[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / 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] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: nnie.jpg (88 KB, 505x315)
88 KB
88 KB JPG
old: >>3752334

>All discussion and questions related to gear should take place in this exact thread.
>Redirect other gear-related threads to this thread.
>Remember to be polite.
>This is the thread in which you can be a gearfag.
>no photos allowed

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Width505
Image Height315
>>
I just ordered a Leica Q. It’s a little wider than I’m used to using on my XPro2 but the lens looks amazing.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1280
Image Height853
>>
File: beercan.jpg (96 KB, 1300x975)
96 KB
96 KB JPG
Gotta bump from previous thread: >>3756829.

>>3757039
No, I don't shoot sony. Previous pic was just from internet. This one is mine. With adapter, this lens sticks out quite a lot creathing much leverage. It is not most stable set up, especially when pointing lens in other direction than straight forward.

>>3757044
Thanks! This one is really good, but for 111 usd it defeats purpose of using meme vintage glass. There are some cheaper and intresting options on aliexpress, but sitll gonna bump for other options.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2020:11:09 14:30:13
>>
so I returned the a6400 that I got because i decided I wanted a full frame camera instead. should I be looking at the eos r or a7iii?
>>
>>3757299
Samsung NX1
>>
are drone prices down yet cause of drone laws?
>>
>>3757299
What didn't you like about a6400?
>>
>>3757162
How many of you own multiple different camera brands? Do you use them equally? Do you own two of the same camera model? If you do, why?
>>
>>3757237
>I don't shoot sony
>has a Minolta lens
ok
>>
>>3757331
Does that bitrate hack thing work. I saw that it reduces color macroblocking, and some test footage on youtube looked super impressive, but I don't know if they were just using a rented Alexa and trolling
>>
>>3757706
>this is your brain on being damaged by the internet at a young age
I hope you end your own struggle, zoomer
>>
>>3757705
It's clearly a Fuji in the picture FIDF
>>
>>3757299
Based kek, you have relieved me of great guilt.
Get the EOS, fuck Sony and their ergonomics. Or a Nikon Z6.
If for video, EOS because Magic Lantern lets you resume recording after 30 min.
There's great adapters made by Nikon and Canon themselves for EF to RP and from F to Z that allow to use the lenses from the DSLR mounts without some of the usual problems that adapted lenses bring.
t. the guy whose discussions memed you into purchasing it
>>
>>3757184
Good choice. I was tossing up between a Q and a Sigma fp. I settled in the Sigma fp but I might buy a Q2 later and sell the fp.
>>
>>3757341
no, dji is just releasing cheaper drones. "good" drones are still 1k+
>>
As a newfag, what is the single best choice to buy for the largest improvement of photoshoot lightning? As someone who never bought lightning gear before.

A "softbox"?
>>
Got my rf 24-70 f2.8 yesterday. Any suggestions for what I should go shoot to test it out?
>>
>>3757901
Yeah or a shoot through umbrella
>>
is this a good deal on the a73?
https://www.amazon.com/Sony-Mirrorless-ILCE-7M3K-Wide-Angle-Accessories/dp/B07PMFQY7J/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?dchild=1&keywords=sony+a7iii&qid=1605020342&sr=8-1-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFUSzNZSDAyMks0RkUmZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTEwMzA0NzAxVU01N0RKS0hVNzVBJmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTAxNTc3OTFIMVVLS0xWVUxTTDUmd2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9hdGYmYWN0aW9uPWNsaWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl
>>
>>3757906
Use your phone and shoot a terrible blurry snap of the lens next to your keyboard and mouse on your crusty table. Then post it to /p/.
>>
>>3757908
Thx. I made the effort of looking up some different pieces of studio lightning.
There's hair light which seems like it's not really needed unless you shoot against a dark background.
There's the key light which can be substituted for regular room lights, for beginners.
There's the fill light for casting the soft, flattening shadow. It seems like this is where a softbox/umbrella comes into play.

Am I on the right track?
>>
>>3757910
amazon has never sold a counterfeit sony product in its history so i don't know why you are worried, anon
>>
>>3757743

How do you like the fp?
>>
Just made the move to full frame. Sold my D5100 a couple months ago and now just ordered a mint Canon 5D II.
Eager to try it. Honestly switching to Canon was what I cared the most about. The Nikon was an awesome camera but that flange distance kills it.
>>
Opinions on black bodies with silver lenses? (Not mine btw)
>>
>>3758082
Thinking about getting this lens but am also looking at their other focal lengths.
>>
>>3758082
nothing wrong with that desu unless you want to look pro for business reasons
>>
>>3758068
>Sold my D5100 a couple months ago
Sacrilege! Seriously though, after nearly a decade I'm finally thinking of doing the same, upgrading that is.

The Nikon D7500 is £679.99 on DigitalRev which is in budget.

Or sell up and go mirrorless with Sony or Fuji. Fuck knows.
>>
hey /p/ whats your guy's most classic meme'd starter camera?
>>
>>3758105
Don't go mirrorless lol. After the ergonomic masterpiece that the D5100 is you'll only be getting hand cramps with a mirrorless specially if APS-C, they give them tiny grips no matter the brand.
If I were you I'd probably get a D610 instead of the D7500. I just checked the store you mentioned and it's £636.99. Nikon FX cameras let you use DX lenses in crop mode, but you also get the ability to use FX lenses for the extra DoF control and FoV.
Man, I'm gonna miss the flippy screen.

>>3758181
Canon Rebel?
>>
>>3758218
reminder to filter DSLR users by adding "FX" "DX" "DoF control" and "FoV" to the filter list
>>
File: nikon-z6-menu.jpg (28 KB, 700x394)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>3758227
I could just say full frame and crop and those terms aren't exclusive to DSLRs but Nikon. Nice try, dumbass.
>>
>>3758241
Add "dumbass" as well, such boomer language is used exclusively by DinoSLR users
>>
>>3758242
>boomer language
Cringe :^)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVm35BlstjY

Filter away, maybe you will stop getting triggered.
>>
>>3757911
Are you me?
>>
Hey /p/, so I want to get a DSLR. I've been shooting film as a hobby for about 9 years, and lately I find I want to move on and learn more about photography, and perhaps make it a part of my career. I can't realistically do that with film...

In a college photojournalism class I used a 70d with, if I recall correctly, an okay 24-105mm lens, but I think I'd like to buy something a little better for myself to shoot news, maybe sports, portraits, street photography. Just something decent all-around for someone who knows the basics of photography and wants to get something pretty good around the $1000-$1500 range. I like the looks of an a7iii, but it pushes the limits of my price range, especially with a good lens.

What other cameras might might be worth looking at? Thanks
>>
>>3758293
>pretty good around the $1000-$1500 range
Talking camera-only or camera+lens here?
>a7iii
That's like $2300 new, also Sony sucks.
Get a DSLR, you'll want the superior AF for sports. The ergonomics and battery life are also usually better.
>>
>>3758293
>>3758336
I looked at some stuff and I think you should get a 90D. It's faster than the 7D II which is a good thing for sports (10 fps vs 7 fps).
If the speed on the 7D II seems enough for you I'd get the 6D II instead, it's currently cheaper and it's full frame which is always nice to have. The speeds are basically identical: 6.5fps vs 7fps.
The 90D is the best when it comes to autofocus though, not just fps. The downside would be the inferior sealing.
There's also the Nikons but they have contrast AF (slower). They're damn fine cameras though. But bear in mind, Nikon is the type O negative of the camera world. You can use their lenses in all the other cameras but they only will take Nikon lenses because of the flange distance, unless you use an optical adapter which degrades the picture.
>>
>>3758293
>>3758347
Forgot to mention the Nikon models, the D500 would be your best bet (shoots 10fps).
The entry-level full frame D610 shoots at 6 fps and the D750 at 6.5 fps like the 6D II.
I was going to say if I were you I'd get the 90D because you get the chance to adapt old lenses for portraiture but I'm now realizing it's pretty pointless when it's a crop sensor. Honestly, both D500 and 90D would serve you well but if sports matters most then I'd lean towards 90D. Neither will be breathtaking for portraits but they will work okay. If portraiture matters a lot get a 6D II. But bear in mind you'll need a bigger lens to fill the frame with the same subject from a long distance (that's why people usually prefer crop sensors for long distance photography).
I didn't check connectivity capabilities or stuff like dual cards, but take a look into it because for both news and sports it may be worthwhile to have the ability to upload on the go and to have a backup card in case one fails. This (backups) also applies to wedding photography or any event you want to record that won't repeat itself.
>>
>>3758218
Will have a ponder.

>Man, I'm gonna miss the flippy screen.
Such an under rated feature.
>>
>>3758350
Indeed, I wish more DSLRs equipped it. And I wish they hadn't gone for the "smaller is better" and "more knobs on top is better" approach they went with the D5500 and D5600.
The 90D feels more like a D5100 than the D5600, it's ridiculous. I don't get why they put that ridiculous wheel/knob for the aperture in the newer ones, I think it's because it was the only way to keep the relative position more or less equal while making the camera shorter. A waste if you ask me. Such a busy top for no good reason other than muh size reduction. I wanted to post a pic but it keeps giving me some "upload failed" bs.
>>
So is like the Panasonic G7 the kinoest mirrorless for its price range?
>>
Also is there something along the likes of G7 that can do 120 FPS?
>>
>>3758370
I hate to admit it as a MFT hater but probably yes. It shoots 4K and I bet it doesn't overheat like the Fuji trash.
>>
>>3758390
In 4K, for that price? Pipe dream. Takes a beefy processor. Maybe there's something for 1080p.
>>
>>3758393
1080p should do fine. I don't intent to shoot on 4k as much. I see it as a bonus.
>>
>>3758391
What's the downside of MFTs ?
>>
Leica M6 or Fuji GFX 50R?

