[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: DSC_5572-1200.jpg (334 KB, 1200x1535)
334 KB
334 KB JPG
Gear obsession edition

What cameras or lenses have /p/ bought recently? What are you planning on buying?

I'm waiting for the RF 70-200mm f/4L to drop. Some sites are saying end of January, others are saying March.
>>
Do you normally tell people every single piece of camera gear you own every time you make a comment on photography?
>>
>>3793113
I bought a Ricoh kr 5 super and a f/2 50mm lens to go with it. wanted a 35mm but couldn't find one.
It was dirt cheap too.
>>
>>3793113
Is this man huge or the camera really small?
>>
>>3793120
Ken is a giant homunculus
>>
Is worth upgrading from X-E2 to the X-E3?

Or should I wait for X-E4 or save for X-T30?
>>
>>3793113
I just want Nikon to come out with their "compact" 40mm
>>
>>3793146
Good to know.
>>
>>3793148
>"upgrading" from one wormy sensor to another
Nope. Return them to a moist garden and buy a Canon.
>>
>>3793116
lmfao what a fag
>>
>>3793116
Not all people aren't crazy, especially on the internets.
>>
>>3793173
haven't you shat up enough threads today?
>>
>>3793173
based
>>3793113
faggot OP, next time paste the gear thread text instead of making a fujifag tier OP
>>
>>3793215
Nevermind, I just noticed it was the pic of him with a Fuji. Looks like OP is the fujifag from last thread.
What do you worms think of what he had to say about "simulations"?
>I'm not a fan of the film simulations. I love the look of real Fuji VELVIA film, but the electronic simulations in the X100V (or any of the Fuji cameras) just don't do it for me.
>>
>>3793116
Consumerists are cancer. Gear becomes their hobby.
>>
>>3793216
That's a Leica, you moron.
>>
>>3793219
reeeee I wanted a fujifag to reply to it, you no fun allowed faggot
You think I didn't see the illuminator window?
It could only be a true rangefinder.
>>
>>3793173
i laughed. and unironically agree. canon is kicking ass and probably the smartest eco system to buy into
>>
File: 1607216033790.jpg (84 KB, 700x420)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
Which camera produces the best white borders? I really think this could take my photography career to the next level.
>>3793113
Fuck you.
>>
>>3793173
>Sell your Sony and buy a Fuji has been replaced with sell your Fuji and buy a Canon
Kek guess they hate being on the receiving end of that
>>
I’m thinking of buying the Sigma 100-400mm DN, but I think the 24-70mm DN would be more convenient for photography until we’re allowed to travel again, but the sigma 24-70 is $350 US more here than it is in the US while the Tamron 28-75 is slightly cheaper than in the US. God sigma needs to make a 24-105
>>
>>3793259
R6 is unironically good. All the EOS R models are way better than anything Fuji makes. EOS M is also getting very good these days. It's more of a consumerist camera system, but the lenses are both compact and inexpensive, which justifies its consumerist designation.
>>
>>3793260
>I’m thinking of buying a Sigma
Oh, nooooo. It's retarded.
>>
>>3793253
It definitely is, I wonder if (and hope) the newer models solved the banding.
Nikon is fucking up with Z mount, FTZ adapter has no reason to be $450. People end up buying a Fringe and using Canon EF glass instead.
>>
>>3793259
I shoot Canon and fujifags have called me a Sony shill several times because I shat on their meme cameras lol
>>
>>3793253

Except for the fact that they overcharge out the ass for their shit.
>>
>>3793264

I think you’re the retarded one, anon.
>>
>>3793288
It’s because Sony betrayed them and censored their anime tiddies in their imported anime games. That’s where “Snoy” originated from.
>>
Looking for a new lens for my Nikon, should I stick to only Nikkor lenses or is that retarded?
>>
>>3793299
You didn’t say what kind of lens for what purpose and if it’s Nikon Z or F
>>
So I found an old film camera that accepts only pc flash input. The camera works but it has no flash. I was wanting to hook it up with an on camera flash on a bracket. I found a bracket on b&h that will work. But b&h doesn't list what type of bulb is used in their on camera flash. I need one with halogen, not led. Does anyone know any (inexpensive) on camera flashes with halogen and not led?
>>
>>3793303
I'm looking for a prime lens for low light stuff, it's an F mount
>>
>>3793314
Well still a wide range of focal lengths. FF? DX? Sigma 35mm 1.4 is less than half the cost of the Nikon 35mm 1.4g iirc.
>>
any suggestions on a K mount 35mm lense that isn't too expensive but not shit either?
>>
>>3793315
It is a crop sensor but really my question is: is the lens brand ever a factor when looking for new lenses? Like are some known to be bad or good? Or does it depend on the type of lens?
>>
>>3793329
Look at the reviews. Brand is literally meaningless unless you find some wun hung lo brand on ebay or amazon that you've never heard of.
>>
>>3793254
the more expensive the camera the better the white borders are
>>
Is the Panasonic LX10 still a good camera? Or should I pay more for the RX100VA? I don't care about video but I want the best possible image quality at iso 1600.
>>
>>3793382
why use a higher iso when you can just lower your shutter speed?
>>
Ken is such a god damn chad
>>
>>3793287
yeah, an ftz is a third of a new z50, fucking weird.
>>
>>3793387
handholding?
>>
I own a modified Canon 100D which I use for astrophotography (with a Samyang 135mm f2) and a Pentax K-S1 for daytime photography which I don't use very often (suffering from aperture block, looking into DIY repair).

This year I want to shoot more "regular" photography (as opposed to astro), landscape/nature stuff and a few portraits. I have no complaints with the Pentax and I pretty much only use vintage m42 lenses, but it's rather bulky so I often don't bring it out.

Any suggestions for a cheap second hand camera that's more portable, takes M42 and PK lenses well and the Samyang (EF mount) as well? Or should I stick with the Pentax and get a cheap compact to carry with me?
>>
>>3793316
bump

Also why do I always read about fuji, canon, sometimes pentacks and nikon but never about Ricoh on /p/ee?
>>
what's the deal with x100v when xpro3 cost basically the same while offering ever so slightly better specs and most importantly an interchangeable lens mount?
>>
>>3793497
x100v is smaller, lighter, has a very compact lens, and a leaf shutter. I'm in the market for a compact camera that I can stick in a jacket pocket, and the x100v is in the running.
>>
>>3793503
This seems very marginal to me. Lens compactness might be the more important part I suppose. Is a leaf shutter even that much big of a deal?
>>
>>3793497
Fixed pancake lens camera vs ICL.
>>
>>3793511
>Is a leaf shutter even that much big of a deal?
Shutter sync all the way through, nearly silent, no rolling shutter. It is if you want any of those things.
>>
>>3793518
Alright, thanks, makes sense.
>>
>>3793430
Canon EF bodies like your 100D can use M42 lenses with no issues, you just need a cheap adapter.
With "modified" you probably mean IR-filter removal, you can just use an IR-filter in front of the lens.
Get one as large as your largest lens and a few adapter rings.
Compact cameras have a tendency to suck, if you want something compact sized, get a small mirrorless camera.
If you get a Canon EOS M series camera, you can use your EF lenses almost natively with an EF-M to EF adapter and you can use all SLR-lenses with some sort of adapter as well.
>>
>>3793395
don't have parkinsons maybe?
>>
I recently bought the 18mm f/2 R for my X-Pro2 and I'm waiting for DHL to drop it off this week. Outside of that, I'd love to get an 80-200 f/2.8D for my D610 so I can replace the beat to shit previous generation 80-200 I've got for esports work
>>
>>3793511
>>3793503
There aren’t any more compact lenses. But if you’re going to get a fixed lens compact, ditch Fuji and look at the Ricoh GR III, it’s a lot slimmer if you must be able to fit a camera with lens into a pocket, it’s about 20mm slimmer.
>>
>>3793525
I did try using M42 lenses on the 100D, unfortunately my camera only had the filter removed and not replaced with a clear glass one therefore to focus properly you have to use liveview, the viewfinder no longer matches the actual focus. I might look into clip-in clear filters, but for compactness and focus peaking a mirrorless is appealing, on average they seem rather slimmer compared to my 100D which is very small for a DSLR.

