449576
I'm sorry, I got my post mixed up. I meant to ask the original part about them ever not making an af version the mitakon or any 0.95 lens for that matter and if not should I consider an AF adapter with something like the voightlander 50mm f1.2. Sorry for the confusion

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 6D Mark II
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2018:09:17 19:43:49
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/1.4
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1000
Lens Aperturef/1.4
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length24.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1800
Image Height1200
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
Just as an aside, do you guys have any preferred lens reviewers you read/watch on youtube? I personally like Christopher Frost's vids. I also check the articles and photo samples by Steve Huff and Gordon Laing but besides them I find it a pain to search youtube when it's mostly guys sitting at the desk showing nothing but charts and very little to no real life sample images/portrait snapshots etc. The worse is when checking out older manual focus lens and bokeh, they default to the usual "you should just stop it down at 2.8" feels bad man...I just want to see what the damn 0.95 to 1.2 looks like then decide if it's shit. If I wanted to just shoot 2.8 I would
>>
File: Kiron_105mm_layout_WEB.jpg (91 KB, 1000x763)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
Reposting from the macro -thread, maybe someone here knows a bit more.

Someone redpill me on (easily?) adaptable (to Sony E APS-C) vintage macro lenses

So far I've been looking at:

>Kiron 105mm f2.8 macro
local prices are around 200€, people seem to love this lens a lot. It's apparently nutty sharp, has a very long focus throw, and pretty high-quality.

>Minolta MC/MD Macro Rokkor 10mm f3.5
local prices are around 180€ including the 1:1 extension tube, seems to be a popular lens as well. Is there a discernible difference between the MD/MC versions?

>Vivitar/Cosina 100mm f3.5 macro
local prices are around 100€ including the (not sure here) extension tube or extra-lens (?) for 1:1. I don't know a whole lot about this lens to be honest

Maybe someone has other suggestions as well?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationUnknown
Image Width1000
Image Height763
>>
File: 321.jpg (3.24 MB, 6000x4000)
3.24 MB
3.24 MB JPG
>>3449574
> push for mirrorless
Yeah. Photo with planned lenses from Zenitar announcement. Main goal is to try and relaunch most popular Soviet lenses with better quality and for new mount's. They gonna release those in 2019-20.
KMZ also trying to add AF to them, but it still "very early in development", so initial productions will be MF only.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-6400
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:03:15 19:30:59
Exposure Time1/40 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating2000
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Brightness-2.2 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length21.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3449603
I meant the thing has been a vaporware for 2 years now.
We saw a prototype a long time ago, and then nothing.

So it makes sense they got energized when they learned they could adapt the 50 F0.95 to 3 more mounts than just E-mount.
>>
>>3449604
>>3449603
Is this the lens that's been in production for 5 years?
>>
File: DSC_0007.jpg (436 KB, 1920x1440)
436 KB
436 KB JPG
>>3449294
I have the other Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 with MC-11. It produces pretty sharp snapshits but autofocusing is a bit pain in the ass. If dividing the screen in 3x3 slices, autofocus only works when the focus point is in the centre slice, otherwise it just pumps back and forth endlessly.
>>
>>3449164
is that focus by wire?
>>
>>3449635
Yeah, I think everybody just use eyeAF though, rather than manual.
>>
>>3449634
Good for shooting in the rule of center
>>
>>3449603
First line on the slide is talking about them having electronic aperture control, too.
>>
File: .png (53 KB, 695x814)
53 KB
53 KB PNG
>>3449634
maybe use a lens that's compatible with the converter next time brainlet
>>
File: 1482013926502.gif (771 KB, 381x400)
771 KB
771 KB GIF
>>3449555
>1200g
Uhhh....

Yeah. I think I will just stick to the SLR Magic Cine II 50mm f/1.1.
That one is just 450 gram.
>>
Samyang manual lenses for crop mirrorless seem to get good review, should I cop an 85mm one?
>>
>>3449681
Yeah, but buy it with return policy or so you can check in store. They've been known for decentered lenses. On good samples they're very good.
>>
File: 810_6772-1600.jpg (429 KB, 1600x2140)
429 KB
429 KB JPG
>>3449498

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
Samyang 12mm or Sigma 16mm for an A6000? Don’t want to shoot astro that much.
>>
>>3449735
The Sigma has AF.
>>
>>3449655
Nah, that lense will act almost the same with my Canon 70D. It won't jump around but focus is still off if the point is outside the 3x3 centre.
>>
File: 1372240590968.gif (144 KB, 340x340)
144 KB
144 KB GIF
https://4.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS1600x1600~forums/62369828/99c00671f8b342b6af41c3341f853066
>it doesn't actually use the full diameter of Z-mount
I'm going to rub this in Thom's face next time he brags about mount diameter.
>>
File: IMG-20190316-WA0002.jpg (237 KB, 1600x1364)
237 KB
237 KB JPG
Wat camera is this?
>>
>>3449808
Sony A5000.
>>
File: vt5012.jpg (25 KB, 450x450)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
Welp, time to save up some money. What's on you guy's wishlists?
>>
>>3449767
You don't know how optics work. You need to account for flange distance as well.
>>
>>3449832
Nah, I could use that to attack your argument back when you had flippy mirror.

Today none of us have flippy mirror. So your argument is void.
>>
>>3449831
>Welp, time to save up some money. What's on you guy's wishlists?
1. A wide-angle lens for Leica M mount. Not sure whether I want 28 or 35, but one of those.
2. An X-T3 to replace my X-T1

I think that's actually pretty much all I'm specifically jonesing for these days.
>>
File: .jpg (154 KB, 1200x800)
154 KB
154 KB JPG
>>3449767
and now we know why it has no AF. the groups are so close that there's no room to move the glass
>>
>>3449831
The 24 GM.
>>
>>3449841
The inner barrel that holds the glass is roughly 42-43,7 mm.

So much for big mount being necessary.
>>
>Anon why are you driving that car from initial D? That manga is super old and theres a lot of modern cars tha-
>You just dont understand bro, like chill out man I'm getting the most out of this car and isnt that like all that matters in life bro? I'm out here livin my truth dont harsh my mellow man.
>>
>>3449841
>the groups are so close that there's no room to move the glass
I mean, if that were the case, it wouldn't be able to focus manually either. Given that presumably it can be focused, I'm guessing the reason is a combination of:
1. it would be too complicated to make a good AF motor for a lens that's really only designed to show off the size of Nikon's dick
2. If you force the user to manually focus, they can't blame the lens when they inevitably shoot at f/1.2 and get things out of focus.
>>
File: .png (1.22 MB, 1171x789)
1.22 MB
1.22 MB PNG
>>3449865
It's quite evident from the cutaway that there's little to no room for the glass to move internally. The only way I see it moving is with most of the front groups moving outwards, and the cutaway seems to support that. Haven't been able to find video of the front of the lens when it's being focused but it would be hilarious if this $6K lens isn't even internal focusing.
>>
File: 61eH925rXvL._SX425_.jpg (18 KB, 425x315)
18 KB
18 KB JPG
How bad is the RX100 III? I want to get a compact camera and lens for under $400... preferably closer to $300. I'm going back and forth between a used RX100 III and an a6000 with the retractable kit lens. I know that the smaller sensor won't deliver as good of image quality and the limited creative controls are a little crippling, but if I can fit the camera into my pocket, then I'll have it with me, and I'll take pictures with it. I'd prefer something with a zoom lens to a fixed compact like the Ricoh GR or the fixed focal length Fuji's. The a6000 with the retractable lens should be borderline small enough, but it kind of is in a different size class, so I'm looking at the RX100 III.
>>
What do you guys think it's the best camera for low light under $1000 usd? Or should I just focus on bright lenses?

