[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 111 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: p.jpg (369 KB, 875x875)
369 KB
369 KB JPG
You are over-encumbered edition.

All discussion and questions related to gear should take place in this exact thread.
Redirection to this thread for questions is encouraged.

Previous thread: >>3457967
>>
>>3461931
That one camera.
I wanted it for YEARS, Anon, srsly.
I have the money, but i dont shoot novadays.

What do i do? Try to stay cool knowing that 600usd equv would better let be on bank account or BUY THAT FUCKING AND TAKE ANOTHER GEARFAGSIP in my life?

Somehow i feel lost now then it's a step in front of me.
>>
>>3461940
what cameras are you looking at?
>>
>>3461931
>You are over-encumbered
Just use the scrolls from that guy near Seyda Neen
>>
>>3461943
imagine going to a photography trip to vvardenfall
>>
6D or 5DmkIII? Going for a full-frame used body on the cheap, the first option seems obvious but having a joystick+AF points and two sd slots is a big deal to me, although I'm not sure if the price difference is worth it. Enlighten me.
>>
>>3461947
If you're talking about the original 6D, then *definitely* get the 5D Mark III over it. The difference in autofocus system alone is worth the extra money.
>>
>>3461947
*sigh*
...
For what purpose?
>>
>>3461952
I'm still using an old rebel with dreadful focus and clunky controls. Always wanted to jump to full frame but I can't justify paying for a new body or even going mirrorless. The two models I mentioned seem like good middleground options that will cover my needs for years.
>>
File: Vs..png (219 KB, 724x282)
219 KB
219 KB PNG
Which is the better camera objectively/subjectively?

Canon 200D DSLR or Sony rx100
>>
What you guys would cope with:

Nikon D810 or Nikon D500?
>>
>>3461962
d810 for general use
d500 for sports/wildlife
take your pick
>>
>>3461964

for high iso, portraits and nature, you'd cope with D810, right?

I'm not much into sports
>>
>>3461979
If those are what you're going to shoot, I'd go with the D750 (better high ISO, and iirc faster focusing) unless portrait is your primary focus and you have lenses that are good enough for the D810's resolution.
>>
File: wedding.jpg (2.3 MB, 1920x1280)
2.3 MB
2.3 MB JPG
Hi there,

I’m going to tell you a story, please let me know what you think.

> I've been shooting weddings for about two years now. It's not my "real" job but I like it and I make some money out of it, mostly during summer.
> I'm currently using a Canon 80d + sigma 17-50 f2.8 and a Canon 55-250 stm, I also have a nifty fifty. Just what I used for travel before starting to do some gigs.
>The body is OK and I like Canon glass but the sigma 17-50 really struggles and sometimes I don’t get good results indoors / low light.
>I think it’s time to invest some money into my gear. Not just for the sake of it, but because I want to deliver better pictures to my clients (ISO performance is not ideal, anything over ISO 1000 tends to be a bit grainy) my budget is around 2500€/$2500 prices tend to be similar.
>I have four options as far as I know and I’m not sold on any of them so I’d appreciate your most brutally honest opinion.
>1st Stick with Canon: Glass is cheaper than other brands, huge lens selection and also good third party glass. – But the EOS R has a very low FPS which I use quite a lot during key moments. (one SD card is not a deal breaker for me, never had a card failure)
>2nd Go Nikon: Also great glass and not very expensive, really like the Z6 but oh man, those XQD cards are expensive, almost 200€ for 64Gb and I can easily fill 128Gb each shooting day so I’m afraid it’s going to end up being more expensive than the other options.
>3rd Switch to Sony- I like the A7 III and I’ve heard good things, but Sony glass is super expensive. I’d go for the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and wait until Tamron releases a 70-200 during the next century. I’m also worried that the E-mount is very small and I’ve no idea how that will impact future lenses.
>4th Stick with my current camera, invest on Canon glass and wait until Canon releases a decent camera that’s not going to break the bank (I’ll be probably dead by then)

Thanks!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 80D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2018:11:20 20:29:06
Exposure Time1/1600 sec
F-Numberf/4.5
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating640
Lens Aperturef/4.5
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SaturationLow
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3461953
Let me rephrase myself. What do you want to use the camera for?
>>
>>3461979
Oh, and since this post sounds kinda English as a second language, cope isn't normally used like that. Cope has the negative connotation of dealing with something substandard or otherwise bad circumstances. Both the D810 and D500 are really good cameras.

A better construction for what you're asking is something along the lines of "would you prefer the d810 or d500". This phrasing is content neutral (it doesn't imply that there's anything good or bad about the choices. It merely presents the choices).
>>
>>3461980
portraits are my main project tho
nature is most animals headshots and landscapes.

I also was focusing on greater resolution. because I'm starting to print 'big' (60cmx40cm to 1mx80cm)
>>
>>3461984
thank you very much man, never thought about it, saw someone using it, and tried to do the same.

thank you very much
>>
>>3461981
>Fifth-buy a speedlite

>Fill a 128 GB card
Homie, start being more selective. I get that you probably machine gun to ensure that you get the shots you need, but as you've got experience shooting these, you should have a much better feeling of anticipating the right moment to hit that shutter release. At the very least shoot shorter bursts. I mean Christ, that's over 4k shots. Just going through those to cull the bad shots at a half second each takes you a half hour. I can't imagine how much time it takes just to transfer those onto your computer...
>>
>>3461990
You're welcome. English usage is a pain because of how certain things are normally used versus how they can be used just looking at the definitions. It's like how you'll frequently see non-native speakers like models and photographers say something like "DM me for cooperation" instead of "DM me for collaboration"...technically it works, but it's just not how anyone phrases it.
>>
>>3461985
D810 would probably be the better fit for what you're looking for then.
>>
>>3461979
the d810 used to be nikons best camera for exactly that two years ago thanks to 36MP full frame no aa sensor and extreme dynamic range, I don't see why you're considering the d500 which is primarily a wildlife/sports camera instead.
then you have the d750 >>3461980 which is smaller and much more lightweight, doesn't have the "pro-layout" and build quality but much easier to carry with you and does very slightly better in low light, better video and cheaper as well.

my suggestion is to either get a d750 or d810 and focus on good glass instead, much more important than bodies.
>>
Looking to upgrade from d3000
Budget is around 460usd (mind that in argentina usd is 1:45)
I can get a new D5600 for around 457usd in fnac (dad travels to spain in a few weeks)

Should i go for the new 5600, aim for a used 7200, any other suggestion, brand, etc.

Mostly shooting low light portrait, and some street photography lately
>>
>>3462001
>low light
don't get the d5600.
save up for a used d800/d610 instead, both can be had for around $750 which is 15% more than what a used d7200 goes for.
>>
>>3461991
Thanks anon, I have a 430 EX III-RT but I've never liked flashes. Never been into the look flashes tend to give. Maybe it's just me but I think they sometimes deliver very unnatural moments.

As for the 128GB that's about right, Last wedding I ended with 3700 shots, 2300 valid pictures. (Over 14 hours long and 300 people)
But that wasn't the point, I mean, XQD cards are super expensive and you need at least two 64Gb cards IMO. what happens if one fails or you shoot more? You always need to have spare storage.

Really appreciate it :)
>>
>>3462004
I'm not looking for optimal performance, i'd like to stay under 600usd, what about other system?
>>
>>3462007
nothing that really offfers better low light than the d5600 at that price point, if you want something better you go full frame.
the d5600 is still going to be a huge upgrade from what you have but glass is much more important for low light but if you absolutely must I'd buy the d7200 instead because the body is much more pleasant to use.
>>
>>3462010

Third world problems.
So i guess I better pick a d7x00 used, i get the ai compatibility and weather sealing, right?
>>
>>3462006
How much of that is how you're using the flash (are you bouncing/using a modifier/is it on camera or on a bracket/have you checked out what can be done in a lot of spaces with 2 or 3 remotely triggered lights providing fill with an on camera for key) versus just being strobe photography? Controlling the light also speeds up your post processing (less variability to deal with to make them look the same).

I realize I'm making a sales pitch to you with this, but say you do get a body with 2 more useable stops in post. That doesn't necessarily mean that it'll be able to focus well enough in that light, especially if you are already wide open (and doubly especially if you throw in a f/1.4 to get a third stop)...I dunno, I just don't see that as saving as many images, but you know how you shoot.

