Thread for stupid questions that don't deserve their own thread.Last>>4065939
How do I get my images to look like the image on the left from a digital camera
>>4075993delete the red channel
why are these threads almost exclusively gearfaggotry? just shit up /gear/
Why does my lens hood keep letting lil lens flares escape?Pic rel
how to get qt /p/gf?
>>4076011Go to art school and be a 7/10
Is 250D (+kit lens) a good camera for starters? I'm not looking to become a photographer, however I want to learn and become good at taking photos.
>>4076009Maybe internal reflections? What lens is it?
I find something off about this picture and I can't put my finger on it..don't get me wrong it's a wonderful view and decent post processing too. What is it anons? framing? something else?
>>4076092Can you get a photo like this straight out of camera or is there editing involved?
What to buy now efm is kill? Got two primes (22mm and 32mm).I noticed from an old camera i used a lot of 55mm on the kit zoomlens. Should i buy into a new system or buy a 56mm for efm?
>>4076009is it the reflection of the sun on the lighter?
>>4076092all that dark space on the bottom right maybe. I personally would have included more sky and maybe water
>>4075862I'm a first year high school English teacher and I somehow got shafted with teaching a yearbook elective despite having absolutely no experience (even with my own high school one) -- probably because no one else wanted to do it. The last yearbook teacher left the school, so I really have no one to turn to. She did leave behind some Canon Rebel T3 cameras with some big boy lenses though. What do I need to teach the photography team so that they can succeed this year?
>>4076027She's not my gf yet but can confirm
>>4076092There's something weird going on with the fence and the sky which doesn't look normal. It just looks over saturated and the rest of the image is gray. The image in general looks maybe over sharpened or something odd
How did you anons take your photography to the next level lately?
>>4076099Editing is a must if you want a look similar to that.
>>4076062Yes, you can absolutely get great-looking shots with the camera. Not entirely sure about the kit lens, haven't used it myself.
>>4076344What even is yearbook elective? Taking yearbook photos? If so, then start with the basics. Exposure triangle, composition theory, how to light portraits, etc.
Kit Lenses kinda suck dick because the housing is cheap plastic and you have both a high base and variable aperture. Shoot on it until you understand why it sucks and then get a nifty fifty.
Is it worth getting a telephoto lens or is it just pointless gear wankery
>>4076396Of course it is if you want the telephoto look. Telephoto zooms are easily my most used lenses.
>>4076396you'll know when you need one.
>>4076396If you have to ask you don't know what you're photographing, in which case any lens or having a camera in the first place is pointless gear wankery.
Why is packfilm freezable but integral film not? Both have liquid chemistry in burstable pods, both have a negative and positive dry chemistry layer, the only difference is the integral has a transparent negative substrate and an opacifier that packfilm lacks.
I feel like I haven't seen photos with lighting like this in decades, what changed
>>4076344show us the stuff you have
>>4076466Did you never take pictures during sunset?
>>4076364Yes, the elective is the creation of the yearbook. We have a team of 6-7 students for each major component of the yearbook (ie. the journalism, design, marketing, and photos). I only have to teach the photos to the that 6-7 student team so I guess it's not too bad. I just wish I had more experience to draw from to help them.>If so, start with the basicsOkay, gotcha. I guess now I have some homework to do myself.>>4076484You want a picture of the lenses or are you asking if I have any personal photographs to share? If the latter, I have zero experience beyond my phone's camera which I mentioned in my original post.
>>4076492It's more than just sunset, there's a certain soft quality to everything, and I haven't seen anyone take photos like these since the early 00s
>>4076506>soft quality to everythingSo, you are talking about film.
>>4076506film has a different look to the highlight rolloff than digital and you can see lots of halation in the 2nd imagecouple that with the softness of older gear / filmyou can get that look with digital not a problem though, you just basically have to intentionally degrade the imagei see digital shots emulating that style all the time, especially on the video side of things, you just must not be looking in places for it[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2017:03:10 13:44:20Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1000Image Height584
Do you get aperture flicker if your shots are not back to back. I get this warning on Magic Lantern but do you get any flicker if, for example, you were to take a 1/500 s picture every 5 seconds, do you even get any flickering?Also if you could recommend a good workflow for making timelapses, for now I'm just thinking of editing a bit and syncing everything with Lightroom and then use ffmpeg to make a video from the pictures.
>>4076502Just pictures of the stuff you have to use
I have an A6600 and a:Sigma 56mm f1.4Sigma 18-50 f2.8Sony 18-135 Do I "need" anything else?
>>4076955Honestly, no; go take thousands of pictures before considering buying anything else.
>>4076957OK what do I buy after I take thousands of pictures
is there a site of 'best settings' for cameras (in-camera color settings, etc.)?
im a /p/ noob. i shoot in aperture priority most of the time, set it to f/11 for most shots and set iso to auto with a 1600 limit. the only trouble i have is setting exposure. i tend to under expose because the sky always gets blown out otherwise, but it makes shadows look really black (is 'crushed' the right term?). how do i avoid this. and if im using such 'set it and forget it' settings, would i just be better off going full auto?
>>4076970I'd love if you could show any shot that you didn't like.But in general, if you have a brighter background than the foreground you have to use a flash or you could also try bracketing, most cameras have built-in bracketing. You'd be looking at taking a shot under exposed, over exposed and then get it done on any editing software.
>>4076958You'll know by then if you need anything.
>>4076976How? I've already taken thousands of pictures...Albeit in similar conditions
>>4076978If you don't feel you need anything more, you're all set.
>>4076955sensor cleaner/pen, blower. yes.extra battery or SD card, polarizing filter, tripod, external flash? you'll eventually know if you really need one.
>>4076970Depending on how static your scene is, you could try doing HDR photography.Just don't overcook it
>>4076983Don't have a sensor cleaner but I have a lenspen , blower, microfiber cloth, and zeiss individually packaged wipesi have 1 extra battery and multiple sd cardswhat do filters do? I have UV filter for lens protectionnot interested in flash
>>4076986>what do filters do?They give you different kinds of looks and effects. ND filters reduce the amount of light if you want to achieve much longer exposure times.
>>4076985thanks. turns out my camera has a hdr mode, but it's very limiting. im also learning of bracketing, but as a noob, i just want to do things in-camera, really.from more searching, it looks like i have to learn how to 'expose for highlights', taking advantage of spot metering.should've learnt this stuff sooner, but oh well.