I was thinking either the A7 (full frame, but people seem to hate it...) or the D7200 (crop but great focusing in the dark and it's getting cheaper now that it's discontinued). Maybe something else completely?
>>
File: tripod mount.png (174 KB, 308x351)
174 KB
174 KB PNG
>>3449841
>>3449887
Wait, what, why, why not the other way?
>>
>>3449952
Get a flash.
>>
What 35mm equivalent lens can I get for my EF-M that is faster than f2.8?
>>
>>3449952
the original a7 and a7ii are really bad for low light, like exceptionally bad for modern full frame.
better than the d7200 but I wouldn't, the later a7's are much better for low light, probably the best ones sensor and processor-wise but expensive.
d750/5d3/6d1/d800/d610 are much better at that price point, the d750 has the best autofocus though so that might be worth it for you.
>>3449956
tripod*
>>
>>3449577
>>3449723
thanks for the tips, but I ended up scoring one of these https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/28f28ais.htm
on eBay for $150 -- I'll post here with some test shots when it comes in
>>
File: canon-ef-m-22mm-f2-hero2.jpg (281 KB, 2000x1500)
281 KB
281 KB JPG
>>3449957
Canon 22mm f/2 EF-M lens. How do you not know about it? It's like the reason to own a M body. If you have a Fuji or Sony crop mirrorless it's literally still worth it to get an original EOS M + 22mm on fleaBay for like $200 because the lens is that damn good.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3449960
>>3449577
oh, and as for MF on the D610, I haven't found it to be too hard with my 105
>>
>>3449957
seconding this >>3449962, both the strong endorsement because the lens is great and the "how do you not know about this already?" part, because the ef-m lineup is literally only 8 lenses lol
>>
File: .png (1.25 MB, 1201x801)
1.25 MB
1.25 MB PNG
>>3449954
that's the outer shell brainlet. none of those even touch the glass. the mess of shit right there is for the tripod foot. Also, note that the manual focus ring is at the front of the lens (circled for you). Do you see any way for that section to move the back part?
>>
>>3449962
i have the lens with original m.
i can say it's really good.
fuji btfo.
only zeiss 24mm 1.8 on sony e is better but that thing is larger.

not sure if i want a m6 or m50 or wait for m7.
>>
Lads,if on a tight budget would it make sense to get 17-40 L + adapter for a7ii or should I rather save up for some time and get FE 16-35?
I'm honestly not sure about this, a good adapter itself costs like $250 kinda don't want to throw money away on a useless piece of metal.What do yo think?How do they compare?
>>
>>3450024
The adapter will open up basically the whole world of relatively cheap EF lenses to you. Just make sure you get one of the good adapters--I can personally vouch for the MC-11, and I've heard the Metabones adapter is in the same class, but I know the cheap adapters suuuuuck.
>>
>>3450024
It's still going to be slow, go native or go home.

Don't forget Tamron is coming out with a cheaper F2,8 alternative soon.
>>
>>3450035
>MC-11
That's what I had in mind.Luckily I've got everything covered and don't need anything. I have FE 28/2 and 50mm that's enough for me, it's the wide angle range that I'm after.
After a quick search it seems that the corners on canon are pretty bad at 17mm and with an adapter I've heard the situation is even worse.
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=100&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1009&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


>>3450043
Never heard about the tamron is that a wide angle zoom that's coming?

Heck,sony ultra-wide angles are not cheap, are there any off brands I can use, something from canikon,maybe primes?
>>
>>3450045
>Never heard about the tamron is that a wide angle zoom that's coming?
Obviously.
17-28 F2.8
>>
Look out fujibois, a new meme lens is coming.
>>
>>3450049
figured that much
>price rumored to be 999 euros
Yikes,not exactly low budget
>>
>>3450043
>It's still going to be slow, go native or go home.
My experience has been that Canon lenses on the MC-11 are about at fast as native Sony AF lenses.

I can test with my 17-40 and MC11 in the morning.
>>
>>3450052
Maybe in the a9. The a7ii is a completely different story.
>>
>>3450052
>>3450053
I'm actually not really concerned with auto focus since I'm shooting stills anyway.How's manual focus on 17-40?
>>
>>3449960
>>3449963
That's a good lens too, have fun with it. I only recommended the f/2 version because it's not too expensive and it's a full stop faster. If you can MF with a 105 it shouldn't be a problem with the 28, you have way more depth of field and reach infinity way sooner.
>>
Truly sorry for the newfaggotry but what's /p/'s agreed best starter DSLR?
>>
>>3450106
If Canon: 70D or 80D for a little more money. You could also consider the Rebel T7i aka 800D. If you get the kit lens (basic 18~55mm) I siggest also grab the nifty 50/fantastic plastic f/1.8 lens

If Nikon: d5600 and their 50mm lens too
>>
>>3450110
Why not a 35mm as first prime on those cameras? 50mm is too tight on crop, surely?
>>
>>3450111
You're the right. I just figure to give it a mention since the nifty50 is widely available and cheap for any beginner to get into. It would be nice for him to play around with it alongside the basic kit lens if he used it with the bundle purchase.

I should've added if he wasn't planning on getting the kitlens then yes the 50 would be too tight to keep using alone in every situation.
When I think of the 35mm the immediate ones that come to mind were the 35 f2 for maybe 500usd or then the 35L. It's been a while but I believe there was also a pancake 24mm and 40mm 2.8 for cheap.Those could be a viable options too.
>>
>>3450106
Used G70 with 14-140 II
>>
Thinking of getting either an S1 or a XT-3. Coming from a GH4, I'm really sick of mft. I'm a cinematography student who does alot of stills too, my biggest demands are 4k30p 10-bit uncropped, a weatherproof body, great stills and the ability to easily adapt all my vintage lenses (mostly M42, smc takumar line being my favourite). Both of these cameras do this, I'm having a hard time deciding.

I like how the kitlens on the S1 is a macro lens, but I also really like Fuji's lenses in general and enjoy the film simulations and fuji colors alot. Opinions?

(fuck sony and fuck mft sensors)
>>
I basically want the x100f but with interchangable lenses
looking at the xpro 2 but Im not sure if I can justify spending so much money, since I need a few lenses, too
xe3 looks nice but I dont think I will like the touch screen
any other options?
I tried sony a6000, didnt like it at all
>>
>>3450106
so many different answers but if you want most bang for buck d7000 and a6000
>>
I just wanted to know if there is a cheap manual alternative to the mft m. Zuiko 45mm 1.2f pro lens.
I already have the 12-100 f4 pro and want a dedicated prime portrait lens that wont break my bank.

If my only option is to use an adapter, that's fine too.

Thanks in advance.
>>
>>3449952
Recently got an a7i and tend to use it with samyang 26mm. Cost me $680 brand new from amazon including buying the lens separate. It’s light, fits in jacket pockets and does the job well for an enthusiast.
>>
>>3450272
Native:
Sigma 56 f1.4 dc dn. Autofocus and huge but worth a look. Manual Rokinon 50mm f1.2, and my fav Kamlan 50mm f1.1. (these used to go for 50 via certain channels!)
Adapting:
Huge range of 50mm lenses.
>>
>recently bought D3400
>post in this thread for lens advice
>nikor 35mm is recommended
I got it for €140/$160 (used), and even inexperienced me can tell what an upgrade it is from the kitlens, many thanks to the anon!
>>
>>3449952
D610 for $500-600 and a good 1.8 or 1.4 lens
>>
>>3450388
happy to help. In general, the old manual focus primes are really good, so consider those anytime you are thinking about a new lens
>>3450100
I did some reading and found that the 2.8 typically has less distortion and is (probably negligibly) sharper at most distances except focused at infinity -- my guess is that I will usually be shooting a wide and extremely sharp lens at 5.6 or higher anyway to keep the whole frame in focus, so I can hopefully live without the extra stop. Glad I took your advice about the 35mm though; as I already have a 50 it would be kind of redundant and with the even wider perspective of a 28 my kit is somewhat more complete (like you, I will pretty much only be using the 28mm, 50mm, and a long prime). color me fucking jealous of your 135mm DC though, that's on my wishlist
>>3450106
D7000-7100 or >>3450414
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (87 KB, 1280x720)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
I just put my Canon 7D and my small collection of EF-S lenses up for sale on ebay. I'm thinking of replacing it with a Sony crop sensor camera. I don't want to spend more than I'll receive from selling my current camera equipment, which should be around $500, optimistically. Probably more like $425, especially after ebay takes all their fees. Just looking to get a body and a kit lens to start. What should I get? Thinking about pic related, but a little concerned about no viewfinder. Is it a step down or a step up from my 7D?
>>
>>3450453
>Is it a step down or a step up from my 7D?
In terms of usability, it'll be a huge step down from your 7D. They're nowhere near the same league.