Yes I know they are two totally different things, but;

1) Leica m6, gold standard film camera, will last a life-time
2) Fuji GFX, excellent and compact MF digital camera, can actually emulate TX-1 / Xpan panoramas very wekk.

What do you /p/eople think?
>>
i will finally buy my first analog camera and won’t have to borrow some from friends anymore. I’ve decided on a Pentax MX. What am I in for?
>>
>>3758404

I would go for the Fuji. Digital medium format excites me a lot. I would love to try it one day.

M6 is probably a good investment though. But you could get similar images from any film SLR with a good lens.
>>
File: 1595979130283.jpg (401 KB, 1000x666)
401 KB
401 KB JPG
So I'm toying with the idea of selling my Sony gear and switching to Fuji. Getting prices via KEH, I have about $3550 worth of gear, and I might be able to get a bit more going private sale instead of via KEH. The reason is I find it harder than I expected to get good as post processing. I've spent countless hours in capture one trying to get good at creating looks that I like, but I still can't get anything remotely close to what comes SOOC on Fuji with their film presets. I know it sounds fucking stupid to take the loss in money just to switch systems for color processing in-camera. But I dunno, maybe that's my only hope for taking photos I actually like the colors of.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern4734
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2017:07:03 15:56:45
Exposure Time1/1250 sec
F-Numberf/4.5
Lens Aperturef/4.5
Exposure Bias0.7 EV
Focal Length70.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
How much does dust and slightly fungus condition affect lens resale prices? I am planning to sell my Fujifilm 18-55 2.8-4 zoom that I got for 250 USD three years back as I no longer use it after moving to primes. I noticed there are some dust and a one tiny patch of fungus.
How much can I expect to sell this lens for?
>>
>>3758413
Good point.

Another film contender is a Nikon FM2 which is a mechanical marvel.

The GFX seems like a beast. I played with one while in Japan, and one way to describe is meaty but refined. Also, the possibility of adapted MF glass is intriguing.
>>
>>3758336
>>3758347
>>3758348
Thanks anon. This is super helpful. But yeah, you're right, the a7iii's do run higher than my stated price range.

I'd just seen some offers on best buy and amazon for around $1900 packaged with a bad lens, and was willing to go that high in this case. I just wanted that camera and was willing to wait for a better lens later... From what I've read it seems like a great camera for the price.

At the same time I knew there were probably better options, hence my post.
>>
I'm sorry if this is the wrong board for this, but I feel like the question is better here than /g/. I'm upgrading my phone soon at my company's expense. I have a degree of freedom in choosing a phone, but have a budget of about $750. I was looking at the Oneplus 8 or 8T, but neither of these phones have a telephoto lens. A number of other phones with other worse specs or that don't have access to google services, something I need, do offer telephoto lenses. I have an EOS 60D with both telephoto and wide angle lenses.

Is it silly to care too much about telephoto lenses on a phone if I have a DSLR with one anyway? I don't often do thoughtful photography on my phone, and usually use it for videos or taking casual photos of my pets, but I would hate to miss out if I was in a situation where I needed good zoom and didn't have my DSLR.
>>
>>3758448
>From what I've read it seems like a great camera for the price.
It's really just the standard of what you should expect at that price. That's the better way to think of it.

What truly is great for their procepoints are the Tamron E-mount zooms.
Whether it's the
17-28, or the 28-75, or the 70-180.
Or even the 28-200.
All 4 zooms represent tremendous value at their respective price points.
>>
Have a D3100 and was looking to get some use out of it again. The current zoom lens is kinda heavy, was thinking of getting a pancake lens for it (Nikkor 50mm 1/8, or e series). Is this camera terribly outdated? Should I just get rid of it and get another one?
>>
>>3758395
Sincerely I don't know where to start, kek.
Let's start with noise in low light.
>>
>>3758427
Sorry to burst your bubble but KEH tends to overcharge a bit
>>
>>3758427
Also pirate LR and some presets before you sell anything
>>
>>3758882
just because it's more expensive than ebay doesn't mean it's overcharging, retard
you're paying for the quality assurance versus just trusting a sellers word
>>
>>3758885
or he could just sell the Sony and get a camera that has a life expectancy beyond 2 years
stop coping with your purchase by trying to force others to stay loyal to the same mistake LOL
>>
>>3758755
Depends on what you want to do. I used a D5100 until recently and it was fine (but admittedly the sensor is much better, same one as on the D7000).
Really depends on the application.
What zoom do you have that you consider heavy?
>>
>>3758888
>implying sonyfag
>trying to reverse my own phrase that triggered you while encouraging consumption
lol
do you faggots get paid by Fuji or something?
The only Sony I was ever interested in was the A99 and that interest died when I found out it didn't have an OVF.
>>
>>3758887
>quality assurance
lol, as if there weren't horror stories from KEH
>>
>>3758905
I literally didn't mention Fuji LOL
>rent free in the heads of sony gamers
>>
>>3758911
The general consensus is KEH is conservative and "BGN" items are often scratch-free entirely

Share some "horror stories" you contrarian zoomer faggot
>>
>>3758913
Anon was talking about buying a Fuji, stop being a disingenuous faggot.
>>
>>3758914
"listed as excellent, came with fungus" isn't all that uncommon. I agree that you can often get items as BGN which are really nice, but don't act like they're Japanese seller tier.
>>
File: the great debate.png (112 KB, 240x460)
112 KB
112 KB PNG
Which one should I get for a 5D2?
>>
>>3758917
>Japanese seller tier
oh you're just a weeb that hates KEH because it reminds you of your Georgian parents who didn't accept you for being gay for anime
>>
>>3758920
Far from it lmao, I plan to buy some vintage glass on KEH soon because you can't beat the variety they have and on some of the more obscure manual lenses the prices are incredible. But I know they're far from perfect. And you can stop projecting, I don't watch >cuckime.
>>
>>3758927
So you've never actually ordered from KEH before and just assume there are horror stories

is your life the real horror story?
>>
>>3758930
>So you've never actually ordered
I have, and I've had good luck so far
>just assume
I know people who've had bad luck. Apparently there was some unseen fungi that dislodged during shipping. It was returned and they honored it though.
>>
What is the best system with the smallest form factor that still is good for taking pictures of animals in the wild and astrophotography?
>>
P900 probably
>>
>>3758984
meant for >>3758982
>>
File: m4i.jpg (73 KB, 1587x1600)
73 KB
73 KB JPG
Is it worth it getting a Metz with secondary flash over one matching the camera's brand or is secondary flash a meme?
What about the build quality, does Metz match or even surpass Canikon or is it crappy? I feel drawn to its style that reminds me of vintage stuff but I may be a victim of marketing.
>>
>>3759019
The "made in Germany" part attracts me too.
>>
Are there any alternatives to Craigslist for trading (not selling) gear? I want to 1:1 swap a lens if possible rather than sell it for cash, but I've had terrible experiences on Craigslist buying/selling furniture in the past.
>>
>>3759019

Got a Metz 34 cs-2 and I love it. Small, compact and has automatic exposure for any camera (matching iso/aperture to three different automatic modes). I use it both with digital and film. Works well with flashq-triggers for off camera use.
>>
>>3758007
Haven’t tested it out yet. Waiting on the lens to arrive - canon 35mm 2.8
>>
Fuck one, marry one?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1280
Image Height958
>>
Between the Godox V1 or AD200 which would you get? Mainly for night portraits
>>
>>3758882
>Sorry to burst your bubble but KEH tends to overcharge a bit
I was only using KEH as an estimate for selling, not buying.
>Also pirate LR and some presets before you sell anything
I downloaded a trial of LR earlier this year and the pirated presets pack that gets passed around here. I was completely overwhelmed with the vast amount of presets. I played with it for a while and tried to find ones I liked but it was like trying to find a needle in a haystack so I just gave up.
Is there like a smaller presets pack that is higher quality / more focused and selective that's more worth looking at? On Fuji cams, you only have a limited set to choose from, and they're all pretty good, so it's more reasonable to use is what I'm thinking.
I've got some film styles for Capture One too (not the official ones, I forget where I got them from, I have a couple different packs) but they're all too heavy handed, bumping up the contrast way too much, adding absurd levels of color cast, and darkening or brightening the images too much. So I just don't use them.
>>
>>3759068
>tape over inoffensive out of the way fujifilm logo
>bright red leica logo indicating how expensive the camera is in plain sight
?????????
>>
When do you think the A7iv is coming out? 2022?
>>
>>3759119
Q3 2021 targeting christmas sales
>>
>>3759068
>>3759113
Anyway, someone who uses such a mouse has completely lost control over his life.

>>3757162
Mary the Jeep, out of necessity fuck the camera. Maybe it is possible to blanket Annie for that time.
>>
What hot shoe should i get for my Aputure MC light?
>>
>>3759156
Glad to see someone else was triggered by that mouse.
>>
Hey has anyone used both the AF-S VR Nikkor 70-300mm and the AF-P VR Nikkor 70-300? I know the AF-P is newer but I'm wondering if there are any other differences and if one is demonstrably better than the other since they're both still being made and sold.