Any suggestions besides the M50/M5?
>>
>>3793540
medication can do only so much
>>
>>3793511
Now put a lens on the xpro 3
>>
File: canon vs fuji.png (720 KB, 1548x1544)
720 KB
720 KB PNG
>>3793290
>overcharge out the ass for their shit
lmao
>>
>>3793679
>lmao
When you realize that the fuji lens is actually a 135mm f/3 equivalent and they are charging f/2 money for that shit, yeah, it's pretty funny. LMAO.
>>
>>3793683
It's what I was poking fun at, lol
At least the Oly 45mm f/1.8 (f/3.6 equiv) is just 399. Fuji is paying more for less.
>>
>>3793553
If the M50 is within your budget, it's probably your best choice.
Allthough I'd recommend buying the M50 MK1 used, MK2 is basicly just a firmware update.
>>
>>3793687
Also don't forget that it's an L-Lens.
They aren't exactly known to be of the budget variety...
>>
>>3793687
f2 is f2 buddy. And it's got aperture ring right on the lens. Many are willing to pay extra for that comfort.
>>
>>3793687
I just realized that my choice of Oly lens is retarded lol, I halved 90mm instead of halving 135mm. However the 60mm f/2.8 (120mm equivalent) is the same price. A closer equivalent, the 75mm f/2.8 is highway robbery at 899.
>>3793694
Exactly lol. It's the cream of the crop.
>>
File: 1609810623428.jpg (1.13 MB, 2048x1536)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB JPG
>>3793695
>f2 is f2 buddy
For luminance purposes yes. For subject separation no. That's why MFT is advantageous for certain kinds of pics at a distance, like the one of the basketball hoop that guy posted a few days ago, pic related.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOLYMPUS CORPORATION
Camera ModelE-M5MarkIII
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Color Filter Array Pattern778
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)300 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:04 17:19:53
Exposure Time1/500 sec
F-Numberf/5.6
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/5.6
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length150.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3793695
>f2 is f2 buddy.
Depth of field is highly dependent on distance to the subject. When you take an f/2 lens and then you have to back up a few feet because your camera crops off the edges of the image circle, the depth of field gets larger. You can not isolate the same subject with the same framing to the same degree with these two lenses in: >>3793679

>>3793694
The Fuji lens is technically mid range--they have a little red badge for their most premium line--but it's built to about the same degree of quality as the L lens. Metal barrel, weather-sealing, their best autofocus motor...the only thing it's missing is OIS, but they have red badge lenses that lack that.
>>
>>3793695
>F/2 is F/2 when comparing FF and APS-C
Yes and no.
Yes, the light per square mm hitting the sensor is the same.
No, the depth of field is not the same.
Physicly speaking it's a 90 mm f/2.0
On an APS-C sensor it is equivalent to a 135 mm f/3.0 on a FF sensor.
And then we can factor in the sharpness as well, assuming both resolve the same amount of lines per mm, the FF lens has 1,5x1,5=2,5 the detail of the APS-C lens.
>>
>>3793707
I'm not saying it's a bad lens, I just doubt it compares to an L-lens on a FF body.
>>
>>3793691
Thanks for the input, even used the M50 is a bit pricier than I was looking to spend but I'll keep it in mind. Comparing some models with Camerasize I'm not sure the decrease in bulk over the pentax K-S1 is worth the change, I'll have to think about this some more.
>>
>>3793148
>>3793173
lmao I've sold my canon to buy the fuji x-e2 tha I plan to upgrade.

Canon is great and all, but the important thing to me is size and time to get the result I want.

Regarding to size, i did not buy sony just because I liked the fuji colors better, and working with Capture One and Fuji I get faster results than I was with Canon and Ligthroom.

It's not what is best, it's what works best for me.
>>
Is 650 a good price for a x pro 1 with a 35 mm xf f2 lens? Looking for a first dslr
>>
>>3793679
would anyone actually be buying into a brand new canon or nikon or snoy Dslr these days? whos going to go and buy a flappy mirror camera and then by old legacy leftover junk at full retail to put in front of it
>>
File: bufu.png (127 KB, 300x278)
127 KB
127 KB PNG
>>3793744
>buying a wormy sensor
>"good"
>>
>>3793738
There are also "lower" tier more compact ones.
Essentialy the size of a compact camera+whatever lens you have mounted.
>>
File: EOS-M50-hand.jpg (51 KB, 590x442)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
Let me guess: you "need" more?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7RM3
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time1/160 sec
F-Numberf/6.3
ISO Speed Rating500
Lens Aperturef/6.3
Exposure Bias0.3 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length85.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
>>
Is Sigma still the king of lenses? I stopped coming to /p/ in 2014
>>
>>3793113
okay /p/ i'm new here
i own a nikon coolpix L27
i like it
i rarely use it because it eats AAA bateries fast
i'm not gonna go outside with bag of AAA batteries
so i found out that it has an battery adapter that i can recharge and more importantly i can use it while hooked to electrical grid inside house
>ali link
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001040915853.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.40c272b0Rp5JQE&algo_pvid=94dcb169-36c4-482e-8976-21ecb5f2bece&algo_expid=94dcb169-36c4-482e-8976-21ecb5f2bece-1&btsid=2100bdf116099767936601160ed7b4&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_,searchweb201603_

should i buy it or is this a waste ? it's on sale now
and i want basically to use this camera to learn how to take photos (now that i have more time)
eventually to take pics of vulpurlous looking naked womans
your troughts ?
>>
>>3793802
Isn't that an 8 year old bridge camera that is supposed to take 2 AA batteries?
Anyway, it's not worth investing into it.
Also:
Rechargeable batteries are a thing...
>>
I'm a newbie looking to get into photography and mostly shoot stuff during my hikes and travels.

