Old: >>3757162>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.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelNEX-F3Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.2 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Focal Length (35mm Equiv)28 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2012:11:09 14:57:31Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/4.0Brightness4.0 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length19.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>3764390>Redirect other gear-related threads to this thread. >Remember to be polite.me getting called a faggot every time I mention gear outside this thread:
bought a nikkor 20mm f2.8 lens at a local shop and he threw in a broken olympus XA for free I'm going to mess around with>feelsgoodman[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeEASTMAN KODAK COMPANYCamera ModelKODAK EASYSHARE Z1015 IS DIGITAL CAMERAFocal Length (35mm Equiv)59 mmMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.1Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution480 dpiVertical Resolution480 dpiRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownExposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/4.1Exposure ProgramActionISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/4.1Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length10.60 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3648Image Height2432Exposure Index400
My gear: Nikon D40Lomo'Instant Square GlassI think I'm pretty well equipped for anything.
Why did my parent's Kodak P850 from 2005 come with a hotshoe cover, but my Sony A6000 I bought new didn't.
answer my fucking questionIf 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?
>>3764415>What'll give me even better quality pics than a modern smartphone?Sony a9
>>3764416I'm willing to spend that if it's actually good. I don't know shit about mirrorless though. Is a similarly priced DSLR any better?
>>3764417Is goodGet it
>>3764415It's an "EOS" and it's 16 years old not 20. The biggest advantage isn't image quality but low light performance and artistic control.Also higher resolution to do big prints.>>3764416Fuck off shill he doesn't need to spend 2k bucks on something that doesn't even have an OVF.
>>3764417Ignore the shill, mirrorless is a stupid meme only worth getting if you mainly do video.The gains to be had with a dedicated camera are as I said low light performance and artistic control, as well as longer lengths since your lenses on your phone are equivalent to 26 and 52mm. It's undoubtedly superior to the X100 line of Fujis that trannies love to shill here, but a proper DSLR would serve you well.Do you want to buy new or do you prefer higher end but older? What's your budget?
>>3764425you seem knowledgeable I thank you for your time. reckon there's something i could get used for maybe 300ish that would outperform the phone?i also have two old lenses, one which is still going for like $700 according to ebay so I could use that with the cam too
>>3764433im this guy >>3764435the guy who said about "I'm willing to spend.." isn't actually me
Cheap point and shoots with>compact size>flash>full manual>no bluetooth/wifi/connectivity >no touchscreen >weather proof>good zoom>good batteryAlso, do any new cameras still have CCD sensors?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2019:10:23 17:09:26Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>3764435What lenses do you have?Canon crop lenses don't play nice with full frame bodies so you'll want a crop. Also Canon has the shortest flange distance among DSLRs so they're useless with other brands. If I were you, I'd get something like a 70D or 80D.Tell me what lenses you have though, maybe it's better to sell everything and switch systems (in case they're redundant with your phone).When it comes to image, lenses matter more than bodies.
>>3764443>no touchscreenWhy, touchscreen is an advantage for AF
>>3764444a Sigma DC 18-250mm lens and an Ultrasonic EF 17-200MM lens. IDK much more than that but they're apparently expensive ish
>>3764445I always have my leather gloves on, half the time when they're off my hands are numb, and I just prefer selecting things with actual buttons.Plus if I'm taking creepshots I don't want to accidentally slide my finger across something and have a butt be out of focus or something.I guess if it's only partially touchscreen, or optionally touch screen it's not a deal breaker.
>>3764444Oh my God, look at the tasteful thickness of my quads. I know checking one's own digits is poor etiquette but damn.>>3764446Those are expensive because of being superzooms but won't give you amazing picture quality. They're versatile in that they can take both wide and long pictures. If you have them at hand take a look at the full names.Look for things like OSS (optical image stabilization), HSM (hypersonic motor) and EX (means high end, similar to Canon's L) as well as the f-number (example, f/3.5-6.3) on the Sigma. Look for the f-number and any other info on the Canon. It will be either on the ring around the front element or the barrel near the controls. Look for switches on the barrel too, usually AF/MF and stabilization on/off.I presume the quality will be less than stellar on either, though (because of the massive zoom). Canon is likely better but that can vary.
>>3764452idk sounds like a lot of work my dude. do i just get a new camera or wot m8
>>3764455Just look at what it says on the damn lenses lol, you only gave me focal lengths. They could be good or bad lenses or anything in between. Is the Sigma like this one?They go for like 200 bucks used.
>>3764455Also for third party lenses Pentaxforums usually is a good place to look for samples and get a good idea of how good a lens is.Does any of these pics look better than what you get on your phone? If yes, keep it.https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/sigma-18-250mm-f3-5-6-3-dc-macro-hsm.html
>>3764457alright lets pretend i don't have lenses what camera do i buy
>>3764443Used first gen rx100 maybe
>>3764459If you care about video, Canon 70D, if you don't, Pentax K-70 (or Pentax K-S2 if pinching pennies).Nikon D7100 is another solid option.Is your Canon lens like pic related? It's the only 18-200mm I found.>>3764460I hope he follows your advice lol
>>3764461you mean the ultrasonic? no it's black and white. and thanks I'll look into those used cameras
>>3764462Yeah, the ultrasonic.It's probably not a 18-200mm lol, I'm not finding it anywhere.>and thanks I'll look into those used camerasNo problem, I hope you get something you're happy with. A cool thing about the Pentax is that it lends itself to shooting with cheap old glass because it has stabilization in the body and the same flange distance as M42.There's also a really cool 1.7x teleconverter that gives manual lenses autofocus. I prefer Canon myself because of Magic Lantern, but I'm a wannabe movie director lol.Also small word of advice: avoid Micro Four Thirds, the sensors suck.
>>3764466desu ill probably just stick with my phone lmao
>>3764467lmaojust by chance, when you said black and white did you mean something like this?I'm not finding any 18-200mm Canons like that, but these white lenses while not having as much zoom are excellent and expensive.
>>3764468you're really obsessed with these lenses fuck sake gimme a sec i'll grab it
>>3764468ok full nameEF 70-200mm f/4L USM. it kinda looks like that picture but the black parts are more grey and the white is more a beige cream. otherwise yeah.
>>3764476>>3764468if you google the EF one it comes up.the other lens I have is all black and it's called:Sigma DC 18-250mm 1:3.5-6.3 HSM. it also has gold letter optical stabilizer written on it
>>3764476Oh shit dude and here I was shit talking your lenses.Get a Canon, that thing is gold and it'd be a shame for it to go to waste. Costs a pretty penny unlike the 18-200mm which is mediocre at best. Also this one is full frame, it completely changes the game. That lens alone goes for like 400 bucks used. I'd get a Canon full frame. The original 6D is probably your best option but it will be closer to 500 bucks than to 300 to get a good one. It's probably a better choice than a 5D Mark II, the memory alone will mean huge savings (5D Mark II takes CF instead of SD and those can get really expensive if you want a fast one). For example, Sandisk Extreme Pro is 120 bucks for CF and 36 bucks for SD. This lens is a real game changer, it's a pro lens and it makes switching systems a lot less attractive. >Sigma DC 18-250mm 1:3.5-6.3 HSM. it also has gold letter optical stabilizer written on itOkay, it's almost the one I posted earlier but with stabilization.Nothing spectacular but I guess it will give you the shorter end.If you go full frame, check that it doesn't hit the frame (there will likely be vignetting though)
>>3764478So that Ultrasonic lens won't work with anything other than Canon? Like a physical, literal won't work or more metaphorical won't work?
Someone stop me from buying the xf100-400mm
>>3764482Thanks I appreciate it I won't for now
>>3764480It's a practical thing, you can make it work with special adapters but not without degrading the quality or losing the ability to focus into infinity. It has to do with a property called flange distance, the distance between the sensor and the lens mount. Also Canon lenses have no aperture ring so any adapter needs electronic. Even if you adapt to a shorter flange distance (mirrorless mounts) the adapters get super expensive. For example one for Sony E is like 400 bucks. And AF works poorly.But being a full frame lens, just getting a full frame body will be a game changer. You see, your 20D has a 1.6x crop sensor. This means the lens gives you the same field of view in the 20D a 112-260mm would give you in a full frame camera.Inversely, on a full frame camera it will give you the field of view that a 44-125 would give you on the 20D. It's like having a different lens.