Also, to be clear: I'm talking about the FX lenses, not the DX 70-300.
>>
Should I expect black friday to come with good deals in CF cards?
>>
>>3758894
I have the stock one it came with. https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-55mm-vr.htm
I am just an amateur, thought making it smaller and lighter would make me use it more. I live in a city, so I can check out thrift stores for cheap lens if there are common nikkor f mounts. I was thinking of getting the nikkor 50mm 1.4 non ai or something like this one https://www.adorama.com/us1324455.html?CategoryID=246488
The prices aren't that different for non AF and AF so I might end up getting an AF since I am doing photography.
>>
>>3759631
>or something like this one https://www.adorama.com/us1324455.html?CategoryID=246488
my uncle has that one and uses it on his 3100, it's an awesome little lens
>>
>>3757331
I have to ask again: was samsung actually relevant as a camera maker at some point?
It just seems surreal, but hey they managed to be relevant in the headphones market now so who knows.
>>
>>3757677
Ricoh, Fuji, Sony, Canon here.

>Do you use them equally?
No, all have their purpose. Due to lack of time I hardly ever take pictures lately and all that remains are weddings or stuff for friends. There I use eye-af for the couple shots, otherwise for e.g. ceremony and party I shoot an old Canon, sometimes switch to the Sony by constraints.
The Fuji was for the leisure time mostly that I have hardly anymore. Always with me is a Ricoh GR, actually also unused.

>Do you own two of the same camera model? If you do, why?
I did, when I photographed a lot more. It's pain in the ass to achieve a uniform image look with two different models, since the shots from every scene need to be edited also for separate camera models independently. In the end, with e.g. the Sony I also shoot a lot different than with the rest, because I take the Sony in situations where the other sensors are more likely to reach their limits.
>>
I want a new camera to replace my 5Di but I was thinking instead I get a GR or X100T/F to have a side camera I can take everywhere.
Though an X-Pro1 sounds fun to mess with 7artisans and my vintage lenses.
>>
File: 1994_canon_35-135_usm.jpg (38 KB, 500x451)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
Just ordered this bad boy as my first FF lens for fiddy buckaroos. How much did I fuck up?
>>
>>3759730
>5Di
huh?
>I was thinking instead I get a GR or X100T/F to have a side camera I can take everywhere.
I never got this meme.
In what exact situation is carrying a DSLR impractical but a X100V isn't a problem?
In any case don't fall for the Fuji meme. Get the Ricoh if you must. At least it's actually small. The Fuji is just small-ish, smaller than a DSLR but already too bulky if you're concerned with carrying stuff.
>>
I was using my canon 700D for forest shots etc but want to shoot street photography ( mainly walk up to peoples faces or surprise them when they enter public transport, have already almost been beaten up twice lol) am thinking of something easy to carry around. Saw a Pentax MX for cheap (less than 150$) and thinking about buying it with a 50mm 2.8 or a 35mm.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareInstagram
Image-Specific Properties:
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width750
Image Height500
>>
>>3759730
Like deliberately take everywhere or take everywhere like you're mobile phone? I don't think the last one will ever work and for the first one the size of the camera is almost irrelevant.
In addition small equipment is really overpriced. My tip would be to try out smaller equip without playing your cards for good.
If you read >>3759721 again, you'll find that I don't really use the Fuji or the Ricoh. As soon as I have something tangible in mind, I take interchangeable lenses with me anyway. And mirrorless is really great in terms of new options but in return you fight with other whims.
Ah, you should treat the X100 as if they only had an electronic viewfinder. Making it optical is merely a gimmick. What I really appreciate about Fuji is more the pure photography. Instead of taking the optimal shot and editing it to look the way you want it to look, I take the final photo - in jpg format, ready to use. Fuji cameras are entirely centered around this concept. I never tried their raw workflow.
>>
>>3757162

Should I buy Series X or Playstation next for my hubbies kids? I heard that Playstation can brick.
>>
>>3759767
You should probably get the box that s in least demand, so someone else can get that PS5 which is in short supply.
>>
>>3759735
I had 5d classic and now have fuji xt20. Bulk and size difference is fucking night and day, even when you carry backpack.
>>
>>3758427
I did what you did. I’m glad I sold the Sony, but I eventually ditched my Fuji for a Canon and don’t plan on going back to either (I still have an X100V but will probably sell that to justify paying for the ridiculously expensive lens I just bought). The film sims are a bit of a meme. I’ve grown to appreciate LR editing. That being said since you’ve tried it and don’t like it, maybe you’d feel the opposite.
>>
>>3759812
I feel like Canon and Sony would be roughly the same thing. I reinstalled LR and I'm going to play with it today, I already edited one image. Found some Mastin Labs presets linked on here.
Why did you switch away from Fuji to Canon?
>>
>>3759755
I guess my dubs being totally ignored as well as my post (that included a photo) means it’s a good idea to buy it. Thanks gearfags I appreciate the advice
>>
>>3757162
T
>>
>>3759814
With regards to JPEG output they are the same thing. But the Canon’s user experience is far superior to the Sony’s. Button layout, ergos, menu system, etc. I’ll never buy a Sony camera again.

I had an XT3 which has no IBIS and I wanted a camera great for both stills and handheld video. I also kind of soured on the film sims. They’re not bad, I just grew to find them fluff. I could’ve gotten an XT4, but for me at this tier of camera, Fuji still wasn’t quite there for me so I wanted to try a new system. My EOS R6 gives me everything I want: FF, ergos, menu UI, intuitiveness, cream of the crop lens/AF/low light performance, IBIS, 4K video non-cropped, battery life, etc. Yes I’m paying a lot more, but I’m happy.

This isn’t to discourage you from getting a Fuji. I think it’s a great brand. I would just hesitate if you’re doing it just for film sims (which was kinda why I did it, plus the vintage look and better menu system). But if you really, really don’t want to mess with LR/C1, it might be just for you. You don’t know until you try.
>>
>>3759823
Which Sony did you have? To be honest, at their price I don't dare to go for the R6 and R5 yet, because I'm afraid that the operating concept is not yet fully matrued. Have firmware updates already worked in this direction? Is there any other way you can speak for or honestly against the camera? Some Sony people complained, for example, that you can't put the switch between electronic and mechanical shutter on one button. And obviously, the electronic shutter was initially (or maybe still is) restricted to short exposure times and not applicable with exposure bracketing.
Can you compare DualPixel to previous models e.g. 5D4 or 80D, M5?

Thanks!
>>
>>3759833
For photography get the original R. It's gotten cheap now, imho best ff for the price.
>>
>>3759823
>I also kind of soured on the film sims. They’re not bad, I just grew to find them fluff.
translation: film sims made me realize my photography isn't good enough to stand on its own without luminar 4's help
>>
>>3759837
I absolutely can't stand the EOS R, that's why I'm with the Sony A7 III, which I also can't stand, but which offers me net and in contrast to the R almost all the possibilities of a state-of-the-art mirrorless camera.
>>
>>3759833
Ive only ever used mirrorless digital ILC cameras. I had an a7iii. The Canon “just works” and is easy to figure out, feels great in the hands, is being supported through firmware updates (mostly video / temp improvements currently), etc. The R5/R6 are their mirrorless flagships so I’m not concerned about support in the slightest.

As far as cons: the price is really high and even though it’s basically irrelevant I wish it had more than a 20MP sensor in 2020. But I believe a good user experience is just as important as technical prowess, and I think while the a7iii checks off the latter, the R6 does both for me.
>>
>>3759838
Film sims are mediocre and put you into a box. As a photographer I like thinking outside the box, instead of just slapping on the same 8 Instagram-lite filters for that easy social media cred.
>>
>>3759850
Sounds good, thanks! Then I hope for a bargain. :) I couldn't be less interested in resolution, but I see that this is a point for complaints.
>>
>>3759839
>I absolutely can't stand the EOS R
What's so bad about the eos r?
>>
>>3759823
Anon who originally asked the question here.

I'm fine with Sony's UI and ergonomics. I don't spend much time in the menus anyway. I have all the settings I need mapped to my menu. I also don't shoot video, just photos. But yeah, if the film sims didn't work out well for me then I wouldn't really have much reason to go Fuji besides the shooting experience of their cameras with dials and the X-Pro3's design.

>>3759852
Sure that's all well and good if you know what you want and have the skills to do it. I personally feel frustrated trying to get anything remotely good looking, and I don't know what I want, either. I try messing with colors and it always just ends up looking weird and wrong with obvious color casts, or so subtle that you can't even tell. I've definitely seen pictures where the colors are edited well and they have a cool style to them but I don't have the vision to guide me to that end, nor can I get there via playing around with colors and sliders.
>>
>>3759869
It's too slow for me, does not exhaust the potential, so that I could justify it in comparison. I prefer the 5D4 by far, and I certainly don't buy the latter because it's too similar to my existing equipment. Even if the A7 III lags behind an R6, may be pants on heads retarded, it's available second hand at half price compared to an R6 and may compare to it. DualPixel in every respect, but in the reaction speed at least earlier than the R5 and R6 the Canon milc are no comparison to an slr. Also, the prowess of the Sony A7 III has made the necessary step for me not before firmware 3.
>>
>>3759852
You are mediocre and put yourself in a box. You have never thought outside the box because you believe doing so requires external rather than internal motivators.

You are a gay.
>>
File: vapebox.jpg (56 KB, 1200x497)
56 KB
56 KB JPG
>>3759770

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
File: 20201114_111405.jpg (26 KB, 557x420)
26 KB
26 KB JPG
>>3759767
just get this
>>
>>3757237
What tripod is that?
>>
what resources and camera should a total beginner in photography look at?
>>
>>3760382
https://store.genesisgear.eu/en/tripod-kits/1695-genesis-base-mini-abt-kit-tripod-with-ballhead-5901698714550.html
>>
>>3760388
Get a Leica M10 with a 50mm Summicron, 35mm Summicron, and 90mm Summarit. Read the manual. It'll cover everything you need to know.