That said, rent one of the current low light beast cameras and screw with it for a week and see what that does for you.
>>
>>3462014
yup, tons of cheap af-d and older glass in general that will give better results than modern trash.
having a top LCD is helpful at times as well, the d7200 doesn't offer that much more than the d7100 except for some small changes here and there either so that might be your best bet.
>>
>>3462016
So 7x00 wins, thanks anon! I hope i can get a 800 tho
>>
>>3461982
Portraiture and events (mainly at night).
>>
>>3462019
6d, the 5d3 is still ridiculously overpriced used still.
leaves you a lot more money to get good glass instead which is the important bit.
the 6d1 leaves things to be desired though since it's not a fully premium body so it might not be worth the investment if it'll be something that you'll keep for years, can't go wrong with the 5d3 though but it's expensive.
>>
>>3462022
BODIES ARE DISPOSABLE GLASS IS THE INVESTMENT
>>
>>3462024
I tend to agree but it's the body that you'll be using and I'm not wrong in saying that the 6d is far from a premium body with it's low quality shutter, 1/4000s and 97% viewfinder, of course that's not going to affect your photography in any meaningful way but you will feel it.
still that'll be my choice since it leaves me with much more money for glass.
>>
>>3461994
good to know. I remember someone helped me about the meaning of 'manifestation' and 'demonstration' some threads ago.

>>3461997
it would give me even more details and 'crop' when necessary

>>3461999
I bought the D500 when it's first came out, because it was fitting me. I usually shoot demonstrations and rallies for a news agency. But now I'm moving away from some calls and changing some stuff I was used to do. It doesn't mean I'm going to stop taking photos from those subjects (i.e. demonstrations), but I'll be focusing my real efforts and profiting more on another projects.
Considering my uses on 'wildlife', while seem other nature photographers doing almost the same stuff, I can't see why the D810 would be a draw back.
>>
File: cropfactor-1.jpg (200 KB, 728x509)
200 KB
200 KB JPG
>>3462033
>I can't see why the D810 would be a draw back
less pixel density that the d500 which in turn means much more "zoomed in" pictures which makes it better for wildlife and sport, not to mention much better fps.
the main advantage of the d810 is that it's full frame and not APS-C like the the d500 which means sharper images, better cropability and better low light/details in shadows.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2010:05:03 23:02:58
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width728
Image Height509
>>
>>3462033
>Considering my uses on 'wildlife', while seem other nature photographers doing almost the same stuff, I can't see why the D810 would be a draw back.
In that and stuff like sports: it's faster to fill the buffer, lower fps, and autofocus is noticably slower, both of which can cost you a shot.
>>
>>3462034
>less pixel density that the d500 which in turn means much more "zoomed in" pictures which makes it better for wildlife and sport, not to mention much better fps.
I formatted this text completely wrong, I'm an idiot.
the d810 has less pixel density than the d500 which in turn means that it's less zoomed in than the d500, not to mention much worse buffer and fps.
>>
>>3462034
Pixel density doesn't have anything to do with sensor size.
>Sharper images
Not necessarily true. Larger pixel sites limit the fine detail that can be detected by the sensor while giving you more light collection thanks to a larger area for light to hit. This is one of the reasons that there D750 has better low light performance than the D810. In the D750 sensor, they went with larger pixel sites.
>>
>>3462042
>Pixel density doesn't have anything to do with sensor size.
practically it does, most FF cameras are 24MP whereas APS-C cameras are usually at 24MP or below which means that the APS-C camera will have a way higher pixel density, the d500 still beats out the d810 in terms of that even with 36MP, you'd need what? 50MP to get the same density as a 24MP APS-C?
>>
>>3462022
>>3462024
>>3462025
The original 6D uses the same autofocus system as the 5D Mark II, which is basically the same autofocus system as the 5D classic, which is basically the same autofocus system as the Rebel XT but attached to a full frame sensor so it doesn't cover nearly the same amount of the frame.

What this means is that you only have 11 autofocus points, and they are all clustered in the center, and only the actual center AF point is cross-type, which means the other 10 only work worth a damn in really bright light.

The autofocus system is worse than modern-day Rebels. It's worse than contemporary Rebels. It's worse than rebels that were released years before it.

Especially if he's going to be shooting portraits--where you generally want to focus on someone's eye, and the eye is generally not going to be dead center in the frame--this autofocus system is just painful to use.

The 5D classic's autofocus system was the main reason I upgraded to the 5DIII and skipped the 5DII back in 2012. It's just absolutely trash garbage. Given the autofocus system, I would honestly recommend a 70D over a 6D.
>>
>>3462048
Interesting how you only bring up higher MPs and pixel densities and not how say you can find 10 MP sensors from the size of a nipple up to 8x10 and beyond...

At the bleeding edge, it's a combination of us getting close to hitting the resolving limit of most lenses and deciding on whether to optimize for fine detail or low light, not any kind of manufacturing or physical limit.
>>
>>3462034
>>3462038

Not a fan of spray and pray. but I'm sure the AF system sometimes would be a heaven's gift.

>>3462036

surely it will. I would have to play cautious when using the burst.

the D810 fits me, but the D500 can give me some of the speed sometimes I need. Durability I know both cameras are solid.
>>
>>3462060
no I don't disagree with that but APS-C TENDS to be better at wildlife and sports and those cameras TENDS to have better pixel density, hence the word "practically".
I think we're just arguing semantics
>>
>>3462066
>have BETTER pixel density
No, we're not arguing semantics. I'm attempting to disabuse you of the idea that pixel density is a useful measure in any regard because there's a running ton of factors that are required to know in order for it to say anything. Take for instance the D810 and D500 that was brought up earlier: the sensor that the D810 already has out resolves most Nikon lenses. Increasing it by around 2/3 to match that of the D500 would only result in more detail being captured with a handful of lenses while also greatly reducing the already reduced low light/high ISO performance with every lens. It is only "better" in a minority of cases so it's mistaken to generally call higher density better.

Pixel density, as I stated earlier, represents optimizing between light detection and fine detail optimization. Generally this also is happening at a high enough performance level in both of these factors that what they chose to optimize doesn't affect the vast majority of photographers.
>>
>>3462079
I understand what you're going at now, I stand corrected.
however
>reduced low light/high ISO performance with every lens
that doesn't matter if you're trying to capture distant detail since both sensors will be using the same amount of space, is this correct or wrong?
and won't you be able to get more detail out of a lens even if you "outresolve" it?
>>
>>3462098
>that doesn't matter if you're trying to capture distant detail since both sensors will be using the same amount of space, is this correct or wrong?
It depends on if you're talking about a fine detail that's subpixel sized or not and what degree of resolving that detail you find acceptable.
>and won't you be able to get more detail out of a lens even if you "outresolve" it?
Can you fix an out of focus shot to get fine detail? Because that's what we're talking about. Saying that a sensor outresolves a lens means that the smallest detail that it can detect is smaller than the smallest detail that the lens can focus.

We're knocking on the door of getting into some parts of optics I only half understand and can't explain worth a damn, so it's probably best I just tell you to look up "circle of confusion" and "airy disk".
>>
>>3462066
>>3462079
>>3462098
>>3462110

I'm following you guys, fyi

you guys made it clear about the MP count and pixel density. good conversation.
>>
>>3462110
>We're knocking on the door of getting into some parts of optics I only half understand and can't explain worth a damn, so it's probably best I just tell you to look up "circle of confusion" and "airy disk"
I remember reading about the circle of confusion before but I don't fully understand it, will do.
I'll admit one thing though, I always assumed that APS-C was better than FF for sports and such unless you had a lens that were long enough for FF but I see now, I understand the advantages and disadvantages.
>>
>>3462119
Usually that's true because for the same sized buffer and speed processor, it can hold and clear more images more quickly than full framed, and a lot of people just machinegun the shutter to maximize the chances of getting THE moment. It's kinda like how primes are easier to make better than zooms just because there's less stuff you have to deal with and control for.

Otherwise, there's honestly not much advantage to crop than price since you can get the exact same results with full frame just by cropping in (I know Nikon ff cameras have a crop mode where it just doesn't record the outer edges of the sensor frame to help with burst length and speed).

As to detail, the larger the sensor the better, but people don't try to shoot hummingbirds with an 8x10 field camera because that's not the only important factor. The deeper you go into learning about the tech side, the more you realize that everything is a balancing act between trying to serve different needs. Portability, ergonomics, detail, weight, light sensitivity, production costs, etc. etc. etc.

The basics of the whole circle of confusion thing is that any physical lens (or collection of lenses) can only focus so much. Whether or not you think this is enough depends on how big of a surface you're trying to focus it on and how far away you are when you're looking at it (because the eye has resolving limits too).
>>
>>3462119
>>3462115
>>3462126
>>3462110
>>3462098
>>3462079


APS-C SUCKS

BIGGER SENSOR = MORE LIGHT = BETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>3462141
Looks like someone's mad about full frame being better
>>
>>3462141
It's not really more light, it's the amount of surface area you have for the light and your lenses which is what makes full frame better than APS-C.
And why the fuck are you doublespacing?
>>
>>3462141
I hope at some point Fuji will make f/1.4 lenses for medium format, then it will be the best.
>>
Havel's Ring
>>
>>3462146
>surface area you have for the light

= MORE LIGHT DUMB FUCK
>>
I'm confused

is the D810 better than the D500?
>>
>>3462154
Is a 20 pound sledgehammer better than a 5 pound one?