In terms of image quality, probably about the same.
>>
>>3450457
>In terms of usability, it'll be a huge step down from your 7D.
Except the fact that the 7D was so big that I never took it anywhere.
>>
>>3450453
OK, I just ordered one. Thanks for the help, /p/.
>>
>>3450474
Enjoy!
>>
>>3450272
45 1.8 (duh), 75 1.8 and what>>3450377
Says
>>
>>3449740
Did you try updating the firmware on the MC-11? They just updated it (again) last week. The firmware on the lens might be out of date too.
>>
>>3450377
There's about to be a Kamlan 50mm f1.1 Mark II in a few weeks, I'd hold off on that one since the revision will probably be significantly better knowing the chinks.
>>
>>3450534
This one?
>>
>>3450558
Yup, they showed it off recently at some photography show.
>>
>>3450534
It better be sharper, the old one is just as fast at half weight.
>>
>>3450534
It's only soft on larger mounts, but new one should reduce the price, so you'd safe some bucks by waiting in ether case.
>>
File: image.jpg (2.81 MB, 2694x2433)
2.81 MB
2.81 MB JPG
New camera day boys. Finally I’m native 50mm. Coming from an X100.
The menus are horrific but I think I’ve got it perfect now.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Width2694
Image Height2433
>>
>>3450723
Congrats. Impressive panorama stitching lens.
>>
File: rog.jpg (1.16 MB, 1920x873)
1.16 MB
1.16 MB JPG
>>3450728
>>
>>3450728
That’s a strange thing to say. What makes it good for that? Lack of distortion?
>>
>>3450723
I've had one of these for over a year and I barely use it at all because the only lens I could afford is complete garbage.
>>
should I try to shoot as wide as possible or as narrow as possible for a more "pro" look (yes I know it's a mene)
>>
>>3450733
This lens seems great if you like a nifty fifty. I think I’ll consider the 17mm lens for travelling but it’s fairly pricey and maybe thinking I should go wider...
>>
>>3450730
Optically, it's what you need. Sharp at corners, controllable vignetting, usable focal range, suitable aspect ratio, all that... But, mainly it's just experience with it. Handheld, up to fine stacks is easy. That sample is 19x vertical shots, cropped in half because it becomes too wide. Though, I find it that it's not suitable for double or more rows. It's already too wide for that. I'll use 50 to 100mm for that. Normal usual rage for that 25 is 3-8 for vertical shots, 3-5 for horizontal. Vertical panorama up to 5.
>>
I’m getting $1300 from tax returns and want to buy a rig for video, can someone point me in the right direction?
>>
File: IMG_20190316_114031.jpg (1.31 MB, 3264x2448)
1.31 MB
1.31 MB JPG
Managed to get some old manual lenses for M42. And mount them on my second-hand Canon 500d.
>Industar 50/2.8
>Pentacon Auto MC 135/2.8
Tomorrow I will pick up Jupiter 21M 200/4 for around 26 USD and there is a good deal to buy Zenit TTL camera, along with Pentacon Auto MC 29/3.5, Helios 44-M 58/2 and again Pentacon Auto MC 135/2.8. for approx 66 USD in one bundle our eastern european version of craigslist.

I have one question, as a poorfag from eastern yurop, how the hell does anyone afford actual lenses beyond the kit lens? My photography is just a bullshit hobby of a phd student in physics, hence the poorfag factor and not being afraid to use old M42 lenses.

In America you could probably get old F-Mount Japanese lenses on a good price, and especially when your camera has a motor to power the focusing axle and the aperture lever, then you have a good source of cheap glass at your disposal. But then you are limited to F-mount lenses and cannot really use M42 lenses, since the adapters from M42 to Nikon suck.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera ModelGT-I9300
Camera SoftwareNJH47F
Equipment Makesamsung
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2019:03:16 11:40:32
Image Width3264
Image Height2448
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
F-Numberf/2.7
Focal Length3.70 mm
Lens Aperturef/2.6
Exposure ModeAuto
Image Height2448
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
White BalanceAuto
Image Width3264
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
CommentUser comments
FlashNo Flash
Exposure Bias1 EV
Brightness0 EV
ISO Speed Rating116
Exposure Time1/22 sec
>>
I currently have a 600D with the 18-55 and 55-250 kit lenses as well as the 24mm STM prime. It's served me well for the last 7 years but I'm curious what the best direction is to go in for 500-1000 €. Any suggestions?
>>
File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (159 KB, 1280x720)
159 KB
159 KB JPG
Need help /p/. I'm going to buy my first mirrorless and I don't know what to choose between these two.
I must say that I usually go to hike so I need something to take nice landscape pic and also some urban subject.
>>
>>3450936
Ether will do well. Personally I'd pick Fuji simply for more dials.
>>
>>3450954
I've just found on ebay the Canon (with 15-45mm lens) that starts from 250 dollars and a Fuji (with XF 18-55mm) at 300 dollars. I hope the price won't grow too much and to keep one of the two. Any comment about the lens? Should I take into consideration other mirrorless model?
>>
>>3450960
I very much doubt those were the prices. You must be mistaking current bids for actual (final) prices.
>>
>>3450969
Yes these are the current bids. What do you think should be a good offer?
>>
>>3450936
I’m a Canon guy and I’d still pick the Fuji out of those two.

1. It’s a slightly higher-tier camera (eg, it has more control dials)
2. Smart money is currently on the EOS M line being a dead end with the introduction of the R full frame mirrorless cameras. Time will tell whether M has a niche it can survive in, but I wouldn’t recommend buying into the system at the moment.

(Ironically, the reason why M’s future looks bleak—lack of full frame support—also applies to the Fuji, but since Fuji doesn’t have any full frame line at all, it’s more likely to survive)
>>
File: IMG_8784-1.jpg (1.75 MB, 2000x1333)
1.75 MB
1.75 MB JPG
So I was walking around with my 5D classic and a Canon EF 28-135mm lens and I shot around 200 pictures on Saturday. It was the first time I really used that camera/lens combination.

3 times during the day, beginning after around 100 shots, the mirror would stick up. The viewfinder goes dark with no exposure info and sometimes the red led would flash when this happened.

Turning the camera off and on fixed it 2 of the times and once I actually had to remove the battery.

Wtf is happening and how fucked am I on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being I need a new camera?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 5D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 7.5 (Windows)
PhotographerJonathan Adams 5D-1
Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:03:18 13:38:57
Exposure Time1/50 sec
F-Numberf/5.6
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1000
Lens Aperturef/5.6
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length115.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3450980
Thank you for the good point anon, but I think I won't be able to buy a full frame very soon. Anyway I think that both, under 400 euros, are a good deal. It would be my first decent camera.
>>
>>3450936
>>3450986
Get an X-T1 and invest the money saved into better lenses. Lenses are much more important than the camera body for image fidelity.

X-T1 is still a great rugged camera and still gets firmware updates. No brainer for a first camera.
>>
>>3450983
The 5D classic has a well-documented issue wherein the mirror will detach from the frame it's in. Canon used to fix it for you for free but stopped doing that a few years back. It could be that issue popping up--e.g., if the mirror is flipping up and just sticking to the bottom of the viewfinder. In which case the fuckedness isn't quite 10 because it can be fixed, but I have no idea how it might cost and 5D Classics are pretty cheap right now so it might not be worth it.

It's also possible that there's some communication failure between the lens and camera. I've had problems like that with some lenses where the aperture stops working properly and it sends my camera body into a tizzy. Is it making any sort of error message on either of the LCDs? Does the camera work consistently with a different lens? Does the lens work consistently with a different camera?

(Possibility three: Something else and I don't know what it is)
>>
>>3451057
i am familiar with the mirror issues and that's actually what i presumed had happened the first time. i gave it a shake and expected to hear it rattling around in there.

that wasn't it and i inspected the mirror assembly when i got home, put it in cleaning mode and examined the underside... it all looks fine. the foam bumper is in good shape and isn't sticky.

i used that lens on a film camera (EOS 620) later for only around a dozen exposures and nothing happened. i also shot a dozen or so photos on the 5D with a 50mm lens and it didn't happen again.

i just got this lens a couple weeks ago and this was the most i've used it, so it could be related. i've shot several hundred photos with a 50mm lens over the prior 3 months without issue. i really haven't used it enough to know for sure if it is just that lens.

it's a little reassuring that you've experienced communication difficulties between lens and camera before. when it stops working there is no error messages on either lcd, though the led by the aperture wheel does blink.

i've noticed my batteries run down rather fast, don't know if that could be related so i'm going to buy a couple new ones. i really like the images this camera makes and don't really have the money to replace it at the moment so i want to keep it going as long as i can.
>>
>>3451069
If you’re buying new batteries for it, get genuine Canon ones. I’ve yet to have a third party battery for any of my cameras that didn’t stop holding a charge after just a few months of use whereas my first-party batteries last for years and years.
>>
>>3450751
Depends if n what you’re trying to capture. Want to maximize subject isolation? Go wider. Showing an entire scene? Stop down. Totally situational.
>>
>>3450932
If you want to stick with crop sensor canon I’d look into an 80D.
>>
>>3451073
yes, definitely
>>
I haven't been to these threads in a while. Why isn't there a Pentax image in the OP?
>>
File: 1495549247481.png (1.17 MB, 1023x681)
1.17 MB
1.17 MB PNG
I need suggestions on a Fuji X-mount portrait lens. There are four options to choose from:

(prices as new)
50mm f2 wr - £380
56mm f1.2 - £605
80mm f2.8 wr ois - £880
90mm f2 wr - £830

The 80 or 90mm are the ones that are most appealing to me. The 90mm doesn't have image stabilisation, the 80mm is the only one that does. Also, the 80mm is a macro lens, which would let me try macro in the future. The 50, 80 and 90 have very fast autofocus and are "weather resistant". The 56mm seems to be the most popular one on the internet. I get the feeling the 50mm will be too short for what I want, but I really don't know because I've not done many portraits before.