>>3764481>Common Sense>This Fuji 100-400mm is a great lens, but is it $1,900 great?>As I've cautioned, if you work for your money I'd think long and hard before spending this much on what is essentially a plastic lens for a consumer camera system, when you could spend not much more and get a proven professional lens like the new Canon 100-400mm L IS II and use it on any Canon DSLR, including the inexpensive and superb Canon SL1. I'd get the Canon 100-400 and an SL1 and shoot that alongside a Fuji system.>Likewise, if you are getting this for your Fuji because you want to carry less, this is a big lens and defeats that purpose. A superb and little known camera is Sony's brand new RX10 Mk III which has a superb Zeiss 24~600mm equivalent lens. This new Sony works incredibly well and it costs less than this Fuji lens alone. The Sony's ZEISS lens even has metal focus and zoom rings, which this Fuji does not!
>>3764486dawg i dont know shit about what you just said but ty. You've been a great help. honestly the cameras you mentioned are quite expensive, even used, so I'm gonna keep using phone for now until it becomes a bit more financially sensible to purchase one of those cams
>>3764488If I were you, I'd put the Sigma for sale on eBay and use that money to get closer to the 6D.I was looking at finished auctions and with some luck you can get a nice one for around 370 bucks.For 400 bucks you can get a nearly mint one, look at this one that sold 2 months ago as an example:https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-6D-20-2MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-Black-Body-Only-Perfect-condition-/402451615958?_trksid=p2349526.m4383.l10137.c10&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=truePut the Sigma and the Canon 20D with memory card for sale and you're covering 200 bucks if they're in mint condition. Sell lens and camera separately because one could tank the sale of the other easily.
>>3764491Yeah I've got some other equally old cameras too that I could probably sell for like 50 bucks ea so I may scrounge together the money at some point
>>3764495With the 20D make sure you publish it with memory card included because the CF cards are a massive reason to stay away from them lol, by publishing it with card you give the buyer some peace of mind. Also keep in mind those things keep depreciating and that from publication to sale it can take a long time, so publish them as soon as you can. Also I just looked at KEH and it's laughable how little they give you for the camera with battery and charger in top condition, 13 bucks lol. On the plus side, it's immediate. For the Sigma they give you like 60 bucks or 110 if it's macro.
i want to get a 82mm filter and i have 49mm, 52mm, 77mm, and 82mm lenses among others but would i get a set and use multiple for the smaller lenses? e.g. 82-77 +77-72+all the way the way down to 52/49 or get each specific 82-52mm, 82-49mm, etc step down rings?
>>3764390I wanna see images made by that set up!
>>3764568I'd use rings desu
>if you get a mirrorless, you’ll have to clean the sensor all the time>don’t get the EOS RP, it doesn’t cover the sensor like the R when it’s not in useUm, /p/, sweaty? I’ve had the camera for 6 months now, take it out to the dust on hikes all the time, and I haven’t cleaned the sensor even once! And look at that. Spotless, dustless. If the dumb sensor cleaning stories are keeping you from getting this camera, don’t listen to them.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationRight-Hand, TopHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4032Image Height3024Scene Capture TypeStandard
Realistically, how much of a risk am I taking using my Snoy α7iii in the rain? I've never taken it out when it's remotely wet because I'm concerned about the reports of insufficient weather sealing. I'm worried about water finding its way into things and causing issues over time, not necessarily instant damage / ruining.Like I want to go out shooting today, but I'm worried because there's a 25% chance of rain all day and if it starts raining, I'd be stuck outside until I can walk back to my car, which could be 30+ minutes.
>>3764689i wouldn't do it without protection considering how much that camera is still worth
anchor links or cuff? I figure I could make a strap out of paracord or some old leather belts I have
>>3764689Do you have any grocery bags around the house? I wrap my camera in plastic when I shoot in the rain.
>>3764699H-how do you use it when it's wrapped in a grocery bag?
>be me>take possession of an MTF cameras and some prime lenses>look into prices of telephoto lenses for MFT... yikes>get told Full Frame is superior anyway>look into FF cameras>the cheapest doesn't even have an EVF built-in>look at FF lenses>they're 2-3 times the price for a quarter of the focal length of an MFT telephoto lens...Exactly who buys Full Frame lenses, and why do they seem like their gear is either paid for by an employer of some kind, or they're just rich weirdos who have very little free time to actually go out and take pics, and instead just jack off to their expensive gear... Sometimes I wonder if some camera owners just buy them just to let them collect dust, cuz they're less in daily use than some expensive Mercedes car.
>>3764706Do poors actually think like this?
>>3764706Professionals, for that kind of purpose most regular people just stick to superzooms like the P900.
>>3764709If you haven't noticed, there's a pandemic occurring, and I can't imagine many people these days have a lot of money to just spend on lenses for the shits and giggles.I can see someone justifying their purchase of like... a high performance car, cuz they can use it everyday, if they have to rely on it for transport everyday.But photography is much more of a hobby, and I can't really see how someone, during one of the worst global recessions, can really justify those prices.>>3764711Yeah, but paying 3 times the price of an Olympus 300mm Prime lens for a Full Frame 45mm prime lens seems almost like FF users are chums who will buy anything.
>>3764706>they're 2-3 times the price for a quarter of the focal length of an MFT telephoto lens...This Tamron is 730 dollars.It doesn't exist on M4/3, but it it did, it would be equivalent to14-100mm F/1,4 - F2,8Not bad for 700 bucks, eh?Wait until you find out about the AF motor. Responsive and 0 decibell noise.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiColor Space InformationsRGB
>>3764723Well, there is a Tamron MFT lens. It's this 14-150mm lens.But it's discontinued and those you can find new fluctuate between $300-$500, but again, I wouldn't buy from a US website, because of the customs I'd likely pay for it to get to Europe.I was also predominantly talking about Full Frame (L-Mount), not APS-H or APS-C. Also, I'm weary about zoom lenses, as I understand they lack sharpness when zoomed in.The sorts of MFT lenses I meant were like the Panasonic 200mm or the Olympus 300mm. They cost about $1000-2000 depending on seller. When you consider that a 45mm Full Frame L-Mount lens from Panasonic, Leica or Sigma costs about the same... then that's where I have to ask why Full Frame exists.
>>3764732>Also, I'm weary about zoom lenses, as I understand they lack sharpness when zoomed in.That's a problem with many cheap lenses like the one in your image.That old lens would definitely get BTFO by the new Tamron in image quality.The RXD tamron the new Nikon travel zoom are a new generation of super zoom that have drastically improved sharpness compared to super zooms in the post.>The sorts of MFT lenses I meant were like the Panasonic 200mm or the Olympus 300mm.Canon RF have new long focal range primes with tiny apertures that are roughly equivalent to those micro4tf primes.
Anyone have the xc 50-230 or the viltrox 85mm for Fuji? Currently choosing between them as my next lens (only current is 35mm f2). I know the specs and use cases I’m just looking for user feelings to help push me one way or the other
>>3764466>Pentax-F 1.7x AF AdapterThat's pretty cool, didn't know it existed.>doesn't work with M42 lenses and K ones without aperture leverAaand it's not so cool turns out.
>>3764723>Not bad for 700 bucks, eh?>Wait until you find out about the AF motor. Responsive and 0 decibell noise.
>>3764746You forgot Sigma.Zeiss would be in that club as well, but they don't really offer value, just high end primes.
>>3764689on this note... how are the newer nikon and canons mirrorless when it comes to weatherproofing
>>3764460That seems good thanksIs the battery and weather proofing good?
>>3764575yah but do i get a set and use multiple for the smaller lenses like picrel or would i get 82-52, 82-49, and 82-77 all specifically?
>>3764780Dude, avoid that trash. Used pnshoot zoom cameras have shit ton of dust in them, and there's no way to get it out.
>>3764746why are trannies obsessed with sony?