The answer is that it depends on what you're looking to do. The D810 is a beast for stuff like portraits and landscape. There D500 is a beast for stuff like sports and wildlife. Both of these cameras are at least pretty good for most all kinds of shooting, one is just aimed at a different kind than the other.
>>
>>3462155
in you opinion

which one is going to devalue faster?
>>
>>3462157
>In your opinion
No, that's pretty well as objective as you can be. Assessing what body is better can't be done independent of one's intended use and preferences. You even foolishly focus on devaluation as a measure--which you're perfectly free to do, just dumb because digital bodies are consumables.
>>
>>3461955
They are very different.
DSLR has interchangeable lenses, so you can have nifty fifty prime for your blur backgrounds. You can also look through lens without sensor because mirror. But is big.
RX100 is the one to have with you. But you get a collapsey dim kit zoom glued to it forever.
>>
>>3462158
I don't think it's dumb, because, for me, those cameras will work as a gateway for my future D850. this being pointed out, I would rather a camera that I could sell used and still have a price tag that would help me to achieve my D850 goal.

something like this.
>>
>>3462161
If you're doing this for a business thing, then well, yeah, that isn't a smart way to go about it. Chasing the newest for what's mostly not that much additional utility. Going more towards every other generation than generational successors is a better model.

The benefits of the D850 over the 810
>autofocus
Can be make or break depending on what's being shot
>4k video
This is actually kind of a push because you can get a D810 plus one of the various m4/3 or crop bodies that do 4k and video far better than any Nikon system camera ever dreamed of
>higher resolution
This is one of those ehhh things in that the biggest benefit to most shooters is being able to crop in (as most aren't printing large enough to warrant the 34 MP of the D810 much less the 40something of the D850), but there's a downside too. The 30-40 meg RAW files that the D810 produces make a lot of computers cry. If it's been a few years since you've updated your computer, an 810's raws will require you to upgrade your comp and 850's will make you go even farther to get decent performance while doing post.

If you're really wanting high resolution images, you might as well go for the Pentax 645z, especially if you want something that'll keep its value, but I'd personally aim for something like the D810 then when I had the extra money to be able to afford the D850, I'd buy another lens, get lighting gear, or set up some shots to sell. Just buying a slightly better body that mostly doesn't do anything my other body does just isn't worth sinking twice the value of my current body into.
>>
>>3462179
I see, interesting point.
I think about the D850 because it can give me some very good nature/landscapes shots, without losing too much for some sport shots. a good 'all subject' camera. But that's something the D810 can also offer, isn't it? just the AF being not comparable at all
>>
>>3462161
And hell, there's another path that might be even better for you unless you're really, really in love with 40+ mp images

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/reviews/pentax-k-1-mark-ii-review
>>
>>3462183
>But that's something the D810 can also offer, isn't it? just the AF being not comparable at all
The 810's autofocus is good, it's just not great. It's definitely usable for sports, especially when it's paired with one of the better lenses. In all of these comparisons, remember that we're comparing really good to great. We're not comparing crap to great.
>>
>>3461947
>Going for a full-frame used body on the cheap
EOS RP
>>
>>3462155
I wish I could find a 20lb sledgehammer
>>
Is Sony ahead of Canon now in terms of autofocus?

Sony's eye autofocus looks great. How does Canon compare?
>>
>>3462209
I think sony's new autofocus update blows canon's out of the water currently
>>
>>3462184
Pentax base here in Brazil is close to zero. Great cameras, but I would struggle to find the lenses for the system. Also I'm working with Nikon, thought about going Canon since here we have a better CPS program, but it would be expensive to make the shift

>>3462185
Yes, I'd realized that. all the comparisons made here are quite 'pro-grade'. That's interesting.

I'm not making it until next week I guess. I have some assignment on my schedule that the D500 will fit.
>>
>>3462190
>having a joystick+AF points and two sd slots is a big deal to me
>>
>>3461931
So here is my problem. I have a Canon 700D and i want to change my camera for a Full Frame DSLR. The problem it's that i'm broke af so the only chance for doing this is if i sell mine first. For the same amount of money i can buy a Canon 5D Mark II, it Is worth it? My problem with the 5D Mark II is that the max ISO is to slow.
>>
>>3462249
Get unbroke first while asking yourself what you actually need full frame for.
>>
>>3462050
So a 5DIII would be your full frame recommendation? Is the 6D's autofocus that bad even for relatively still photog? What kind of apsc would you go for then?
>>
IIRC Sony is better for video and face tracking but lacks AF assist beam compared to the EOS R, so it relies solely on the sensor for AF which might be worse in some situations
>>
Should I buy a new phone with a decent camera or an XF10? My almost 5-yr old, 7 inch chink phone is showing age and I want a somehow decent EDC (either a better camera phone or dedicated camera). Would you spend $ on a new phone or on a pocketable camera?
Mobile phone
Pros:
One pocket, less weight, less intrusive when shooting
Cons:
IQ still not par with XF10, not much manual settings, more lag when shooting?

Xf10
Pros:
Dedicated camera, IQ is good, manual settings
Cons: Additional weight, needs another front pocket
>>
>>3462249
>>3462190
>>
>>3462356
Is there a way to adapt lenses on the RP without ending up with just 11MP images?
>>
Canon SL3 officially announced and revealed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AkpAenE93k

https://www.canonwatch.com/this-is-the-canon-rebel-sl3-leaked-images/
>>
>>3462363
>4K (24p / 25p) high-definition movie shooting
>During Live View shooting, “Puit AF” is activated to detect the subject’s pupil
That's awesome, this camera will take 2016 by a storm!
>>
>>3462364
Not to mention the fact that is a DSLR rather than mirrorless.
>>
>>3462365
They already made M50
>>
>>3462365
I'm not arguing in the direction of entry level dslr, however, there are people keepi g interested in using dslr (alongside of milc)
>>
>>3462261
I mean, the other guy was right in that even compared to other cameras of the time, the 5DmkII's autofocus was slow, but that doesn't mean it's unusable. I shot nighttime sports with that body for a few years. Did I miss shots that I shouldn't have because of the slow AF? Probably. But I still made it work for me. Get the 6D or a 5DmkII, especially if you mainly shoot stills.
>>
>>3462249
Ask yourself in which way your current camera is limiting you. I think the photography community has to take a step back with the new FF meme.
>>
>>3461942

I have Sony a700.
I salivate on Sony a850 or a900.

I do agree that both A99 and/or A7 are newer and for some - better. I'll try to fingerfuck em, but theese cameras just dont give me boners.

I do secretly think that i should just get an Nex 6/7/6000 with just a couple of nice primes - for the sake of having my camera with me in my bag, because my A700 with battery grip is a "garage queen".

But thinking about NEX - i tend to think that as everyday camera - the smartphone is enough, may be upgrading to Iphone 8plus is a better idea overall, and the DSLR just should be available from time to time.

See? I just can even.

I cant understand what do because it seems like i have no task to deal with.
>>
File: 33659825988_7caa462599_k.jpg (350 KB, 2048x1152)
350 KB
350 KB JPG
What do you think about modern russian lenses? Like zenitar 50/1.2 and announced zenitar 30/0.95? I have 50/1.2 and for the price, same as china kamlan, it looks better for me.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T2
Camera SoftwareCapture One Pro 12.0 Windows
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Exposure Time1/180 sec
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating800
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Metering ModeAverage
Light SourceUnknown
FlashFlash
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3462433
The bigger the Zenitar logo on it - the more i think it's not made in Russia.
>>
>>3462433
Kamlan is coming out with a Kamlan 50mm f1.1 II in May via Kickstarter campaign so I don't really see the point in getting the Zenitar ones. Chink optics are getting really good and cheap for what they are.
>>
File: obektiv_zenitar_3_5_8.jpg (89 KB, 800x700)
89 KB
89 KB JPG
>>3462434
Lol, assembly quality is DEFINETLY Russian. Mine has stiff focus ring, i sent it back t othe factory and they send it back - no issues found, everything in limits.
>>
I <3 my m43 girlfriend
>>
File: 71-4IZctoYL._SL1500_.jpg (57 KB, 836x1500)
57 KB
57 KB JPG
What's a good, cheap tripod to get for photos? Is Aliexpress really the only option? I think I've seen that recommended here a few times.
I'm in Germany, budget is up to 100€ I guess, preferably below 75€ tho.
I'm shooting with an APS-C mirrorless, so weight shouldn't be an issue, although I do have a fairly heavy tele-macro-lens that does get quite some use.

I found the Amazon basics carbon travel tripod, seems to have really good reviews, costs 66€.

Any other input?
>>
recently grabbed the tamron 45mm 1.8 vc and it's really turned me on to the idea of fast glass with stabilization. was thinking about maybe upgrading from my kit lens in the future with a fast zoom with stabilization, any recommendations? was looking at the canon 17-55 2.8 is, since i shoot crop
>>
>>3462461
I kinda wanted to get it as well, how's the color and sharpness on that thing?
>>
>>3462050
Same boat as the original anon, but don't care about full frame. The 77D has dual slot with joystick and double point AF, could I get a quick rundown on pros and cons of this option? At 10fps it also seems great for sports/wildlife.
>>
>>3462500
>77D
might as well buy a rebel
>>
>>3462458
I'm a fan of Vanguard tripods. They're at a middle price point, but the three I have have been great.
>>
Looking to upgrade to FX from my D7100, I'm very happy with the feature set of the camera, I just want the bigger sensor and accompanying FX lenses (I have a 70-200 2.8 already)

what would be the equivalent Full frame body that wouldn't put me backwards in terms of quality of life features but won't break the bank.