>>4075993Shoot in color, convert to black and white and use the color filters.>>4076009That's just a flare. Different lenses flare differently. Clone it out if it bothers you. Lens hoods prevent light from coming it from the side, if you're shooting into a highlight they won't help you.>>4076092Blacks are too crunched while the highlights are blown. Clarity/unsharp mask is a little high too, that's the halo around everything. Just overprocessed generally. Would've shot for the highlights and brought the shadows up.>>4076239Your money your choice anon. Get a cheapo fast 50mm prime sounds like the move. Or experiment with telephoto. idk, have fun, fuck up, you can always sell it back.>>4076351I rented a studio space and am challenging myself to make it a worthwhile expense. Trying to make more portraits and work with light in new ways. Also trying to print more and hang some shows with the goal of getting a portfolio box of prints together to bring around to some photo editors here in NYC.>>4076396Depends.>>4076955Definitely not. You could probably learn a lot by practicing with off-camera lighting though. Cheap old vivitar flash and a radio trigger would sort you. Read Strobist for some basic tips.>>4076958A ticket to somewhere else to take thousands more in a new environment.>>4076970If you're shooting in aperture priority and auto iso, of course you're having trouble setting exposure. The camera's meter is setting it for you. Shoot in manual. Fuck up. Experiment. Find what works.>>4076989Certain things you can't do in-camera, or you can, but it costs so much more in extra hardware that it's easier to just put it on a tripod, bracket and do it in post. I'm thinking of split-ND filters here. No real point for those unless you're shooting film or cinema.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON Z 6Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 11.4.1 (Macintosh)Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern922Focal Length (35mm Equiv)40 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2022:08:03 18:05:36Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/2.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating10000Lens Aperturef/2.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length40.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingCustomExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>go to national park>at an overlook at one of the highest points of elevation at the park>have a crippling fear of heights>stand 20 feet away from the ledge because my knees are already getting wobbly just being there>try to take pictures from that spot because too scared to move any closer to the ledge >meanwhile normalfags just walk up right next to the ledge like it's nothing snapping selfies on their camera phonePlease tell me I'm not the only one like this.
Tips for self portraits? Is it all in my head?
>>4077126Definitely. Take some, look at other’s, look at painter’s self portraits, think about it, take more. See yourself in a cool reflection? Take a self portrait! Feeling like Cindy Sherman? Dress up like somebody else, stage a scene and take one!
>>4076466Bro just use a diffusion filter, a small aperture and a film LUT.
>>4077162>>4077204Love it and appreciate it. Thanks
>>4077085One of my friends fear of heights disappeared completely when he found out how fun it is to go downhill in a roadbike
>>4076508>>4077232I'd know how to replicate it if I wanted to, I'm curious why does no one use the method anymore because I think it looks great compared to the most common style now
>>4077279I had that as well. It's fun challenge overcoming it. Ladders, hiking, airplanes. I still get adrenaline rush from looking down, or from remembering stuff that I did. A part of the unexplainable dread remains, but it's not the same. I almost miss it.
>>4077294>I'm curious why does no one use the method anymore because I think it looks great compared to the most common style nowYou're just looking on odd places then. It's extremely popular in the places I see, and ProMist (and similar) filters are absolutely at an all time high in popularity. Emulating a "film look" for digital is as popular as it's ever been.It's a neat aesthetic and can work well, but it's just as gimmicky as any other trend in processing.
>>4076506theyve got an interesting glow, almost like a dream world
>>4076008questions of the stupid variety should be evenly dispersed to avoid an overload of "shit"¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>>4076092The red horizontal reflection line ruins the diagonal composition of the fence, now everything bottom right square is messy.
For shooting portraits, do you bring any props? Put it to Google and it's all bullshit/ fairy lights, confetti etc. What are some good props that'll boost the subject and maybe make them feel more relaxed or confident?
Is this a good deal? AU$550 (US$369)Nikon D3300.18-55 kt lens55-300mm zoomEverything else in the picture.All in perfect condition.Camera has only taken 1855 shots.
>>4077473There is also this one with a 70-200mm lense for AU$450
>>4077467>For shooting portraits, do you bring any props?I don't, unless the subject requests some.
>>4077473The lenses are F tier and the body is F tier and it's a dead mount
>>4077473My first camera was a used d3400. I had a blast with a 35 prime lens honestly.
>>4077473>$369oof. dont know why they are overcharging, not really worth it unless you cant be asses to find anything else and dont mind paying extra
How do you get lens flares like this
>>4077792With the star lens flare filter, of course
repost >>4077803best way to take camera + film through security at an airport? will the xray machine fuck up anything?
>>4077804Put it in a plastic bag and let them know its film, they might hand inspect it. 5 seconds on google
HOW IS IT 2022 AND THERE'S NOT an easier way of creating white borders in lightroom or photoshop jesus fucking trash applications
Was this picture taken on medium/large format? I like the look of it
>>4078105yea it's because they know white borders are shit and people that use them are shit
Hello,I'm seeking a < $200 camera to utilize as a dedicated day hiking camera. I would trust the recommendations on here better than those from your typical search engine. Could someone offer a model that fits the aforementioned price, and isn't terribly difficult for entry-level use?
>>4076955It depends.I have a 6400 and a:Sigma 30Sony 20Samyang 12.All prime and fast lenses and I'm really really happy. The 20 is a pancake and I use it when I cannot bring the 12.No need for anithing else. But it's just me. You don't have to cover all the usecases, you only need what you need.
>>4078489Better phone. You cannot have anithing really good for 200. Put those money on top of your phone budget the next time and you'll be happy
>>4078166>Was this picture taken on medium/large format?Seems that way.
I understand that a lens created with FF format in mind will have a crop factor on APSC and smaller format bodies because of their “smaller” field of view, but why do lenses made for APSC in mind (I.E. Fuji’s X Mount lenses) still refer to their 35mm equivalent focal lengths? I’m probably overthinking it
>>4078715focal length is a physical property of the lensthe crop happens based on what you put behind the lensff / 35mm just is the standard reference point nowadaysa 50mm crop lens and 50mm ff lens would give you the same fov on that aps-c camera, and same fov adapting both to a m43 camera
Just heard of this guy on Sean Tuckers vid.Can you go 'too far' when editing? I usually only push it with b&w.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPhone 4SCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 10.0 MacintoshSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)35 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Width1200Image Height1600Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUnknownPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationUnknownHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2015:04:30 09:57:09Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating50Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness4.1 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length4.28 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1120Image Height1493Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>4078715People use to refer to 35mm at the beginning of the apsc because 35 was the standard and people were able to relate the focal lenght to field of view only in 35.Now there are a lot of people like me that have only used apsc and so can conly relate that to the FoV. I never understod why they keep to compare to 35 if they have never used. for me the FoV in degree is the most comprehensible measure and it's the one I use in CGI.
>>4078718The focal length is the distance between the lens and sensor/film, right?I assume that distance is true no matter the camera/lens/crop factor, etc.
How do I shoot IR Trichrome on film?
Read something about how you are supposed to format your card to delete photos rather than using the delete all function. Is this true?
I"m quite new, how to get white balance good outside without time to adjust between shots? Set it once at the beginning and then check the shots in post?
>>4078926Auto White Balance on your camera should be good enoughIf you really want "correct" white balance the easiest way is to do it in post. Just find a spot in your photo with neutral grey (white) colour with the RAW post-processing software's white balance tool (usually look like a dropper)
>>4078928thanks anon, I am not making anything where it matters but I just am interested in doing it the "right" way
>>4078914It is better for the card in the long run, yes.
I will be shooting a golf tournament for practice but I have no idea what I should look for in a lens for sport.. I'm using a g85 right now
>>4078489>>4078635I'd actually suggest you go for an old Canon, any rebel t5i and below are likely going to be in that price range, maybe an eos M even if your looking for something more compact.And well, most Canon cameras are the same wouldn't say the most beginner friendly but still easy to understand.