>>3764736>That's a problem with many cheap lenses like the one in your image.I mean, there are cheaper prime lenses than the Tamron out there, and they're definitely considered among the best of the MTF crop.>That old lens would definitely get BTFO by the new Tamron in image quality.Yeah, probably, but I don't understand why Tamron didn't make more than 1 lens for MFT. Sigma made a whole bunch, and while most of them are now discontinued, they still have a few. Voigtländer have a whole series of MFT lenses too. I understand Tokina also made an MFT lens, but it was apparently a pretty shit macro lens. And Kowa make a number of lenses too.>Canon RF have new long focal range primes with tiny apertures that are roughly equivalent to those micro4tf primes.Yeah, I looked up the the Canon RF 600mm f11 lens. It's quite a bit cheaper than the aforementioned Panasonic and Olympus lenses, but at the same time, the Panasonic lens is f/2.8 and the Olympus one of f/4. I think I need to think some more about aperture now, cuz I've been thinking about aperture in terms of light conditions for so long, I never really thought about it for Depth of Field.
>>3764800New one's like 500 bones though
>>3764807>and the Olympus one of f/4That's 1 stop faster than the RF lens. Not that bad of a trade if you want to save some money.>there are cheaper prime lenses than the Tamron out there,On the short prime lens e side, the FF shooters have Samyang and Tamron as well. They go for as little as 300-400 bucks.>Yeah, probably, but I don't understand why Tamron didn't make more than 1 lens for MFT.They went with FF, because I guess that's what they wanted to do.They are expanding into APS-C now though, soon.>I never really thought about it for Depth of Field.I just think of it in terms of noise. Micro 43 needs much lower ISO to get comparable noise.
>>3764443>>3764780>>3764800>>3764810What about this one?https://www.amazon.ca/Panasonic-DMC-ZS60-Megapixels-2-3-inch-F3-3-6-4/dp/B00K73BNZQ/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&keywords=panasonic%2BDMC-ZS60&qid=1606088947&sr=8-5&th=1I really like the ring thing on the front that you can use to focusHow bad is a 1/2.3-inch High Sensitivity MOS Sensor? Like in lowlight and stuff
>>3764833>I really like the ring thing on the front that you can use to focusYou have no idea how much I hate you.
>>3764833look at some samples and see what you likehttps://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6203776726
>>3764834My a6000 had it and I fucking loved it so suck my dick>>3764835Thanks anon. I'm gonna bookmark that site.Seems like it sucks in lowlight, but still better than my phone. If nothing else comes up I'll probably go with it.
>>3764833>How bad is a 1/2.3-inch High Sensitivity MOS Sensor? Like in lowlight and stuffCould blow some more cash and get the ZS100 instead, it has a 1" sensor
>>3764390Red is not an acceptable colour for cameras. Options include:BlackBare metal (may vary by material)
>>3764814>That's 1 stop faster than the RF lens. Not that bad of a trade if you want to save some money.I'm happy enough with sticking with the camera I have. Selling off a camera and 3 lenses seems like a total hassle to buy into a different system.Still... a nice telephoto prime would give good reach for photographing wildlife that likes to keep its distance from humans.>On the short prime lens e side, the FF shooters have Samyang and Tamron as well. They go for as little as 300-400 bucks.I don't trust Samyang. The thing with them, is that they're not using the MFT standard officially, which suggests to me that they're doing the reverse engineering stuff for all their other lenses. I know they're cheaper, but... something feels off about them. Maybe why they're also doing weird stuff with L-Mount without being in the Alliance.>They went with FF, because I guess that's what they wanted to do.I can't find anything for Tamron and L-Mount...>I just think of it in terms of noise. Micro 43 needs much lower ISO to get comparable noise.Yeah, the camera I have has a minimum ISO of 200, though I don't understand how the OM-D E-M1X can get to lower ISOs with the same sensor... I do use the camera's own noise filtering, which is surprisingly decent for what it is.I guess a Full Frame camera would also be pretty good at not having as much noise as a result of having a bigger sensor to collect light with... But the expense in switching over to an L-Mount system is just... not value for money imo.
>>3764407>thinking Sony consumer shit is designed to last more than a few months
>>3764854>Maybe why they're also doing weird stuff with L-Mount without being in the Alliance.You must be thinking of some other lens maker. Samyang hasn't released any AF lenses on L-mount.
Why so angry about snoy?Did they touch your pp when you were a kid?
>>3764876What are you even talking about?Sony is one of those companies where it's completely useless to attack or defend them, because they're going to sell regardless of what anyone here does or says. No matter if it's for or against.
>>3764883Ok, I still want to know why people here hate them
>>3764883But why do you wear diapers?
>>3764443I'm adding viewfinder to that list>>3764843Mmh I like that, too bad you go from 30x to 10xzoom. I don't know which I like better.I also heard the ZS60 has better grip than the 100 weirdly.
How much of a difference in low light between a 1/2.3" vs a 1".A lot?
What are some good or interesting vintage lenses? Recently got the canon fd 1.4/50 so not really bothered about acquiring another 50mm. I'm looking for something in the 20-28mm range and maybe a portrait too.
What's a good entry into the Fujifilm mirrorless system? Everyone seems to recommend the X-T2 or X-H1, but finding one within my budget (~$300) is proving to be difficult.
>>376489320mm was the good lens range. Harder to find a bad lens in that range. They were the money maker lenses for companies, so good glass went into them.
>>3764897Could you save up $600 and get the camera you want?
>>3764714>Yeah, but paying 3 times the price of an Olympus 300mm Prime lens for a Full Frame 45mm prime lens seems almost like FF users are chums who will buy anything.Are you a bad troll or unaware of aperture and aberration correction?
I want to make short films. What kind of lens should i get? What do I need to look out for?
>>376494111mm f/8 fisheye
>>3764942thank you wise anon
>>3764941tele, film your neighbors
i currently have a sony a99 but i want to upgrade.looking at the a9 but $$$$$$$$$$is it worth the upgrade
are Lumix cameras any good? I was looking for some cheap mirrorless cameras on amazon and these things are like $600 max and some even have 4K
I have a X-H1. Would it be better to get a 16-55 f2.8 or the 16-80 f4.
I have shot with a Canon T5i for the last 5 years or so and I'm so completely bored of my camera and lenses. I have the 18-55mm f/4-5.6, 70-200mm f/3.5-5.6, 40mm pancake, and yongnuo 50mm f/1.8. I have been researching Fujifilm X-T3 with the 16-80mm f/4. It's on sale for $2000 CAD right now. Would you recommend selling my Canon gear and buying the Fujifilm setup? Is this a good setup for photographing mostly outdoor scenes. A lot of landscape photos and overlanding stuff when I'm out 4x4ing. I hate swapping lenses on my Canon camera and I'm also sick of forgetting my camera and taking all my photos with a Pixel 3 XL.Thanks![EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS REBEL T5iCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.2Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2020:11:22 09:23:59Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.0Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length44.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width3380Image Height4733RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image ID5ee7c082e12ff5fa0000000000000000
>>3764481I bought mine at sale price several months back but don't get nearly enough use out of it to justify the cost. It's a wildlife lens for sure, but because it's heavy and huge I almost never bring it on long hikes (which make up a huge amount of the time I'm shooting outdoors). Because of the bulkiness you're not gonna want to switch the lens on and off much, so you'll probably either have to run a second camera or leave a heavy body and lens combo hanging around your neck. Image quality is fantastic up to ~300mm but I've noticed it drops off quite a bit towards the long end of the focal range; outside the center it's pretty fuzzy.I wouldn't recommend it unless you've tried the other Fuji telephoto zooms first (+ teleconverter) and are absolutely, positively certain you need the extra focal range AND have no problem burning $1300+ like that.
For a total beginner does a Fuji X-T10 + XF35mmf2 + some extras for ~$350 seem alright as a starting off point or would it be worth it to move up to something a bit more expensive?
I already have a 18-55... Really tempted to jump on either of these lenses. Which would you pick?
>>3764997I ended up buying both, and still I couldn't bring myself to sell the 18-55... despite the fact I don't really use it.
Looking at FF dslr for freelance work and personal portfolio and a mirrorless for snapshitting/convenience.Any MFT/mirrorless on the market that's a good all in one yet??
>>3764789i just wanna say this isn't bait, i saw this on the amazon review and it looks dumb as fuck but the set seems pointless if not to be used like that
Does Fuji do Black Friday sales? I’m on the fence about upgrading to an x-pro3 but maybe I should wait a week.
Gotta upgrade from my webcam for work, I'm basically stuck with Snoy or Panasonic for streaming, right? Seems like Canon only supports it through software and Fuji overheats?