Cheers in advance.
>>
>>3462501
Or even M50
>>
>>3462393
Why sony? Also why a700? Why not gearfag for some obscure compact camera, why some old irrelevant dslr?
>>
>>3462511
D610 of course. but you should take a look on a used D800/D800e
>>
>>3462511
d800
>>
>>3462511
D610 is damn near impossible to beat in terms of price/performance
>>
>>3462501
Messed up, meant 7D mkII.
>>
>>3461931
What use could you possibly need for 5+ cameras at one time?

Is this someone taking the "use the camera you have" axiom to the most illogical conclusion?
>>
>>3462602
>>3462518
hope you're joking.
the d610 is a entry level full frame while the d800 is a pro level build full frame with much better build quality and parts, can be had for about 5-10% more which is worth it, the only reason to get a d610 instead of a d800 is if your budget is extremely tight, you want 2 more fps or you want a smaller body, ehh I guess there's also the inclusion of the mode wheel and automatic mode but the pro layout is much more fun to use in my experience.

the d800 is nikons poorfag full-frame camera, not the d610.
>>
How long does a camera investment usually hold for a hobbyist photographer?
D3500 seems to be the go to recommendation for beginner DSLR camera I can find, but what is the rate at which cameras need to be upgraded for someone that enjoys it, or would gear related upgrades come more in the form of lens?
>>
>>3462501
Yes I was considering one and im like this is better and worse than the 80d why
Why the 77d has a better processor and sensor yet costs less and has no AFMA is beyond me.
>>
>>3462654
It was made with shitty rebel leftover parts and put it in a higher end body to trick users into buying it.
>>
Is it worthwhile using 2x CR-V3 batteries instead of the 4x rechargeable AAs I currently use?
>>
>>3462660
But the internal parts are good and the body is cheap and not weather sealed like the 80d

It literally makes no sense
>>
redpill me on CCD vs. CMOS

I have heard an exactly equal number of people favouring one over the other
>>
>>3462662
I wouldn't call a 1/4000 low quality shutter and 97% pentamirror viewfinder "good internals".
The sensor is on par with the 80d, not better.
>>
please contain all the sonyfaggers from shitting up the rest of the board.
>>
>>3462666
We gearfags won't contain anything, brandwhores aren't welcome here either.
Fuck off.
>>
>>3462665
Yeah I just did some further reading and realized the "5 axis digital IS" is a meme too
What is the advantage to pentaprism over pentamirror, less light loss ?
>>
>>3462668
Yes to both questions.
>>
>>3462611
Looks like shooting golf with primes.
>>
>>3462611
Can't get dust on your sensor if you buy a camera for every lens
>>
Anyone here try those peak design camera clips that go on your backpack? Is it really worth the money, or do the chinese ones work just as well?
>>
What gear would you buy for $1200 (body and lens?) for professional stills/occasional video work?
>>
>>3462681
Some prosumer body from the last generation or so plus a 24-70 2.8
>>
>>3462681

$1200 is enough for a good body or a good lens. If you do both for that price you'll have to do APS-C
>>
>>3462683
I'll look into it, thanks! Any particular recs?

>>3462687
I'm not opposed to apsc if it'a an alright combo. I was eyeing an 80D for crop though the lure of mirrorless is there I guess!
>>
>>3462687
Hence the post above yours.
Spend around $300 on a body, then the rest on a 24-70 2.8 which will cover everything from group shots to landscapes, to general event shots, to portraits, even on a crop (framing of like a 35ishmm to 105ishmm) with a wide aperture to help with lower light situations and bokehwhoring.

You can get Canon's 24-70 2.8 I all day long around $650, so that puts you at what? Near a 70D's worth left over? Nikon probably has near the same price range going on.
>>
>>3462663
>redpill me on CCD vs. CMOS
>I have heard an exactly equal number of people favouring one over the other

This battle is over, and CMOS has decidedly won.

People used to say that CMOS looked better at lower ISOs, but this assertion never stood up to a blind (so to speak) test--people can't actually tell the difference between a photo from, say, a (CCD) Leica M9 and a (CMOS) Leica M typ 240.

CMOS is the clear winner at higher ISOs (the M9 looks like ass at ISO 2500; a modern CMOS looks fine at ISO 3200 and they can go to ridiculous heights like 25,600 and above), and CMOS chips can do video and live view (smaller CCD chips can do those, too, but I gather that it's harder to do it on the larger sizes with CCD).

Nowadays, you basically never see a CCD chip in any serious cameras, so there's also the fact that CMOS has had several extra years of refinement to the technology to improve its image quality over older CCD cameras.

Just personal experience, as someone who owns an M9 and several full frame CMOS cameras, there's nothing particularly special about the CCD output that I've been able to see.
>>
>>3462683
I'll look into it, thanks! Any particular recs?

>>3462687
I'm not opposed to apsc if it'a an alright combo. I was eyeing an 80D for crop though the lure of mirrorless is there I guess!
>>
>>3462701
I don't know why my message was duplicated, but thanks! Sounds like a solid option
>>
>>3462706
Oh and that's a I (one), not an L (although the I is an L lens, it's just version one is the one you can afford, version II is more than your whole budget).

Anyway, don't get caught up in needing the newest, shiniest stuff or be like that other person and think that you have to have full frame. Any camera that has come from the big guys in the last 6 or 7 years will do what you need. Will you have to be a bit more careful about your exposure? Yeah. Will you have the same autofocus as a $5000 current body? Nope. Does that mean it's unusable? Hell no. And earlier I specified prosumer just for one reason: that's where you start getting either a second dial or wheel. On most consumer level bodies, they usually only put one dial on the body which makes it a pain in the ass if you shoot manual (instead of having a separate control for shutter and aperture, they map both to the same dial. To change one you just spin it, to change the other, you hold a button and spin it).

Bodies drop value like a rock too. The D810 was around $2500 used right up until the D850 came out, and now it's $1200-$1500. Lenses tend to hold value for a much longer time because newer tech tends to not be able to make the older ones obsolete like with bodies and they don't update lenses anywhere near as often.
>>
File: left-1200.jpg (297 KB, 1200x1112)
297 KB
297 KB JPG
How does the D7100 stack up today? There are plenty of refurbished models for under 500 USD, but how does it compare to newer cameras (A68, D3500, etc.) In the $500 range?
>>
>>3462458
I’ve been quite happy with this, anon. It’s proven to be light and quite sturdy. Not sure about availability in germany though.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00NSEKEMO/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_ozQRCbYSF1W91
>>
>>3462720
Definitely compares favorably to newer lower-end cameras like the d3500. Sensors have not advanced significantly at that level, so a D7100 basically gives you all the image quality and much better build/controls for less money.

Also: A68 would be an *especially* bad choice of camera to get, since it's A-mount and the A-mount is like the guy in the zombie movie who swears that he hasn't been bitten but is clearly starting to sweat and has weird red circles around his eyes.
>>
File: 1554858463403.jpg (94 KB, 1280x720)
94 KB
94 KB JPG
I'm going to be buying an a7iii in the next couple of weeks before heading overseas (take advantage of the sweet sweet duty free rates)

Is there anything negative I should know about it beforehand?
any accessories i should buy for it right off the bat?
>>
>>3462726
Thanks anon. I'm naturally a gearqueer with everything else I do, so picking a camera is a huge struggle right now.
>>
>>3462734

Maybe an extra battery if you shoot a lot, but those new batteries are pretty incredible. Outside of that maybe the Tamron 28-75
>>
File: 81v3jtn2tuL._SL1500_.jpg (101 KB, 1500x1500)
101 KB
101 KB JPG
>>3462503
thanks, I had not heard of these before. They are quite a bit more expensive, but I did some more research in the meantime and it does seem like all tripods sub-100€ tend to be hot garbage, so I guess I should get a pricier one to avoid buying another one in a year.

>>3462723
That one is indeed available here as well, costs like 83€.
As I wrote above, I did some reading in the meantime and am prepared to spend a little more than I originally wanted to. I had looked at the Rollei C5I, to which this Neewer seems to be the direct competitor, for 40€ less though.

People complain about the legs flexing in reviews about the Neewer, how's yours in that regard?
>>
>>3462791
I often mount my 7D and 150-600 to it. Never had any issues with flexing. This being said, it’s my first tripod that’s not some super cheap aluminum piece of junk, so maybe I’m missing something?