Also, if anyone has any suggested reading on portrait photography, please let me know.
>>
>>3451101
You can do "portraits" with any focal length. There are kind of sweet spots, though, in terms of distance from the subject and how much of the subject you want in the frame. For example, are you doing full body portraits or head shots? Do you want to take the photo up close or are you able to back up 15-20 feet? An 80mm or 90mm lens on an APS-C sensor is a very tight crop on a person's face if you are indoors. You might even have trouble getting their whole face sometimes.

Focal length is a stupid topic for anyone to opine about, though. Don't you own a zoom or two that covers these focal lengths? Figure out what you need and go from there. The 50mm f/2 is a great lens that's nice and compact. The 56mm f/1.2 is a little faster and not as compact. Neither is noticeably deficient optically. Both the 90mm and 80mm lenses are big motherfuckers. You are trading a stop of light for macro capability with either lens. Decide on your priorities.
>>
File: gear.jpg (146 KB, 1233x1748)
146 KB
146 KB JPG
>>3449164
1000 USD more for the same lens.

tell me /p/ is it worth it to buy the more expensive lens? how much sharper are we talking about here?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographeruser9
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3451137
14 vs 24 isn't the same lens at all.

The 14mm suffer from lots of distortion, and it doesn't have autofocus or exif data.
>>
Is there like a /p/ guide for beginners who want to buy their first camera? I want one, but the info is too much and I dont know what to do lol
>>
>>3451158
it's not 14 vs 24

it's

14 vs 12-24

anon
>>
>>3451116
I only have the 27mm so far. I have a Helios 44-2 which I've not got an adapter for. I'll play around with that for a bit to get a feel for the focal length. The 80 and 90mm are probably way to big for using on the X-Pro2, I really like small lenses.
>>
>>3451137
>>3451158
>>3451161
this is fucking bait on another level. the lenses are nothing alike.
>>
File: Lenses.jpg (238 KB, 2195x674)
238 KB
238 KB JPG
ok ill try my best.
Sooner or later I will buy 3 glasses. but at this moment I can only buy 16-35 or the other two. Which one do I buy first? What do you think?
>>
>>3451186
>at this moment I can only buy 16-35 or the other two
The 55 1,8 isn't a necessity.
That standard 50 1,8 actually has some advantages over the 55, and it's a much lower cost.

Cost is a concern for you, so I would go for the two F2,8 zooms from Tamron instead.
>>
>>34511
>two tamron's
17-28mm and ?
>>
>>3451078
Thank you, I'd love a FF but can't really justify the expense.
>>
>>3451189
28-75
>>
>>3450932
Heh. Same here, plus the nifty fifty. Even though still crop, really thinking about migrating to Fuji since they actually have a decent lens lineup for the crop system. Or maybe a used 6D, but I really don't feel like hauling it and its glass (compare the 35/50 L lens or the 3rd party equivalents and the fuji 23/35mm xf...) around everywhere. Looked at the M series as well, but it's probably a dead end for Canon in the future. And then there's the R/RP which are likely to go down in price once the R's successor comes out, but they'd still be fairly expensive considering the crippled features; the RF line seems eternally expensive and an adaptor plus L glass (or 3rd party equivalents) doesn't excite me... Don't know man. What are you thinking?
>>
>>3451192
>>3451188
thanks man ill consider that option.
>>
>>3451200
There is also the Samyang AF lenses.

You can get F1,4 from them at 35, 50, and 85.
And they have become even more affordable than Sigma, they pretty much stole Sigma's market while was distracted with L-mount.
>>
>>3451202
>samyang
they are worth it?
>>
>>3451203
In term of affordability? Obviously.

There is no one else than them who offers F1,4 lenses with AF below 700 bucks.
>>
>>3451197
I'm currently thinking 80D or 800D with more money for a nicer 18-55 since I mostly do urban landscape photography
>>
>>3451206
*But that's mostly because I'm fairly happy with the 600D processing RAW to make up for my cheap lenses, I'd just like a slightly better sensor
>>
>>3450936
m50 + 22mm f2
>>
>>3451206
So you're thinking of sticking to (canon) DSLR crop sensor then? That's very rare these days. Do you think it'll be that much of a difference from the 600d? Why not get a used 6D if you plan on sticking to canon dslr? Not trying to dissuade you, just in the process of upgrading myself and maybe I'm not considering canon crop for the wrong reasons...
>>
>>3451209
I might rent a FF and see how I get on, it's basically the only DSLR I've had since I stopped using film/compact digital. My more recent purchases have been video based.

Thank you for the suggestion.
>>
>>3449401
He got it
>>3449417
>>3449410
They dont.

Another bang for buck champ is the 40-150 4-5.6 which is very sharp and can be bought for 50€ sometimes.
>>
>>3450723
Congrats. The menus will grow on you because you can literally customize every button and even the mode dial to save custom modes. For real life shooting the super control panel is pretty much all you need anyways.
>>
>>3449164
Little bro wants a relatively cheap compact camera with at least a 1" sensor that can be mounted on some cheap gimball. He originally asked me to rec him a phone with a good camera because phone gimballs are cheap, but I convinced him that a compact camera would give him way better results.
I'm about to rec him the original rx100, are there any better options around for less than $300?
>>
>>3451265
Nikon 1 series used
>>
>>3451265
It's pretty good when there is lots of sunlight.

Just make sure you set it up for Extra Fine Jpegs in the output.
He wouldn't know what the fuck do do with the RAWs, and even if you taught him, the workflow is too shitty and would turn him off completely.
>>
>>3451300
I think he wants it mainly for video but I'll tell him. I'll try to convince him to save up for the mark 3 which is supposed to be way better in low light because of the bsi meme and one stop faster lens.
>>3451278
>dead 1" ILC system that costs the same as a 1" compact
>>
>>3451300
>He wouldn't know what the fuck do do with the RAWs
oh please lol camera raw isn't fucking rocket science.
>>
>>3451300
unrelated, but i've never been able to tell the difference between normal and fine jpg's from the camera
>>
>>3451309
For the new generation? It absolute is a pestilence.
You're also asking them to invest into monthly subscription of Lightroom. Good luck with that.
Or ask him to pirate lightroom and deal with potential trojans. Hmmm.
And even then the sluggy processing speed on the PC could still be a turn off.
They are not proffesionals, they don't get the same out of the trouble as you, nor do they have your patience.

In comparison to this, his mobile phone automatically uploads automatically processed jpegs into the internet.
That's why smartphones are winning and our industry is dying.