>>3765064Get the Panasonic.You won't be doing anything overly cinematic so a super 35 sensor doesn't make much sense, and the Panasonic is way better at thermals. Look up the BMCC4K too, not sure if it has webcam capabilities but it would be even better than the Panasonic if so.
>>3765064>Fuji overheats?i use an xt4 as a 4k webcam and never encountered any overheating. maybe in direct sun for hours on end?
Is there any reputable online camera store not ran by jews? I don't trust them.
>>3765110NoGo buy a stolen one from Kijiji
I just picked this point and shoot up from Savers. Is it any good? I tested the flash and it's really powerful.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelLG-H932Equipment MakeLG ElectronicsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2020:11:21 14:33:06Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiISO Speed Rating50Exposure ProgramNot DefinedF-Numberf/1.6Exposure Time1/120 secFocal Length4.03 mmFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Bias0 EVDigital Zoom Ratio1.2Image Height3492White BalanceAutoBrightness0 EVImage Width4656Exposure ModeAutoColor Space InformationsRGBAltitude0.00 m
New Tamron 17-70 F2,8 for APS-C.Equivalent to 25-105mm F4 on FF.
It horrifies me that almost everyone just uses autofocus these days. Most of those people don't even know HOW to manually focus their cameras.Why doesn't that horrify you? Don't you see what is happening?
>>3765228People don't like the Korean and Chinese lenses that don't write exif data into the RAW.Which can be a shame, since they are incredibly cheap, and the barrels are good precision metal barrels with nicely dampened focus rings.There are some niche manual lens makers like Zeiss and Voiglander who writes EXIF into RAW. But those options are so incredibly expensive.Most people who are in this pricing segment prefers to get an autofocus lens at this price point.
>>3765202I had a Freedom Zoom 130 Date for a while. Not the best ps I ever had, but certainly worth way more than $6. If that one is anywhere near as good as mine was, you got lucky finding it.Don't ever try to mount it on a tripod; the mount is shallow af, and if you screw it in too far, which is super easy because the plastic is super brittle, you'll break the whole camera.
>>3764980Nah that’s good, I’d go for the 23mm f2 personally but I just find 50s to be too tight
>>3765236I really appreciate the tripod tip. I was seriously considering trying to mount it. I only have experience with SLRs and digital point and shoot cameras. Are there any quirks to these?
Possibly wrong thread. New to the board, trying not to clutter things.Inherited some Minolta stuff, and these bits were in the bag. I've sussed out that they go together, but I'm not entirely sure how to properly use them. Google didn't turn up a lot, either.So... How exactly does one use these mystery bits with the filters?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakemotorolaCamera Modelmoto g(7)Camera Softwareriver-user 10 QPUS30.52-23-11 321b release-keysSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:11:23 11:26:06Exposure Time1/24 secF-Numberf/1.8ISO Speed Rating389Lens Aperturef/1.8Brightness-0.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length3.95 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4096Image Height3072Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>3764951nvm they look like trash
Any good suggestions for ultra cheap telephoto lenses for birdwatching? Been doing it for a year now but my standard 300 mm lens just isn't cutting it anymore...I just want to take cool photos of birds[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1D Mark IVCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)PhotographerVivek KhanzodéImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2013:06:28 08:22:11Exposure Time1/1600 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias1.3 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length600.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>3765349You may wish to reconsider your priorities. 300mm to 600mm isn't a huge difference. I use 2x converter on 100-400mm on 2x crop camera, making it effectively 400-1600mm and I still need to be less than ten meters from my birbos for quality photos.
>>3764706>paying 3 times the price of an Olympus 300mm Prime lens for a Full Frame 45mm prime lensWhere's that $8k 45mm prime? Maybe Leica could pull that off.
>>3765364Would a converter be a worthwhile investment?
>>3765081Black Magic + lens would be pushing out of my price range unless there's a good sale this weekend, but damn it does look nice! Budget is capped at about $1k, should've mentioned that in the post.
>>3765212>17-70 f/2.8 zoom for Sony EOk this is huge news
>>3765440I emailed those faggots at Sigma for such a lens, and they gave a positive response, but it was ultimately just lip service.It turned out to be Tamron who was the chosen one.It's likely to be affordable as well. Cheaper than if Sigma made an F2,8 zoom.
>>3765349>Any good suggestions for ultra cheap telephoto lenses for birdwatching?yeah, reflex lenses or digiscoping (but that one is a lot less mobile)the board expert on reflex lenses is Eggy, you may want to see some of his suggestions in this thread where cheap teles were discussed a lot: >>3757797
>>3764443>CCD sensorsnever again
>>3764390Kind of in a rut here anons:Is the A7Rii worth keeping?I don't necessarily care for full frame right now, but that megapixel count is nice. However I have mostly canon lenses in addition to the two sony lenses I have. So using my adapter makes buying e mount lenses redundant, since the lenses work fine in auto or manual.I also have an a 6400 so mirrorless isn't an issue. I have a Canon in the 30mp range so quality wouldn't be bad. The thing is, I mostly use my Canon for gigs, since it's reliable. I get paranoid about losing or breaking gear which is why I even have two big-bodies cameras to begin with. I should've stuck with one brand, but whatever, I live and learn. TL;DR, I can see uses for the A7Rii, but don't know if it will truly matter to me in the next year or two.
Viltrox havin' a 10% off black friday sale so I grabbed the 56mm f1.4 for fuji. I was pretty bummed when I missed it was on sale during prime day on amazon. No tax and free shipping so it kinda works out to be the same.
>>3764698cuff. Wrist straps are just better ways to securely hold your stuff and have quick access to it.
>>3764997At comparable prices, I recommend going for the 2.8.I have the 16-80mm, and it's got its charm points. Versatile zoom range and good stabilization. But you start to feel the f/4 come down on you. If it was $300 cheaper(if you buy it in a kit it's essentially $500), then I'd say it's a good deal. But when it's just $100 difference, I'd go with the 2.8.
>>3765228Well there's not much need to. I mean, using focus peaking highlights is kinda fun. And I manual focus when doing macro shots on a tripod.Here's a fun video on zone focusing.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZOQNf_VVXo
>>3764706>Exactly who buys Full Frame lensespeople with jobs.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelBBF100-2Camera Software0Equipment MakeBlackBerrySensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2020:11:23 21:54:16Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiISO Speed Rating3137Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramF-Numberf/1.8Exposure Time1/17 secFocal Length3.89 mmFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeNight SceneImage Height3996White BalanceAutoBrightness-5.0 EVImage Width2664Exposure ModeAutoLens Aperturef/1.8Color Space InformationsRGBRenderingCustom
>>3765239Not as far as I remember. It's a decent ps, just won't stand up to rough-housing. Honestly it's not crystal-clear, but it's close, and it'll get depth and exposure correct just about every time.
>>3765561where is the sale? eyeing the 56mm myself
>>3764897Any other brand.
>>3764975No you need a better camera, not worse
>>3765592oof, imagine buying so much third party sigma junkand actually being proud of it
>>3765212>New Tamron 17-70 F2,8 for APS-C.>Equivalent to 25-105mm F4 on FF.25-105 f/2.8* fixed that for you(with f/4 equiv DOF)
>>3765349No such thing as good, ultracheap long lenses. Quality = Cost = Outcome.The newer tamron and sigma 150mm-600mm lenses are adequate for this purpose.
>>3765608>with f/4 equiv DOFSame size as F4 FF as well.Same ISO image noise as F4 FF too.And you ends up with same shutter speed as F4 FF too.What else is left?
>>3765610*blocks your path*[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPhone SECamera SoftwarePhotos 2.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)29 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:09:04 22:34:04Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/2.2Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.2Brightness0.5 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeSpotFocal Length4.20 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4032Image Height3024Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>3765611Probably less ISO noise because the FF will have to crank up the ISO (multiply by 2.25) to compensate for the smaller aperture.
>>3765607imagine being so poor that you dont even have a home photography studio, and that you arent even interested in making money with photography[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelBBF100-2Camera Software0Equipment MakeBlackBerrySensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2020:11:23 22:58:04Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiISO Speed Rating1329Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramF-Numberf/1.8Exposure Time1/30 secFocal Length3.89 mmFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeNight SceneImage Height3996White BalanceAutoBrightness-2.5 EVImage Width2664Exposure ModeAutoLens Aperturef/1.8Color Space InformationsRGBRenderingCustom
>>3764975>I'm also sick of forgetting my camera and taking all my photos with a Pixel 3 XL.How will a new camera change your bad habits?>pro-tip: it won't
>>3765622I don't like carrying a bag of lenses around and swapping them all the time so I don't like using my camera so I'm not eager to bring. I have convinced myself a new smaller, lighter camera with a single more capable lens will help remedy that.