If you're unhappy with the above advice, then you need to be more specific in what you're asking because if you don't specify things then any answer will do.
>>
>>3760416
isn't that camera like $8000? I'm just looking for something entry, maybe under $500 to get started. And any book recommendations to gain competency taking photographs
>>
File: p info-Recovered.jpg (3.1 MB, 5000x2179)
3.1 MB
3.1 MB JPG
>>3760428

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution299 dpi
Vertical Resolution299 dpi
Image Created2018:11:23 18:28:23
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width5000
Image Height2179
>>
>>3760435
thank you!
>>
File: Screen.jpg (167 KB, 720x1280)
167 KB
167 KB JPG
Please /p/, set me on the right path. I'm a total beginner and I never owned a real camera. I'm pretty much only interested in shooting wildlife (mainly deer, pic rel is a screenshot of a shitty video I took through my telescope ) and I'm very lost. I need to know how much I should save minimum.
From what I gathered, the camera needs decent ISO range, AF, fps in burst mode, and that the lens is more important than the body. Also from what I've read cropped is better than full frame if I can't afford a really good distance lens because it gives better "reach".
One site said a good entry level combo would be the Nikon D3300 with a Nikon AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IF-ED or Tamron SP AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD.
How correct is this information? Is it reasonable to jump straight into this kind of photography?
>>
Whats the best smartphone for taking pics?Right now im using xiaomi 9t but id like a better one.
I cant take my dsrl everywhere.
>>
File: AF D.jpg (21 KB, 270x270)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
What's a good bunch of cheap lenses for the Nikon F mount?
A D700 it's on its way and i wanted a good AF 20mm, looking at the 20mm 2.8 AF-D but many claim it's soft and it's hard to see good examples because old men like to put orton effect and cheap HDR in sample images.
What else there is? 24mm is not wide enough and my next shot after the 20 is a 35mm along with a superzoomer 28-200, both AF-D.
>>
>>3760519
Id go canon 7d, 70-210 f4L first gen + 1.4 tc
>>
>>3760558
>What else there is?
There is:
Nikon 14mm F/2.8D ED - $800+
Nikon 18mm 2.8D - $450+
Nikon 20mm 1.8G - $500+
Sigma 20mm 1.8 EX DG - $300+
Sigma 14mm 2.8 EX HSM - $???

Those are the ones I can think off right now. There is newer stuff of course but it's all pretty pricey.
Prices are for used lenses and will vary.
>>
>>3760519
The sensors on the D5xxx are usually a lot better than the ones on the D3xxx and the price difference isn't much. I'd go for a D5200 over a D3300, it also adds a bunch of nice features like the articulated screen and some useless ones like the stereo mic (what use is a stereo mic where the two channels are a cm apart? kek). D7xxx offers you autofocusing with older (D-type) lenses too (in-body motor with drive screw). There's extremely cheap D-type Sigma lenses on KEH. You can get a 100-300 like new for 60 bucks, but the autofocus will only work with a D7xxx body. A Tamron 70-300 is like 90 bucks too, screw focus.
But Nikon offers poor lens adaptability. If I were you, I'd go with Pentax. Is this you >>3760558?
Also APS-C reach becomes a meme when high-res FF enters the game, but lenses do get expensive as you said.
When shooting wildlife, you'll be using long lenses so Pentax's in-body stabilization will come in really handy for you (the longer the lens the more you can notice shake and having stabilization in the camera means even old cheap lenses made decades ago benefit from it). Don't go for a MFT camera, the sensor gets too small and ends up giving you too much noise (it's like 1/4 the size of a FF sensor).
I'm a Canonfag myself but Pentax is the superior option for your particular application.
That Nikkor 70-300 is pretty good, I tried it a while ago. But I'd go with the cheaper D type ones, or go Pentax instead. For Pentax you can get a 80-320mm for 80 bucks, on KEH too. Or you can get a 55-300 from eBay for 90 bucks.
>>
>>3760611
Also I forgot to mention it (in the type of stuff I shoot it doesn't matter much) but Pentax has weather sealing. Probably good if you'll be out there.
>>
Is the Peak Design Everyday Sling to carry an fuji X-H1 ?
>>
>>3760579
Thanks, honestly i sold some stuff to even buy the $250 D700 so most of those are stand-by options (massive low income right now)
>Sigma 20mm 1.8 - $300+
Didn't know it was that cheap, i will seriously consider that.
>Nikon 18mm 2.8D
That one is built like a tank but i read it's not that different from the 20mm 2.8 other than it has more aberrations and costs double. It is one of those pseudo-cast iron lenses so it still is tempting.

>>3760611
Not him but Pentax was my first option (K5 II) but i wanted to try full frame. The K1 also looks great but even if it is "cheap" for a modern FF i'm looking for low-light capabilities and lenses, if i had bought that i would've only used a pinhole.

But hey now that you are into it, i want to consider a camera in the future that can pull decent pictures at midnight, my D700 can supposedly manage ISO 6400 decently enough but in black conditions i suppose i need a relatively clean 25600. A Nikon Z6 can do it but i was thinking about a D5 or D4, can they do it? can a Pentax K1? because i'm still amazed with its sensor and utilities like IBIS and Stacking.
>>
File: DSCF1342.0.jpg (136 KB, 1200x800)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
Is the XT30 still worth buying now? The XT40 is just around the corner, right?
>>
>>3760622
Yeah, Pentax is almost an APS-C only brand. When you buy a camera, you're buying the system. That was my mistake when I bought a Nikon years ago, for my purposes it wasn't the best choice.
IBIS is important if you want to shoot on old glass, with a FF Pentax I'd probably mostly use M42 lenses. It all comes down to what you need to do.
>>
>>3760629
Get an Olympus instead, they're super cheap right now.
>>
File: Sigma.jpg (509 KB, 2304x1536)
509 KB
509 KB JPG
>>3757162
I'm poor and have a dx what am I in for with this?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Comment4e4bda8e54d51401fd7903b161fc1f7538b7e120d09ecad409b34799dbeeac566c4724a82ad9879dc32c25094b89d50fbfbd7e4f7becca9bd6a23329a4e7bfbe0879960170255593ae448450ba48dd81
>>
>>3760637
Isn't that a FX/Full frame lens tho?
>>
anyone here ever use a Mir 24 35f2 or a vivitar 35f1.9? can't decide which one i want to order
>>
>>3760638
It is, but you can use FX on DX. DX on FX is where it gets troublesome and the camera goes in crop mode.
>>3760637
You'll probably get sharper stuff than someone on a FX because the edges of the picture is usually where problems like vignetting or distortion show up.
>>
>>3760643
Huh. Well, I could give it a shot since the focal length range is pretty universal for everything i want to do. Shame no AF-S tho, my camera doesn't have a motor and my eyesight forces me to focus using display instead of viewfinder.
>>
>>3760644
Can't you focus with your glasses on? I do that, I adjust the diopter for my glasses and shoot with glasses.
Have you already bought it or were you just asking? Maybe you could find a DX lens with AF.
>>
>>3760644
Also I just looked on eBay and there's an auction for a Sigma f/2.8 28-70mm HSM, currently at 50 bucks. You may want to look into that if you haven't made the purchase yet.
Here's a list of lenses for Nikon with built-in motors:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nikon_F-mount_lenses_with_integrated_autofocus_motor
>>
>>3760645
Didn't buy yet. It's kind of uncomfortable with glasses on, and I'm waiting on new ones anyway, hopefully that will be better. Damn shame diopter sight only goes to -1.5
>>3760652
There is one in a somewhat sensible price in Germany, I'd rather buy in my country (poorland) but I'm not rushing, might be worth it. Thanks.
>>
>>3760656
>Didn't buy yet. It's kind of uncomfortable with glasses on, and I'm waiting on new ones anyway, hopefully that will be better. Damn shame diopter sight only goes to -1.5
It's definitely less than optimal, but it beats having no viewfinder lol
>>
>>3760656
>There is one in a somewhat sensible price in Germany, I'd rather buy in my country (poorland) but I'm not rushing, might be worth it. Thanks.
oh, you're yuro lol
I was giving you US data. You're right not to rush, if it weren't a Nikon I'd say get an adapter and buy old glass instead of D lenses that won't autofocus anyways but will be much more expensive.
>>
>>3760611
Thank you, screenshotted. I still have to learn everithing but I don't feel as clueless.
>>
>>3760666
Nice trips. Probably the first time someone tells me they screenshot one of my posts here lol.
Feels good to be of help.
Look up flange distance, it plays a huge role in what lenses you can adapt. It's the distance between the lens mount and the sensor. You can adapt lenses made for longer flange distances with no loss of quality or ability to focus to infinity, but you can't do the reverse unless you use a special adapter with a lens in it (much more expensive, causes some loss of quality). When it comes to DSLRs the most versatile ones would be Canon and Pentax, with Pentax having an edge on stabilization and Canon on flange distance (you can use Pentax lenses on Canon but not the other way round). I believe Pentax has some cool functions for light metering on old lenses too, the famous green button. I'm not sure what's so special about it because I never really looked into it but Pentax users swear by it. I know it has something to do with stop-down metering.
>>
Another question from a poorfag. My friend borrowed me a Tamron A001 and I enjoyed it greatly. At the first glance, it seemed like basically cheapest option for a 70-200 on my market, so I went ahead and bought one, but idk if I got a fucked QC unit or it was just broken, but compared to my friends unit, this one couldn't focus for shit, so I gave it back. Are there any comparable (meaning price-wise) 70-200 for nikon f? I really want an AF motor one, and to my surprise the shitty ring clutch didn't bother me as much as I thought it would. Or should I just keep looking if another A001 or a later model pops up for cheap?
>>
>>3760709
Look at Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM and Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II
>>
>>3760629
If the price is right but the X-T3 (former flagship) and X-S10 (x-t4lite) are $999 brand-new atm
>>
>>3760558
>28-200 AF-D.
Nevermind, that thing only focuses after 1,8 meters or 6 "feet". What the fuck, and the other options are plastic chink stuff.
>>
File: mc-45.1-01.jpg (86 KB, 1000x1000)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
Should I take the monopod pill or are they a meme? Pic related is just under 500 bucks.
Seems a bit much for a glorified stick to me but maybe it gives super steady photos in return. It's all carbon.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 5DS
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.1 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:02:15 09:28:57
Exposure Time1/200 sec
F-Numberf/20.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/20.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length28.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3759721
I have canon and sony. I like them equally but if i had to pick, canon.
>>
>>3760734
just buy a sirui monopod and save hundreds
>>
>>3760734
Is it just a tripod leg?
>>
>>3760805
Not exactly, it has a mount for a tripod head on top.
>>3760773
Do those provide as good stabilization as the RRS though?
>>
I want to buy my first camera and this looks like a decent option. Is it a good camera or should I buy another one?