>>3451310
It's just Jpeg in higher quality settings, you can tell when you zoom into subpixel.
>>
>>3451308
>mark 3
That's the one with XAVC codec. It's a step up from the mark 1 due to the codec and lens, not so much the BSI.
>>
File: 1354142985690.jpg (45 KB, 240x240)
45 KB
45 KB JPG
>>3451309
I once asked my brother why he hates RAW, he told me it's because Windows Explorer gives him thumbnail of jpegs, the the RAWs don't have them.
Even the tiniest smallest reason like this could make the difference. We have to be careful to not live in this bubble and be out of touch with things outside of it.
>>
>>3451160
No, /p/ loves arguing about gear, but not being helpful about its selection.
>>
>>3451160
Pick a manufacturer and look for an APS-C sized body that came out after 2014, read a few reviews, take a look at the features and decide which one is the most worth it for you. Keep in mind that if you buy into a lens system and you want to switch you'll have to replace all your lenses too most of the time.
Sony - Best sensors on the market, the a6000 series is supposed to be pretty good and not too expensive, they're mirrorless so very small and compact compared to dslr. Sony lenses are known for being extremely overpriced costing more than their nikon/canon counterparts and generally being worse. Most people also don't like their A7 lineup's ergonomics
Canon - Lenses are very good and you can buy older cheap but sharp full frame lenses that will mount on your APS-C body, so you can keep those lenses if you decide to upgrade to FF. You cou theoretically do this with sony as well but their FF lens lineup only has modern expensive glass. Also canon shooters praise canon colors, but this is subjective and it matters less and less the more you use LR, sooc colors are usually not the best anyway. The 1300D is a nice camera to start out with
Nikon - Better image quality than Canon because they license Sony's sensor technology, but this is unlikely to make a big difference if you're just shooting as a hobby. Lenses are alright, you can mount FF lenses on crop bodies but compatibility is a mess. If you get the d3xxx or the d5xxx series you won't be able to autofocus on the older and cheaper "D" lenses, which often have the exact same optical design as their "G" counterparts for less money. The d7200 is really good but a bit expensive

Or if you're a Chad get a used d800 on ebay, if you're patient you can probably get one for $600-650. Then buy a 28mm/2.8 af-d and a 50mm/1.8 af-d, have fun and if you're still shooting in half a year save up for a used 28-70/2.8 VR I. A lot of pros still use the d800 because it's so good that they can't justify buying a d850.
>>
>>3449164
Apologies for the stupid question, pretty new to the technical aspect of all of this. I've been shooting lately with an old 600D (T3i) and kit lenses, and was wondering what the logical upgrade from here is if I want to be a jack of all trades (portrait, landscape, events, lowlight...). I also want to make sure that whatever I buy will be useful for a long long time, "future-proof" if you will. Proper lenses seems to be the obvious answer, but even then there's so much info out there I just can't decide. Any guidance is appreciated.
>>
>>3451467
>lowlight
Search for the
Q999H
In aliexpress. It's super cheap and enables any of your future cameras to gain good low light performance.
>>
>>3451469
>I don’t take pictures of anything that moves, so I assume no one else does either
>>
>want to get a camera with rare lens from ebay
>no disposable money for months
>the camera gets delisted
>>
>>3451101
i cannot stop staring at this picture
>>
>>3451493
It's cute mother and son skinship.

Screw what society says.
>>
>>3451493
Its the pictures laying on couch next to her that im staring at
>>
>>3451504
>Screw what society says.
wat does society say?

that gilded apartment is so tacky it's vulgar. those columns supporting nothing, all the pseudo baroque gold style of a knock off versace t-shirt. a poor person's vision of wealth. all the pre french revolution visual cues of precarious wealth inequality, you can almost see the peasants just outside the frame with torches and pitchforks.

melania's gaze at barron- her only source of warmth, the only thing that's real in her existence. how much barron looks like eric. can't help but wonder what it must all be like for him and what model of fuji instax is that...

there is a lot going on in that photo and it stirs a number of emotions in me. had the photographer selected a larger aperture and turned the gaudy background into creamy bokeh he could have portrayed the scene very differently
>>
>>3451526
>those columns supporting nothing
It's a style that represents European civilization.
>>
>>3451532
you posted a picture of columns clearly supporting arches...

in the US, unnecessary columns represent McMansions as they are known colloquially
http://mcmansionhell.com/post/148935246684/mcmansions-101-columns
>>
>>3451541
I don't think it's wrong to try an emulate your roots and your ancestry.

Japan and China have their very distinct styles as well.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width8688
Image Height5792
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2017:05:04 08:53:36
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width2120
Image Height1374
>>
>>3451526
Vulgar indeed. The chandelier juxtaposed with that bathroom stall spotlight and the tacky marble finish columns supporting nothing. Wew. Nigger-rich/new jersey mob-rich/russian oligarch-rich aesthetics.
>all the pre french revolution visual cues of precarious wealth inequality, you can almost see the peasants just outside the frame with torches and pitchforks.
Fuck the French Revolution though. Fuck the aristocracy, but fuck the proto-envy-centric-socialist-ethos too. And fuck communists. Lying to yourself and selling self-righteousness and resentment as egalitarianism since 1789. Glorious rev is a much more respectable blueprint.
>>
>>3451543
again, a picture of correctly used arches in architecture

take a look at this pic >>3451101 and tell me what they are supporting

just now coming to realize that this anon is going in some white nationalist european identity direction and not actually objectively evaluating architecture...

>I don't think it's wrong to try an emulate your roots and your ancestry
>>
File: 1334973225915.png (25 KB, 188x140)
25 KB
25 KB PNG
>>3451545
>and not actually objectively evaluating architecture...
I don't think you were either, I think you commented on the picture due to the two subjects in it.

Photography isn't architecture anyway.
You can arrange the photo so it looks like how you want it to look.
The arrangement doesn't need to fulfill an architectural importance.
>>
>>3451448
Thanks!
>>
>>3451360
hmm
>>
>>3451360
it's kinda ironic that amongst all this warmongering and hostility between brands and equipment the gear thread itself manages to stay civilized
>>
>>3450932
>>3451191
Nikon D610. crop sensor price for a very capable full frame
>>
>>3451582
Well, the op says to be polite.
>>
>>3451160
D610 or D7200 are the best bang for buck and you can buy old MF lenses with very good optical quality for cheap
>>
>>3451588
>>3451590
don't forget the Canon 6d1 as an entry level FF
they're both actual good and relatively cheap entry level full frame cameras (looking at you RP with a downgraded 6d sensor)
>>
holy shit I just discovered something stupid, I can actually rebind my video record button to the iso button
that changes everything for me and I can finally go back to shooting full manual without moving my left hand from my lens
>>
50mm nikkor 1.4G or 1.4D?
20mm 2.8D or 24mm 2.8D?
>>
Does anyone else get red flags from seeing "never used" or "had for a while but only used a few times" on Craigslist, letgo, or offerup postings for lenses or anything else photography related?

I'm looking for a Canon MP-E, and pretty much every post has some variation of what I just exampled. Is this supposed to tell me that the lens itself is bad?
>>
>>3451701
58 1.4G obv and 20mm 1.8G
>>
>>3451590
>recommending AI-s lenses on full frame digital to newbies
Stop doing this. I fell for this autism and the $600 I've spent on muh vintage primes is just an extra $600 I still had to save up for the 24-70/2.8 VR. I would already have enough money for the 70-200/2.8 VR if I hadn't listened to /p/. I get that you don't want to spend that much right away but then just get a 28-105/3.5-4.5. It's cheap, has a very versatile range, the speed will make you more careful and deliberate when choosing your settings, so you can appreciate the extra speed better once you get a faster lens. You can even shoot pseudo macro with it.
>b-but muh character
Then shoot film. Digital doesn't get the same nice creamy softness from a lens with "character" (aberrations and a roller coastery mtf curve) as film does. MF on a digital body is also a pain because you have no split prism.
>>
>>3451931
>Does anyone else get red flags from seeing "never used" or "had for a while but only used a few times" on Craigslist, letgo, or offerup postings for lenses or anything else photography related?

Just remember the rule, if it sounds too good to be true IT IS. The only time you might get an amazing "never used" deal that isn't a scam is if some old person who has no idea about the tech at all is selling...then again one has to assume if they don't know anything about it, they probably have no idea how to make an online listing in the first place. Anyway, good luck and happy hunting
>>
>>3451965
>spending $600 on vintage primes
Jesus Christ, dude, when we recommend shooting with old manual lenses we mean like picking up cheap $20 lenses. If you spent $600 on manual focus glass, that’s not really something you can lay at our feet.

>MF on a digital body is also a pain because you have no split prism.
Depends on the camera. On mirrorless cameras with focus peaking, it’s easier than a split prism. On some cameras like the d700 (and probably other Nikons I haven’t used), there’s a little digital rangefinder that works a lot like a split prism so it’s about the same difficulty. And, of course, you can get a replacement split prism screen for a lot of DSLRs.
>>
Want to buy a used full frame camera.
Budget is £600.
5d mark ii seems to be the crowd favourite at this price point. But I feel like the Nikon D610 is better value. I mean you get a better condition d610 for the same money, it's newer and has better AF.
But then there's the original Sony A7.
Which objectively is the best of them all. But all the decent lenses cost twice what the body will. But I mostly shoot landscape so I could just use lens with an adapter. But then the A7 has no weather sealing. So I'm back to the D610.