I guess I can put it this way: I don’t regret the purchase one bit, and I’ve personally been very satisfied with it.
>>
Olympus e-m10 MK2, is it good or not ? I am looking for a compact camera that I can keep in my pocket, and it seems to go for quite cheap as refurbished. It would replace my Samsung nx3000 which isn't as compact as I like.
>>
Is there any point to buying a 18-55 and a 55-300 if i can just buy a 18-300?
>>
>>3462808
Typically, you pay for the convenience of a single lens over separate lenses. Also, it makes it more annoying if you want to replace your short zoom or your long zoom, since you'll be carrying extra weight/bulk for a range you won't be using.
>>
>>3462352
Ricoh GRII is much better than the XF10 for around the same price.
>>
>>3462734
Does Sony do the gray market shit where you get no warranty if you buy overseas and try to register it in the US.
That's the only drawback I see
>>
>>3462471
really nice, there's a little bit of CA if you're shooting contrasty subjects wide open but other than that it's got great optics
>>
Hey guys,
I own an Olympus E-M10 with 17mm f2.8 pancake lense. I love this setup for traveling and just carrying it around in my jacket.

But. Focusing in low light is just almost impossible. Camera hunts forever and even with manualy focusing and seeing that the subject is in focus, the camera still keeps hunting after pressing the shutter.

Is there something that I am doing wrong or is this setup just bad for low light situations?
>>
>>3462808
Superzooms like 18-300 are generally trash tier junk, don't bother.
Get the 18-55 and the 55-300 and if you want a convenient lens for the holidays get a 18-105 or 18-135, this is the kind of superzoom that is still have an acceptable image. Not stellar and definitely not better than the kit and kit telezoom lenses, but acceptable.
>>
>>3462352
Get an Olympus XZ-2 (good fast zoom lens, small sensor), Panasonic LX100 (same as the XZ-2 but slightly bigger sensor) or a Fuji X70 (good fast prime lens - meaning no zoom, and a high resolution APS-C sensor you can crop a lot in post)
>>
>>3462840
Sonys warranty is shit anyway so you don't lose much
>>
>>3462791
>so I guess I should get a pricier one to avoid buying another one in a year.
Nah mate, you've got that a little twisted. You get a better tripod to avoid buying a new camera in a year. Even if you're just sticking a $200 body with a $60 lens on top of it, that's a not insignificant amount of money that you can lose because of a gust of wind...
>>
>>3462808
If it has a zoom of greater than 3x, it's optically garbage unless you're spending $100k to get a box field lens.
>>
>>3462667
this, even us gearfags won't accept them here.
>>
/p/ newfag here. Unironically asking for a frend, as I have no idea of photography.

Is a Nikon d5500 for 500$
And a sigma 10-20mm wide angle lens for 250$
Both 2.5 Years old, used a good deal?
>>
>>3462949
Do you know what a 10-20mm lens is for?
If not, look for something with an 18-55mm kit lens first. And avoid the D5x00 line, it is way overpriced for a plastic entry camera.
A D3300 would be much better for you.
>>
>>3462949
no
>>
>>3462951
Slight correction: the d5500 includes a 18-55mm lens. Is it still overpriced for 500$?
>>
>>3462951
Slight correction: the d5500 includes a 18-55mm lens. Is it still overpriced for 500$? It seems to be a similar price to the d3300.
>>
>>3462148
1.4 on medium format wouldn't have any practical application.
Heck, anything under 1.4 or 1.2 on ff isn't needed.
>>
>>3462800
>it’s my first tripod that’s not some super cheap aluminum piece of junk
that's what it's gonna be for me as well.
Thanks for your input in any way.

>>3462871
I know what you mean, reading about cheap tripods not just failing at some point from various defects, but failing specifically in a way that ends with the camera slamming onto the ground already put me way off and made me up my budget.
Spending between 100-200€ really is nothing in comparison to saving a few € and then saying goodbye to my +1000€ body/lens-combo.
>>
>>3462967
Oh one more thing about tripods
Carbon fiber is kinda a meme check out the weight specifications for any tripod you find that has an aluminum version and a CF one (or check out similar feature ones). Look at the price difference, then ask yourself if those few ounces of weight savings are worth that price difference.
>>
How much would you pay for a used 6D (28k shutter count) with a used 24-105 mm F4? This guy is asking $1200 for both.
>>
>>3462979
That's not a bad price, but I'm super not a fan of either.
>>
File: IMG_2619.jpg (2.02 MB, 2990x3487)
2.02 MB
2.02 MB JPG
Simple question, does this looks like an thorium coated lens ?
it was made by Tomioka

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwarePolarr Photo Editor
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Width2990
Image Height3487
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3462982
i mean we can see a yellowing, right ?
>>
>>3462993
Wb is a bit off, but yeah there's some yellow to it
>>
>>3462961
I'm a bokeh whore, and I hate backgrounds
>>
I just realized there's extremely cheap tripods, like the Cullmann alpha 1000 for 15€

I suppose it's better to have one of these than nothing? How bad can they be?
>>
>>3463086
You can also get a boob job in Thailand for $100.
>>
Are lenses (more or less) a long time investment considering you stay with the same camera brand? If you went from some average $400 entry level camera, would you need all new lenses for your $1200 semi pro camera 3 years down the road?
Still trying to understand where the smart buying points are when it comes to photo before committing.
>>
>>3463098
Yes but not completely.
Entry level cameras generally have crop sensors (typically a APS-C 1.5 or 1.6) and only capture the middle of the image rendered by the lens.
Because of that, field of view is different for same focal lengths, and so camera companies make special lenses for them that have smaller focal lengths and render a smaller image. If you buy crop lenses for entry level camera (EF-S, DX, E) and then mount them on a full frame camera (EF, FX, FE), then the lens will not cover the entire frame and you will have to crop.
If you buy a crop camera and full frame lenses, you can later upgrade and use their full image, but they will come in less convenient focal lengths (more about zooms), likely to be bigger, and more expensive to begin with.
>>
>>3463085
>backgrounds
>1.4 medium format
I think you mean everything but the sub 1mm dof.
>>
File: spoon of time dilation.jpg (528 KB, 1444x964)
528 KB
528 KB JPG
>>3463116
1mm is enough!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-6300
Camera SoftwareRawTherapee 5.4
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width6016
Image Height4016
Compression SchemeUncompressed
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Data ArrangementChunky Format
Image Created2019:04:07 20:43:04
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating6400
Brightness-5.8 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length0.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
File: 614tFhLA1wL._SL1000_.jpg (119 KB, 1000x1000)
119 KB
119 KB JPG
>>3463101
Expanding further on this point, its perfectly fine to buy a cheap APS-C camera and a nice full frame lens zoom lens.
For example the EF 70-300mm IS USM is a much better investment than the similarly priced EF-S 18–200mm.
The only lenses you would buy specifically for crop cameras are wide angle 10-18mm everything else your better off getting full frame


Moving on to tripods I have seen quite a few recommendations for this Rangers 55" it can basically do everything including inversion and converting to monopod and seems well built overall for 80$ I'm probably going to get one.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01IUO068S/
>>
File: photo.jpg (151 KB, 900x900)
151 KB
151 KB JPG
is the basic mac book pro ok for video editing? no 4k. i have a grand to spend on a laptop and dont know shit. pls help.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
is there any body that gives you an onscreen timer when you are shooting in bulb mode? i'm not gonna seek out a body based on that feature, obviously, but it just occurred to me that it seems like it would be easy enough to add and super convenient for long exposures
>>
>>3463134
https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/laptops/yoga/700-series/Yoga-730-15/p/81CU000UUS

Two caveats: to get the most out of it you'll need the active stylus (not sure if this model ships with one)
And you'll want an external hard drive and most likely a powered USB hub for it.
>>
>>3463137
Not sure about EVF bodies, but with OVF nope, because a lot of bodies aren't super well light sealed at the viewfinder, so it's bad mojo to continuously have a light on.
>>
File: calvaire-poster.jpg (136 KB, 700x931)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
>>3463144
>https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/laptops/yoga/700-series/Yoga-730-15/p/81CU000UUS

pretty much just what im looking for. and looks pretty slick to boot. much appreciated.
>>
>>3462720
It's a great model. The images are really sharp.
>>
>>3463147
They kick major ass. If you can find the 720 for cheap, that one works too (I got one six months ago). Being able to edit directly on the screen is great and I've had no performance issues doing pretty heavy editing on D810 files.
>>
>>3463134
mac books are terrible at anything intensive because they overheat and run at minimum CPU speed also adobe somehow is less stable on OSX even tho it was originally designed only for OSX
>>
>>3463154
>originally designed only for OSX
Nope.
>>
>>3463134
Not really but will do
>>
>>3462720
Bloody fantastic, the 7200 just isn't worth the extra money over the 7100.