Give me better reccommendations if you want
>>
i was talking about the sony dsc-h300, forgot to post a pic
>>
I'm kind of on the fence between getting into m43 or Fuji X-mount. Anyone got experience with those two?

I borrowed a friend's OM-D e-m10 mk3 and really liked the photos I took and the fact that it's so compact. I also got to try the Voigtländer 42.5/0.95 which is a great lens for night photograpy and portraits.
So lens availability and overall image quality look pretty good to me here.

What I didn't like so much were the controls. So far I've been mostly into film photograpy and the all dial controls of for instance the X-T4 or X-Pro3 look really intuitive and nice.
X-mount also has the larger sensor which is both good, because it might mean slightly better image quality and bad because lenses with same effective focal length are larger and heavier. Bodies seem to be mostly the same size though.

There's also the bit where Olympus is selling off their camera business. Anyone got an idea how that'll affect the m43 ecosystem?

..otoh I have a bunch of Nikon glass so maybe I should get a Z6 after all.
>>
Im thinking of buying a cheap second hand Canon EOS 450d to take mediocre pictures of wild animals and nature with. Any reason I should reconsider?
>>
>>3760435
>no tony & chelsea
What kind of useless guide is this.
>>
>>3760529
Get a Ricoh GR II or III. Smartphones take shit photos.
>>3760616
I assume you missed "big enough". Yes it should be. I don't have an X-H1 but I have a Peak Sling and it's plenty big. Also there are 2 sizes of it FYI so you should be more specific if you want a better answer. But really, just get the dimensions off their site and compare to the camera's dimensions, it's not hard.
>>3760629
>>3760636
Lmao don't fucking buy an Olympus. The X-T30 is still just as good as when it came out. If you want something that will probably be in the X-T40, then wait.
>>3760643
>You'll probably get sharper stuff than someone on a FX because the edges of the picture is usually where problems like vignetting or distortion show up.
That is not how it works when adapting FF lenses to APS-C. In fact FF lenses that are adapted often perform worse on APS-C than native APS-C glass, even if they're more expensive and part of a higher range from the manufacturer. Do some research on the topic and you'll see that I'm right.
>>3760847
>dsc-h300
No. Look here. https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/wiki/index#wiki_cameras
Yeah I know reddit is cucked but they have a good buying guide. Honestly it should be stickied to this board.
>>3760859
M43 is dead. Go Fuji. Olympus is just the first to die.
>>
>>3760629
Recently got one as my first decent camera and I really like it.
>>
>>3760529
None of them. Even the best smartphone is worse than a $400 point and shoot. Canon G7, Lumix ZS100 or a new old stock Sony RX100. Ricoh GR are the best. Anything with a 1 inch sensor and made in the last 10 years won't be beaten by a smartphone for another 10.

>>3760885
>M43 is dead. Go Fuji. Olympus is just the first to die.
Olympus isn't dead yet, if I recall correctly some clause in the JIT deal requires that they actually do something with the name instead of being able to just license out the Olympus name for something else, and I think the Olympus parent company still has veto rights in the imaging business. When mass firings of everyone on the R&D teams start I'd be more concerned.
M43 is also quite popular with video cameras and drones are also picking up on it, and a few years ago Yi made a M43 camera. I think the ecosystem is too widespread to kill it off. All Olympus has to do is make a camera with top tier computational photography and great SOOC and they've got a big seller.
>>
>>3758394
Fuji X-T200 can, but only for 30 minutes max on 1080p. 4K can do 30fps max for 15 minutes. It's not an overheating thing, just segmentation.
>>
been looking for a reason to get a new camera to replace my ancient beast, or to buy something smaller i'd take everywhere. but last night i decided to snag a lens i've been wanting for years and years to shoot with my ancient camera more.
still gearfagging but i got a good price and it feels good bros. can't wait to go shoot with it
>>
>>3760885
Fuck off with your overpriced toy cameras Fuji shill
>>
>>3760859
xt4 is more pro oriented body. Something like xt30 is much more compact.

For what I know, em10 mk3 is almost downgrade from mk2, they got bunch of stuff wrong.

If you are casual shooter, choosing camera is a big meme, because every will do the trick.
>>
>>3761159
Fuji and Olympus are both for the SOOC shooter, and Olympus is the superior product
>>
>>3761163
because?
>>
>>3761159
>em10 mk3 is almost downgrade from mk2, they got bunch of stuff wrong.

There are some noticeable upgrades. Menus are more logical. Image processor is better. The old one would fill buffer in about eight shots of raw+jpeg. mk3 can store almost continuously. Quality 4k video. uhs2 card support, but you absolutely need it for increased buffer and 4k video. Slightly better ibis as well. Negatives. Only two programmable buttons. mk2 allowed remapping of nearly every button. Few shooting modes are locked into advance photo modes. Because of this, features like silent shutter, can't be used in aperture and shutter modes, but are constantly in P. Aperture override works, but it can still be very annoying. Plastic body, though after several years, I can safely say that the build is still of a very high standard.
>>
>>3761169
Because price/performance with the rebates going on and because there's more native glass for it.
>>
are there any benefits from a "normal" light meter like pic related to a spot meter ?
i'd like to use it for portraits aswell as for landscapes
i currently have pic related but my concern is that it's not the best when it comes to landscapes...
>>
>>3761265
It’s isn’t the best sure but what most people use the more robust spot meter for end up with the same result as using the average function on yours.
>>
Im a braindead newfag, someone please shill a budget camera to me. I'm just going to be taking portraits and stuff, oh also lighting gear would be cool to know about, sorry for being newfag and thanks.
>>
>>3761265
watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzxImM9a_FQ
based youtuber using mft/large format for landscape work, never leaves without his spot meter.
>>
what's good multipurpose key light and fill light gear for beginners?

do I want a flash or a static light? Softbox? Parachute? Light reflecting off the parachute or shining through the parachute?
Where can I learn more without asking to get spoonfed?
>>
>>3761307
Used Canon full frame or APS-H
5D classic or 1D Mark III
You want subject isolation for portraits and a big sensor gives you exactly that, also those two cameras have beautiful color rendition. Get one with low shutter count.
>>
>>3761419
For photos, flash. If you want video then continuous.
>>
>>3761425
So I want two flash lights with shoot-through parachutes as key and fill lights for single person portrait photography? how do I know what flash lights are compatible with my a7 iii?
>>
Which FF mirrorless system looks the most promising for the future?
I like Nikon ergonomics best, but which is best long term for relatively affordable lenses?
>>
>>3761419
I wish I knew the answer to this too. People just point you at strobist but I don't feel like reading an outdated fucking blogspot site.
>>
>>3761468
There wasn't any update patch to physics in recent years, you know? Strobist is still pretty fucking solid tutorial, you could change godox model for something like tt350, but everything else still holds.
>>
>>3761440
If you consider lower cost 3rd party lenses with native mount support and variety in selection, then Sony. Then probably Canon or Nikon will follow with the 3rd party aspect.
>>
>>3761471
>you could change godox model for something like tt350
As someone who has no idea what either of those are who's new to this, how the fuck am I supposed to know that? You need an up to date guide.
>>
How is the Nikon D3500? thinking grabbing it as my first real camera
>>
>>3758919
both are good. just don't get em off amazon or you'll likely end up with chinese knockoffs
>>
>>3758181
Canon Rebel __
They're good and also cheap.
Do most of what an expensive camera can do.
They don't much care for rain or dust in my experience.
>>
>>3761775
It's good enough but I'd look into a Canon Rebel instead, or an older D5x00 from Nikon.
The Rebels worth buying are the ones with their model name ending in i: T3i, T4i, T6i, T7i, T8i.
Canons can adapt old lenses so you get some extra versatility. Nikon D7x00 models get focusing motor in the body so you can have autofocus on old Nikon lenses and new ones that come only in D models such as the 50mm prime. Nikons can't take lenses for other most mounts without an optical adapter that degrades the quality (the adapter needs to compensate because the Nikon F mount has the longest flange distance).
Pentax is cool for adapting too, not as versatile as Canon but adds stabilization in the body so you can easily shoot with a '70s lens and still have that benefit.
Lenses matter more than the body and you're buying into a system when you get a DSLR. Buy Nikon if you want an awesome camera and don't mind being limited in lens choices. Buy Canon or Pentax if you want more variety.
If going Nikon the D7000 is an old but solid choice.
If I were you I think I'd get a Pentax K-70. Articulated screen, weather sealing, focus motor, stabilization, great adaptability second only to Canon.
I used to have a Nikon with articulated screen, I sold it to get a Canon for the lens adaptability and full frame sensor but I'm sure it's the thing I'll miss the most.
Get a used K-70 with low shutter count. I saw it's available for $468 in excellent plus condition on KEH, body only. You can probably get even better deals on eBay. The D3500 costs $465 with kit lens, but when you eventually sell it and you probably will you'll take a massive depreciation hit for paying full price for it.
Another similar option, but cheaper is the K-S2. You can get a mint one via eBay from Japan from under $300. It offers similar features to the K-70 but it's more entry level, not sure what the exact differences are because I'm no Pentax expert.
>>
>>3761781
>just don't get em off amazon or you'll likely end up with chinese knockoffs
wew really?
that's exactly where I planned to buy them lol
>>
>>3761310
this guy is the only photographer i have subscribed oh and recently Craig Prentis too
almost same content and no annoying background music....
>>
>>3761435
if flash + box is too expensive for you, try this
2 cheap softboxes (continous light) set them up one left one right and shoot...it gives a nice light & glow
there are chink products that come with lamp tripods bag softbox + bulbs
>>
>>3761152
you make a reasonable & logical argument.
i wish to subscribe to your youtube/onlyfags channel.
>>
I'm don't think I'm smart enough to own this lens.
But I want it anyway.
https://youtu.be/nveqzKZuaIw
>>
If getting a "sharp look" requires more glass to correct for various problems, why is the Pentax SMC 50mm f1.7 so fucking tiny (or any of the nifty fifties, really)?
>>
>>3761959
Canon's cheap nifty fifties are weak at the periphery
>>
as far as portable lights go, what are the different use cases for a panel light vs a stick light? is it just shape and size or does the light shape matter
>>
Shill me value key/fill lights for beginners. Preferably dimmable.
>>
File: FX6 WDR.png (93 KB, 540x640)
93 KB
93 KB PNG
It's literally over.
Panasonic and Canon confirmed ded.
>>
File: 71koHzDrKbL._AC_SL1415_.jpg (109 KB, 1098x812)
109 KB
109 KB JPG
Getting into nature photography, and is the 18-300mm lens too good to be true? How can it handle such a wide range?
>>
>>3762089
By compromising image quality. Like every superzoom.
>>
>>3762089
Only quality super zoom in Olympus 12-100 f4. They're still great for practice and learning composition.
>>
I have not used that lens, but I've read, from people that I trust, that the lens gives acceptably sharp photos. The point they made is that the photos aren't the sharpest in the world, but they are very good none-the-less.
>>
>>3762147
>>3762149
Figures. Need to figure out if it's worth it. I'm willing to compromise some quality for the convenience of a single lens that will take 99% of every photo I usually like to take. But I don't want to compromise too much. Will look more into it.
>>
Let’s fucking goooooo