A like new K-S2 + 18-270mm lens for 425 bucks seems perfect to me. Or would you recommend something else?
>>
>>3793811
>Isn't that an 8 year old bridge camera that is supposed to take 2 AA batteries?
correct
>Anyway, it's not worth investing into it.
it's debatable since i literally used it few times
>Rechargeable batteries are a thing...
ye except they are not
i went to local electronic seller and asked him about that since my camera shut down even when cells were full
so he said to me "look at their voltage, rechargeable cells have lower voltage than non rechargeable, that's cause it's not worth to charge them to their original state and so rechargeable cells are always "late" with their delivery, so camera shuts down instead"
>>
File: 26399_L27_front_left.png (184 KB, 700x595)
184 KB
184 KB PNG
>>3793811
looks like a compact camera to me famalam
>>
>>3793817
>so he said to me "look at their voltage, rechargeable cells have lower voltage than non rechargeable, that's cause it's not worth to charge them to their original state and so rechargeable cells are always "late" with their delivery, so camera shuts down instead"
Some cameras have a setting for NiMH batteries
>>
>>3793824
old on lemme check my rechargable AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA cells
>>
File: l27.png (49 KB, 977x416)
49 KB
49 KB PNG
>>3793825
It's right there in the manual. You need to select COOLPIX batteries.
>>
>>3793830
wow i guess i'm a retard cause i missed it in my manual
thanks anon
welp it went well for first visit on /p/ guess rumors weren't true
on the other hand i feel dumb for begin a guy that looked for "philips" screwdriver
>>
>>3793831
>welp it went well for first visit on /p/ guess rumors weren't true
lol I'm always willing to help anons myself, I just troll people with a bad attitude (usually fujifags but can be anyone)
>>
>>3793775
Nothing in this world is about need, you shittard. We don't live in africa or the pacific islands. Nobody needs a camera, it's completely superfluous to your existence. It's all wants, it's a motherfucking hobby, which is 100% about wants.
>>
>>3793837
>fujifags
FUCK SNOY!
>>
>>3793842
Joke's on you, my camera doesn't have a Sony sensor unlike the Fujis lol
>>
>>3793837
>I just troll people with a bad attitude (usually fujifags but can be anyone)
Theoria aphostasis on you tube said that nikon IS the greatest but i don't know shit
so what's current status at corpowars ? who's more butthurt ?
>>
>>3793844
based iphone shooter
>>
>>3793814
sorry anon but these faggots only answer to canon, fuji or nikon posts.
>>
>>3793857
no, there's just no point giving "recommendations" to someone who has already made up their mind, or he's obviously trolling to get a rise out of brandfags
>>
>>3793695
No it’s not, f/2 is a ratio. 135/2 = 67.5, 90/2 = 45
67.5 is not 45.
>>3793705
>For luminance purposes yes
It’s not, you get approx 1/4 the amount of light over the picture, hence why MFT is approx 2 stops behind FF. 5.6 and 150mm and ISO400 would be 300mm f/11 and ISO1600.
>>
>>3793881
>hence why MFT is approx 2 stops behind FF. 5.6 and 150mm and ISO400 would be 300mm f/11 and ISO1600.
this is your brain on /p/. fuck me.
>>
>>3793903
Thats 100% correct though.
>>
>>3793881
What's my rollei getting wide open at 3.5?
>>
>>3793931
f over 3.5
>>
>>3793881
>It’s not, you get approx 1/4 the amount of light over the picture
lel you're an imbecile
the F number being independent of sensor size is why when you want a visually equivalent picture on full frame than one from micro four thirds you have to crank up the ISO 4 times the one on MFT
this isn't hard to test
>>
>>3793945
Take a f/4 FF lens and if you had a 0.5x speedbooster you’d now have a f/2 lens on MFT, it’s not Magically giving you 4x more light, it’s the same amount of light concentrated over a smaller area. Hence f/4 and f/2 give the same amount of light on FF and MFT respectively, and the SNR will be similar when FF is using 2 stops higher ISO. At 50mm f/4 and 25mm f/2 just about everything will be the same - noise, depth of field, field of view, etc.

That’s exactly how it works. There is a 2 stop difference (approx) between MFT and FF in signal rose noise ratio. Because there is less signal on MFT at the same f-number. Signal is the amount of light you’re getting. You’re getting 1/4 the amount of light at the same f-number on MFT.
>>
>>3793955
>speedbooster
That changes the f number and length, it's a focal reducer,
Put a 100mm f/4 lens on a MFT and take a picture.
To get the same picture on FF you need a 200mm f/8 (equivalent framing and DoF), now you have a much darker situation that forces you to use 4 times the ISO for the same shutter speed to get a picture that looks the same.
Naturally, most of the time you want more aperture not less, but then it ceases to be equivalent. Same framing, DOF and exposure demand double the f number, double the focal length and 4 times the ISO (or a shutter 4 times slower).
>>
>>3793957
Yes you need 4x the ISO, the amount of light however is the same, 1/4 the light intensity, but 4x the light collection area. Same DoF, same field of view, same SNR. The same amount of light treated the same just spread out over a larger area. Hence f/4 (mft) is equal to f/8 (FF), 100/4 = 25, 200/8 = 25, 100/4 = 200/8. Glad to see you agree with me.
>>3793695
>f2 is f2 buddy
Hence this is patently false. f/2 is f/4 from mft to FF
>>
>>3793960
>Same DoF
this is due to the distance to subject more than the sensor itself, although said distance is a symptom caused by the crop factor
>>
>>3793967
Same distance to subject, equivalent aperture, equivalent focal length eg 100mm f/4 and 200mm f/8
>>
>>3793751
I am of half a mind to liquidate my Sony and all my film cameras and just get a EOS1V for 35mm and a 5D mk iii and spend the rest on EF L glass.
>>
>>3793978
>liquidate my Sony and all my film cameras
What do you have and how much would you sell it for?
>>
>>3793316
All the pentax smc are pure kino tier. Even the Japanese made ones by off brands have good focus and clarity.

The 50mm 1.7 is a beast still under 80 quid most places. The 28mm 2 is more expensive and elusive but good. The 35mm is good too. Don't forget you can mount old f nikon lenses on pentax as well
>>
>>3793978
Sounds like a plan (unless some of your film cameras are Leicas, might be worth keeping one).
5D3 is honestly a better value than 5D4 and pretty much all L glass is stellar.
>>
Just bought a Leica.

My first thought is that I should have just bought one much sooner.
Do yourself a favour and sell all your gear and buy Leica.
That's all.
>>
>>3794009
lel nice try but rangefinders aren't my thing
>>
>>3794011
pretty sure 90% of /p/ shoots "street" (or basically fuck all outdoors) so unless you shoot weddings, zone focus (aka f8 and 3m to infinity) is all you need

for the occasional anime figurine bokeh at f/1.4, any manual focus system is good since you can take your time.
>>
>>3794016
Sounds like I'm in the 10% lol
I hate "street", fucking meme.
DSLR 4 lyfe, looking to get a 100-400 soon.
>>
>>3794023
>looking to get a 100-400 soon.
ah, a lion and elephant shooter, I see
>>
File: Walken-Cowbell.jpg (17 KB, 365x273)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>>3794026
More into cows with bells to ring if you catch my drift :^)
Seriously though for me it's all about the perspective compression.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width365
Image Height273
>>
>>3794032
>>Seriously though for me it's all about the perspective compression.
which does not exist.
cool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TTXY1Se0eg
>>
>>3794032
Big titty girls at the beach?
>>
is the canon 6d mk II a meme? I've seen a lot of mixed reviews about it - wondering if anyone here has experience with it and could recommend it for photography.
>>
>>3794033
no one is is going to watch your shitty youtube channel
>>
>>3794038
>your shitty youtube channel
based schizo poster
>>
>>3794033
It does exist, your video is proof of it. You can't get a decent photo with an extreme crop on a short lens.
>>3794034
I plead the 5th :^)
>>
>>3794036
It's a meme for its age, I guess you're fine if you buy used.
>>
>>3794049
was looking to buy new ideally. I liked the look of the 5D Mk IV but don't really want to spend over 2 grand on a camera right now. that said I'd still like a full frame, just having a hard time choosing the right one.
>>
>>3794051
What type of photography?
Usually the 5D models have better weather sealing and better AF among other things but the 6D offers things like the articulated screen which is really cool.
>>
>>3794053
mostly landscape / architectural photography with some portrait work for family and friends.
>>
>>3794054
Should be fine with the 6D2
>>
>>3793844
Jokes on you, so does my Canon.
>>
>>3793744
pls respond
>>
>>3794119
>x pro
>first dslr
it's not a digital single lens reflex (dslr) camera
it's a mirrorless camera

anyway an xpro1 body should be under 300 these days and you can lookup if the 35m f2 is over 300
which I don't think
>>
>>3793863
even if he wasn't trolling. People only talk and masturbate about these 3 brands on this general.
>>
>>3794005
Thanks
>>
t3i + cheapest 70-300 is all you need for outdoor portraits
>>
>>3794144
>zoomlens for portrait
>on some crappy cropped DSLR
lmao
>>
>>3794147
>muh primes
>muh full frame
Try it, faggot
>>
I use an iPhone 8 for wedding photography. My clients love my work.