Bargain.
>>
>>3463156
Indeed they were. For a long time ps ran like shit of pc.
>>
>>3463171
Indeed it wasn't made for OSX, an operating system that didn't come out until 2001. It was made for Mac OS 7ish (don't remember the exact version), and no, this isn't nitpicking. OSX was a major change.
>>
>>3463184
I should have said
It was designed for Mac
There now you can stop having a semantics fit.
>>
>>3463198
>groundbreaking operating system that was a major change in design philosophy and approach to consumer products is just "semantics"
I don't think you know what semantics means.
>>
File: Keyboard-NAB.jpg (275 KB, 755x451)
275 KB
275 KB JPG
>$1000

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4032
Image Height3024
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:04:08 14:56:11
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width755
Image Height451
>>
Been in the market for a DSLR and now quite a few deals are popping up on ebay and im not sure what is the best option:
- EOS 800D + 18-58mm + bundle (sd card, tripod, bag, etc.) $600
- EOS 80D + 18-55mm $850 (or a body + 18-135mm lens for 980)
- D3500 3 lens kit $440
- D5300 body only $375
Mostly looking to do night time shooting & wildlife (and my dogs) style stuff.
>>
>>3462976
>Carbon fiber is kinda a meme
I've been debating with myself already, yeah. I'm actually going to bring it outside a lot, so a little less weight should be nice, but the savings really aren't that amazing I guess.
Another thing that gets mentioned a lot is the CF sort of 'absorbing' vibrations better; I do some high-magnification macro, and while less vibrations would be nice for that, a sturdier, better tripod from metal might do just the same for the same price or less. But then again, I can't easily bring that anywhere outside because of the weight. However, if it's windy, the vibration-absorbing qualities of CF are fucking useless because the whole thing is light af and moves in the wind.

So wtf do I even buy lmao
>>
>>3463258
Unironically Pentax KP
>>
>>3463299
Dont know anything about it, but there are some for $800
>>
Am I gonna fuck up my camera if I charge a third party battery in camera via usb-c?
It's a decent one, not some super cheap one if that makes any difference.
>>
>>3463297
>But I can't bring it outside because of the weight
That's what the hook is for: hang your backpack, bag, whatever from the tripod and yay! Now it's got a giant hunk of mass to dampen vibrations.
>>
Found a good deal for a D750 but the possibility of a shutter issue makes me doubt, what's the correct approach here.
>>
>>3463371
Depending on the body you already have, go for it. New shutters aren't that expensive even if you have to come out of pocket ($200-300).

Also, if you can get the serial number, look it up:
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/service-and-support/service-advisories/technical-service-advisory-for-users-of-the-nikon-d750.html

Dunno if the recall is still open for free repairs, but that will let least tell you if that particular one is in the problem range.
>>
>>3463371
You can check the tripod mount on the body, if there is a black dot in there it means the shutter was fixed in service.
>>
>>3462726
>>3463150
>>3463169
Thanks. I've been sitting on the idea for about a week now, so I think I've decided to pick it up with an 18-105 for $495 USD (used).
>>
>>3461931
Can I expect to work semi-professionally with an used D610 and good glass? The image quality, AF system and price point seem to strike a great balance even now. It's even praised for low light. Then there's the D750 but the slight improvements don't impress me. Also, any red flags to look out for in this particular model?
>>
>>3463478
You're going to love it. Pic related.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D7100
Camera SoftwareLightroom
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.3
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)57 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2019:04:09 11:53:05
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/10.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/10.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceFine Weather
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length38.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
>>
>>3463492
Could you post a good photo as well to demonstrate the cameras performance?
>>
Should I spend 500 dollarydoos on a Tokina 11-20 2.8? It seems expensive as fuck but I don’t know of any faster quality wide angles for the d7200
>>
>>3463516
Probably not.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D7100
Camera SoftwareLightroom
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2019:04:01 12:13:57
Exposure Time1/800 sec
F-Numberf/4.5
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/4.5
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceFine Weather
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length35.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
>>
>>3462461
god dammit, there's a used 17-55 2.8 for $150 off the regular price that i could pretty realistically afford, it would just be somewhat excessive since i just bought the tamron. god damn these deals, they piss me the fuck off
>>
Can I get some recommendations for laptops/tablets (figured a surface might be an option) for Lightroom/Photoshop at around $500?
>>
>>3463557
Go on eBay if you havent already. They are doing a bunch of deals on all categories of stuff, lenses and cameras included.
>>
File: DSCF3047.jpg (524 KB, 1080x1350)
524 KB
524 KB JPG
I want to get into photography on the very cheap.

I've been using an old bridge camera we had laying around (Finepix S5600) and honestly I'm pretty happy with it with the exception of it using xD storage. I only have a 512mb card that's on its way out (errors out every now and then) & can only hold about 45 RAW images.
A brand new 2GB one would cost me 40€ which I find a bit ridiculous

Anyways, I looked around the local used market and found a Nikon D80 with a lens included (no details specified and I couldnt figure out which from the images) for 130€ which honestly isnt that massive of a jump compared to buying the xD card or a proper body in the 400€ range.

Think this would be an alright purchase?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelFinePix S5600
Camera SoftwareRawTherapee 5.5
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.2
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Maker Note Version0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width1080
Image Height1350
Compression SchemeUncompressed
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Data ArrangementChunky Format
Image Created2019:04:10 15:45:02
Exposure Time1/320 sec
F-Numberf/3.6
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/3.6
Brightness5.7 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length63.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
SharpnessNormal
White BalanceAuto
Chroma SaturationNormal
Flash ModeOff
Macro ModeOn
Focus ModeAuto
Slow Synchro ModeOff
Picture ModeManual Exposure
Continuous/Bracketing ModeOff
Blur StatusOK
Focus StatusOK
Auto Exposure StatusOK
>>
>>3463558
Macbook Air
>>
>>3462159
Rx100 depending on the version has 1,8-2,8 lense so it's rather fast
>>3461955
Rx100 is basically the best all-round compact series on the market, if you are going to stick to kit lense in 200d then just but sony.

t. 100d and rx100mk3 owner
>>
>>3463606
D80 is a decade old but still a usable stills camera (no video) given you have a small budget as long as you accept the limitations during low light in which you are opted to use the flash or a tripod in most cases. Try searching for other newer used cameras like an A6000 if you want something light. Or newer, used DSLRs if you want something tough, there might be other cheap deals.
>>
>>3463632
Sonyposter opinions are always to be disregarded
>>
File: DSCF2980-1.jpg (320 KB, 1080x1080)
320 KB
320 KB JPG
>>3463671
I don't really care about video
Sure if it could do 1080p without any significant time limitations, but cameras that were actually allowed to do that are out of my price range.

The options that are typically in VGA resolutions dont interest me at all and the cheaper end of the spectrum that does give you 1080 seems to usually be the interlaced variant

I do like the A6000, but I think I'd prefer to find a DSLR somehow

I'm not in any sort of hurry to upgrade anyway, at least until my camera still functions

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelFinePix S5600
Camera SoftwareRawTherapee 5.5
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.2
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Maker Note Version0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width1080
Image Height1080
Compression SchemeUncompressed
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Data ArrangementChunky Format
Image Created2019:04:07 10:42:31
Exposure Time1/200 sec
F-Numberf/3.6
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating64
Lens Aperturef/3.6
Brightness5.7 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length63.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
SharpnessNormal
White BalanceAuto
Chroma SaturationNormal
Flash ModeOff
Macro ModeOn
Focus ModeAuto
Slow Synchro ModeOff
Picture ModeManual Exposure
Continuous/Bracketing ModeOff
Blur StatusOK
Focus StatusOK
Auto Exposure StatusOK
>>
>>3463717
Panasonic G7
>>
File: IMGP2254-2.jpg (773 KB, 1000x665)
773 KB
773 KB JPG
I want to get into macro more but know nothing about ring flashes.
Best option to pair with Pentax K-3?
Will be used with the 100mm f2.8 WR

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeRICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera ModelPENTAX K-3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2016:01:10 21:32:50
Exposure Time1/100 sec
F-Numberf/11.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/11.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashFlash, Compulsory
Focal Length100.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeMacro
>>
>>3463724
You can use a normal manual flash like the Yongnuo or Godox flashes and use a macro extension adapter, which is basically a mirror tube to project the flash at the end of the barrel extension of the lens. There are ring type flash extenders as well.
The normal flash also sits high enough to have a usable amount of light on the close subject, with the help of the diffuser plate and bounce card.
I used my Godox TT600 with usable results with the Tamron 90/2.8 1:1 Macro, the old long extension one.
>>
>>3463480
guise blease
>>
File: d2hs-80-200mm.jpg (177 KB, 800x476)
177 KB
177 KB JPG
Hello, I mostly have normal and wide angle prime lenses for my Nikon FM2 and was thinking of getting a nice zoom lens to take photos of birbs etc.