>>3765623Protip: you don't have to carry every lens around or swap them all the time. The 18-55 alone is more capable than your phone. >>3765621>androidCringe. Any self-respecting blackberryfag either stuck to his guns and still uses a BB10 phone, moved to Sailfish on a Xperia or Gemini, or even moved to iOS.
>>3765627>using your phone for anything more than texting, talking, and typingCringe.>self-respecting>4channelChoose one.
>>3765623>I don't like carrying a bag of lenses around and swapping them all the timethis isn't mandatory...all you need is a nifty fifty or equiv. sell the rest and be cash positive for once
>>3765627Thanks tips! I still find my Canon excessively boring and I'm not often impressed with the image quality or colours of my raw or jpeg files. I realize I could probably optimize better and get better results, but I'm ready to move on to something new.
>>3765628Android is fucking horrible even at that, you're only reinforcing my point. Also >not using your phone for emails, shitposting and browsing the net on the go or in bed
>>3765630That's about the way you develop. Also maybe try a polarizing filter and adjusting white balance.
>>3765633The market proves you wrong.
>>3765581Thanks for your insight anon. Gonna pick up the 16-55 f2.8
I talked myself out of getting the viltrox 56mm f1.4 tonight, told myself I should aim for something more different than my 35mm f2. Is this a valid sentiment for someone with only one lens? I was thinking a zoom also - how many stops does the OIS on the 18-55mm add for night street photography?
>>3765349The cheapest way to birdwatch is probably to buy a superzoom point and shoot.
>>3765618>multiply by 2.25No. APS-C crop factor is only 1,5.ISO noise will be equal when you raise the ISO to match FF f/4,2 with APS-C f/2,8.
>>3765561>>3765601I'm eyeing it, too. These are interesting tear down and modding articles on that lens:https://yukosteel.wordpress.com/2020/10/02/disassembly-viltrox-56mm-f1-4-af-lens-fuji-x-mount/https://yukosteel.wordpress.com/2020/11/20/click-stop-aperture-viltrox-56mm-f1-4-lens-fuji-x-mount/
I'm looking at ND filters for my fuji 35mm f2, how many stops do I want for shooting wide open in sunlight? Are variable ND filters good - or is it best to get fixed? Should I get a larger size filter with an adapter since 43mm is a pretty small lens?
>>3765647The fuji xf 90mm f/2 is a very nice lens if you wanted a longer reach prime.
>>3765658Most people prefer variable ND filters because it's less fucking around. The smart thing to do would be to buy a larger one that fits on your next lens' diameter filter, then buy a step down adapter specifically for the 43mm. There are a lot more (and nicer) filters available in th larger standard sizes.
>>3765647how's the viltrox 56 reviews? rumors are Sigma will enter the fuji x mount. your sentiment is fine.https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/fujinon/xf-18-55mm-f2.8-4-r-lm-ois/image-stabilization-test/
>>3765664also, this one says 3.5 stops claimedhttps://www.fujivsfuji.com/fuji-xf-18-55mm-f2pt84-review
>>3765664the regular youtube guys praised the viltrox 56 and 85 pretty unanimously. Sigma would be awesome, it did occur to me that I might want to wait till more 3rd parties enter the x-mount auto-focus space with viltrox being the first (besides zeiss). Tokina lenses is supposed to put out some AF lenses soon also, which seem to just be higher quality viltrox lenses https://alikgriffin.com/a-complete-list-of-fujifilm-x-mount-lenses/. I do also have it in the back of my mind that the viltrox lenses are new and the used market isn't really available yet, so might be able to snag them for even cheaper early next year maybe, and I can wait that long
Which one will make good quality photos - Nikon d3100 or Fujifilm x100 ?
>>3765669Only the photographer behind the camera can make good quality photos
>>3765674Thanks for the low effort answer
>>3765680he's right though.fucking mindblowing photos were taken 40 years ago with technology you would laugh about, and buy on ebay for $10.
>>3765686I mean, I get that it depends on a photographer, sure. But I'm asking because I want to get my first digital camera and I'm just curious would be there a significant difference between my old DSLR and that x100 fuji. Or it's on the same level. Because if so, I'd better get rid of the DSLR and buy a more compact camera. But I don't want to get some smartphone-camera-level photos.
>>3765687depends on if you have nikon glass imo. If you already have lenses you'd use that will work on the d3100 then go with that. Otherwise I'd say the fuji
I feel like the camera on my galaxy s8 is kinda shit, how much would I need to spend before I was getting a significant upgrade?
I need a recommendations wireless remote release for a Fuji X-Pro 3. The phone app sucks
>>3765696whatever price difference there is between an iphone or an s20.
>>3765696any aps-c camera will be better
>>3765623If you don't like swapping lenses, why buy an interchangeable lens camera?Some options: Fuji X100V, Sony RX1R II, Sony RX100 VII, Ricoh GR III.
>>3765687They don't have the D3100 and the first X100, but they have the next generation of both (D3200 and X100S). You can compare the IQ here.https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_d3200&attr13_1=fujifilm_x100s&attr13_2=nikon_d3200&attr13_3=fujifilm_x100s&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=200&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0
>>3765762oh okay, this one is great. thanks, anon
I'm gonna buy pic related. Good decision or bad decision?
>>3765784it's the EOS M6 Mark II btw
>>3765784Retarded decision, and I say this as a Canonfag.Get a RP instead. It's just 1000 dollaridoos more with the 24-105mm, it's full frame and it's a RF mount which isn't a dead mount like EF-M is.
>>3765790>just 100 dollaridoos moreMeant to say 100 lol
>>3765790Image quality is actually lower on RP. It's using a really outdated sensor.
>>3765824I'm looking at some comparisons and maxing out the ISO they look very similar.The RP has a tendency to generate greener noise and the M6 II resolves shadows slightly better in those conditions but it's still nothing to rave about in either case.Lenses>body
17-70 F2,8.70-180 F2,8Both constant aperture.Tamron just saved the Sony APS-C system.
>>3765857>tamronMore like tampon.
>>3765784canon will release an RF mount apsc, M mount lens selection has already been neglected
>>3765862>>3765790It's not true.The EF-m is still the king in terms of marketshare.>>3765863Well, it's Tamron, so we can expect good value and minimal rip-off.Around 700 - 900 dollars.The FF 28-75 and the FF 28-200 variable aperture are both the same size as this new APS-C zoom.The 28-75 is almost 900 bucks.The 28-200 is slightly above 700 bucks.
>>3765865>The EF-m is still the king in terms of marketshare.It may well be, but that's only because of the price and it will get cannibalized by RF APS-C.
>>3765784Honestly not as bad as others say, but take a look at what lenses there are available for it because that's all you gonna get.There are very slow zooms only, but they are compact. There are few compact primes from canon and sigma. That's all and likely won't be anything else.
>>3765867The other thing to consider is Sigma doesn't appear to have permission to release RF lenses. But theyr have 3 decent F1,4 primes on EF-m.Plus Canon has a really nice F1,4 lens on EF-m as well which is said to be at least as good as the Sigma lens..
>>3765871>permissionAnon, third party lens manufacturers operate with no permission in most cases, save for E-mount, L-mount and MFT which encouraged other manufacturers to join.They literally reverse engineer the compatibility for EF. F and K.
>>3765876Samyang reverse engineered MFT afaik. Access to the standard is by NDA, and Samyang isn't part of the MFT standard, unlike Olympus, Panasonic, Tokina, Tamron, Voigtländer and Kowa. Also Rokinon has access to the standard for cine lenses and there are a few other MFT users in niche applications like a broadband camera, a high speed camera and even some kind of computer vision thing
>>3765882>RokinonLiterally rebranded Samyang lol
>>3765882>Samyang reverse engineered MFTSamyang has af mft lenses?
>>3765894I believe they're reverse engineered Olympus and Panasonic lenses.>>3765884Then why does Rokinon have official MFT recognition and Samyang doesn't?