Is it worth upgrading to an iPhone 12 Pro?
>>
>>3794149
no buy a nokia phone
>>
>>3794149
>iPhone
pfft, your clients only tell you they love your work out of pity because they can tell you're mentally retarded. anyone with a brain would be using a superior android device for wedding photography.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1HIkBEi9uY
>>
>>3794147
Wide aperture zoom lenses exist, they aren't cheap though...
>>
File: 20210107_164515.jpg (2.57 MB, 4128x2322)
2.57 MB
2.57 MB JPG
>>3793113
This arrived today and I couldnt be more happy, being my first wide lens. Considering also its almost as new and i paid 100 bucks shipped, it was a nice investment. Will try some estate pics tomorrow
>>
>>3794063
Based. I shoot Canon too.
>>
>>3794176
>This arrived today
>i paid 100 bucks shipped,
It says on the label that it costs around $450, though. Or is that some kind of souvenir that came with it?
>>
>>3794240
That's probably the original price, but you can find those used around 150 bucks, it's an old lens
>>
Any recommendations for a cheap workhorse camera? I have a job where I take a ton of photos and they really just need to be in focus and properly exposed, both wide and telephoto, there's no art in this at all (pre & post purchase home inspections, 4-points, wind mitigation, etc). It's the most artless photography job you can get but it pays the bills. I just need to shit out a ton of in-focus JPGS.

I was looking at point & shoots because that's what I've used for years but for the price of some of these I could get a used shitty entry level Canon DSLR and a used shitty Tamron 18-250mm superzoom for about $250 or less. I have a Nikon with real lenses but I don't want to use that for this job, and a terrible Kodak (really) digital point and shoot that I use now that's pretty miserable to use.

I almost don't want a camera that's too good because I don't want to waste it.
>>
>>3794274

A smartphone or tablet will do.
>>
>>3794275
I've used my phone in a pinch but it's not ideal. I need real zoom which is the only reason I still use this Kodak point and shoot.
>>
If you are just photographing purchases at peoples homes I would use a smartphone or a tablet. That's what everyone else does these days. And that is what the purchaser/home owner understands. It's kind of weird to photograph someones new purchases at his home with a dslr or ilmc and the home owner will ask questions about that.
>>
getting back into photography and about to grab a Canon 70-200mm USM II, very excited
>>
Would a wireless lav mic work with a cell phone out of the box? Or is something else needed?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: this.jpg (139 KB, 929x507)
139 KB
139 KB JPG
>>3794274
Get this.
>>
>>3794307
Hey that's not bad
>>
Could you guys recommend me some more compact prime for my nikon apsc camera? I have a 50 for portraits and stuff and I like it, but the 35mm rome from nikon sucks imo. Would that smol sigma 30mm be worth it? A non-shit af is kind if inportant to me and sigma HSMs were so far lovely
>>
>>3794274
>>3794280
Sounds like a job for a bridge camera to me. Some Nikon or Canon or Sony or Panasonic or even Fuji (the bridge ones are worm-free I think).
Sony H-300 is available used from B&H for $144 in 9/10 condition. It was the best selling point and shoot camera on KEH this year.
>>
>>3794423
Oh hey, that Sony looks pretty good. If I can find a good deal I might look into that. Thanks mate
>>
>>3794280
A bridge camera will do the job pretty well.
>image quality is far better than phones
>insane zoom range from superwide to supertele
>not overly expensive
>usualy autofocus and automatic mode work pretty well
>>
>>3794423
>Fuji-worms
IIRC that's not an issue with straigh out of camera .jpg.
The issue is caused by the different colour filter array and RAW-converters that aren't optimized for it.
>>
>>3794451
X-transformer reduces it a bit but it's still present in the end result. Still, bridge cameras don't have the X-tranny sensor so they're safe.
>>
>>3794439
No problem. Look into other bridge cameras too, for example there's a Canon PowerShot SX710 HS on eBay for 130 with case, memory, battery and charger (the Sony uses AA batteries instead).
>>
>>3793392
incels don't have growing families
>>
>>3794466
He has a family of incels.
>>
>>3794274
Sony A6100 or whatever
>>
>>3794463
>>3794449
Thanks, I will!

>>3794497
Nah, even that is too nice. It would be a waste of a decent camera.
>>
x100s user here. thinking about switching to 28mm, should i get the wcl converter or sell the fuji and get a ricoh gr?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width520
Image Height400
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3794526
buy an xpro1 or 2 with a 28mm
>>
>>3794526
>or sell the fuji and get a ricoh gr?
yes
converters look like ass and the Ricoh has better colors and lens anyways, also more compact
only downside is no flash if it's the iii
>>
>>3794589
be careful shopping for the ricoh
there's a
ricoh gr iii
ricoh gr digital iii
the digital is from 2010 and a 10megapickle ass version. nearly got gypped into buying one for $200 thinking i got a gr iii at a stupid awesome price.
>>
>>3794590
lol good to know
>>
Is a neoprene soft case enough protection for walking around with the camera hung from my neck or throwing into a backpack?
>>
>>3794613
this guy
>>
I'm looking for a dedicated landscape camera and I'm between the D850 and the A7RIII. I don't need a wide selection of lenses, just a standard (but preferably quality) kit lens, plus very good ~24mm and ~50mm primes since I shoot at those lengths a lot.

Size, weight, and autofocus don't matter to me, battery life does matter a little. No limit on money (I can afford both bodies), but if I can save money with one system to get the same quality, that's a big plus. Any thoughts between these two systems, purely for landscape?

Also, should I consider the A7RII? Is the III a substantial jump, or should I save a huge amount of money and go for the II instead?
>>
>>3794618
The Nikon is weather sealed. Get the D850 purely for that reason. Don’t even consider Snoy for any work in the outdoors. Those are for vloggers mainly.
>>
>>3794629
>implying landscape photogs don't look at the weather forecast
landscapes look shitty with shitty weather
>>
>>3794633
>implying forecasts are ever accurate
>>
>>3794526
>or sell the fuji and get a ricoh gr?
why do people buy cameras without viewfinder

fucking zoomers grown up with smartphones
>>
>>3794633
Maybe where you live. It can easily poor down here while theres limited cloud cover and very good light.
>>
Looking for recs for a first camera. Greentext for simplicity.