How's my logic?
>>
>>3450558
>>3450652
>>3450666
>>3450720
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/kamlan-50mm-f11-bokeh-beast-mark-ii-75mm-f35-fisheye-at-tps

Kickstarter is launching in May, under $200 price tag.
>>
File: DSCF2704_1.jpg (1.67 MB, 5912x3192)
1.67 MB
1.67 MB JPG
>>3450720
It's soft on crop mounts too. This was taken on an X-T2 at f1.1, see the writing on the masks around the edges.

T. Actually own it and not going off Kai's video.
>>
>>3452018
I’d go for the D610 out of those three.

5D Mark II has an absolutely shitty autofocus system. Worse than contemporary Rebels, and much worse than modern Rebels, much less anything approaching good today. Not a huge deal if you mainly shoot landscapes, but will be an issue if you ever want to branch out.

The Sony is just a shitty camera to actually use. It definitely wins on paper, but it loses badly in the field.

I’m a Canon shooter who’s never actually touched the D610 but, by process of elimination... D610.
>>
>>3450754
I have the 17mm, and desu I love the focal length but it’s not as sharp as the 25mm and it’s too expensive new for what it is imo. I got it used at a good price.
>>
>>3449661
You're not a weak forearm wimp are you?
>>
>>3452087
If you've ever followed any of the /p/ Instagram accounts, just about everyone here seems to be a stick insect no muscle generic hipster with ultra skinny jeans.
>>
>>3452018
Don't overlook the D800. Especially if you're doing landscape. Yes it's older but;
36mp.
Properly weather sealed, unlike the d610.
>>
>>3452097
you can just say fujifag next time rather than define it.
>>
>>3452097
Hey now.

I’m a morbidly obese no muscle generic hipster with baggy jeans.
>>
>>3452099
>Don't overlook the D800. Especially if you're doing landscape. Yes it's older but;
>36mp.
>Properly weather sealed, unlike the d610.
What about the K1?
>>
>>3451448
>Pick a manufacturer and look for an APS-C sized body that came out after 2014, read a few reviews, take a look at the features and decide which one is the most worth it for you.
Advice like this is a little stupid. Just give him a list of recommended models.
>>
>>3452236
he said his budget was £600
K1's are great but cost over £1000 used
>>
>>3452237
X-T1, X-T2, X-T3, X-Pro2, X-A3, X-E3, X-A5, X-H1, X-T100
>>
>>3452236
>K1
Good body and IBIS is nice, but it's way more expensive, hardly comparable to the d800.
>>3452018
D800 mate. The original a7 has bad battery life, FE mount lenses are expensive and not as good as canikon ones and the 5dmii has something like 11 stops of dynamic range vs 14 on the nikon. I normally don't advocate spec faggery but that's a huge difference.
You'll definitely appreciate the extra AF points, and maybe even the extra resolution.
>>
>>3452246
that's just wrong, I could go over reasons for why the d800 is a better purchase than the 5d2 but dynamic range?
iso performance is the the important bit here and will negate bad dynamic range, but even then DXOmark can not be trusted because they rate sensors in a misleading way.
>>
>>3452271
Not only does the d800's sensor handle noise better than the 5dmii, but the extra dynamic range means you can let in more light before you start clipping in high contrast scenes, leading to cleaner shadows.
Besides the 5dmii isn't even the same generation as the d800, the 5diii would be a better comparison although the d800 is still better.
>>
>>3452275
listen, I don't disagree but mentioning dynamic range as a selling point irks me
>>
>>3452280
It's a selling point when compared to the 5DII -- or any Canon camera.
>>
Is it true that the Sony a6000 is better than the Canon 7DII and Nikon D7200? Or is it just better than the 7DII?
>>
>>3452280
Why not? It can make a big difference in high contrast scenes
>>
whats the best alternative to 24 gm that doesn't cost as much as the camera itself
>>
>>3451524
Yeah, she must have been posing for a long time for them to be developed.
>>
>>3449164

i just bought the batis 18mm for my norway trip along with a new polarizer + 10 stop nd.
tell me what i'm in for
>>
>>3452285
depends on what you mean by better
canon 7DII and nikon d7200 has better ergonomics and controls whereas the a6000 is smaller
noise performance is d7200 > 7DII > a6000 but it's barely any different
>>
>>3452285
Not really. Sensor is good, but Sony cheeped out on raw compression for better fps, and it's got anti-aliasing filter. You're getting compressed raws no matter what, and anti-aliasing filter ruins another bit of sharpness that you get out of it. Combined this means you're getting better pic quality even out of smaller sensors.
>>
>>3452341
>depends on what you mean by better
"Comparatively more good."
"Superior."
>>
>>3452349
>but Sony cheeped out on raw compression for better fps, and it's got anti-aliasing filter. You're getting compressed raws no matter what, and anti-aliasing filter ruins another bit of sharpness that you get out of it. Combined this means you're getting better pic quality even out of smaller sensors.
I can understand theoretically why that would be the case. Have there been any photographic comparisons done?
>>
>>3452351
In my experience, with roughly 25 cameras owned at this point, a camera is a camera is a camera. They're all capable of taking good photos provided you know what you're doing and pair the camera with a decent lens, a good lens being more much important than an expensive camera body. Unless you're a pixel peeper you won't notice a difference in image quality between camera models, especially since Instagram compresses the shit out of every photo uploaded so it all ends up the same 1mb mush in the end.

The important part is ergonomics and ease of use. Because we all have convenient enough cameras on our phones now, a dedicated camera has to be piss easy to use and a joy to hold or it'll just gather dust. You won't want to pick it up or carry it around otherwise.

To me, the best ergonomics on a camera ever belong to the Ricoh GR line and nothing else really compares. Maybe Fuji cameras but they're still not as comfortable to me as a GR.

Anyway, go to a camera shop and see which one feels best in your hands, and see if the menus/dials are intuitive. If the camera feels fun and does what you need, get it. Don't sweat image quality much as even cameras from <2011 still make great images. Just get the one that you're most likely to actually use.
>>
>>3452246
>The original a7 has bad battery life
same as eos r and z6 lol
>>
>>3452337
>tell me what i'm in for
Sharp wide angles of good quality.

Now just learn to compose your images right. With a prime it's important and you stand in the right place at the right distance from your subject.
>>
>>3452284
>or any Canon camera.
5D IV, 1DX II, EOS R all have great DR. The 5Ds, 5DsR, and 80D have good DR. Pointing at a 5D II or 5D III and saying "hurr canon dr bad" is just stupid. They're old cameras at this point.
>>
>>3452293
>Why not? It can make a big difference in high contrast scenes
It can make a big difference when you have to save a single frame. High contrast scenes still require a couple exposures if you want the best IQ.
>>
>>3452018
What SYSTEM do you want to be in? Decide that first based on lenses and ergonomics, then choose a camera.
>>
>>3452285
>Is it true that the Sony a6000 is better than the Canon 7DII and Nikon D7200? Or is it just better than the 7DII?
No. Both the 7DII and D7200 have vastly better ergonomics, controls, and interface than the a6000, so it's much easier to get good shots with them.
>>
>>3452411
My D850 disagrees, so does every other sensor post 2016 which isn't a Canon sensor.
>>
>>3452489
>my comfort zone disagrees and I mistake this for my cameras capability
You have no idea, faghead and neither do most in this thread.
>>
File: 9876655931442.jpg (14 KB, 500x500)
14 KB
14 KB JPG
what's a step up from this shitty chink tripod everyone seems to rebrand and resell?
>>
>>3452552
Q999H

Look it up in Aliexpress or Ebay.
Around 75 dollars.
>>
>>3452554
how about a tad cheaper?
sorry for being a poorfag
>>
>>3452555
75 dollars is cheap.
Western stores will demand 200-300 dollars for a solid tripod with horisontal mode.

Frankly you should probably fuck off out of this hobby and stick to your smartphone if you can't afford 75 dollars.
>>
>>3452555
https://www.amazon.com/Targus-Panhead-Bubble-60-Inch-TG-P60T/dp/B007REQU9W

this one is $45 and i found it was a significant step up in terms of build quality after having owned that same one you posted
>>
>>3452576
That still has the same shitty tripod-head.

Just 15 bucks more will get you a real Tripod.
>>
Strongly considering the Voigtlander NOKTON 50mm f/1.2 and I'm wondering which version to buy. Pic related is the Sony mount version (more recent) and from my research on review sites and youtube, I see that it somewhat ease of focus because it utilizes the autozoom on your viewfinder/LCD to help you nail shots.
On the other hand, a few reviewers suggest just getting the original M mount version and pair it with an Autofocus adapter, which apparently now works with eye and face detect (Sony). The other sugegstion was that it would be worthwhile even if you ditch the AF adapter later because you'd still be able to have use of the lens itself to mount on other camera bodies. Would /p/ go for the E mount version that attaches directly or just make life easy and get AF adapter and M mount version?