One lens that seems quite affordable used is the Nikkor AF-D 80-200mm. Would that be a good tele-lens to start out with? I'd pretty much exclusively use it for manual focus.
There's also the AF-S version offered for pretty much the same price where I live. As far as I understand that one's heavier and has more plastic parts. OTOH it might be useful if I ever want to use it with a DSLR without focusing motor.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D70
Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.8.4
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.1
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern2230
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)99 mm
Serial Number10035dc9
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2014:03:23 17:00:12
Exposure Time1/100 sec
F-Numberf/6.3
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceShade
FlashFlash, Auto, Return Detected
Focal Length66.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width0
Image Height0
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
ISO Speed Used400
Image QualityFINE
White BalanceSHADE
Image SharpeningAUTO
Focus ModeAF-C
Flash SettingSLOW
Auto Flash ModeBuilt-in,TTL
Flash Compensation42.0 EV
ISO Speed Requested400
Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EV
AE Bracket Compensation0.0 EV
Tone CompensationAUTO
Lens TypeNikon G Series
Lens Range55.0 - 200.0 mm; f/4.0 - f/5.6
Auto FocusDynamic Area, Center Selected, Top Focused
Shooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/Off
Color ModeLandscape sRGB
Lighting TypeSPEEDLIGHT
Noise ReductionOFF
Camera Actuations4507
Image OptimizationVIVID
Saturation 2NORMAL
>>
>>3463790
Why not? People work professionally with lower level bodies with good results.
>>
File: 1539354099000_1437132.jpg (26 KB, 500x500)
26 KB
26 KB JPG
What tripod ya got? I'm thinking of buying this Benro Wild 1, meant for birding and shit, but it's cheap and the green is pretty cool
>>
>>3463815
You'll be better off with a 300 or 400mm prime for birbs on 35mm film.
Sigma has a good 400/5.6 manual lens if you can find one.
>>
>>3463864
Used old beat up Manfrotto 190XB I got for cheap with a 410 geared head. It is good and steady.
>>
>>3463865
Hmm.. Never used a telephoto prime. Seems like you'd always end up either too far or too close without being able to fix it easily.
>>
>>3463865
>>3463868
I guess a prime would work if you were operating from a fixed hideout, just taking shots of birds feeding on the stuff you laid out

Personally I'd advocate for a zoom lens if you wanted to take pictures of anything you didn't more or less stage
>>
>>3463886
...are you for real?
>>
>>3463888

Kek, some people just don't have any experience but can't resist giving advice regardless.
>>
>>3463724
Wtf
>>
>>3463888
I don't know honestly

That's just the logical conclusion I reach when I think about it
>>
>>3463892

You just work with what you have, and adapt to the situation.
>>
>>3463868
>Hmm.. Never used a telephoto prime. Seems like you'd always end up either too far or too close without being able to fix it easily.
>>3463886

So, if you're too far, you just crop. Like you're probably already doing for most of your wildlife shots anyway because you suck at stalking. If you're too close? You get a shitton of really hard to get detail/closeup shots and be really happy.
>>
>>3463868
For birding you are never too close.
>>
>>3463890

Sorry, I was being a bit dickish here; I used to think the same way. Sure you feel confined or limited sometimes, but it's rarely going to ruin your day. You'll just end up going for a different shot instead.

As far as birds in flight go, the ability to zoom out helps immensely for acquiring and tracking subjects. I don't really care about them in flight much, so use a prime. I still do get plenty of in-flight shots though. It's just harder, that's all. A zoom lens is also nice for shooting perched birds where the wings are going to get clipped the instant they fly. You can get much closer without suffering the consequences once they do take off.

Another reason to avoid most larger zooms is how much dirt and water can get into them. Even if they have internal focusing (touted as "nature-ready" for being tougher) pumping that barrel in and out while zooming can make things pretty crunchy over time.
>>
>>3463891
Depth of field is a function of focus distance. The closer you focus the thinner the DoF gets, so even with maximum closed aperture in macro shots you will get a small range to work in focus
>>
>>3463907
Yep, this is why I always recommend a telephoto prime over a zoom.
With that said a 70-200/2.8 is a must have lens for any photographer IMO
>>
>>3463948

I agree, it's an excellent lens to have. Nikon's is all internal zoom as well, so no drawbacks.
>>
the ricoh gr 3 can only get like 300 shots but it's amazingly tiny, but no viewfinder.

Should I buy a ricoh gr 3, an x100f, or wait until the end of the year for an x100f successor?
>>
>>3463953
Fuuuuck I just want a fujifilm x80 already jeez. Give me my flippy screen motherfuckers.
>>
I saw a video reviewing, or rather shilling a lens and I'm convinced that I'd love it, but it is expensive and for full frame, while I only have crop.
Should I buy it anyway?
>>
>>3463953
>Ricoh vs x100
What do you value most
>Tiny, sharper, always on you.
Vs
>Non pocketable, has viewfinder, better low light af.
>>
I want to buy an a7 just to muck around with adapted lenses. Good idea? y/y?
>>
>>3464002
Yeah, it's fine.
>>
>>3464002
Ricoh GXR with M-mount module
>>
>>3464009
>richoh gxr
It's not full frame though. That's literally the only reason I want to get the a7 to adapt. My current cam is apsc.
>>
What gear do I need to make this faster?
>>
File: ?.png (301 KB, 899x298)
301 KB
301 KB PNG
Should I get Canon 200D or 77D?
never owned a DSLR before,

is there a huge difference in quality?
if not should I just get the cheaper DSLR and get an expensive lens?
>>
>>3464058
USB 3.0+a faster drive
>>
>>3464069
I'm just using camera as card reader, and it only has enough pins for USB 2.
Is it a mistake?
>>
>>3464070
Mistake? Not really, just not necessarily maximizing your transfer speed

If your computer has USB 3.0 ports, then yeah, likely that's one of your choke points.
>>
>>3464059
neither
those both suck.
>>
>>3464076
which DSLR do you recommend?
(that's less than $1000)
>>
>>3464083
Used 6Dii
>>
>>3464087
trash suggestion anon
>>
File: IMGP5221-2.jpg (1.05 MB, 1000x665)
1.05 MB
1.05 MB JPG
>>3464083
fuckin pentax my nigga
>>
>>3464092
what's so good about pentax anon?
i prefer canon (have had better experience w them)
>>
File: IMGP7494.jpg (1.12 MB, 1000x665)
1.12 MB
1.12 MB JPG
>>3464093
performance unrivaled for price, best features, best ergonomics, weather sealed, infinite supply of K mount lenses to fuck with (but newer selection especially super telephoto is sparse)
You can pick up a used K-3 for under 500 bucks, or the K-3 II for a bit more with built in astrotracer and pixel shift
>>
File: duckpick.jpg (804 KB, 1000x665)
804 KB
804 KB JPG
>>3464094
autofocus is meh but still works decent for wildlife
>>
>>3464094
how safe is buying a used camera tho lol
what lens do you recommend i accompany it with?
>>
>>3464101
It's quite literally the only smart way to get into photography.
>>
>>3464099
Those are some happy looking ducks. I wonder what their secret is
>>
>>3464145
they can fly
>>
>>3464145
Ducks always look like they're smiling even if they dont want to.
In this particular case it seems there's a male and two females.
Boi getting his corkscrew penis double dipped.
>>
>>3464002
A7 II at least if you want IBIS.
>>
>>3464101
It’s the only way to go. Just make sure you’re buying from a seller with a warranty program. KEH offers one, I assume others do too.
>>
>>3464101
All my gear was bought either used and in two occasions from B-stock (open box or store demo piece). They all work without any problems.
If you don't buy from store used stock then be sure to check the sellers background. If he did shady stuff before then avoid, but most ebay sellers are okay. Photographers generally take good care of their stuff, it's not like buying a used Xbox or whatever.
>>
>>3464083
Nikon D7100 with a prime and a zoom lens.
>>
Rookie here.
Which compact has the best image quality between the Panasonic tz90, the Sony HX90V, and the Canon SX730.
They are all between 250-300€ (my budget) and have decent zoom.
>>
>>3464229
None of them.
Olympus XZ-2, Pentax MX-1, Panasonic LX100 are your options.
>>
Having a tough fucking time choosing between the X-T3 and the A7iii.

X-T3:
• 4k60p
• Less expensive
• Made in Japan

A7iii:
• Better Bokeh
• IBIS
• Full frame 4K

Please help, anons.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1280
Image Height720
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3464292
Both are good. You can't go wrong. The deal breaker for me would be how they handle. Personally I prefer how the Fuji feels to use.
>>
>>3464293
Can you elaborate? There’s no where near me I can actually see how it feels to use. Any lens recommendations?
>>
>>3464292
X-t3 is made in China bro
>>
>>3464298
>Buying a $3000 gadget you've never put your hands on.

Hell, at least buy it through Amazon play with it, return it, then buy the other
>>
>>3464292
X-T3 isn't made in Japan. It's made in China. The last X-T made in Japan was the X-T2.
>>
>>3464292
Buy the one with lenses you want to use & buy. The lens line-up is the important part. I bought into Fuji because their F2 Fujicrons were exactly what I was looking for. Obsessing over the body is retarded since you'll probably replace the body in ~2 years. You won't replace the lenses.
>>
I'm looking at picking up my first DSLR, a Canon. As for model, I'm largely undecided. I'm looking on Facebook marketplace and Craigslist for cameras. They are plentiful in both, but it seems like everybody is overvaluing their used things.