>Second hand only
>Willing to spend up to 800 AUD
>Primarily used for landscapes and nature photos (I hike a lot)
>Not overly concerned about weight or size
>Would like to take high detail photos of things like bugs and plants
>Definitely keen on high levels of zoom in order to take photos of birds. Not sure if most cameras have detachable lenses or not, I know nothing about this hobby.
Thanks :)
>>
>>3794709
>>3794709
>Definitely keen on high levels of zoom in order to take photos of birds
Getting a lens for that will be a major issue at that price
>>
>>3794718
Okay, how about mid tier zoom? Or what would you suggest in the cheaper end of the spectrum. Doesn't have to be crazy zoom.
>>
>>3794721
You can get a Nikon D3400 and 18-55mm lens which would be an every day zoom lens for around $500 aud, from standard wide angle to slight telephoto. You can then find a cheap 70-300mm lens for around $200 or so, but they’re usually not sharp at the long end.
>>
>>3794633
>landscapes look shitty with shitty weather
They can look fantastic right after shitty weather, though, as the mist is still hanging in the air and clouds are low on the horizon but breaking apart.
>>
>>3794589
>Ricoh has better colors
really? I know it's much sharper but how exactly are ricoh's colors better? More accurate? i really like fuji colors on my x100s, i usually shoot provia with minimal adjustments
>>3794590
i've always wondered why the old 10mp ones are so overpriced but i guess it's the terry tax

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution100 dpi
Vertical Resolution100 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1025
Image Height1441
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3794723
https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/greenwith/digital-slr/nikon-d3400-and-accessories/1264428512

Thoughts on this listing? Basically just go there, ensure it operates correctly band leave?
>>
>>3794736
>https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/greenwith/digital-slr/nikon-d3400-and-accessories/1264428512
Looks a bit overpriced. The body alone is $410. On his listing.
For example
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Nikon-D3400-AF-P-18-55mm-Kit-Lens/353345939464?hash=item52450f2808:g:oTQAAOSwH1xf97uB
>>
>>3794744
Oh, I'm pretty sure the seller is saying the camera comes with HB-61 sun shade, battery charger MH-24, camera to usb type-C cord and Nikon DX af-p Nikkor 18-55mm lens.

I'll contact them and find out. If so, she's that seem like a fair deal? I think the other items are seperate.
>>
>>3794760
And you’d have a bit left over for a cheap 70-300mm lens. Though I don’t think they’re that great usually.
>>
>>3794761
Cool. Yeah I'm not looking for anything fantastic. Just want to buy myself something nice and get into the hobby/teach myself to take photos.

I could probably do a shittone of research but what little I've seen says this is a good entry level piece and that's all I'm looking for really.
>>
>>3794613
Really depends on what's in your backpack. A bunch of cables and relatively soft things? Sure. Heavy things and things with sharp angles? No.
>>
>>3794736
>>3794760
I'd suggest getting something like a D5200 instead. A bit older but much nicer ergonomics and same lens support (D5100 is awesome but doesn’t support AF-P). I found this listing but it's kinda iffy to me, pics of the lens box but not of the lens itself. If real, it's a much before deal. How does Gumtree work anyways? Is there some reputation system like on eBay? Not an Aussie.
https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/wantirna/digital-slr/nikon-d5200-dslr-as-new-up-for-quick-sale-/1264380361
>>
what should I look out for when buying used?
>>
>>3794736
>>3794760
I'd unironically go with a used (or new) Pentax K-3, K-70 or KP with normal and telezoom kit lens and an extra 35/2.4 prime
>>
>>3794931
Body
>How high is the shutter count? What's the expected shutter life?
>Are there dead pixels?
>Are there scratches on the viewfinder or any digital screens?
>Do all buttons and dials work?
>If flash is built-in, does it still work?

Lens
>Is there fungus/dust inside the lens?
>Are there any scratches on the front or back glass?
>If included, do the focus and aperture rings still work? Do they turn just fine?

General
>Is there any visible damage? Cosmetic may not seem like a big deal but can be a sign of heavy use.
>If reputation is available, does the seller have good reputation?
>Is the body/lens still under a transferrable warranty? Not a deal killer but it can be a big bonus.
>How does price compare to similar listings? If it's way cheaper, why?
>Are there any recent photos taken with the listed equipment?

Not comprehensive but just stuff I can think of off the top of my head.
>>
>>3794931
>>3794946
Plus: if it's from a photography shop is probably better.
Never had any issues with used stuff even from ebay, but taking directly from a shop you may have some sort of warranty
>>
>>3794946
I'd like to add the following from personal experience:
>give it a discrete sniff

I once got a great deal on a 17-55 years ago, no scratches, looked absolutely mint.
It wasn't until I got home I noticed the rubbers absolutely reeked of cigarettes and it took ages to get the smell out.
>>
Why do Pentax DSLRs have worse battery life than Canon and Nikon?
>>
Best value DSLR for £500 or so second hand? Please recommend. I particularly want compact body and lenses.
>>
>>3794990
At that pricerange the EOS M50 is great, not a DSLR but a MILC though.
>>
>>3794990

If you want a dslr than a Nikon D3500 is the best one. It costs £429.00 and you need to buy a memory card which costs at least another £10.00.
>>
>>3794931
>item location: Japan
Usually good to go. If it's not in absolutely mint condition, it will be disclosed heavily

>seller: KEH
>condition: "used condition"
It's going to be completely worn out, beat to shit, probably have a shutter count WELL NORTH of 1 million, heavy soiling, and maybe scratches on the sensor from being cleaned improperly.
>>
>>3795002
Not entirely accurate but in the large scheme of things not wrong either. There's some amazing deals on KEH, but buying from Japan usually involves detailed photos of the actual item you're buying (look for the ones that publish each article for sale separately).
Some of them you can even see the serial number on the pics and it's the one you get.
Also "used" isn't a condition for KEH, literally everything is used there unless explicitly stated otherwise. But you have grades, from as is to like new. Sometimes you luck out with the bargain items and get something that's near mint with some minor functional flaw, specially on vintage gear. And you can return things if not satisfied unless it's graded "as is".
>>
>>3794997
>Nikon D3500
I'd rather go upmarket and second hand honestly.
>>
>>3794997
Don’t do this. Used D700 for a little bit less is heaps better.
>>
>>3794997
Why not a D5x00 model instead?
The only reason I see to buy D3x00 is if you're desperate to buy brand new.

>>3794990
You said pounds so it's safe to assume UK.

If looking for Nikon I'd buy this:
>D5200 like new, £259.00
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-digital-slr-cameras/used-nikon-digital-slr-cameras/nikon-d5200/sku-1106314/
or
>D5300 excellent, low shutter count, £294
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-digital-slr-cameras/used-nikon-digital-slr-cameras/nikon-d5300/sku-1110908/
plus this lens:
>Nikon AF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED DX VR II, £229
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-lenses/used-nikon-fit-lenses/nikon-af-s-18-200mm-f-3-5-5-6g-if-ed-dx-vr-ii/sku-1062036/

If looking for Canon I'd buy this:
>60D like new, £314
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-digital-slr-cameras/used-canon-digital-slr-cameras/canon-eos-60d/sku-1098322/
and this lens:
>Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, £184
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equipment/used-photo-and-video/used-lenses/used-canon-fit-lenses/canon-ef-s-18-200mm-f-3-5-5-6-is/sku-1089312/
>>
is the fuji x-t1 still worth buying? its about all i can afford maybe the 2 at a push if its that much better

thanks
>>
File: s-l500.jpg (42 KB, 500x500)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
IS this lens better than the Fujinon 18-55 F2.8-4?
>>
>>3795016
That 60D looks good. Thanks anon
>>
>>3795020
X-T2 is a much better camera overal.
>>
>>3795023

Old Canon cameras like the 60d and 70d have quality issues and really low dynamic range. Low dynamic range doesn't matter so much in the UK because of the cloudy weather everything is evenly lit.
>>
File: $_86[1].jpg (103 KB, 1024x864)
103 KB
103 KB JPG
All of this for €1250?
>>
>>3795014

>I particularly want compact body and lenses.
>>
>>3795022
no, sharp in center but really soft at corners, no image stab. fuji is wider and longer.
>>
>>3795030
i just realised that used the t2 and the t30 are about the same.. do you know which would be better paired with just a 50mm for learning with
>>
>>3795023
Glad to help. One nice thing about the 60D is that it has some degree of weather sealing unlike the Nikons I suggested. It's a fairly high end body. Also you can use magic lantern with it.
>>3795033
"really low" lol aren't you exaggerating a bit?
look at the shadow recovery
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/2999648
>>
>>3795023
Also just noticed you said compact lol, the 60D is nearly 6D sized.
The Nikons have the edge in that regard.
>>
>>3795041
It's APS-C, do you mean the XF 50mm f2 or a 35mm which turns into 50mm?
>>
>>3795041
X-T30 is considerably smaller and lighter, has a built-in flash, faster burst, a touch screen, and 2 more megapixels (not much, but it's something). X-T2 has weather sealing, as well as some small advantages on the body like an extra card slot, a slightly bigger viewfinder, and a dedicated ISO dial. I'd recommend the X-T30 over the X-T2 unless the weather sealing is very important.