>>4078975A telephoto zoom. At the very least something like a 70-200mm, if not even longer. Ideally a 100-400mm. Depends on how close you can get to the action, but considering that it's golf, probably not very close. Try to avoid shitty zooms that get noticeably softer on the longer end.For sports you want to go with a fast shutter if you want to freeze the action, I'm guessing at least something like 1/1000 would be needed for a golf swing, so go for a fairly fast lens.Built-in image stabilization is nice to have in a sports lens as well, but not a must since I think your camera already has IBIS, if I'm not mistaken.
What is the cheapest full frame dslr?
>>4076502Start with the girls bathrooms
does it looks like shit if you mix 4k 24fps with some 1080 higher framerate lowered for a couple shots? Is there a way to do it effectively without the resolution change being noticeable
whats the best full frame mirrorless with ibis and good lens line up that i can get for 1500euros?
>>4079202X-S10 with 18-55mm kit, or the X-T4. You're not really getting a good full-frame for that price (unless you'd jump to 2k and get an a7iii)
what happens when you adjust the premier timeline to take 60fps footage and make it 24? What is it doing behind the scenes to delete frames?
How and when do you edit photos? I've watched plenty of tutorials, that's not the problem. Every time I edit my photos, I end up with something I don't like as much as the JPG when I compare them. How do you develop a sense of:>this photo needs to be edited
>>40792022nd hand a7ii or a7rii and tamron 28-75 2.8You'll probably want to upgrade to the iii or iv version of either of those bodies eventually, but the ii will lose so little in depreciation that it really makes no difference if all you can afford is the ii for now.
I'm looking to buy an A7 IV and a Sigma 24-70mm. I'm pretty set on the body choice, but is the lens the best option for standard zoom? Was the dust issue ever fixed? I'm finding mixed info on that...I want to buy a UV/transparent filter (don't know what they're officially called) solely to protect the lens. The last UV/transparent filter comparison was done in like 2009, is there an updated list on which one lets the most light through?Thoughts on camera/lens skins? I like the idea of protection against scratches, but at the same time I feel like a skin would eventually get gross and the application process looks horribly complex.Any suggestions on a strap? The Peak Design Slide seems the most recommended (shilled) but I have two issues - aluminum straps potentially scratching the body and the anchors failing. Some people said you should "test' the anchors every time you go out, but how do you test them? Give them a tug?
>>4079339The tamron 28-75 is a better lens
>>4079341Better how? The majority of youtube shills I watched said the Sigma was better in terms of sharpness whereas the Tamron is cheaper and lighter.
>>4076092I think the camera is a little too much to the right? The cutout in the fence should be in the middle of the photo, yet it's a bit offset to the left side.
>>4079377>The cutout in the fence should be in the middle of the photomidwit
>>4079339>buying $3500 kit>needs advice for UV filter>seriously asking about camera skins>concerned over "wear" from strapscan't decide if you're more cringe or retarded
>>4079419>>$3500That's considered entry level for FF, no? >>needs advice for UV filterWhy is this a bad thing?>>camera skinsI've seen some people use them so I was curious>>concerned over "wear" from strapsmetal straps will scratch body/lens, no?
>>4079421>That's considered entry level for FF, no?lolnoyou can get new FF under $1500 with a lens, less used, and a 24-70 f2.8 is by no means "entry level", nor is an a7IVthat setup is 100% fine for a lot of pro work, and better than what even many pros today are likely using>Why is this a bad thing?it shows how uninformed you are, and that you are likely buying a setup far exceeding your skill level, i use b+w mrc nano>I've seen some people use them so I was curiousyeah they look retarded, it's just for people that treat cameras as an accessory more than a functional tool>metal straps will scratch body/lens, no?depends on the system, some straps have pieces that cover where the metal hitsin all likelihood, you won't even use it often / ruggedly enough for wear to happen anyways, so i wouldn't worryif you're also the retarded PD guy, PD links / anchors really don't give wear, it's mostly plastichonestly, caring about visual wear and tear on your camera is mega cringeare you buying a camera to use it? or have a fancy accessory?
>>4079425>24-70 f2.8 is by no means "entry level"Why is this not considered entry level? A standard zoom is perfect for a beginner, no?>b+w mrc nanothank you>strapthe PD slide has metal buckles which is why I was worried about scratchesI don't mind wear and tear on my equipment but I'd rather avoid unnecessary wear and tear. I know the anchors are plastic, but the strap itself has aluminum buckets and I plan to store my camera + strap in the same bag
>>4079426>Why is this not considered entry level?lol, outside of Canon's 28-70 f2 or Tamron's 35-150 f2-2.8, there really isn't a better midrange zoom than a 24-70 f2.8. It's the gold standard for that type of lens.Entry level would be more like the 28-60 f4-5.6, 28-70 f3.5-5.6, or 24-240mm f3.5-6.3.You also have the 24-70 f4, and 24-105 f4 which fit in-between.>A standard zoom is perfect for a beginner, no?It's perfect for a lot of pros too. 24-70 f2.8's are like the standard pro-tier midrange zoom.God you're literally the worst.
>>4079431So would the sigma 24-70 f2.8 be the best choice if I can't afford the sony 24-70 gm2?I assumed pros used a variety of prime lenses instead of zooms
>>4079432Some use primes, some use zooms. 24-70 f2.8's and 70-200 f2.8's are both incredibly common. I prefer primes to a 24-70 but they aren't any more "pro" at all. It's a trade off of convenience vs aperture / IQ / size, etc. Just get whatever you want since you ignore advice here anyways. At least now, when you take shitty pictures, you'll have 0 ability to blame it on the gear anymore.
>>4079433OK so what would your advice be for someone who wants to buy a full frame Sony camera?
>>4079450Like I said, it will be good for you, if you buy pro gear then you have no one but yourself to blame for shitty pictures, and you can stop obsessing over the gear then.I've already given my actual advice elsewhere, you just have more money than sense. Best of luck!
where can I buy a fisheye lens?
>>4079550>where can I buy a fisheye lens?If it was up your ass you'd know
>>4079550bhphoto, amazon, ebay, facebook marketplace, etc, anywhere you'd buy a lens. what camera do you have?
>>4076508left is better
>>4078889Wouldnt it be the same way just with an infrared filter in front
is it possible to mimic this hazy grainy kind of look in a digital camera or with editing?
>>4079947another example[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandColor Space InformationsRGBWhite BalanceAuto
How do I learn to pose? I get girls at parties and am not bad looking, but in pictures.. oof. Especially on holidays it's a shame.
What do yall think the exif data looks on this photograph?
>>4080102looks like video.
>>4080103How can you tell?
>>4080114The aliasing on fine details, and a general lack of sharpness.
Hi /p/,I focus on portrait/street/cosplay/upper body photography, I own a Canon T3i, 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 and 50mm f1.8, was wondering if there is anything else that I may need? also, any website where pics can be viewed and downloaded? I believe Flickr neither 500px let you do it, and I'm hesitating to do a Mega folder or Google Drive.