>>3765945>Then why does Rokinon have official MFT recognition and Samyang doesn't?not seeing either bub
>>3765212Based TamronZ-lenses when?
>>3765863One billion dollars.
>>3765952It's still a complicated topic for many reasons.Tamron and Sigma likely prefers to be known as lens makers with good autofocus, and high quality AF motors => That means sticking with E-mount and L-mount.If they began to actually spend money on reverse engineering Z-mount, well first of all they would be spending extra money, secondly it might not bear fruit and could give them bad reputation such as "that crappy lens maker with crappy AF".So far it seems they are choosing the strategy of hoping to lure you into E-mount and L-mount instead.
>>3765945>>3765882I'm not saying that manufacturing MFT-compatible lens base without electronics is simple by itself, but that's all Samyang did. They don't have any autofocus lenses for MFT, and none of their manual focus lenses have any electronic interface.
>>3765957This summer Tamron reps said Z and RF mount lenses were under development, but covid was affecting their schedule.
>>3765974Source?Tamron is believable. But Sigma tends to give a lot of empty lip service. Right now Nikon is at their weakest, and I think Sigma can smell the blood and aspire to make L-mount larger than Z-mount.
>>3765982>We have to do a lot of research and development into the reverse engineeringThis one could take a long ass time if they intend to do it properly.The faster they pull this off, the more "samyang-like" you're going to get, with slightly weird video AF here and there.
>>3765988Well, I hope they do, and properly.16mm flange distance and all the new cameras Nikon is still planning on releasing, I'm excited for what Tamron could come up with.
>>3766005>I'm excited for what Tamron could come up with.You're just going to get their current and future lenses on E-mount.I doubt Tamron is going to develop lenses that can only fit the weakest selling of the mirrorless mounts.
>>3766010...Did you read the article?
>>3766021Delusions are unhealthy.Also, they will be reverse engineering RF first sinc ethere are more customers there.Then it's Z's turn.
>>3765228i only have 1 af lens out of 5 and no live view with only center point. i guess i'm just built different
>>3765656This removes my main red flag on the lens, I'm back to probably getting it.My last apprehension is that I only have a 35mm f2 currently, and I'm not going to keep amassing lenses - it might stay at 2 for a while. Is a 56mm and a 35mm a decent combo if I just want easy SOOC shooting for indoor subject (food, pets) and street photography? I find my 35mm doesn't get me close enough on people during street photography - I have to move closer to them than seems casual. Will the 56 get me that extra distance, in general? Would the Viltrox 85mm f1.8 be way too much for this purpose?
>>3766079yeah I know, looking for opinions and experience mostly. "I could never survive with just those two lenses" etc
>>3766086There's no one-size-fits-all. You have to determine how close/far you want to get from your subjects to figure out the focal length you're comfortable with. Then among those lenses, you look at image quality and apertures, understanding that the wider you go, the better it will perform in low light, yet will be much more difficult to nail focus should you choose to shoot wide open. So then you're looking into how good the AF is on those lenses. It's just really personal, and you need to do some soul-searching. That said, that viltrox 56mm is inexpensive as hell for how good it looks. The fuji 50mm f/2 is snappy and weather sealed. The fuji 90mm f/2 has nearly flawless optics and is weather sealed.
>>3764714>chumsmore like >champs
>>3764789>when your camera protects against UV better than sunblock 5000https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8oJzfmWO3CU
>>3765790>>3765807>>3765862>>3765868The whole EF-M mount has really started to make me rethink this, but I really don't want to buy a $1000 camera. Besides it seems like Canon has a few choices of EF-M lenses, pic related. Lenses aren't really a priority for me right now, I can make do with what I have. I don't really mind that EF-M is a "dead mount" since any new lenses that do get released will probably be too expensive for me.If I am gonna blow $1000 on equipment I might as well just get the M6 Mk2 and an adapter or speed booster since I already have an EF lens and an EF-S lens.
>>3766102>no primes other than the 22ugh>Lenses aren't really a priority for me right now, I can make do with what I have. I don't really mind that EF-M is a "dead mount" since any new lenses that do get released will probably be too expensive for me.The thing is, if years down the line you want to upgrade you won't be able to keep your lenses for a new camera and it will also be harder to sell a camera that has a dead ecosystem.A $900 camera is almost a $1000 camera, and your EF lens won't be used to its fullest potential on the $900 camera. Also the RP will likely hold its value much better.
is it ok to clean my camera lens with the Costco eyeglasses cleaning kit?it says you can clean camera glass with it behind the box and it's for anti-reflective surfaces
>>3766122yeah I see your point, and buying the RP is probably the better option in the long run. If I do buy the RP however, I would still have to buy an adapter to use it with my existing lenses.I'll wait until black Friday or Christmas to make the decision, if the RP drops in price then I'll buy it, otherwise I'm completely fine with just getting the M6 Mk2, a speed booster, and just not buying any EF-M lenses.
>>3766193join vintage lens gang
>>3764853What about the Evangelion themed Q10s?
so the viltrox 56mm has purple fringing apparently in high contrast pictures, realistically how much of a problem is this for someone who just wants to shoot SOOC jpeg? Like if I take a picture of neon signs at night will it all be purple?
>>3766250>viltroxskip the brand new chinkshit lenses and research a good 90s Canon or Nikon af film lens, it will be cheaper and better quality optics
>>3766250that's what I initially though upon checking Viltrox 33 1.4 reviews before so I asked this question >>3765664
>>3766250Nobody except other pixel peeping photography faggots will care.
>>3764706fuck that is a sexy lens. when did sigma start looking so good?
what would be the cheapest system for doing travel, landscape, wildlife and macro photography. By cheap I mean < 1000€ for the body and 2 lenses, used
>>3766289So something light and small, maybe a m43 ?
Is there a good reason not to get a ring light? I want to get more into portraits but don't have any desire to get studio gear. I also need to take some professional selfies (for LinkedIn, business cards, etc) and figure this would work nicely as long as I can justify it with more uses.Also sometimes take product and food photos and this would probably be nice for those as well. Idunno, are these a meam or useful for someone like me?
>>3765228Manually focusing a f1.8 or under full frame lens with a DSLR that doesn't have peaking or help of any kind AND without a good diopter for your weak eyes is generally not an attractive idea.
>>3765243Those are filter holders for a lens with a 52mm front screw, the lower right piece is a gradient neutral density filter that darkens half the frame, usually used to have more detailed skies.The white ones i have no idea, bud
I find this particular camera very attractive, has anyone here used it or has any opinion about it?Olympus usually has great SOOC colours and the body seems to have enough buttons yet still compact. Seems cheapo too.
>>3766359Yup, Mattias has opinion of it: https://youtu.be/CyUBH6xyGWU
>>3766360Mattias is a good guy but every time he talks the prices rocket up, that fucking nordcuck made foveon sensors stop being a budget option.He's a decent shot have to say.
The Fuji XE1 with 18-55 2.8-4 is $500 new right now. That's cheaper than the lens itself now, even a used lens is like $300-$400. Worth it?
>>3766382xe1 is really old camera and has major inperfection. I wouldnt buy it unless you can keep the lens and sell body for more.
>>3766382Just got this combo for like £370. This has to be one of the most compact ways of getting a 50mm equivalent focal length with a decent viewfinder. Obviously it’s manual focus and purely aperture priority but I’d recommend this combo to anyone new to photography.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1280Image Height958
i've inherited a Leica CL with a 40mm lens. which mirrorless camera should i get to use this lens? i'm not gonna buy a leica m9/m10. i'm thinking either a sony or a fujifilm, but i don't know which one[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height1200Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>3766436Just use the CL.If you go digital you'll probably want full frame as on a APCS it might be too tight for you. Saying that I used to love my 40mm Pentax Lens on my APSC KP.
>>3766400It's not 50mm, though. You get 53mm. Imho the best one is cheap manual 25mm lens on em10ii. Proper 50mm, and you get really high end stabilization and evf along with it.