Since you're learning though I wouldn't recommend being too picky about the model you're learning on. Keep both in mind and see which you can get a good deal on.
>>
>>3795055
>>3795055
ah, which would you recommend? from a quick look the 35mm is the same used as the f2 50mm is new..

>>3795057
ah nice, smaller and lighter would definitely be better for me. seems there are a lot more x-t30's out there and generally come with the kit lens at the same price of a body only t2 so ill have a look at a few vids. thanks
>>
>>3795060
There's an XF f2 35mm that should be available for less than a new f2 50mm. The XF f1.4 35mm (more expensive) is a stop faster than the f2, but it's older, slightly bigger, and the autofocus isn't as fast.

To make things more confusing, there's also an XC 35mm f2 that's almost entirely identical to the XF 35mm f2, albeit made of plastic and cheaper as a result.

Choosing between 35mm and 50mm on crop comes down to preference. For learning, 35mm is probably better because it's the equivalent of a nifty fifty all-arounder on full frame.
>>
>>3795014
>compact
>>
>>3795060
As an owner of the 50mm: don't get it as your first
>>
what sites and whatnot are generally deemed the most true? not paid for shite ads but geninely good reviews on cameras and gear?
>>
>>3795078
unironically kenrockwell.com
>>
>>3795078
This >>3795124 but with a grain of salt
Every review says that camera is the best but will have a lot of practical info and tidbits that are useful
>>
>>3795006
>Also "used" isn't a condition for KEH, literally everything is used there unless explicitly stated otherwise.
KEH has two conditions: "good" and "trash." Both are worse grades than anything you'll get from Japan.
>>
>>3795036
>fujiworms
>selling for >$0
Bad deal.
>>
>>3795146
I agree with you that Japan usually has the best stuff but KEH is stellar sometimes
>>
>>3795022
YES. The Fuji lens can not be mounted on a high quality camera, such as a Pentax. Only on cameras that are full of sensor worms. Therefore, Pentax wins by default.
>>
File: OM-1.jpg (646 KB, 2500x1930)
646 KB
646 KB JPG
My Olympus OM-1n just arrived. Second hand so a bit scuffed, but seems to be in good nic. Any tips? Recommendations? Very pretty piece.
>>
>>3793814
That lens is not very good and has 0 worth, treat it like it is an extra gift for the camera.
That price while is not bad, I think you could do better with a K-70 and a kit lens, maybe with a kit+telezoom bundle.
In any case the 18-50 kit and 55-300 telezoom are the ideal starting kit. Avoid superzooms like the ones you posted.
>>
>>3795212
Shoot a roll of film immediately and quickly to make sure it’s working fine. After that just go out and shoot bro.
>>
Going to pick up a Nikon D3400 tomorrow, first DSLR I've owned

>$410 Ausbux
>Charger, cable, sun shade/hood thing for lens + 18-55m lens
Thoughts? Photos seem in good nick but will inspect physically tomorrow.

I did post here yesterday but I've investigated what was suggested vs what's being sold locally and this seems like a fair deal, assuming it's in good condition.
>>
>>3795249
Picture has a 40mm macro lens attached not the 18-55?
>>
>>3795250
I know, that one is being sold seperately to the items I mentioned.
>>
Ive been taking pics with my shitty chinkphone for a while now.
It mostly close ups and often the colour and sharpness is kind of fucked. Should i get a Ricoh?I need one i can carry in my pocket easily
>>
File: 61qWlcHJaPL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (92 KB, 1356x1218)
92 KB
92 KB JPG
What filter should I get first? Polarising, ND or protective? At the moment I like landscapes, but I hope to develop portraits when the pandemic situation is over
>>
>>3795249
Not a bad camera but I would have looked into older D5x00 models instead. At least buying used you won't lose much money when you eventually upgrade, just consider it a long term cheap rental. I had a D5100 for 3 years myself which I sold at just above the same price I bought it (bought it in the USA for just under $200 with 2 batteries, bought the 18-55mm, the strap and the USB cable separately, sold it for $300 as a kit). I babied it and watched my shutter though. Now I have a full frame Canon that I plan to hold on to until it dies.
>>
any fujifags know if the x-t3 is worth paying £250 more (used prices) over the x-t30? i don't really care about video but it would be nice i guess
>>
>>3795293
If you're shooting landscapes you will definitely want a polarizer for skies. A strong (6-10 stops) ND is good for smoothing water and clouds too, but not as essential as a polarizer. You don't need a UV filter if you're shooting digital.
>>
anyone from nj know of any good camera shops left?
>>
>>3795319
Ty anon, I was thinking about this Kenko mostly because of the price tag
Also, I recently got a wide-angle lens, 24mm on a full frame, until now I was using the 50mm or a zoom lens. How much of a issue is a polarizer lens on a 24mm?
>>
>>3795329

Polarizer is okay above 28mm

Much below that you will see weird shit happen to your sky, if you want ultra-wide and that polarizer effect for deep blue skies, get a lens with a curved front element that you can't put filters on and you basically get the same thing
>>
>>3795318
I think it is due to the feel and also the viewfinder is much better. I consider the EVF to be one of the most important parts of a camera.
>>
File: D3S_4672-oblique-1200.jpg (209 KB, 1200x1179)
209 KB
209 KB JPG
Is there a point in putting a vintage lens like the Zeiss 35mm on a modern body like the Xpro3?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: D3S_4277-1200.jpg (159 KB, 1200x953)
159 KB
159 KB JPG
>>3795391
ok bad example of lens. how about like a vintage leica lens

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3795391
It'll probably look worse in 26MP APS-C than it ever did in film. Highly dependent on the specific lens. Pixel peeping is WAY harder on a lens than film printing ever was unless you routinely did massive enlargements. Most people never printed bigger than 8x10 and just about any lens looks good on such a small scale if it's in focus. Old lenses usually lack good coatings and things such as reflection off the sensor itself can in rare circumstances cause image degradation. Like I said, highly dependent on the specific lens.

Luckily old lenses old value well so you can buy one, test it out, and if you hate it, sell it for what you paid for it unless you paid above market value.
>>
>>3793116
I usually disable signatures on forums.
>>
>>3795393
>>3795391
I suppose it will work
>>
File: 478984_2560_1600.jpg (639 KB, 2560x1600)
639 KB
639 KB JPG
>>3795356
Funny, I consider having less than two live view screens one of the most important things in a camera.
>>
>>3795036
Not bad. The x-t30 is a solid camera. I would value a used one at $600. Each lens is about $300-$400 each.
>>
>>3793113
Laowa 65mm 2.8 macro is next on my list.
>>
>>3795473
I would value one at not worth buying.
The only camera that approaches being worth it in the entire Fuji X lineup is the X-T200 and I wouldn't get it because it has no AA filter.
>>
>>3795394
>>3795461

Cool aight thanks guys. Guess I'll stick to the newer lens then
>>
Any suggestions between the lumix 14mm 2.5 prime vs 14-42 3.5 zoom with ois? I do mostly video, and have a 25mm prime. All this is on m43.
>>
>>3795528
The one you have with you.
>>
>>3795528
Constant aperture zooms are a cool thing for video as long as they're actual zooms instead of varifocal lenses marketed as zooms.
>>
Anyone seen the new unannounced Sony GM lens in theDPreview video?
>>
>>3795465
Based
>>
>>3795249
Nabbed this.