>>4080133If you like the pictures you're getting, that's all that matters. Try to look at new gear purchases as solutions to problem areas you currently have.>was wondering if there is anything else that I may need?You could look at a new lens, which could give you shots that are optically better (sharper, more distortion and aberration free), with more shallow DoF, or improve your ability to shoot in lower light, or even just autofocuses faster.You could get a flash, which could open up new avenues for you, or even just make existing type shots better. I recommend Godox / Flashpoint (same units). A reflector could also be worthwhile, and pretty cheap.>also, any website where pics can be viewed and downloaded?Unsplash is good for easy downloading.
I put my camera in one of these triangular DLSR bagsThat bag then goes into my backpackIf I put a cold plastic water bottle (taken from fridge or freezer) into the side pocket of my backpack, I get condensation on the lens of my camera when I take it outIs there any way around this
>>4080373insulated water bottle
>>4080429When I go out I usually buy water from convenience stores, bringing an insulated water bottle adds too much weight
When should I stop just taking pictures, and rather putting education into pictures?
>>4080373>>4080430Carry the water bottle in your hand or just drink it all if it's under 1L
>>4075862>>4075862Wait for x-pro4Buy X-HS2Buy A7 IVneed?landscape, wildlife, architecture, creep shots
I like going on hikes then planting up somewhere and waiting to see animals and birds and shit, are there any good cameras under £500 that have good zoom and won't shit the bed at moisture? up until now my only photos have been taken on phones
>>4080454Buy X-pro3 then sell if the 4 looks like a decent upgrade. More than likely you'd get your money back
Stupid question: why isn't there a thread about the new iphone 14 pro yet? I thought the camera was supposed to be a "Game Changer"
When you have a super heavy lens like pic related are you ever supposed to hold the camera horizontally with 1 hand by the body only?
>>4080569You’re supposed to do whatever is comfortable and ergonomic. If you’re rocking a pro tele zoom, generally you have one hand supporting the lens and one hand on the body handling the controls. Or you have a monopod or tripod supporting from the lens’ foot, and your other hand on the controls. Either way, you can’t treat the camera the same as when you’ve got a small lightweight prime attached. Think about the center of gravity.
>>4080591OK what if I have a lens that's about 50% heavier than my body, making it front heavyIs it "safe" to let it hang from my body on a shoulder strap? It's heavy enough to make the camera lean forward on a strap but not so heavy it points straight down.I'm paranoid about the mount weakening over time...
>>4079339UV filters: just get Hoya's top tier, the HD3 UV filters. They're expensive but worth it. They live on my expensive lenses.Camera/lens: I can't help much on your lens choice because I'm a Canonfag. That said, the Sony A7 IV is a great camera, and Canon's being a little bitch about 3rd party glass so I won't even try to suggest a Canon here. Here's a link to the two lenses you're considering at The Digital Picture (assuming I picked the right ones). That site is the go-to site for side-by-side lens IQ comparisons you can actually see (as opposed to muh black box score).https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1518&Camera=1175&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1586&CameraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0It looks to me like the Tamron is better at the wide end, the Sigma at the tele end. It's kind of a bummer that the Tamron starts at 28mm. And you're more likely to stop down at the wide end but shoot wide open at the tele end IMHO. For me those two things would give the edge to the Sigma, but your priorities might be different.
>>4079450Anon was being a bit of a dick to you. If you KNOW you're going to love photography, and you've got the money, then there's nothing wrong with starting with an A7 IV and a 24-70 f/2.8 "pro" zoom. Buy once, cry once.
>>4079947>>4079949Yes. But I would also recommend using vintage lenses and lens filters, instead of trying to do it all in post to a pristine digital image.
>>4079180>Is there a way to do it effectively without the resolution change being noticeableNot if the 4K footage is too sharp. Soften it to match the 1080p footage better.
>>4080555https://youtu.be/GglWuKTrLdYI just saw this one, the A7 looks so fucking good, Should I just get a fucking full-frame, man it's so hard. Expect no street lighting in Europe next few winters so full-frame would benefit
I need a decent and affordable tripod to be my first oneanything in particular I should be looking at?
>>4075862Why was that>take a good photo>wake upthread deleted? I made this pic especially to post in there. That was a high-quality nihilism thread and some janny swept it away.
Wrist vs over the body strap? It's just a hobby to me so I don't need perfection.
>>4080454>>4080685I am completely new to photography so this advice is probably shit but I recently "upgraded" to FF after using APSC for only a month.My FF setup is about 2x the price, 2.5x the weight, and 2x the size of my APSC setup. Both have standard zoom f2.8 lenses.If you can handle the cost, weight, and size differences I see no reason to not go FF.
>>4080728What made you upgrade? I actually just want FF in a x100 format, but I'm too poor to get a Leica.
>>4080728>Tfw went from a d3400 to a d850 recently Bros it feels good ....
Is it normal for cf express readers to get so fucking hot? These things aren't cheap for what they are and I didn't expect them to get so warm. After like 10 minutes plugged in the thing must be ~120F. I'll measure it sometime cause I'm just interested.
>>4080728are you the retard from the other thread who upgraded because he saw people use fool frame in public?
I'm sure the answer will depend on the particular subject and background. However, for a scene like this is it desirable to have it level, or at an angle? Pic relatedWill post a straightened version next for comparison.I'm sure some of this is subjective, but I'm curious what anons prefer.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-T3Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 5.5 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)41 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2022:09:14 20:40:20Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating160Lens Aperturef/5.6Brightness8.3 EVExposure Bias-0.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length27.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4080772Straightened version[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-T3Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 5.5 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)41 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2022:09:15 13:06:55Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating160Lens Aperturef/5.6Brightness8.3 EVExposure Bias-0.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length27.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4080772In my opinion, especially for a scene like this, the horizon needs to be level.
>>4080507fz300 for you my friend
does static aperture on a variable focal length mean that when you are focused on something and then zoom in, the depth of field remains unchanged during the zoom?
>>4080837No, only its light-gathering capability. DoF changes
Best cloud service to backup my family pictures?
>>4080839oh okay thanks
whats the difference between framing a wide shot with a low focal length, and walking backwards and framing the same shot in a higher focal length
Couple questions. Using a 50 mm lens, is the only way to focus on the eye and make sure it's SHARP is to use live view and zoom in and box it in ? When using the viewfinder it just seems the focus box is too large and occasionally doesn't quite nail the eye. And other question, when calibrating a lens do you expect the lens to get perfect focus *everytime* with the 0 in focus and both 1's in equal blur when using a focus pyramid ? Feels like mine's 50/50 on getting it perfect.
>>4080840Amazon prime can store unlimited amounts of gay migdet porn.
Any recommendations for a speedlight that works within the godox system? Mainly planning to use it on camera but planning on using it as a secondary fill as welll.