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution216 dpi
Vertical Resolution216 dpi
Image Width1242
Image Height1390
>>
>>3762218
you better post some good photos with that thang.
>>
File: confused.jpg (39 KB, 612x408)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>take out camera after a month long break
>can't autofocus even on stationary objects
>can't even fine adjust since it's completely inconsistent
>try once more before giving up, now it's focusing as good as ever

What could cause my dslr's autofocus to be completely shit for the last month?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3757162
is it a meme
>>
>>3762233
It was a good start. But the development of multisensor computation will be taken over by smartphones, since they have far, far greater revenue and have multiple developer teams within the different smartphone brands to accelerate development and leapfrog each other.
>>
I just got into taking nice pics with my samsung galaxy s10 and it's got some pretty nice options on it.

i dug thru my old shit and found a Canon EOS 20D with a sigma DC 18-250mm lens. that shit is old as fuck right? will my phone outperform this 20 year old DLSR or should I start using the DSLR again?
>>
>>3762340
like for some perspective the canon has an 8 megapixel camera and the samsung phone has a 16
>>
I'm looking to adapt some lenses to a mirrorless camera for focal length, cost, and compatibility reasons (I also shoot a film SLR from time to time). What's a good adapter brand to look out for? Anyone have suggestions? I'm hesitant to trust Chinese adapters even though they're obviously cheapest
>>
Are camera backpacks or messenger bags good investments
I tried the put inserts in your backpack meme but that just take so long to get my camera in and out of that I start thinking about getting a purpose built backpack/bag for it. The only thing its stopping me is that they (Wandrd prvke or a billingham small pro) are somewhat expensive (+-200usd range). Do I just bite the bullet and goy for the stuff for the supposed convenience or protection?
>>
>>3762340
test it out for yourself would probably be the best way to get a for sure answer and see which you like the results from more
>>3762398
i got a brevite jumper this year and i'm liking it. i think the main thing with camera bags is having the side zipper to the main compartment, and the dividers of course.
>>
>>3762398
They're like a billboard that says "rob me" but other than that they're fine.
I think I'm getting a diaper bag for my camera instead.
>>
>2020
>not shooting on cinestill
>>
Should I buy ancient telephoto lenses?
There's a Takumar 200mm f4 up for $35
>>
>>3762507
If it doesn't have fungus or other problems I'd buy it
>>
>>3762512
The case is dented but it's fine apparently.
There's also a minolta rokkor 200/4.5 for about the same
>>
Just picked up a canon ef 85mm 1.8 usm. It makes a high pitched noise when focusing. Should l return it or is this normal?
>>
Any tips for cheap gobo projection?
>>
File: gyxbvfm7wuz51.jpg (1.6 MB, 4096x2516)
1.6 MB
1.6 MB JPG
>>3757162

>>3757162
i'm going to see the northern lights this weekend

pic related is the type of shot i want to get

i'm thinking i should bring my A7R instead of my A7iii. the A7iii is a better camera but the A7R should be better for low light. is that thinking correct?

and which lenses? i have really limited space, so can bring either SEL28F20 (28mm, f/2) or SEL24105G (24-105, f/4). again, the SEL24105G is the better lens overall, but i'm thinking for my purposes, 28mm should be a fine width, and the wider aperture should be a big advantage in this situation
>>
File: 1599556717535.jpg (78 KB, 768x1024)
78 KB
78 KB JPG
>7artisans 35mm f/0.95
the only problems i see here are chromatic aberration, and the clickless aperture ring. maybe this doesn't matter so much when you shoot black and white all the time

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelGFX 50R
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 10.0 (Macintosh)
PhotographerJonas Dyhr Rask
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)95 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2020:11:03 11:54:53
Exposure Time1/125 sec
F-Numberf/32.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/32.0
Brightness-2.1 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashFlash
Focal Length120.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3762569
Le reddit picture

I'd want the better sensor of the a7iii and the wider aperture lens.
>>
>>3762624
Man the X-Pro3 is such a sexy camera and I want one so bad but it's so fucking overpriced. Fuji c'mon. It should be like half of what it costs.
>>
>>3762648
my only complaint about the X-E3 (which is a fucking good camera) is the lack of physical ISO dial. if you don't give a shit about the OVF then go for it
>>
>>3762394
bump
>>
>>3762688
Metabones makes quality ones.
>>
any suggestions for a durable and lighter weight camera to take hiking/camping?
>>
>>3762657
>if you don't give a shit about the OVF then go for it
I think the OVF is pretty cool actually and that's one of the main draws of the camera for me. :/
>>
>>3758406
>>3759755

Day 8, still no answer
>>
>>3762732
ytho
>>
>>3762711
literally any camera
>>
>tfw haven't snapped a picture on anything other than my smartphones for like 7 years
>takes pictures with it every day
>always wanted to get a decent camera
>friends recommends Sony A7 II with a bunch of soviet lenses

It's a lot of money but since I take photos basically everyday it might not be so bad? Or am I just a retard for buying something so expensive as my first "real" camera? I'm looking at second hand options right now and waiting for Black Friday.

I have a telescope and would perhaps like to take some night and low-light photography so a fullframe would be better in that instance. I started all this looking at the Sony a6xxx series but then I'm getting the feature creep itch.
>>
>>3762341
>Muh megapickles

Your phone has a significantly smaller sensor. Smaller sensor - Less light. PHOTO - "Light".
>>
>>3758736
Hey anon, thanks to your advice I'm looking into a 6D II. I think it's best for my needs, and, frankly, I can't imagine getting seriously into photography without a full frame sensor. The 6D II body is also within my price range.

But then there are lenses. I think I'd like a kind of all-purpose 24-70 mm zoom, and the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM is very appealing, though a bit more than I want to spend (I mean I'm flexible on price to a point, but paired with the 6D II this lens would eat a large chunk of my savings).

The Tamron 28-75 looks like a good option. But what's the "ceiling," so to speak, with these cheaper lenses? In other words, what are their drawbacks or limitations, generally? Money notwithstanding, at what point might a photographer want to move on from one of these third party lenses? I know the answer is different for everyone, but I'm just trying to get a sense of what these lenses can do and what they're for (aside from being a cheaper option) compared to "real" Canon lenses.
>>
>>3762746
The 6D is a different thing than the mirrorless camera.
the OVF is like super high resolution, and looks really good when you see through it. Nothing like an EVF at all.

The downside is the old optics is sometimes great, but sometimes not as good as the newer mirrorless optics.
Here's old DSLR Tamron vs new mirrorless Tamron:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=366&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1422&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
hover your mouse over the image, then move the mouse away from image, the difference is quite a revelation.

>but I'm just trying to get a sense of what these lenses can do and what they're for (aside from being a cheaper option) compared to "real" Canon lenses.
Context is important when you ask this topic.
On the Canon and Nikon mount, the 3rd party lenses are more of an unwelcome pestilence. Some camera firmware updates have in the past killed compatibility for certain Sigma lenses, and made them require lens firmware updates to work again.
The 3rd party have attempted to reverse engineer the mounts and hacked their way into "compatibility". And people consider it more safe to stick to 1st party lenses.