Any suggestions for someone with no idea how to use a DSLR to get started?

>Read the manual
In progress.
>>
>>3795647
have you ever, ever felt like this?
>>
>>3795647
Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson
Read it
>>
>>3795465
I agree with you but if you’re going to have an EVF you better make sure it’s the best EVF possible.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width800
Image Height533
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3795391
The Zeiss lens would work great on an xpro3. However with the adaptor it will make it a little big so you may as well save your cash and get a recent 7artisans. The 35mm f1.1 is great.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1280
Image Height960
>>
>>3795659
Mein upside down nerger
>>
>>3795667
Why are xe2s’s so hard to find? I’m guessing it’s the price point/quality, but still. I never see them.
>>
>>3795672
Not sure. I found this S for £250 a few weeks ago. It’s nice but would prefer a better EVF.
>>
Does Nikon or Canon have any similar lenses to this? I’m looking to get a DSLR and Pentax seem to have the most compact lenses. They’re also very highly regarded.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width300
Image Height248
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
did they stop making them in japan after the x-t2?
>>
>>3795807
Stop making what?
>>
File: sling strap.jpg (142 KB, 1012x1500)
142 KB
142 KB JPG
Can I get some sling strap recommendations that aren't hideous or expensive? It will usually have a D610 with 24-70 f2.8 on it so decent amount of weight.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D3400
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 21.1 (Macintosh)
PhotographerBry Cox
Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.7
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern1022
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)78 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3609
Image Height5351
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution400 dpi
Vertical Resolution400 dpi
Image Created2020:05:13 22:56:58
Exposure Time1/125 sec
F-Numberf/14.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/14.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceFlash
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length52.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1012
Image Height1500
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3795693
Canon's got the EF 40/2.8 and EF-S 24/2.8 that are both pancakes. They're not *quite* as small as the Pentax, but they're in the same general pancake size category.
>>
>>3795693
The DA Limited 40mm isn't even really that useful. It's a 60mm FF equivalent, so kind of tight, and not very fast either, so it's not exactly an ideal portrait lens.

If you want a compact camera, buy a mirrorless. Something like the Canon EOS M6II is a great option, takes great photos, has easily the best APS-C sensor on the market, and all the lenses are small/lightweight.
>>
>>3795664
>I agree with you but if you’re going to have an EVF you better make sure it’s the best EVF possible.
Why?
>>
>>3795831
i cant personally vouch for it, but i have a friend who has used the amazon basics one ($15 or something) for a few years and had zero issues
>>
>>3795647
Steps of a photographer
>phone shit
>dslr
>aperture mode
>unnecessary small dof
>manual
>tripod
>first 10,000 photographs
(This is where I am)
>framing
>>
What compact camera would you recommend me as an alternative for when I'm too lazy to carry around my big DSLR? Greentext for simplicity of the list of requirements:

>ofc, compact
>less than 200€ used
>good in low light (not necessarily aps-c compact level good though, I am aware that's hardly possible with this low price), any form of IS is also appreciated for the same reason
>lens can be zoom/prime, but prime will probably be better in low light so I'd rather have that
>can shoot in raw
>>
Is the Olympus TG-6 the best rainy day/fishing camera? It seems to be the in the top of its field when it comes to rugged compacts, and it's the only one that can do RAW from what I can see. Been on the fence for a while, but I'm getting closer to nabbing one.
>>
Thoughts on the Nikon AW1?
>15m Dive water proof
>2m shock proof
>interchangeable lens
>1" sensor
>>
File: IMGP3073-1.jpg (2.02 MB, 1500x1001)
2.02 MB
2.02 MB JPG
You're putting together a kit from scratch
You're shooting
>nature/wildlife
>macro
>maybe some landscapes
>maybe some sports
You have funds to buy whatever you want, but you're not retarded so you're not spending more than maybe 2 grand
What do you buy?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3793113

Just came here to say, I've been using my Sekonic L-408's spot meter backwards for a couple weeks now.

I'm so fucking dumb.
>>
>>3795951
The phone you have with you. You're probably not gonna find anything with great image quality that's also compact under 200. If you're willing to spend more, maybe the x100v.

>>3795987
Your requirements are a bit too broad. You basically want to do everything so I'm going to recommend what I consider a "good value" but I know that anon is gonna come in here to shit it up, so feel free to get the equivalent in other brands too.
X-T3 when it's on sale for $1000. Not at the current price. It was on sale tons last year and they'll probably do more this year.
With the 18-55mm or 16-80mm kit lens. The 18-55mm might arguably offer better landscapes since it has a wider aperture at the wide end. The 16-80mm will be a little more versatile in reaching something further away. But don't plan to shoot birds with it. You'll need at least a 400mm to do bird shooting.
And a Laowa 65mm for your macro. It's manual focus only but it's really easy to manual focus on mirrorless with tools like focus peaking.
>>
>>3795987
Mint 5D3, about 900.
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II, about 700
Canon 28-80mm f/2.8-4 L, about 400
Not the best kit but serviceable.
>>3796022
Retarded kit
>>
>>3796056
Oh and add a 100-400 by Cosina, should be about 100 bucks.
>>
>>3796022
>The phone you have with you. You're probably not gonna find anything with great image quality that's also compact under 200. If you're willing to spend more, maybe the x100v.

If I was willing to spend more, my first options would be the older x100 cameras, or even a Canon m100 with a tiny prime.

What about some of those one inch sensor compact cameras for example?

I really don't like my phone, it doesn't shoot raw, its jpg processing is horrendous, I can't get google camera to work on it, and besides the camera it's a phone I really like (super resistant to everything, 10000mAh battery, Blackview BV9500 plus if you're curious). If anyone knows a rugged phone with an actually good camera that shoots raw, that would also be an option, but I'd rather have my camera separate from my smartphone.
>>
So with the announcement of the new Pentax K3-iii and it's ridiculous pricing should I leave Pentax and move to another system?
Currently have the original K-3 which I got for 600 bucks with the 50/1.8, also have a 100mm macro and 55-300mm
K3-iii is looking like it's going to cost more than the K1-ii and it's still not even close to the AF specs of anything from canikon or sony within the past several years
Should I stick with Pentax and buy the K1-ii (surely their next full frame will be price gauged as their new APSC) or sell my gear and invest in a new camera system (and which one because I haven't been in the market or looking at what's out there for years now)?
>>
>>3796075
just buy a fucking iphone you pleb
>>
>>3796075
1 inch isn't bad, and neither is MFT. Both are miles above your phone.
>>
File: 105 macro.jpg (84 KB, 640x544)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
>>3795987
That is a lot to accomplish well with $2k, but then again I don't believe in buying kit-quality lenses.