>>4080846[spoiler]The unlimited storage service is not available in my country[/spoiler]
>>4080752Yesbut another way to see it is:I saw mostly FF gear at the events/places I wanted to take photos at. I came to a logical conclusion that maybe FF gear is more suitable for the type of photography I want to do.>>4080743I originally chose APSC because of size, I didn't want to buy a new backpack just for my camera. The FF setup is larger and heavier but still fits in the camera bag (that goes into a daypack) that I use for my APSC.From what I gather FF is objectively better than APSC if you ignore size, weight, and price.The way I see it, if I can fit a FF setup without modifying my current going out setup, I see no reason NOT to "upgrade". To me every photo I take is a memory and I want to take the best possible photos (quality wise) to the best of my ability (MF is too expensive and even larger from what I googled).Keep in mind I'm new to photography so my advice isn't really advice. If you judge photos based on their creative aspect my thought process may not apply to you.
What should I as a sigma male choose to photograph?
>>4080843your mental IQ
>>4080843>low focal lenght>higher focal lengthYou mean short and long.Anyway, to answer your question, the appearance of the perspective would be completely different. The longer your focal length is, the more "compressed" the image appears. It's easier to get deep focus with shorter focal lenghts.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-7RM3Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 21.2 (Macintosh)PhotographerWilliam SawalichMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)167 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Width2000Image Height1333Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:08:28 10:41:31Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Brightness5.8 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceDaylightFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length167.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1024Image Height682RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4080845>Using a 50 mm lens, is the only way to focus on the eye and make sure it's SHARP is to use live view and zoom in and box it in ?No, not everyone needs to zoom in. You get better at it with practise.
>>4080896thanks anon just trying to learn
>>4080845Depends on the focus criticality you want to achieve and the aperture you're using.
How do I get pussy (Or boypussy if possible) with a camera
1/125f2.8iso 100The very tip of the stamen isn't in focus because my aperture is too large right?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.2.16Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution37 dpcmVertical Resolution37 dpcm
>>4080987Yes. But you could have focused on the tip instead. Try different combination next time and you'll understand. =D
>>4080987You can take the shot from farther away which will put more things around your focus in focus or you raise the aperture number.
>>4080856Sorry for calling you a retard anon. You are right though, aside from size, weight, and price FF is better, but those are important considerations for a lot of people. Good luck
Hi bro,I use a a6400 for photogrammetry. I need RAW and I need to use a remote. Cannot use the smartphone app because it record only jpg! (dumb)I used pic related but it broke and now I'd like to upgrade. I'd like to try some bumb shoot too.Suggestions?
>>4080845Some lenses just aren't built well, especially cheap 50mm
>>4081033Tfw it's a 50 mm sigma art.
>>4081010no worries I am definitely a retard
>>4081000I explicitly wanted only the flower to be in focusBut because the stamen sticks out like that I wonder if it'd be possible to use such a large aperture AND have the entire flower in focus>>4080998Wouldn't focusing on the tip result in the rest of the flower being out of focus if I stay with a larger aperture?
>>4081154To have more focus depth at the same aperture without changing lens/focal length, you'd have to literally just take the picture from further away. Which doesn't make sense here so I would just raise aperture from 2.8 to 5 or something. Play around with a depth of field tool sometime.
>>4081178can you recommend one
>>4081031come on dude, it's clearly a typo. Bulb!
>>4075862Whats a good budget camera + housing to take pictures underwater?I already own a gopro 8 for POV videos of spearfishing and freediving but I wanted a proper camera to take some nice fish pictures
>>4081010If you're looking at equivalent setups, full frame tends to be smaller, lighter, cheaper and obviously much higher image quality.The only way apsc remains cost effective is if you buy an entry level body and kit lens, and never want for anything more.
>>4081260>full frame tends to be smaller, lighter, cheaper Can you give just one (1) example of this?Image quality yes FF is objectively better. But you literally need more glass to cover the larger sensor at the same focal length.
>>4081260I hope this is just an error. FF is actually larger, heavier and more expensive. For the first two reasons I'm using an alpha 6400. The 6600 is larger than the other 6000 and for this reason I've not bought it.I use my camera for work in architectural/engeneering field, mainly documentation and photogrammetry and it's way more than enought if properly used. But yes, a FF would be better, but if you have to carry a TLS and maybe even a drone, better to go lightweight.
>>4081268>>4081278he said equivalent, that's probably the reason. But it hardly matters. With FF I rarely find myself shooting under f/8.
>>4081281Sigma 56mm f1.4 is like $400Sigma 85mm f1.4 is like $1000
>>4081260Only if you care about bokeh-whoring in which case FF is indeed the better choice.For many small crop setups there also simply is no FF "equivalent" because they do not make lenses with apertures that narrow (price would not scale linearly with aperture either) and most FF cameras are larger than crop cameras with otherwise comparable specs.And if their performance is sufficient for ones purpose why bother with something bigger?>>4081283for moop "equivalent" means same dof
>>4081281Yep!Large and open diaphragma is mostly a meme. If you are using wide angles most of the time you want to close it to have sharper images. Similar for tele, where the bokeh can be assured easelly moving the subject away from the background. It can be useful for midrange, where bad lightning is a problem, and other situations, but in those cases it's mostly a compromise that allow for a proper exposed shot, with a proper bokeh, but an overal bad "quality" of the image. To recap, a very fast lens could be handy, but more often than not you will stop down to increase sharpness and the difference between apsc and FF end up being negligible.In my opinion the greatest strenght of FF is the sensor quality in term of noise and colors. FF camera are just tecnically better also because are usually made with better tecnology and to be more "pro" and more expensive. There are some limitations in apsc, but it would be possible to make better apsc camera at the double of the price. (but yeah, what would be the point?)
>>4081283You're comparing an 85mm 1.4 to a 85mm f2 equivalent lens.Aperture equivalence is necessary, not only to describe the amount of dof, but also to give an equivalence in total light gathered per unit of time.Even the Fuji 56mm f1.2 is only an f1.85 equivalent, but let's call it close enough to the Sony 85mm f1.8The Sony is $600 and 370gThe Fuji is $1000 and 405gAnd the Fuji would need glass so good that it can resolve twice as much per unit area as the Sony to give equal results.You can read up about aperture equivalence all over the internet, in case you were in any doubt as to whether I or the other anon is correct. Here's a bit on Wikipediahttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm_equivalent_focal_length>For example, a 50mm f/2 lens on a 2× crop factor Micro Four Thirds camera would be equivalent to a 100 mm (= 2×50 mm) f/4 (= f/(2×2)) lens on a Full-frame digital SLR in terms of field of view, depth of field, total light gathered, and diffraction effects.As you can see, aperture equivalence is an incredibly inclusive and complete tool for comparing lenses on different sensor sizes.Anons that get upset over aperture equivalence are just projecting because they're upset they can't afford a new camera system and they're stuck with whatever hand-me-down shit they got when their grandpa died.
>>4076365a nifty fifty if you're shooting a full frame body perhaps. if you're using a crop then a nifty fifty becomes a 75/80mm. bit tight for an all round first fixed prime.
>>4081283what does moop mean?
>>4081441It's the guy shilling full frame sony non-stop. He's been doing this since at least 2015You can search for him in the archives
>>4081470>You can search for him in the archivesnot really seeing anything other than schizos calling people moop. you okay dude?
>>4081473Funny because he had quite the reaction when he saw himself in a pic I posted lmao.He's very easy to spot, being the board lolcow and all that.