Do cameras really not depreciate in value this much? Comparing against Amazon, all of these used ones are only marginally cheaper. I'm thinking about contacting these people and offering half of what their listings are for. If I can't get a hell of a deal, I'm not going the used route.

Should I be asking in the Stupid Questions thread instead?
>>
>>3464317
Canon and Nikon used market is usually overpriced. There are plenty of offerings but plenty of clueless idiots who only know these two as cameras.
You can also broaden your field by looking into Pentax DSLRs or Fuji MILC as well, like the K-3, KP, X-T2 or X-E2
>>
>>3464323
I appreciate the input. I'm a bit reluctant to broaden my field when I'm still this new to photography. I'm studying theory and reading https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm for a second time, but I want to go with highly accessible and readily available for gear to start with.
I've made lowball offers on a few used Rebels et al. Worst they can do is block me.
I'm not a poorfag, but I just get grumpy at people who overvalue their shit. If I can't find a deal here in the coming week, I may just pull the trigger on a Canon T6 bundle on Amazon that ought to keep me busy for the Summer.
>>
>>3464323
Over priced? Wut?
>>
>>3464334
As far as useablity goes, most all prosumer (two dials) and above bodies are pretty much the same. It's mainly feature set and menu layout that contribute to the differences in which are more accessible, which generally translates to the camera doing a lot of stuff for you which kinda defeats the purpose of shooting something that's not your phone...
>>
>>3464317
>Facebook marketplace and Craigslist
You'll occasionally find a good deal on those, but mostly you'll get people who think "Well, I paid $500 for this two years ago, so it must be worth $498 now."

Check eBay and keh.com for a better idea of market value.

> Comparing against Amazon
Also, if you're comparing against cameras on Amazon, you're most likely looking at listings for cameras that are either (a) still current-models, so no, they wouldn't have depreciated much or (b) old listings that the seller hasn't bothered updating.
>>
>>3464347
>You'll occasionally find a good deal on those, but mostly you'll get people who think "Well, I paid $500 for this two years ago, so it must be worth $498 now."
Deals come to those who are patient and have the money on hand to pay.

A general life tip for y'all who are a little established:
Always carry $500 in cash on you. You'll be amazed at the amount of $2000-$3000 items you can get just by being there with $500 in hand.
>>
>>3464292
Think about the 35mm frame, anon.
It's full.
It's complete.
It's perfect.
Except the corners, the corners are clipped by a narrow mount.
>>
>>3464347
Thanks for the advice. Keh.com is interesting. I've never heard of it but I will use it to compare other used cameras.
>>3464403
Here's another tip: always lowball. Some people selling crap are push overs. Just ask for a low price and they'll occasionally agree. It's not just a matter of being patient for a good deal, make your own good deal.
>>
>>3464292
Nikon z6
>>
>>3464410
Oh yeah, I kinda assumed that was implied.

Horse trading stuff is kinda fun too.
>>
>>3464323
>Canon and Nikon used market is usually overpriced
You wut? Try looking at high end Sony's and M43's lenses. Canon/Nikon is actually the cheapest around thanks to being the oldest.
>>
>>3461931
Q: What lens should I look for to use on a Z6? Context: Going to be in Europe in the late end of June to early July (15 days), I want to capture the overall beauty of architecture and landscapes BUT on a budget. Any reasonable kind will do as long as I can get good use out of my newly purchased body.
>>
>>3464464
I'd go with a 20mm 2.8 D and 24-70 2.8
>>
>>3464471
If the 24-70 is too spendy, then there's also an older 35-70 2.8D, or 20, 50, and 85mm primes.
>>
>>3464472
Alright. Currently looking at and shopping for all those options.
>>
>>3464474
Just remember that F-mount lenses other than AF-S and AF-P will not autofocus on a Z6.
If this is important for you, look at those newer lenses.

Did you get the 24-70mm f/4 S with your Z6?
When discounted along with the body it is very hard to beat for the price.
>>
>>3464485
No. I bought body only because I have access to an old ED 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G AF-S that came with an uncles old D50.
>>
>>3464489
>ED 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G AF-S
That's a not very good DX kit lens though, your Z6 will be kind of wasted (and stuck in ~10mp DX mode) until you get something better.
>>
>>3464453
>Canon/Nikon is actually the cheapest around
I built up my whole system for the price of one used old body and one mediocre lens from Canon
Canon/Nikon are overpriced because idiots don't know any better and are willing to spend more and keep the prices high.
>>
>>3464496
>>3464453
Not to mention My entire system costs as much as one used Canon 70-200/2.8 L IS MkI and I have a 70-200/2.8 and one 24-70/2.8 equivalent
>>
>>3464493
Ah so I need to shop for a newer lens. Well, I dont want to spend over $300 for a dedicated everyday lens purchase. I realize the Z6 is expensive but I wanted a good decade of usefulness and some future proofing (minus only being 24MP). I can just rent lenses with more capability.
>>
>>3464485
They didn't include the screw drive? That's gay.

Still get the 20mm D though. No one needs auto focus on wide angle.
>>
What lens cleaner do you guys use? I've been using picrelated, wondering if there's anything better
>>
>>3464524
Usually just a microfiber
If I need to use liquid, then rubbing alcohol
>>
>>3464517
Nope, they included an aperture lever for non-E lenses and an EE servo coupling post but that's basically it.
>>
>>3464524
sperm and toilet paper
>>
File: IMG_20190415_001731_715.jpg (164 KB, 1280x869)
164 KB
164 KB JPG
>be a complete newbie to /p/
>find my father's film SLR
>decide to try it out for fun during vacations
>have fun, and having the roll printed added value to those good memories
>buy a tripod and some lenses for cheap
>next vacation do it again with comparable results
>my gf's father lends me his film point and shoot
>use that too in other occasions and have a blast
>now with Spring at the door I'm starting to want into photography
The problem is that shooting film doesn't scale very well due to film and dev costs, and for the time being I have to mind my expenses. What's a half decent digital camera for 200~300 eurobucks? I'll be buying second hand of course.
>>
quick, best cheap 20mm m42 lens!
>>
>>3464524
Just thoroughly rub the front element glass with sand and it's all good.
>>
>>3464592
>Implying small scratches on the objective does anything of note to IQ outside of handful of edge cases
>>
>>3464524
My breath and shirt sleeve
>>
Do you ever feel like you debate purchasing new gear so long that you end up wasting a ton of time not actually just taking shots?
I'm feeling guilty today. I need to get my ass out there.
>>
I have a Nikon D7200.
I've got a
-50mm 1.8 fixed
-18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 (came with it when I bought used)
- a shitty zoom.

I'm thinking of selling the 18-55 and buying a sigma 18-35 1.8 (I found a used one in great condition for $450.) Is the sigma 18-35 a meme? I've seen so many mixed reactions on this board and can't decide. I'm taking a trip in 2 weeks and would like something other than the 50mm as it's often too tight on the crop sensor.
>>
>>3464670
Oh I should mention the 18-55 is the older version without VR
>>
>>3464670
I tried 3 different 18-35 1.8 lenses and I always had a problem with focusing, even after adjusting it with the sigma dock
other than that I think its great, but obviously a little bit big and heavy, compared to the single 1.8 prime lenses
>>
>>3463258
you should try out canon and nikon menu, get whatever feels better
I can't for god's sake get into canon, got a d5300 and with the cheap 35mm 1.8 its a no brainer
>>
>>3463254
yeah its a bitch how over prices this is just for a fucking keyboard, what i think is that they have problem with licensing the software and that blows up the price, on the same topic ive been thinking of building or buying a midi controller and trying to set it up with something like midi to lr or just writing an interpreter on my own
>>
>>3464680
Were you by chance using the D500? I've seen people complain about the AF but every review that complained about this was using the D500.
>>
>>3464688
It's not just the D500. The 18-35 Art is known for having an unreliable AF on all systems, it is due to the optics and the build quality, if one element is a tiny bit off it can produce very wonky bokeh and false peaks in the phase AF.
The varying build quality has been a known issue with Sigma lenses, ART or no ART.
>>
>>3464703
Ah shit. Is it something I would notice right away? I can probably try the lens out in-store before buying it. I’m still relatively new to photography however so I’m worried I wouldn’t be able to notice within only a few minutes of using it.
>>
NEW
>>3464714
>>3464714
>>3464714
>>3464714
>>
>>3464713
If you are this new then why do you want an ART lens right away? There are many great lenses out there for cheaper and more suitable to beginners.
>>
Which lens is the best deal, the original USED Canon for $350, or a NEW Yongonu for $200.
Both case there's no real warranty.
>>
i'm kind of done with gear snobbery. happy with the kit lenses on my k50. sold my others.
>>
>>3464292
get the made in japan one
>>
Fast 35 full frame lens that fits Sony mount or can be adapted? I make video during the night time and I'm looking for something better than my nifty fifty.



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.