And quick question to anyone who's shot this lens and kept it at 1.2 as I plan on doing, what ND filter do you reccomend? Would like to reduce overexposed shots
>>
>>3452635
I think the AF adapter mess up the EXIF.

Heard something about it not putting the correct values into camera.
>>
>>3452635
Cheap ND filters will probably have some kind of color cast and will be uncoated, making them prone to flare and contrast loss. Expensive ones won't. You decide how much that's worth to you.

How strong of an ND filter you need depends on exactly how much light you want to dump overboard. You usually only need to cut maybe three stops if you're happy to shoot at 1/8000. They make (expensive) ND filters a lot stronger than that, for people who're in bright sunlight but either want to take long exposures, or who want to use fill flash at a large aperture, but need to be below a 1/200 flash sync speed, and so on.
>>
>>3452554
That looks great, do they also make a carbon fiber version?
>>
>>3452785
Not of this specific one.
But there are indeed other carbon fiber ones with horisontal mode, I think they are more expensive.

For what it's worth, Aluminium is really good and solid. And you want your Tripod to be a bit weight, good weight is how it will withstand the wind blows.
>>
best cheapish lens's for nikon full frame?
>>
Any thoughts on software? I'm not super attached to Lightroom/Photoshop so I'm seriously considering alternatives that aren't subscription based.
>>
>>3452635

Honestly, if you're getting an expensive MF lens like a Voigtlander, just learn to use it. The adapter helps, and it does focus reliably in ideal shooting scenarios, but it's not going to be anywhere near a native lens for speed and accuracy.

There are several options for a 50mm on emount already. The nokton should give great results, but if you want to spend a little less and shoot native, I'd probably get Sony's 55mm/1.8 or the Sigma art lens if you want tack sharp images, wider apertures, and a weight to tone your fat arms. There's always the 50/1.4 ZA, but I wouldn't pay that much for a fifty.
>>
>>3452795
well what are you looking for? be more specific
as for a regular lens I'd get a 50mm 1.4 af-d but 24-70's are popular so the tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 which is better than both the nikon 24-70's which really isn't a impressive achievement.
>>
What are the best lenses for an a6000? I just got in on a body only auction on ebay, and I need to get a lens too,.
>>
>>3452839

Sigma 16mm
Sigma 30mm
Sony 18-105
>>
>>3452778
Thanks a lot.

>>3452714
>I think the AF adapter mess up the EXIF.

I think you're right. IIRC, I previously heard it reports the wrong F stop etc but maybe that issue was all sorted out with firmware to get the lens to report correct info the camera. I'll look into it more but it wouldn't be a deal breaker for me.
>>
Anon, im here, im the guy from the thread asking for a camera indication for portrait photography
>>
>>3452951
State your business, people aren't mind readers, and it's a bother to look up your other thread.
>>
>>3449164
easy question i guess: Nikon, I have a 12-24, and a 50 prime but I have a gap in my lens stock from 24-50.
Whats a good zoom lens that isnt the stock 18-55? Alternatively I could just get a 35mm prime I guess
>>
>>3452951
Alright I was just about to go to bed

you sure money isn't an issue?
>I have all the money in the world and my mom absolutely wants nikon
d850 with a 85mm 1.4G
alternatively a z7 with a FTZ adapter and the 85mm 1.4G for eyetracking which is useful for portrait photography since the z mount does not yet have a 85mm prime.
I'd suggest getting her the z7 even if it's just a sidegrade but if she already has tons of nikon glass already get her the d850
personally I'd get the d850 if I had to get a new nikon but that's just personal preference.
get her an 24-70 as well for utility, the Z 24-70 2.8/4 and the tamron 24-70mm G2 for the d850.

>wait shit that's too expensive, give me something cheaper
d800/d810 + 85mm f/1.4G + optional tamron 24-70 2.8 G2
still manages to give you more than you need for professional portrait photography and then even more
>>3452955
DX I'm assuming?
35mm DX prime, I'd suggest dropping an extra 20% more money on the 35mm f/2.0 af-d though for sharper corners and a better built lens.
>>
>>3452960
Youre talking about this one?
I like that its not a DX only lens so if I want to get full frame later, I can take the lens across. Right now i'm using a D7000

https://www.adorama.com/us%20%20%201108591.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwj9LkBRDnARIsAGQ-hUcOuwnu2ipVfkUa-0195nFrRI2aXJ2svkpkDLBYxJkSySWyR9lVCXgaAle8EALw_wcB
>>
>>3452963
yup that's the one
decently good corners on full frame as well when you get to f/5.6
>>
>>3452968
thanks for the advice, ill start looking around for a good used one
>>
>>3452970
your alternatives are the $1300 35mm and the 35mm af-s 1.8 which is generally much softer and has much less contrasts, but hey it's more modern! and holy hell that price difference between the af-d 35mm and DX 35mm is way different from what I'm seeing on ebay.
good luck scouring the net for good prices, I'll head off to the confinement of my bed.
>>
>>3452972
dx is about 200 af-d is about 400 for new amazon prices but much cheaper on ebay
>>
>>3452839
Primes
Sony 20/2.8 (slow, but smallest lens in system), 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, FE 85/1.8
Sigma 16/1.4, 30/1.4, 30/2.8 (slow but small and cheap), 56/1.4
Samyang 12/2, 35/1.2, 50/1.2, 85/1.8
Zooms for Sony crops all suck, but keep the kit, it's small and cheap
>>
>>3452795
28mm f/2 or f/2.8 ai-s
>>
Went and gave in, finally bought my first prime.
Currently had a 16-50mm 3.5-5.6 kit, and a 55-210mm 4.5-6.3 both from Sony for my a6000.
Felt I wanted a "proper" lens for future use in concerts, up-close portraiture (lol, prolly not with that distortion, but whatev) and general low-light situations where I can get close to a subject.

Shit's so cash, its great being able to crank up to 1/4000th of a second still on ISO100 that normally the f/3.5 of the 16-50 would not have allowed. Autofocus is fairly snappy, and performs faster than my 55-210mm when at f/22 and checking the depth of field focus required.

Focus ring has that really nice smooth feel, and it's super weird not having a zoom function, but its a prime so, obviously....
Quite a large-ish lens too, but I was explained that its due to the extra component requirement in the formfactor restriction of the e-mount and f/1.4 aperture making it longer than my simple 16-50mm.

I could have gotten it online for cheaper, around 360-390euros, but I wanted it kinda soon ish, and talked the shop seller from 447 to 420€.
Meh, roast me, I'm happy with the new lens.


>>3449487
What anime. Dammit I need a name.
>>
Worth getting Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 over the kit 18-55 Canon lens?

I looked at comparisons and the picture quality looked very similar. Is the constant aperture really such an improvement?
>>
File: dcdn.jpg (197 KB, 1434x946)
197 KB
197 KB JPG
>>3453128
I hate that focus ring. It's too soft and too big, and since lens is heavy as fuck, I keep bumping into it while resting my left arm on the lens. IQ is defying belief, though. Simply outstanding.

Funny thing how the new m43 catalogue forgot to mention it's also dust and splash proof.
>>
>>3453128
>but I was explained that its due to the extra component requirement in the formfactor
He was bullshitting you.

Sigma always make larger lenses than necessary regardless of the mount.
>>
File: DSCF6152.jpg (2.08 MB, 4000x6000)
2.08 MB
2.08 MB JPG
Using the Fujifilm X100F for a year now but I feel limited more and more. Thinking of selling it to buy a X-Pro 2 or the X-T30. I wanna use a tele and wide lens a lot, especially since I'm doing lots of car photography these days. What do you think, is it worth the "upgrade"? Other than the missing lenses I really love the x100f desu.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX100F
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 7.3.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:01:17 22:36:23
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness-1/25 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length23.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
File: IMG_20190322_203337.jpg (3.02 MB, 3120x4160)
3.02 MB
3.02 MB JPG
>>3453162
I'm an X-T2 user and love it. Never used the X-Pro series but from what I've heard the X-Pro bodies are better designed for compact primes and the X-T1/T2/T3 provides better balance for tele lens. Which makes sense, I own the 18-55 and it's perfectly balanced on the X-T2. Same as some of my other heavier vintage zooms. Here's my X-T2 balancing a heavy Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm for instance.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3453128
Hidamari Sketch, prepare to get wide
>>
>>3453150
>He was bullshitting you.
Not really...
See: >>3453136
It's got 16 elements! Basically they're doing Olympus thing. 'Smaller mount, we can afford to do more glass for same price!'
>>
>>3453182
You have many fundamental misunderstandings.