>>4081473>>4081480By the way, watch him call me Colin when he sees my post lol. I still haven't figured what he means by it, if it's a way of pretending he has dox, if the name "Colin" has some stereotype attached in bongland, if he thinks he has dox on some guy called Colin he believes to be his detractor, if he was bullied by some guy called Colin in school or what. In any case he's the reason so many people scrub their EXIF before posting.
>>4081480>>4081483dude I think you need to lay off the internet for a while.
I've got a fujifilm x100t that's been sitting in a drawer for years and I keep thinking of getting it out again but I can't bring myself to do it.Two stupid questionsHow do you get over the feeling of 'why take x or y photo there's a million of these already taken by someone else'How do I streamline my camera to PC/Cloud workflow? One of the main reasons I stopped was the arduous process of taking the sd card out, putting it into a reader, copying those files somewhere, editing in lightroom, output the files, upload to cloud.I just want to take in camera with the fuji jpeg options and have it upload automatically to something like google photos.
>>4081499just use your phone instead and put the fuji in a nice display case. you can tell everyone you shot using the fuji when you actually used your phone and 95% of people won't notice. otherwise there's some weird android-based cameras like the Zeiss ZX1 or Yongnuo YN455 that can probably do what you're asking for
>>4081500that does seem reasonable to me, any thoughts on using a different camera app instead of the google one?I like fuji's jpeg presets but they can be a bit clunky to change on the fly
Is there a reason to own both a DSLR and a mirrorless camera, especially if they're different brands?
What's a half decent beginner set up camera / lens wise? I love taking pictures with my phone, but I think I'd like to start with a camera. Any recommendations on a beginner one? I'm not very technically savvy yet, budget would be around $300, if possible. Something I can learn on, you know? Any advice anons?
>>4079431*thread for noobs*roasts noob for basic questionsbro go fuck ur tomagachi body pillow or sum
>>4081513>$300used eos 2000d with the 18-55but really, anything with a standard zoom lens, >16MP and MFT or larger will do
When do I use f5.6 and when do I use f8
Can an anon please post an example of a vignette in a photo that actually "adds" to its overall effect? Doesn't have to be your own photo, just an example from anywhere. Thanks!
>>4081579When you want a bit more out-of-focus blur, and when you want a bit less out-of-focus blur. It's all about what look you're going for.
>>4081588I understand your point, it's usually cheesy, but for portrait could work. Just google for it. Don't be passive aggressive dude.
>>4081480>>4081483Colin getting fucking heated today, I give it 3 days until he publicly pisses and shids himself.
>>4079339If you are a begginer you are overthinking it so so so much.Going FF from the beginning could be ok if you are really wealthy, otherwise a random used a6000 serie would do the trick. You can always sell it used again after a while. An a6000 could go for 350€ used with the stock lens and usually some extras. About lenses, if you need to learn, two or three cheap and fast lenses could be a lot more proficient and aps-c helps keeping price low.Some random examples: (prices for new, local reseller in Rome, Italy or Amazon)Samyang 12mm F2.0 (300€)Sony 20mm f2.8 (250€)Sigma 30mm f2.8 (200€)7Artisans 55mm f/1.4 (150€) (note: around 80mm on FF)Samyang 85mm f/1.4 (300€)Sony 55-210 F4.5/6.3 (250€)With this prices for lenses you should probably avoid spending money for UV filter but you should try circular polarizers and neutral density. A cheap tripod (Manfrotto used to have a decent and lightweight one for less than 100€) will be a must have for certain applications, so something to consider too. A flash is a must have for portraits and must be considered too!That said, in my opinion a zoom is not a good pick as a first lens. The one you proposed, expecially on FF is a really good idea from lenght and aperture standpoint. The downside is that's quite expensive and heavy (1kg).But the worst thing, IMHO, is that if you need to learn composition, a prime could be more useful because pone you some costrains and more often than not force you to move yourself in the space, sperimenting different views and having to compromising for FOV and DOF! TLDR: you are going for an expensive system, and the price will inflate a lot with extra gears that are needed. If you are a beginner, and you are not even shure witch kind of photos you will take, consider a cheaper system to upgrade later with more awareness of your needs.
>>4081627in the price range of a used a6000 a DSLR will be a much better choice UX wise (especially the faster AF, better viewfinder, more pleasant shutter sound, better jpeg engine and better menus) if one doesn't mind it being larger
>>4081637Probably. I wouldn't suggest to invest on a dead platform though.But a deal with some lenses and a decent DSLR could work. I piked sony aps-cs only because the 6400 and 6600 are really good and the invironment itself is promision. Plus you can use sony E for aps-c on FF Anyway my point was just on saving money and have more experience before going full involved in something not really understood just because youtube and forums.
>>4081567don't roast normal noobsjust the special one starting out that has posted dozens and dozens of times about upgrading to a7IV + 24-70since they didn't like a6400 + 17-70 f2.8and has already ignored dozens of others' comments
Is there anywhere I can find tripod mount weight ratings?I want to use a blackrapid type strap where the strap connects to the tripod mount but I'm paranoid my camera will get ripped apart
>>4081676there are ratings for tripods, but not really the strength of the mountif you use the camera like a normal person, you wont have an issue with a strap like thatyour camera's thread wont get ripped apart unless you swing it around everywherejust use an l-plate and attach to that if you're that level of paranoid
>>4081677Does normal walking around count as swinging it around everywhere?
>>4081681it's literally a strap designed to carry cameras that way, literally designed for itwhat do you think?
>>4081686but the tripod mount is not designed for strap use, right?
>>4081687No, it's certainly not designed to carry a dynamic load swinging aorund freely. It's meant to support the weight of a camera as it sits still. Blackrapid straps are the only ones that come with a safety tether, go figure. The other problem with black rapid straps is that they screw in, which means as your camera is twisting around while you carry it, it's constantly unscrewing itself and loosening. You have to fidget with and monitor it constantly to make sure that you aren't about to dump your $5000 kit on some rocks.I think it's a bad solution to a problem that didn't need solving. The strap lugs on your camera body will not fail, loosen or dump your camera unexpectedly.
>>4081687no, but the br straps areagain, you are being 1000x too paranoidso i'll say for the last time, in normal usage, you wont have any problems with straps like that at allif you hook it to the camera, and swing it around the room in a circle for several hours, maybe, but i don't think you're that retardedholdfast moneymakers are incredibly common in the wedding / event community, and attach the same way, and are similarly problem freejust googled for br strap failures and aside from being mostly from many years ago (and br has updated their designs a lot), all of the failures came from the carabiner, not the cameras tripod screw mountthe new br caribeeners have an extra piece to help locking them and if your caribeener has a lot of wear, obviously just replace itstop being paranoid[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D7200Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern970Focal Length (35mm Equiv)108 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Width6000Image Height4000Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution3000000 dpiVertical Resolution3000000 dpiImage Created2019:02:04 14:05:21Exposure Time1/40 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating1250Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length72.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2400Image Height1920RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4081690>Blackrapid straps are the only ones that come with a safety tether, go figure.untrue> You have to fidget with and monitor it constantly i check when I screw in, and usually once during a wedding day, 0 problems in 5 years of weddings>I think it's a bad solution to a problem that didn't need solving. and yet they are the standard go-to for a lot of pro photogs, must be some reason why, surely
>>4081694>and yet they are the standard go-to for a lot of pro photogs, must be some reason why, surelyBecause they're a tacticool design that stands out. They're not more functional or more comfortable, and I say that as someone who has owned one for 7 or 8 years.