>>3766447Good call. I'd take the larger sensor and less shitty Fujifilm menus and controls personally. Never knew how cheap the OMs were getting desu. I used to have a OM5 but the low light performance was pretty poor and grainy. Pic is at ISO 1000 and the grain is nasty.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS CORPORATIONCamera ModelPEN-FCamera SoftwareVersion 3.1Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2019:04:30 13:30:06Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/1.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating1000Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length20.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1500Image Height1000RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
So I'm new to MF, just bought a Fujifilm Gx680.Couple accessories, and when seller said it would be great for astrophotography I mentioned there wasn't any really fast glass, but OK.He said f 5.6 is equivalent to f3.5 on a 35mm (or some such conversion) bit like, that 100% bullshit, right? Aperture is aperture regardless of format, focal length, etc....right? I'm not going full retard here....right?Also, are those ImBack digital backs worth it or Nah?
>>3766454That's not om5, and it's also not pen-f. Why are you doctoring your exif?
>>3766464I've owned both PEN F And the EM5ii. Aren't they the same sensor?Why don't you think this is the PEN F?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2000Image Height1500Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>3766436Anything mirrorless has M-mount adapter, but it's full frame lens, so probably Canon, Sony or even Nikon. Sony and Nikon also have techart adapter available for M-mount lenses that gives then autofocus.
>>3766464Micro Four Thirds fanboys are the worst.
>>3766471You're a liar. If you owned them, you'd know that they don't use the same sensor. One is 16mp, the other is 20mp.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS CORPORATIONCamera ModelPEN-FCamera SoftwareVersion 1.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0Focal Length (35mm Equiv)24 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2016:01:27 14:37:04Exposure Time1/80 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating4000Lens Aperturef/2.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length12.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width5184Image Height3888RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>3766478I don't care about pixels. This >>3766454 photo made me move away from M43 for good though. It's a shame as I loved the PEN F build and feel.
New Sigma E-mount and L-Mount lenses with the compact metallic barrel style as the first 45mm.
This one will likely fail in sales since Sigma customer base is absolute aperture whores.
I use iPad Pro 2017 for photo editing and drawing/designing on the go. ( I am NOT looking for desktop). I want to buy newer iPad to make use of usb C ssd’s and better processing power. I’m torn between newest IPad Pro 128gb vs IPad Air 2020. Does anybody know which one will handle affinity photo and Lightroom better?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.0 (Macintosh)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2560Image Height1920Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>3766485Eh, it's so small though, that's Samyang 24/2.8 competition.All depends on how sharp they are going to be.
>>3766480>i owned two m43 cameras and i don't know what were their mp.Stop lying faggot. "Your" image wasn't taken on M43.
>>3766492It's much bigger than the Samyang, so I don't doubt it's going to BTFO the Sanyang pancake.The Tamron 24 F2,8 is a different matter though. That optics is quality, and well CA corrected.The Sigma will have better barrel design and better aperture ring features, but I suspect that's about it.
>>3766493Why would I give a fuck how many megapixels a camera is? And why would I pretend that that photo is a PEN F?! Can you hear yourself?
>>3766493Holy shit? Is this Olympanon?!
>>3766457>>He said f 5.6 is equivalent to f3.5 on a 35mm (or some such conversion) bit like, that 100% bullshit, right? Aperture is aperture regardless of format, focal length, etc....right? See https://shuttermuse.com/fujifilm-gfx-crop-factor-and-gf-lens-35mm-full-frame-equivalent-focal-lengths/.An f/5.6 on Fuji MF, applying the 0.79 crop factor, is equivalent to about an f/4.4 on full frame. This isn't saying that the aperture of the lens has changed to be greater than what it actually is. It's saying that if it were a 35mm full frame lens, it would have the depth of field, bokeh, and light transmission of an f/4.4 lens. It's just a way to put things into terms that people can understand. Just like you'd use a crop factor of 1.5 to calculate APS-C camera's info, you do it with a number less than 1 for MF.
>>3766457>>3766499Fuck, I hit post and then realized you wrote GX680 and not some GFX. So you're shooting a 6x8 MF film camera. Ignore the first link I posted, and look at this one instead: https://photographybay.com/2016/02/06/understanding-medium-format-crop-factors/.The crop factor for 6x8 MF is 0.45, so an f/5.6 lens would actually be equivalent to an f/2.5 lens on full frame.Remember, aperture is still aperture, we're just putting things in terms of full frame so we can discuss lenses in a way that's more easily understandable.
>>3766489Get a 13" macbook pro and stop being a faggot.
>>3766496>Why would I give a fuck how many megapixels a camera is? And why would I pretend that that photo is a PEN F?! Can you hear yourself?>>>3766471>>I've owned both PEN F And the EM5ii. Aren't they the same sensor?Your image was not taken on m43 camera. You are lying that you owned multiple m43 cameras. And you are doctoring exif and posting shitty images of yours to have different exif.
>Sigma lens article 192 Comments>Tamron new lens article 37 CommentsOH NONONONOHow did Sigma get so far ahead in mindshare and interest?Is it over? Is Tamron finished?
>>3766454>Panas 20/1.7 in front of olympus filter stack.Forced black and white to hide all the purple shit?
>>3766504You are insane. Why would I do that?
>>3766507The sigma release is for full frame lenses, they are small, and they are made in Japan. It just sells.
>>3766508It was a shit camera to take to Hong Kong with me desu.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1280Image Height853
>>3766511And now he's hiding exif because he knows it's giving him away...
>>3766517Here you go you stupid idiot.https://flic.kr/p/2j2T3CA
Pentax K-1 Mark 2 users: how is it? I recently started looking into the system after reading about the weather-sealing, wondering how the system compares with one of the bigger ones like Nikon
>>3766503MacBook Pro with m1 is still not fully baked product. Maybe next gen and I am not buing intel oven macs.Also get the idea that some people draw /p/tard
What are some good vintage lenses to use with the X-T1 for street or walk-around photography? Thinking about the Auto Sears 55mm or any of the Mamiya 55mms, but I think something wider might be better.
>>3766500So if I meter a shot at say 2.5 i should dial in 5.6 as my aperture?
>>3766533>intel oven macsI have a macbook pro and it's fine, I have no idea what you're talking about. Just get a refurb of a previous generation and save some shekels.>>3766545No, your meter will give you correct data. No need to meter differently. The discussion of equivalent apertures is purely academic when comparing lenses across different systems.
>>3766520Shit, now I feel sorry for you.
>>3766549Ok, that's what I had in my mind, but when he said it as it relates to low light photography, I kinda WTF?
I'm looking for a cheap quick connect walk-about solution for my camera. Do you think a peak design cuff wrist strap attached to my backpack via a carabiner is a good option? Or how necessary do you think a neck strap is when walking around?
>>3766567Just buy a camera bag.
I got the Sony 24mm 1.4 that I will use as a 35mm via cropping as well. Seems like a no brainer instead of using the sigma 35mm 1.2
>>3766533I mean you only need Lightroom and photoshop and Adobe already have them working. It will be good I reckon
>>3764951>are Lumix cameras any good?Yes, very.
>>3766600>Seems like a no brainerEvil digits for an evil thought. It's only a no brainer if resolution means nothing to you. You lose a significant amount of resolution by doing this.
>>3766248>What about the Evangelion themed Q10s?Yeah that's fine because it's subtle as fuck.
>>3766606It has enough resolution to not matter lol
>>3766533>Maybe next gen and I am not buing intel oven macslol they had to compare those garbage ARMs to 3rd gen i3 CPUs to make them look good. ARM isn't a good move for the consoomer, it's a good move for Apple.
>>3765637A million flies can't be wrong
>>3766457>He said f 5.6 is equivalent to f3.5 on a 35mm (or some such conversion) bit like, that 100% bullshit, right? Aperture is aperture regardless of format, focal length, etc....right?>I'm not going full retard here....right?No, you're not. The equivalence would be closer to f/7 for DEPTH OF FIELD.Now, ISO sensitivity follows a law of squares with the crop factor.For a given shutter speed, if you want an equivalent picture to let's say >35mm f/8 400 ISO @ full frameyou have to get>70mm f/16 1600 ISO @ 6x8This is a pretty good article:https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso
>>3766630You're mixing things up and putting it in a really confusing and weird way. He's not trying to convert 35mm to MF terms, he's trying to convert MF terms to 35mm terms. So the crop factor is less than 1, and the aperture equivalence results in a decrease in f number.
>>3766636No, if he does that then the crop factor is 2. It's the same as converting FF to MFT.
>>3766642The crop factor of 135 relative to 6x8 is 2.The crop factor of 6x8 relative to 135 is 1/2=0.5.I used 135 as the starting point because it's what almost everyone is familiar with.