You implement multiple elements to correct CA aberrations, distortions etc.
You don't do it just for the hell of it.

Secondly, it's the sensor size, not the mount size.
Smaller sensor needs smaller image circle. And smaller image circles can get away with smaller diameter elements.
>>
>>3453173
Thank you! The X-T2 is interesting too. Do you think it's worth it to get the x-T3 instead?
>>
File: 1485743770443.gif (719 KB, 400x360)
719 KB
719 KB GIF
>>3453180
Made by Shaft, of all people. MSMM, __-gatari, Nisekoi, SZS, holy fuck I'm in for a wild ride.
>>
>>3453183
>You implement multiple elements to correct CA aberrations, distortions etc. You don't do it just for the hell of it.
Well, duh... For lenses on larger sensors you can't afford as many because you spend a lot more on glass alone. Manufacturing is more expensive, and QC is more demanding, therefore you can't afford to use more elements to correct optics defects and still manage weight as well. Doing as many of them on ff sensors would be hardly profitable and even less so weight manageable. Cine lenses are only ones that allow you that room. Still, just packing on elements isn't everything. Design of them, glass, and coatings mean a lot as well. In the last two areas Sigma used to be considerably behind. Still aren't at the top of the game, but they've come a long way. In design they were always very good. They hold countless patents, and many of the best lenses out there are their designs, even if they boast different badges.
>>
>>3453182
To be precise, Sigma is doing what Sigma did for Olympus.
https://www.43rumors.com/the-olympus-45mm-f-1-2-pro-lens-has-been-designed-by-sigma/
>>
>>3453191
It would have been easier if you had just admitted Sigma likes to make their lenses big in general.
Have you seen the OP image? That's the Sigma 85 F1,4 in the silhouette.

Anyway, my point was the mount is irrelevant, it's about the image circle.
>>
>>3453202
kek, just noticed dude's developing arthritis holding that brick
>>
Is the Sony 10-18 f4 worth getting for those of you who have it or used it even with the pricetag? I want a lightweight ultrawide AF lens, the 16mm focal length in the kit lens doesn't cut it for me anymore.
>>
>>3453213
I think that's the lens most vloggers recommend since it has stabilisation.
>>
>>3453222
>it has stabilization
Wait what? Why would you need stab on ultra wide? Oh, right, it's $ony we're talking about.
>>
>>3453232
Usable for vlogging.
>>
>>3453232
stabilization is always useful when you're handholding
>>
is there any site recommended for DIY camera body repairs? is it strongly recommended I go to a repair shop?

my D7100's autofocus button stopped working all of a sudden so I'm stuck in manual only now
>>
>>3453300
It is strongky recommended you go to a camera repair shop to do anything that involves anything internal, be it a scratchy motor or dead button.
The chance of you being to repair the camera's problems yourself without the expertise, experience, learned handiwork of a professional is slim to none, let alone when you are getting dubious advice from some site online.

You will most likely cause more expensive and harder to fix problems in your attempt to save a few bucks.

Either your problem is so expensive you may aswell buy the next model up, or you can afford the repair. Simple as that.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCOaQag-1tw
it will be fixed in final firmware they said
>>
is buying into micro four thirds a mistake?
>>
>>3453438
In 2018 the Full Frame market grew by 150% according to Sony.
Most camera makers are retreating to FF, because it's the only segment with growth.

I think m4/3 is in trouble when smartphones learn how to blend +10 Exposures of various exposure levels together to create super HDR in a single timing.

Once they achieve that, even Full Frame could be in trouble.
>>
>>3451319
Does he simply not know that on Windows he needs to manually download a codec pack or raw driver from camera manufacturer and install it, and then you can get the previews, if only with colors slightly off?
>>
>>3453444
>when smartphones learn how to blend +10 Exposures of various exposure levels together to create super HDR in a single timing.
desu that's what a lot of HDR implementations are doing, google blends 8 frames together, apple does 9 I think
computational photography is good but it takes control away from the photographer and into the software
notice that none of these smart HDR camera software implementations let you take control, that's because when you specify the shutter speed and the ISO, hardware implementation limitations prevent you from doing neat HDR stuff
and smartphones are limited by things like lens interchangeability and ultimately sensor size (multiple sensors with multiple focal lengths is a meme, it drives up costs up way quicker compared to ILCs)
instead of asking the question of computational photography on phones, we should be asking the same question on dedicated camera bodies
the first one to market with a professional/enthusiast aimed body that has computational photography tricks will probably make a lot of buck
>>
>>3453456
>and then you can get the previews,
Already tried that. Didn't work because windows is a buggy piece of shit.
>>
>>3453458
>that's what a lot of HDR implementations are doing, google blends 8 frames together, apple does 9 I think
Right now their sensors have to take multiple exposures.
I'm talking about when they have +10 sensors each doing 1 exposure.

>multiple sensors with multiple focal lengths is a meme, it drives up costs up way quicker compared to ILCs
Cost doesn't mean much.
Apple is desperate to have a feature that makes their 1500 dollar smartphone stand out for example.

And a Company like Sony can get sensors for cheap from their foundry.

The future for smartphones gets brighter every year.
>>
>>3452635
I would also consider a vintage adapted 50/1.4 from Nikkor, Canon FD (they got 1.2 as well), or Super Takumar for manual. More hipster cred.
>>
I'm a noob, which should I choose between a K-mount or EF-mount camera
>>
>>3453548
If you're a poor noob go K
If you're a rich noob go FE

Pic related. Getting it shipped on the 27th, what should I do with it?
>>
>>3453589
I use mine for shooting swimming, diving and concerts. It's a fantastic lens.
>>
will the a7 iii and the sigma 20mm last me forever as a general purpose setup? the price tag is way too much for me but I wouldn't mind saving up if it could last me very many years.
>>
File: 1537472197945.jpg (252 KB, 1014x570)
252 KB
252 KB JPG
>>3453747
The Sigma lens is already an outdated DSLR lens.

At 20mm, the Mirrorless lenses can get the same image quality at half the weight.
Don't bother investing into it when you have native options like ToKina Firin with AF.
>>
>>3453767
>tokina
based anon, didn't consider that one. thanks!
>>
>>3453787
It's a great lens, you save some money and also save some weight.

There is also an alternative version that is cheaper.
It's Manual only.
But it has Electronics for EXIF, and its Aperture ring can be clicked/Declicked.
>>
>>3453548
Pentax can't afford R&D
You might want to get the RP
>>
>>3453438
Yes, that's why Panasonic is leaving.
>>
>>3453589
That's my dream lens but I just can't do that price now. If rumors prove true and Tamron delivers an sony mount 70-200 2.8 I'll jump on board.
>>
Protip: anyone who's main gripe about a great lens or a body being its weight is a total pussy.

A giant pussy.
>>
>>3453883
Or a woman
>>
>>3453991
There are no good women photographers
>>
>>3453822
tfw I just bought into m43
>>
>>3453999
Why is that? Do they simply prefer being models as opposed to being on the other side of the camera?
>>
>>3454052
>>3454052
>>3454052
>>3454052
>>
>>3454053
Why do little chimpansee females prefer a soft plushie over a toy car with wheels?

It's biological.
>>
>>3454053
>>3454057
Both very sexist and rude.
>>
>>3452795
yongnuo 50mm 1.8
>>
File: Dun1_E_X4AAUsti.jpg (66 KB, 650x493)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
Totally forgot there was a /p/ board. Since i'm here does anyone have a good VHS camcorder recommendation? I want it to look similarly to pic related [spoiler]obviously for the aesthetics.
>>
>>3449914
I have used a rx100m3 for the past few years.
No problems.
Haven't used the viewfinder as much as I thought I would have.
It's not as quick as say the GR to start up and shoot, and it's got sony's fucking shitty menus.
A6000 has that too, though.
If you can get a good deal on one, it's fine.
If you're buying the A6000 there's the notion that you're buying into a system, or at least the option is there. Problem with that system is that apsc sony sucks.

I use the rx100 mostly for quick video these days, or when I just cbf taking around my camera and lenses, which unfortunately is with greater frequency.
It charges slow as fuck though, so you either buy the battery station or have at least another battery to carry around.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.