>>4081696>They're not more functional or more comfortablei still prefer the single straps from a usage standpoint, much easier to go from hip to shooting than traditional straps, but that may just be personal preferencethe dual straps absolutely are, aside form the obvious pro of dual shooting, they distribute the weight differently & I can attach a bag to them and not deal with backpacks anymore>that as someone who has owned one for 7 or 8 years.don't think age of ownership matters, but I've had my BR for +10, still says patent pending on it and disagree
I bought one of those new B+W filters that come in a pouch instead of being sealed in plastic.It arrived with a bit dust on it and I used a blower to clean it.I thought it was clean but after taking my camera outside and shooting in the sunlight, I can very clearly see tons of dust on both sides of the filter. They're more or less invisible when indoors.Do I clean the filter or no? Is distilled water + microfiber cloth enough? I don't want to use alcohol as it might strip the coating
>>4081835You are overthink it. Breath on it a wipe gently.
>>4081901I did a test to see if the dust would actually affect my photos and it did.I stopped my lens down to f22 and pointed my camera at my phone's flashlight. I could very clearly see tons of small dots/artifacts.I wet a new microfiber cloth with distilled water and wiped both sides of the filter. I redid the "test" and could no longer see the dots/artifacts.Apparently old B+W filters used to come sealed in plastic (which meant no dust) but they're doing some green initiative to stop using plastic. So fucking retarded
I want to take pictures of cosplayers at an indoor convention. Do I just go into aperture priority and use the largest possible aperture on my lens?
>>4081909Well it depends. If you can get all of them in focus and you're happy with it, sure. But also consider a lot of lenses aren't sharpest at the extreme ends of their aperture. Your lens is probably a tad sharper a stop or two above. But if it's at the cost of low iso maybe I wouldn't step up.
>>4081915It'd be one cosplayer at a time, not group photos.>also consider a lot of lenses aren't sharpest at the extreme ends of their apertureIs there a website that tells you how sharp your lens in at every aperture?
>>4081919No site has like every lens.LensTip (my fav) has resolution charts like picrel.OpticalLimits has similar and gives more granular numbers for their measured sharpness.TheDigitalPicture has a tool for mouse over comparisons of separate lenses.They should also give insight to a lenses vignette, aberrations, bokeh shape, etc.Important to note, and they all give disclaimers on this, but you have to be very careful if you're using the charts / figures to compare across different lenses, especially across different brands.
>>4081958more MTF means sharper right?
>>4081960Yup, yup. It's basically a measure of resolving fine detail. The actual numbers themselves don't matter as much, as camera / resolution is a factor in that, and they all use a variety of cameras for testing.You can see also how stuff like vignette, aberrations, bokeh shape, change across the lens too. Like I have some lenses that are really swirly wide open, but look more normal just stopped down once.
Any tips for going to buy a used camera? How to fet bargaining chips? Like for a car you can pull the ol' "hey, these breaks sound funny, and the wheel feels a little janky." Stuff like that for a camera.Also what should I look out for when picking up a used camera? Anything I should specifically look for, or ask to seem competent? Last question! Nikon D3500, or Rebel T7??? I'm an absolute beginner, by the way.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image Width640Image Height640Image OrientationTop, Left-HandLight SourceUnknown
Are there exercises to improve imagination?I don't have aphantasia I just want to visualize better.
>>4081903distilled water + microfiber cloth = Breath + glass clothYou are overthinking it.
>>4081990Ask for the camera shutter count. <10k perfect, 50< fine, 100k< eww, >100 nope.Look for obvious damages on the body. Remove the lense and take a look inside to ensure it's clean (you should rise the mirror to look at the sensor).Take some pics to ensure everithing is fine and ceck for dead pixel.In my experience, get a couple of raw pic from the image and look for pixel and shutter count. if those are ok you are quite safe. Then if the camera works fine when you try it and the seller looks a good guy you should have no problem at all.
>>4082012I can't understand this meme, can you enlighten me?
>>4082044he's making fun of your spelling
Two problems with protective filters are ghosting and flares right?How do I test if my filter is causing either of these problems? Stop down and shoot into bright light?
>>4082165take a bunch of shots towards a light source at different anglesrepeat with or without filterif it's a big concern, that's also what lens hoods help with
>>4082282Can I just do it with a filter, post results here, and have /p/ tell me if I'm getting flares/ghosting?I don't have a tripod (nor do I want one) so I won't be able to get perfectly correct with/without pictures
>>4082285you are 1000x overthinking this, you don't need a tripod, why think that?just google flaring / ghosting and you can see countless examples, are those not a good enough reference for you?just take pictures at various angles towards a light source, like i saidsometimes you'll get it regardless of the filter, sometimes you wont get anything, sometimes you'll get stuff only with the filter which would be the filters faulteven then, sometimes flaring / ghosting can be neat aestheticallyif you already don't notice anything when taking pictures, then you have nothing to worry aboutyou could do this and be done under 5 min tops
What's this style of camera called and what is it used for?
>>4082462Cinema camera, self explanatory
>>4082485What's the advantage of that vs let's say a Sony A7 or something of that tier? Regarding image quality. I imagine the cinema camera gives more control over the camera and has all these nice viewfinders and extra bits that don't necessarily affect the video, right?
>>4082485I mean I saw thtjhe samples of that camera with that canon f4 70-200 and I wasn't like "wow", I've seen similar video with A7III and maybe even worse cameras
How does f value under 1 work? Is the aperture/rear element larger than the front element? Wouldn't it cause issues?
>>4082496Well the camera in the pic is a Canon EOS C300, which was released way back in 2012. Of course it's not going to look very impressive anymore.
>>4082514It's possible when the aperture diameter is larger than the focal length.
Is f/3.7 on a full frame lens that is used on a aps-c body still f/3.7
>>4082532Depends what you're doing.If you were trying to get the exact same framing as you would on a full-frame camera, then no. 3.7 on a FF will have more depth of field / what's in focus vs a crop sensor when keeping the exact same framing.
>>4082555say i have a 50mm prime, i set it to f/3.7, put it on apsc body, is that f3.7?Im aware that it will be now 75mm, but is this still f3.7 or is it f5.55
>>4082576Its still f/3.7, if you were to crop the image on ff to apsc you would get the same result on apsc. Its when you physically move the camera the depth of field changes.
What is soul?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 200DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 18.0 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2022:09:08 20:30:49Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramNot DefinedISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length30.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width6000Image Height4000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
I very recently bought an A6400 and a Sigma 18-50 f2.8. I haven't really had any time to play with it.I want to photograph cosplayers at an indoor convention. Do I just use aperture mode and let my camera do the focusing/shutter speed/iso?