>>3766567I thought I would like it, but it's kind of a pain, it cinches onto your wrist too tight and you can't lock down the slack, it just slips like a noose. It's well made but expensive for what it is. Depends on how heavy your camera is though.
Are early deals from the usual suspects worth it or should I wait until Black Friday?I want to buy some expensive memory but their "deal" is just like 8% off or so, amounting to like 10 bucks.
>>3766400i'd love this set up but with a 25mm f0.95
>>3766567I use this here shoulder strap/sling. It's great because it doesn't screw into the tripod mount so you can keep the mounting plate on the camera if you're doing a lot of tripod shots on the move as i do, it has quick release clips, and it's super comfy. I use an s-biner to secure the camera to my belt loop when i'm hiking or urbexxing (breaking into houses) so the camera doesn't swing around. I think it would fit the bill nicely
sony a7iii or fuji xt4for primarily video
>>3766844xt4 without a doubt. the a7iii is pretty old video-wise with yuck colors.
>>3766310pls /p/ you're my only hope[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareArcSoft PhotoStudioImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2020:11:26 20:49:47
>>3766310>>3766861They're awful. Get a proper beauty dish for your speedlight instead, who the fuck likes those ring shaped reflections in their eyes that make you look possesed.
>>3766867all i have is pic related. could I still make that work? i quick gurgle search looks like the beauty dish is breddy nice
>>3766869No, I doubt it. You'd probably have to get a bigger flash that can be mounted and is more powerful.
>>3766870hmm i'll have to think this over. a new flash or speed light and a dish is about the same price or possibly cheaper than a ring lightthanks anon i appreciate your help
>>3766872Get a used one. KEH is doing a sale for black friday, 10% off sitewide. Surely you can find something to suit you.I'd get something with tilt, swivel and zoom since you're going to get a second one. Make sure it's compatible with your Pentax camera.
Anyone have an X100V? Is it normal for the autofocus motor to be loud as fuck? I can see the lens extend which I know is normal.
>>3766876>the lens doesn't even have internal focusingOH NO NO NOI thought the reason it didn't collapse was to not change its external size lol, Fuji doesn't cease to amaze me.
>>3766877If it's normal for it to be loud as fuck I don't mind, only need it for stills. But I bought it off grey market so I want to make sure it doesn't shit itselfTo be honest anon I really like it so far, my first non-slr camera.
>>3766875I live in Aus so I'll have to find another source but shouldn't be too tough
>>3766884How about this? https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Sigma-camera-flash-EF-610-DG-ST-Pentax-Mount-boxed/193528751441What model is your camera?
>>3766887>What model is your camera?it's a Pentacks KPShould I send you my address too anon, it's Christmas afterall
>>3766888>it's a Pentacks KPI'm not seeing that one listed on Sigma's list, but looking at some forums apparently if it supports newer ones it should work on the K-P (P-TTL didn't change much in time it seems).I also looked for other deals but in most cases you'd have to import from Japan and with postage it gets more expensive.This one is the other good deal but while compatible it has no P-TTL which is undesirable (you can't control much from the camera and a lot becomes manual):https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Pentax-AF500FTZ-flash-Pentax-FP-extension-cord-and-hot-shoe/114531794528Then there's this Metz but it's more expensive and local pickup only at Seven Hills, NSW:https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Near-NEW-METZ-50-AF-1-Pentax-Digital-Camera-Flash-hardly-used/153574719370Maybe Eggy can give you some pointers, he's Australian and shoots Pentax kek. You can catch his attention in >>3757797.>Should I send you my address too anon, it's Christmas afterallkek
>>3766892thanks anon you're very helpful
For the Nikon D# users:Is the Nikon Df any different from the D4/D4S, purely image quality wise?I keep reading about the tonal renditions and lack of "color discrimination" in both that gave more depth or "pop" in the D700, and while i can see a difference in IQ from the 700 to the D4 i cannot see a difference between the D4 and the Df, the latter being touted as being a successor of the ol' 12megapickler.Does any of this matter THAT much if i'm going to heavily tweak them in post-process? i can understand more tonal depth but is that really decisive compared to glass?
>>3766898No problem, glad to be of help
>no OVF>not a rangefinder>autofocus on a leica>stuck on a 28mm lens>live view for chimping out like a zoomerI don't get it, why drop $4k on a thing that's not even a real leica?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D810Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 9.0 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern806Focal Length (35mm Equiv)66 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2015:05:27 20:12:17Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating64Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length66.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>3766900>Is the Nikon Df any different from the D4/D4S, purely image quality wise?The Df is essentially a D600 with the D4 sensor.
>>3766925It’s a legit Leica 28mm summilux... Also you can get it for below £2k
Do the older, less megapixel Fuji sensors perform better in low light? I’m deciding between X-E2 and X-E3.
>>3766817There will be some much better deals tomorrow, but you have to be fast.
Does anyone have the Peak Design Everyday Sling? Was thinking about getting either a 3L or 6L for my Fuji X-H1 with maybe one or two lenses.
Been years since I've posted or really read on /p/ so here's where I'm at now as a newly profitable portrait photographer with my wife:Canon 5D mark III, two bodies, two canon gripsCanon 28-70 2.8 L (no, not the 24-70)Canon 70-200 2.8 IS USMCanon 35 f/2 IS USMCanon 40 2.8 STM (had it since it came out)Canon 50 1.8 STMCanon 85 1.8 USMCanon 100 2.8 Macro USMCanon 20-35 USM580EX430EXYongnuo 568 EX II x2Yongnuo 685Yongnuo 622c x4 Tranceiversand honestly I shoot most of my off camera flash with 30 inch shoot through umbrella's or 45 inch brolly boxes because I can't be fucked with lugging around gridded octaboxes.Basically, I set out to get adequate gear to shoot weddings as cheaply as possible. The 28-70 2.8 is half the price of the 24-70 2.8 . The 70-200 IS gets you 90% of the IS II and is sharp enough. The 100 Macro is only really for ring shots and close ups as the lens is redundant with the 70-200 2.8. The 50 is the best bang for the buck in Canon's lineup. The 40 because why not. The 35 f/2 IS is easy mode in low light. The 5D mk III body is the best bang for the buck and I got two in the 40-50k shutter count range for about 1k a piece.pic related is still my favorite piece of kit.
Hi, Im wanting to buy a good camera soon and was wondering what I should get. Price limit is $400.I’ve only shot on dslr up til now but wouldnt mind going film if that means I can get additional lenses and shit along with the camera for cheap, only thing Im worried about is not knowing right away if the picture turned out good or not. I was also wondering about lenses and zooming with a traditional film camera. Probably a retarded question, but since they dont have a display are you still able to see how zoomed in the camera is?
>>3767062Well, so far, it's pretty shit, at least as far as cameras go.
>>3766975Thanks, would make sense that Df fans/target audience isn't the same as the D4 users hence the lack of a real comparison between both, IQ-wise.
Any M42 recommendations? I already have a Zenitar M2s so no need for the Helios. Currently considering a Volna-9.
>>3767338Takumar/Mamiya fast lenses, especially the radioactive stuff.
>>3767345I don't want to listen to Imagine Dragon songs please
I want to get my first DSLR and am currently looking at a 6d mk II.I'd like to get a good lens with it, too, and I think Canon's EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II USM would be a good fit for me. But is it a good fit for the camera? I know it technically does fit the 6d mk II. But, given that this is an expensive lens, would it be worth it to invest in a 5d mk III instead? (I can't afford the mk IV)I'm pretty new to all this, so please bear with me. Just want to get some thoughts on pairing a pro lens with an "enthusiast" level camera.
Can anyone recommend a decent tripod for under $100?
>>3767657Q999H on aliexpress.
>>3766609this is great
How do portable AC power supplies from hardware stores compare to photog specific ones? What does pee reccomend for running a PC, some occasional stobe use, and such on location?
>>3767232>Probably a retarded question, but since they dont have a display are you still able to see how zoomed in the camera is?The viewfinder displays what the lens sees, so yes
>>3767232>I was also wondering about lenses and zooming with a traditional film camera. Probably a retarded question, but since they dont have a display are you still able to see how zoomed in the camera is?On SLRs yes, on viewfinders no, but zoom lenses are rare.
>>3766645Someone's mad that the A7C wasn't $999