On the E-mount it's different.
There are four 3rd party companies who have license to the full E-mount protocol.
They are: Zeiss, Tamron, Sigma, Voigtlander
As far as functionality is concerned, they are as good as 1st party lenses. (with Sigma it's only the lenses marked with "DN" + only the ones released in 2019 and after)
>>
>>3762740
It would be an excellent camera to start off with. A full frame sony with adapted lenses is a great kit that isn't too expensive and will do you really well starting out. Then, if you choose to buy more expensive, more modern glass further down the line, you've already got a competent body.
>>
>>3762740
You could get any camera made in last 10 years, or even in some cases 15 years and almost every brand has some quirks that makes them intresting and worth picking up. Canon/Nikon DSLR, sony/fuji mirrorless and m43 are all good, don't listen to brandfags.

I would not pick up sony a7ii with soviet lens for two reasons. One is that manual focus takes time and practice, you will end up missing focus in many shots making your begining more painful than it needs to be. Trust me, I started with mf lenses, they can be cool, but first get some proper glass.

And second reason, no matter what your first camera will be, you probably end up not liking one of it's part. Better start with something cheap and common, so it's easy to sell after you get better taste in what type of photography you like and what gear you need.

And lastly, don't obsess with specs and things like FF vs ASPC vs M43. It kinda doesnt matter.
>>
>>3762154
I recently got a superzoom and I'm still a skeptic, but I must admit that *with stabilization*, shooting everything at f/8 works 90% of the time. I had to change my mindset to just zoom in to focus on and separate one object, zoom out to capture more in frame.
>>
anyone ever use tiffen filters other than black pro-mist? i was gonna pick one up but i think i'm gonna go with glimmerglass 1,2, or 3. would use it on my two non-vintage lenses: a 20f1.8 and 35f1.4
>>
>>3762754
Yeah, I'm not thinking about mirrorless anymore. You suggested I get a DSLR like the 90D, 7D II, or 6D II. After doing some more research I think that's what I'm going to go with. Likely a 6D mk II with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, unless there's another similar option better than some slow kit lens
>>
>>3762793
>You suggested I get a DSLR
That was a different Anon.
>>
>>3762793
>Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8,
That's a really bad lens though.

It has nothing to do with the RXD version, so if you ever read some reviews where they praise the RXD, don't apply that to the old 28-75, because they are who different things.
>>
>>3762796
Ah, so only the mirrorless E mount Tamrons are worth it?

Really I'm just trying to get a sense of my options for a decent, multipurpose, non-kit ~24-70mm lens I could get for a 6d II.
>>
>>3762790
I've got a regular pro mist and a black pro mist if that counts.
>>
>>3762646
Thanks
>>
>>3762822
Tamron and Sigma were kind of sucky back 10 years ago.
That's why you can read all sorts of people swear allegiance to 1st party lenses.

Today they were completely different companies with new software to design optics.
>so only the mirrorless E mount Tamrons are worth it?
That might be too much of a generalisation as well.

The DSLR Tamrons with the G2 branding are usually very good.
>>
>>3762823
how do you like them and what strength do you use for what focal length? afaik the glimmerglass mostly just effects specular lights. the warmer versions of both bp-m and gg seem neat too
>>
File: 1577997693942.jpg (824 KB, 1500x2250)
824 KB
824 KB JPG
>>3762844
They're both 1/4 and I bought them in 49mm for my Sony 55mm f/1.8. The regular pro mist is definitely more defined than the black pro mist in normal usage, and it adds a bit of haziness to everything. The black pro mist mostly works with bright lights / specular lights. To be honest, I haven't used them a ton, but I also haven't been shooting a ton (got them both a month or two before COVID hit so I haven't been out as much).

It's also kind of annoying how they put these reflection artifacts in the shot unless you take a lot of care to avoid them. But shooting directly into lights is the whole point, and it makes that more difficult. See pic related, it's that blue eye-shaped thing on the brick. That's with a black pro mist.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7M3
Camera SoftwareCapture One 20 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)55 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1250
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness-3.4 EV
Exposure Bias-2 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length55.00 mm
Image Width1500
Image Height2250
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
File: 1589198843991.jpg (890 KB, 2250x1500)
890 KB
890 KB JPG
>>3762844
>>3762849
You can see it here, too, this time at the top of the image.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7M3
Camera SoftwareCapture One 20 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)55 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1000
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness-1.7 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length55.00 mm
Image Width2250
Image Height1500
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
What is your favorite 3rd party or gray box x-mount lens? I'm mostly interested in ones with AF - looking at a viltrox 85mm f1.8 or the fuji xc 50-230mm. My purposes for wanting them are different - the viltrox for night street photography, the fuji for landscape on hikes. I only have a 35mm f2 though so I need to expand regardless. Separately, are there any good 3rd party super zooms? can be manual, I pretty much just want to sit on a mountain and zoom to the horizon, so I probably don't need AF for that.
>>
>>3762850
>>3762849
What's with those weird lens flares?
>>
File: 1585386088966.jpg (922 KB, 2309x1500)
922 KB
922 KB JPG
>>3762881
That's what I'm pointing out. That's caused by the filter, not by the lens. It's possible to take photos without them, but they're very intrusive and you have to be deliberate about excluding them. Or get rid of them in post, I guess. Picrel doesn't have them, but it also doesn't have as bright of a light source.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7M3
Camera SoftwareCapture One 20.0.3 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)55 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating160
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness-2.8 EV
Exposure Bias-2 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length55.00 mm
Image Width2309
Image Height1500
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3762873
3rd party with AF? You pretty much have to use viltrox or zeiss. You could adapter efs glass, for what I saw fringer had some quite impresive performance.
>>
>>3762840
Is there a particular 24-70/105 zoom lens (Canon, Tamron or otherwise) you might recommend for the 6d II that is around $1000?
>>
>>3757162
Is it better to have two zoom lenses (like the 18-55 mm paired with a 70-300 mm) or one zoom lens from 18-300? How much can image quality differ between the lenses?
>>
>>3762994
Very few lenses go from 18 to 300, 18-200 is the most common superzoom range.
Distortion tends to be a major concern.
>>
>>3759755
You're talking about going from a 700D to a 40 year old Pentax and your reasoning seems to be simply that it's smaller so I don't know where to begin with that. I've got a ME Super which is mechanically similar but gives you the option of aperture priority (labelled as automatic) and I like it for its size and handling but you should look for one bundled with a 50mm 1.4 if you can, those lenses are awesome on film. My ME is alright but apparently the electronics die in them so the MX should be pretty reliable being fully manual and with a vertical bladed shutter. The batteries for the light meter are still available for them as well unlike some older Pentax models.
>>
>>3762961
Like I said, the look for the ones with G2 branding.
>>
>>3763059
>DSLR Tamrons with the G2 branding
Thanks, just wanted to be sure
>>
i want to buy some filters to use with my film cameras. i had no idea how big of a difference they make until today.
i shoot a mix of b&w and color, mainly b&w.
screw on or square with holders and adapters? my current lenses have 49, 55 and 58mm filter threads.
does brand matter? should i invest in 1 brand or does it not matter?
uv is a must from what i read and saw. what about nd and single color ones?
for now i'm looking for the most useful stuff so i'm asking based on experience, which ones are usually the ones that get the most use.
>>
>>3763089
If you're going to stack them, then rectangular is the best idea.
>>
>>3763089
>i want to buy some filters to use with my film cameras. i had no idea how big of a difference they make until today.
>i shoot a mix of b&w and color, mainly b&w.
>screw on or square with holders and adapters?
Square stacks better as per previous post.
Can be $$$ though. Screw on is cheap, and also doesn't leave multiple surfaces to catch dust.
So...
>my current lenses have 49, 55 and 58mm filter threads.
Buy a set of 58mm and some adapter rings so you only need one set.
>does brand matter?
Not really so long as it's decent quality. I use K&F and Hoya Pro.
>should i invest in 1 brand or does it not matter?
Doesn't matter, they all use the same thread.
>uv is a must from what i read and saw. what about nd and single color ones?
Variable ND if you're looking to take longer exposure in daytime.
Also red and yellow for better contrast on B&W.
I have a CPL permanently attached to all of my lenses because I almost always shoot around water, and after a while
I got sick of swapping them about all the time.
>for now i'm looking for the most useful stuff so i'm asking based on experience, which ones are usually the ones that get the most use.
For me, CPL as above.
Red and/or yellow (not used together)
You can buy a set of K&F pretty cheap on the Amazon
Just get the whole lot in pic here and see what you like
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=k%26f+filter+set&ref=nb_sb_noss_2
Maybe even consider getting larger than 58mm - if you stack a couple of filters or more, you're going to get vignetting at wider angles.
With adapter rings on your smaller dia. lenses, shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>>3763095
>K&F
I prefer K&N myself, they're washable
>>
File: 1226169828487.png (39 KB, 875x960)
39 KB
39 KB PNG
>>3762793
>>look at how much this 28-75 sucks
>ah thank you for the help, I'm thinig aof buying that 28-75, should I do it?
>>3762961
>>The G2 Tamrons are probably the best ones
>So which Tamron lenses do you recommend?
Low quality homeless troll under the bridge.
>>
>>3763095
I bought those step up rings trying to step up my 49mm filter size lens to my 72mm filter. Imagine my surprise when none of the rings would allow that combination. Now I've got a useless kit of filter rings. So FYI, >>3763089, if you're planning to use step up rings, be sure to check whether that combo is actually possible with the rings you're buying.
>>
>>3761796
thanks, which one of these do you think is best for nature pictures while out hiking?
>>
I'm an absolute newbie and my main interest is to take pics and videos of my horses and chickens, and nature stuff.