D700 ~$250 (cheaped out here for good lenses)
Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ~$600 (you don't need VR for landscapes, great for general shooting)
Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR ~$800 (sports, you need the speed)
TC-20E 2x TC ~$180 (use with the 70-200, decent for wildlife)
Nikon 105 f2.8D ~$220 (best macro lens on a budget, hands down)
Total: $2,050

You now have 3 high quality workhorse lenses that will last forever and a good body. I would suggest Canon equivalents but I just recently bought a Canon 6D and don't have a good feel for the used market's prices yet. The above is similar to my setup but instead of using a TC with my 70-200mm for wildlife I have a 200-500mm f5.6 VR. If you don't want a bulky 24-70 f2.8 for general shooting and landscapes a 24-85 VR is a good lens for the price (~$200 used) and then you can use the savings on a newer body. Spend $300 more on a body and get a D610 which is faster and has better low light performance for your sports and wildlife (this is what I have, my D700 is a backup). The D700 is a great camera, but the D610 is better all around. Less noise, better dynamic range, faster all around, and the extra resolution doesn't helps when you're doing macro and wildlife and want to crop tight.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2006:04:29 15:39:39
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width640
Image Height544
>>
>>3796077
>Pentax K3-iii and it's ridiculous pricing
Has not been published yet.
>>
What’s your take-everywhere outfit? The camera and lens/lenses that goes with you everywhere you do.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width480
Image Height640
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
File: y2k.jpg (40 KB, 445x690)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>>3796143
this is how I pocket my 70-200.
>>
>>3796143
Bane?
>>
>>3795849
That's funny, my DA 40 Ltd acts as a 40mm on my K-1.
For normal equivalent on APS-C you are looking for the DA 21mm Ltd. Same high quality build and high IQ.
>>
>>3796077
>and it's still not even close to the AF specs of anything from canikon
It has auxiliary AF points, for every AF point you select you have 4 extra points surrounding it. picrel
>>
>>3796077
What's wrong with your K-3?
>>
>>3795837
Thanks. They do look compact.

>>3795849
60mm is good for me for general walkaround use. 35mm on a APSC is ~53mm so it's not that much tighter.

>>3796215
That lens works on full frame too?! Didn't know that. How is your K1 treating you? Is it pretty large?
>>
>>3796246
>>3796215
Looks based AF too.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
PhotographerROB BATEMAN
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3796247

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
PhotographerROB BATEMAN
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: D3S_0444-0600.jpg (79 KB, 600x531)
79 KB
79 KB JPG
I just ordered a Nikon DF body......
What are some good lenses to put on it which will keep the weight down? I don't mind old, MF lenses.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3796218
only 25 cross-type
>>
>>3795837
>They're not *quite* as small as the Pentax
considering it's AF and Elec aperture control, it's size is impressive. There is a YN knockoff for Nikon which i'm tempted just for the size but i'm sure it's optics will be a gamble
>>
File: 5DSR0084-oblique.jpg (250 KB, 1200x1228)
250 KB
250 KB JPG
>>3796251
the MF 50 1.8 pancake lens would be ideal

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3795985
What are you planning on doing with it?
If you want under water shots you are probably better off with one of those rugged compacts like the W300 or TG-6.
It is very easy to get sand or something stuck between the seals on the AW1 causing it to flood.
There used to be a ton of these 'for parts' on ebay.

Also keep in mind that the Nikon 1 system is dead.
>>
>>3793903
How is that wrong? Explain yourself anon.
>>
>>3793116
Can you find images he took? I am sure they look terrible
>>
>>3794274
Instead of an entry level canon I would go for a 50D. They are just as cheap second hand but have a full magnesium body and are thus a lot more robust. You don't need to worry about damaging it as much.
>>
what cameras are generally the best in low light situations? starting a PI job and need something that is easy to use at night time
>>
>>3796307
Generally, moar money + bigger gear = better low light.

What is your budget, I figure that will be your primary concern.

Next is form factor. If you want something tiny and concealable, that limits your options. If you can hulk around a brick, go get a big SLR.
>>
>>3796307
D5, probably.
>>
>>3796307
Full frame. Medium format digital will be out of budget for sure. Most full frame are basically the same in low light, regardless if it’s 12mp or 61mp. Higher mp = only noisier at 100% view but that’s way more enlarged, the noise is physically smaller and cancels out to basically the same as lower mp.

But generally I’m assuming you’ll be in street light conditions at “night time”, which I find iso 1600-3200 range does well (without ibis), cities at night aren’t nearly as dark as people think and in your case it doesn’t matter how noisy or shitty something looks as long as the subject is clearly identifiable.

How close or far will you be photographing the subject typically and what context do you want to show them in?

You may simply want a medium telephoto zoom, like 70-200 or 70-180
>>
File: 1610377459028.jpg (120 KB, 738x831)
120 KB
120 KB JPG
Canon PowerShot G1X Mark III vs Fujifilm X100F.

Which one is better?
>>
Why are fixed aperture standard zoom EF lenses so god-damn expensive?
EF is a pretty old system, and the prices seem crazy.
>>3796332
Why does the Canon resemble an Olympus OM-D camera?
>>
>>3796332
If you want a camera thats fun to take photos with then pick the Canon
>>
>>3796332
That Canon looks liek shit.
X100F is by far the best out of these options and will be a lot more fun to use assuming you're happy with the fixed 35mm. .
Image quality on both will be sufficient for your needs.
>>
>>3796332
Question really comes down to whether you want a capable camera or whether you are a tool who doesn’t know the difference between good image quality and sensor worms.
>>
Thanks. I'll go with the G1X Mark III. The Fuji has better high iso performance but the G1X Mark III is weather-sealed, dustproof, smaller and has image stabilization.
>>
>>3796332
Canon, everyday of the week.
Fuji sucks and prime lenses are for snobs.
If you want to use primes why go for a bad 35mm instead of a fine 28mm focal length?
>>
File: 71KIwIZ1DfL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (101 KB, 1120x1500)
101 KB
101 KB JPG
samsung sd over sandisk ?
its cheaper and has slightly more writing speed...
my last sandisk just broke...it can be viewed on my pc but the camera doesn't recognize it anymore
>>
>>3796380
>35mm
Because of Leica/Leitz
That's the most popular rangefinder length and as such almost everyone wants to emulate it
>>3796381
I tend to use both, but it seems that Samsung have better prices and presence for Micro SD while SanDisk has a greater presence for photography.
Just get whatever's a better overall price for the capacity you need.
You're almost certainly going to be bottlenecked by USB 2.0, unless your camera has USB 3.0/3.1.
That is, unless you have a card reader that's USB 3.0. (I miss integrated SD card readers in PCs).
>>
>>3796381
>it can be viewed on my pc but the camera doesn't recognize it anymore

did you format it in a file system your camera can't see but pc can?
>>
>>3796400
not before i believe...but i formated it after it wasn't recognizable anymore...formated with exFAT on my pc...any suggestion maybe ?
>>
>>3796351
Wrong. The Canon will be more fun to use and won’t be half as frustrating as the Fuji. X100F is not a fun camera to use.
>>
>>3796409
Yes it is. I've owned the T, F and V.
>>
I'm new to Nikon. What does Series E mean?
>>
>>3796438
Series E were budget manual focus lenses that prioritize light weight and compactness over image quality.
>>
>>3796257
Type E has some plastic and is pretty light and stubby. Not too bad.
>>
>>3796381
>128GB
Slightly off topic; don't do this. Get a handful of smaller cards and a card holder/wallet. They take up practically no space and if you take a trip or something and one dies (it happens, even with good ones) you don't lose fucking everything.

T. shoots in backup mode with twin SD cards since one of my high end CF cards died back in the CF-in-every-dslr days.
>>
NEW THREAD:

>>3796593
>>3796593
>>3796593
>>
>>3796402
try normal FAT (FAT32). then reformat it in camera if it shows up. always format in camera.
>>
Sigma fp
Sigma 20mm f1.4
Sigma 100-400mm f5.3/6
Laowa 14mm f4



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.