I see the Canon M50 recommended and it's on sale now but I wonder if it's too much for a first camera?

what's the thinkpad of cameras?
>>
>>3763363
Canon Rebel, get a Txi model where X is a number higher than 3. Don't buy an M, they're killing that mount soon.
>>
Hey friends, what's a decent off-camera studio lighting setup in late 2020? Godox AD200's?

Seems like everyone is doing battery pack flash heads these days? Have monoblocs fallen out of fashion? The MS300 is only $110 and looks decent. I'm mostly going to be doing indoor shooting and not a ton of outdoor work, but is it worth it to get a battery pack regardless?
>>
Hi, I am wondering if there is a way to set auto vibration reduction/IS or if cameras have sensor in the tripod to turn them off automatically. Sorry if I am retarded, I just started playing with my old nikon and didn't see anything like that.
>>
here is my full arsenal

dev chemicals
sous vide kit
plustek 8100
minolta srt101
canon p
bessa r2
rollei 35
fujifilm xt10
mamiya rb67 pro s with sekor 90mm 3.8c
leica iiic with a leitz elmar 35mm 3.5, messed up shutter mechanism, inherited
jupiter 8 50mm f2
helios 44 58mm f2
fujifilm 23mm 1.4
voigtlander skopar 35mm 2.5
voigtlander skopar 21mm f4
voigtlander nokton 40mm 1.4

i need to get rid of a lot of this, idk what should go. I'm trying to sell the Jupiter, the Canon P, will maybe also try to sell the Minolta
>>
>>3763495
>or if cameras have sensor in the tripod
YES
>>
>>3763500
i find the canon p so beautiful. i'm for sure going to pick one up in a couple years
>>
>>3763495
nikon lenses should usually have a vr switch on them
>>
Been out of the hobbyist photography game for a few years since my Pentax K30 broke. I was shooting film for a bit but looking to get a DSLR again. I tried out a friends mirrorless and it wasn't for me.

Am I stupid to try and get a Nikon D5600 this black friday? It came out in 2016 so it's pretty old at this point but I don't want to go higher to the D7600 since I'm only a hobbyist.
>>
File: ddf.jpg (54 KB, 627x477)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>3763495
>>
>>3763525
Don't think of it in terms of low/high end.
Mirrorless sucks indeed.
Do you have lenses for the K-30? If so I'd check out the K-70 because Nikon doesn't take lenses from other DSLRs without optical adapters (adapters that have a lens in them).
The D5600 comes with one big advantage over the D7xxx: the flip out screen.
The D7xxx comes with one big advantage over the D5xxx: in-body AF motor that lets you use D type lenses. They're much cheaper. You can use them on the other cameras too but only in manual focus mode.
You can get a D7200 in excellent condition from KEH for the same price a D5600 costs new.
If I were you I'd buy a Pentax K-70 unless video is a priority. You get AF motor, IBIS, weather sealing and a flip out screen for roughly the same price as the D5600. Ergonomically they're similar to the Nikons, roughly the same placement for most buttons and dials. Biggest difference is the live view that is old Canon style, button instead of a lever.
>>
File: xa.jpg (19 KB, 678x452)
19 KB
19 KB JPG
Noob here, I was wondering why are there no pants pocketable digital full frame cameras but have been achieved by 35mm film ones? GR, XF10 are apsc and don't even have a dedicated viewfinder.
>>
>>3763572
Because the only way to sell digital is with a bunch of features and a huge lens.
>>
>>3763572
You need space for the batteries and both the sensor and the screen have a depth. Film has barely any depth. Also no one wants to pay the money a full frame costs and be stuck with a fixed lens. Closest you get is the Sony A7C and it's pretty awful.
>>
>>3763572
Are you going to pay $1000+ for something with that kind of optical performance?
>>
>>3763579

...yes?
>>
>>3763579
Lel is $1000 a lot?
>>
>>3763585
For something with the lens quality mentioned above? Yeah, I'd say it's about $998 too expensive.
>>
>>3763582
Just go put a body cap lens on your Snoyny gay7 and call it a day, retard.
>>
>>3763585
For that dark viewfinder with a blurry patch, yes. Also for that lens with bad corner contrast and resolution. Compromises were made. The lens is a 35mm telephoto to make it fit.
It sucks and the only reason to want it is hipsterism. It's not even cool like a Minox.
>>
>>3763590
>cool like a Minox
Opinion discarded
>>
>>3760622
if it's worth anything, i got a the sigma 20 1.8 in ef 5 years ago as my first big lens purchase and i love it still to this day
>>
Just received this “genuine Panasonic battery” purchased from eBay from a seller with 14k feedback.
It’s fake right? It doesn’t say Panasonic on it anywhere.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width640
Image Height587
>>
>>3763677
faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake
>>
>>3763678
So surprised a reputable seller is peddling this shit. At least send a fake that says Panasonic on it.
>>
>>3762218
This thing is enormous, Jesus Christ

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3024
Image Height4032
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3763815
Lmao wtf. What lens is that. I have a Jumper too.
>>
>>3763815
put on it sticker "for rectal use only"
>>
>>3763820
Sigma 105mm Art
>>3763821
kek
>>
File: 105mmsonnar.jpg (1.07 MB, 1908x2440)
1.07 MB
1.07 MB JPG
>>3763815
Why don't you just?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4032
Image Height1908
Image OrientationUnknown
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2020:11:02 13:22:14
Exposure Time1/39 sec
F-Numberf/1.5
Lens Aperturef/1.5
Exposure Bias0 EV
Focal Length4.30 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4032
Image Height1908
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image IDL12XLLD01PM
>>
File: RicohGRi.png (1.39 MB, 1132x652)
1.39 MB
1.39 MB PNG
Is there a better compact camera for under $400 than the GR I?
>>
>>3763839
XF10, depends what country though
>>
How confident should I be in the my x-t2 and f2 35mm wr setup - rain-wise? Can I go out in full rain and take pictures - covering it in between shots? Does having the screen open put it at more risk of water damage?
>>
>>3763838
based vintage lens poster. i cant image ever needing that sigma jfc
>>
>>3763963

yes you can. I wouldn't worry. I literally just accidentally dropped a glass of water on my x-t2 23mmf2 WR. You can put these things through anything. Just dont submerge it.
>>
>>3760734
i found my dads old monopod and it seems really nice, like a camera staff. i'll try it out and report back. it's not a ball head sadly
>>
gonna sell my hassy soon.
film is not dead but 120 is, fuck i've spent too much cash on chemicals and rolls. question is what's the equivalent to my 6x6 hasselblad in terms of crisp portrait and glorious landscape? nikon? canon? fuji? sony? did somebody made the jump from medium format film to digital and never looked back?
>>
>>3763982
cheers
>>
Thinking of selling my a7II and going for an a7rII or a9. I use cannon glass because I own a few canon cameras and my dad uses canon too, mainly for nature and night photography, though I've done some sports and event photography too.
Any recommendations? Which would you go for?
>>
>>3764132
Wouædn't you be better off with an RP?

Sony cameras are for people who want the E-mount lenses from Sony or the bang for the buck lenses from Tamron and Sigma.
>>
>>3763838
Because idk what that is
>>
>>3764137
>Worse DR, Colour depth and high iso quality than a7II and a7rII
>Only slightly higher resolution than a7II
>Only benefit is better AF and 'Native' EF lens support.
Also it's fucking ugly to boot.
Seems like a downgrade. It is cheap though.
>>
>>3764144
>fucking ugly
What
It’s a camera, they all look more or less the same
>>
>>3764147
Nah man, the canon mirrorless cameras look ugly as fuck. It's not a major factor but it's a factor no less.
>>
Peak Design is having a sale on all their bags. How are their Everyday Slings. Thinking about getting either a 3L or a 6L
>>
>>3764150
I don't like how you have to touch your shit to the zippers if you're using either of the side pockets. I also don't really love sling style bags I found out. I'm more of a backpack guy. I have one sitting around that I don't use.
>>
anchor links or cuff? I figure I could make a strap out of paracord I have
>>
What's the cheapest way to go wider than 24mm on full frame DSLRs with decent results?
I don't care about AF.
>>
File: Sony_a7C_Lead_Image.jpg (94 KB, 940x627)
94 KB
94 KB JPG
>>3764148
>RP
>ugly
I think you have shit taste lol
I mean look at this piece of shit
>>
If I was in the market for a used camera what should I look for if I want something that takes better pictures than my Samsung Galaxy S10e? My smartphone takes really good pictures, better than my 20 year old Canon ESO 20D but I haven't been in the camera market for years so Idk what to look for now.

What'll give me even better quality pics than a modern smartphone?
>>
>>3757299
>>3757423
What were your intended uses and what didn't you like? I'm looking at one for streaming/vid production first, still shooting second and it *seems* like one of the best options overall for under $1200.
>>
>>3764282
Not him, but as a general rule of thumb, metal will always look nicer than plastic.
>>
>>3764339
Funny, historically people had to pay more to get the black (pro) cameras.
Materials aside, the shape of the Sony is butt-ugly.
>>
>>3764343
>flat metallic surface is butt ugly
Okay boomer.
>>
>>3764148
They look fine. You probably have autism.
>>
>>3764345
Chrome everywhere, those were the days. Before I got the ol' ball and chain. Ah, I still remember riding around in my 59 LeSabre, that was a car. I attached a photo of me with the boys.
-Bob

Sent from my Motorola V3 using Tapatalk
>>
NEW THREAD:

>>3764390
>>3764390
>>3764390
>>
>>3764282
This is actually decent
>>
>>3764282
>inconsistent geometric shapes and sizes jutting off a brick form
>several different colors values of same hues, textures, patterns
This really is a fucking ugly design. Good thing it does something.
>>
>>3764360
I do have autism, but that doesn't change the fact that it looks ugly to me.



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.