>>4082576it's still f3.7 in terms of light gathering, so you'd use the same exposure settings and get the same brightnessthe depth of field would be closer to f5.5 on ff for the same field of view thoughto match the look of 50mm at f3.7 on aps-c, you'd want a 75mm at f5.5 on ffa 75mm f3.7 on ff would be shallower dof than 50mm f3.7 on aps-c
>>4082490>I imagine the cinema camera gives more control over the camera and has all these nice viewfinders and extra bits that don't necessarily affect the video, right?Right. Since it'll be mounted or rigged up, don't need the ergonomics of a traditional DSLR / mirrorless camera. Might get different IO like full size HDMI or XLR inputs, or different media storage, larger batteries, etc. Might be designed to manage heat better. Gets a lot more dedicated video settings buttons.Expanded video feature set (anamorphic desqueeze, false color, etc) over most cameras, and video capability itself (4k120p, 6k, etc) is usually better, but not necessarily.The video quality of a lot of modern mirrorless is very high (a7sIII, S5, GH6, X-H2/s, etc), enough that you might not notice a difference, but the cine cameras are just a hell of a lot easier to work with for serious video stuff. Look at a7sIII vx FX3 for example, huge difference in ergonomics.
>>4075862Got me a Zenit TTL for 5 dollars as my first film camera.Mechanically it seems to be working, the battery compartment has some green corrosion so before eve finding a replacement for the battery I need to clean it. While I know how to do that I am not sure about the inside, its looks really nasty in there.Should I use just a blower and microfiber to clean it? Or can I use some of those Zeiss wipes?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDMC-LZ2Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)37 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationRight-Hand, TopHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2022:09:23 10:22:59Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating80Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceFlashFlashFlash, AutoFocal Length6.10 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2560Image Height1920RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalImage QualityFineWhite BalanceAutoFocus ModeAutoSpot ModeUnknownImage StabilizerMode 1Macro ModeMacroShooting ModeMacroAudioNoFlash Bias0.00 EVColor EffectOffContrastHighNoise ReductionStandard
Is the instax mini 90 the best instant caméra if I want control and image quality ? No instant back please
>>4082630/p/ might hate my response but yeah honestly just go w/ aperature priority, the less your thinking about exposure and the more your thinking about just depth of field and framing the shot (composition, subject lighting/highlights/shadows) the better off the shots'll be.
>>4082684>not freezing/blurring motion on purposengmi
>>4082673InstantKon RF70 is where it's at.
>>4082630That's a good bet. Set your max ISO to whatever noise level you feel comfortable with, min shutter speed to as low as you can go before you get camera / subject movement. Then just adjust aperture for how much in focus you want.Manual can be useful, and it's good to know what everything does, but if you're just constantly adjusting and chasing the meter, you're better off in a priority mode.For event stuff in static lighting, one benefit of manual is that the exposure will stay the same, no subtle variations in exposure thanks to a slight change in metering. So if you shoot a few dozen portraits, you're insuring they'll all come out consistent, and that also makes batch processing a bit easier. But you can also just do the same in aperture priority with AE lock.I do aperture priority + auto ISO for like 85% of even paid pro work.
>>4075862whats the camera in the OP?
How do I know what filter size I need for a lens? I mean should I get a 55mm filter for my 55mm lens? Or its measured from the actual glass?
>>4082763most lenses tell you - it's the number next to the "Ø" sign. if it doesn't you'll have to do some research on the make/model
>>4082763Buy biggest filter, usually 82mm, and buy step up rings or a single jump one (52 to 82)You'd rather have a single excellent filter than many average ones of the same type for every size. UVs probably being the exception, those are protection most of the time and should be also taken out at night to avoid trickery.
I know people say to not expose the camera to lazers but they just mean directly right?
Which American state would be the best to live in as a photographer? I know different genres/interests will probably yield different answers. Just curious what everyone would pick. I have a soft spot for the American southwest. I think Arizona and Utah have some gorgeous national parks. Don't know what every day life would be like in that area though, if it's drastically different from living in the suburbs on the east coast.
>>4082848California, don't @me
>>4082907Homosexuals are not allowed in this board
One day of shooting fills up a 256 sd card (raw+jpeg), about 4000 picturesHow do I quickly go through them to delete out of focus and other bad pictures
>>4081615>don't be passive aggressive dudestfu faggot
>>4082933arrow keys + del key with no prompts
>>4082848Mormons will ruin your life.
How do I use photoshop to x-ray nipples
>>4083309for lace/net that partially covers the nips, I just use the dodge/burn tool, then use saturation tool.
my sd card has like 90MB/s read using crystal disk markwhy did it take multiple seconds to load a 10mb jpg
I have a digishit that only takes SmartMedia cards. Where do I find a SmartMedia card and a reader for it anons?
anyone ever replace one of these? Mine still works just fine but one side is clearly more indented in than the other and it's setting my autism off. I'll probably get a spare part ready or get a Nikon quote for if/when it either stops working or I get annoyed with it.
Hi /p/, I have a trusty SX540hs that works perfectly fine on auto for me. My GF stated getting into photography and messing with the settings then complained all the photos turned out like shit. so I bought a a7 IV and surprise the photos shes taking are still shit. Are there any good resources to help set up some decent profiles or something? oh the lens is the28-70 its comes with i think .
>>4083470That's beausage, baby. Why would you replace that?https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Beausage
How come a smaller aperture doesn't block out the rest of the image and create a crop effect? Doesn't the light hitting the sensor get smaller area wise with a tighter aperture?
>>4083616light doesnt pass optics like a straight line. You'll notice lens elements are shaped in specific ways, concave and convex. Once light hits the element, it bounces and meets towards a certain point (which is defined the focal point) where all the other "strands" of light also meet and form a picture. Its hard to explain, but when you make the aperture smaller, you're blocking out the random/stray rays of light bouncing around the elements that do not converge due to the angle they enter the element/lens.
>>4083586Post the pics, what's shit about them? Colors, composition, technical issues?
Do you ever feel autistic about posting something online and then realizing you want to edit it some more. So you want to delete it and repost it, but you don't want your followers to see you reuploading the same pictures?
>>4083842Solved that by posting with a lag. I edit a batch, I export it at once, then I look at it the next day to see if I still like it. If I don't, it goes through some more editing or it's shelved.
>>4082933i set up a button to write protect then scroll through, write protect the good ones then delete all
Looking for recommendations to get my first better-than-smartphone camera.Ideally I've settled on a mirrorless apsc sized camera because I like the compact slim pocket sized bodies. I have a few local cannon M100s in my area going for $400~ what are other cameras, released in the last 5 years, that would also fit into this budget, size, offering similar or better features?
>>4083984>better than smartphone camera>apscpick one
>>4081499>>4081500>>4081502So after a few days of mucking around I've sorted out some sort of a workflow if anyone is curious.Take photos on the x100t with film sims/custom settingsuse fuji's auto pc save setting which slowly transfers files over wifi to my pcgoogle drive desktop automatically uploads any pics in that folderThe only downside is I have to press a couple of buttons on the x100t to initiate the auto save, but I can live with that.
>>4084276>wifido fujislugs really?
>>4084277This was definitely an option I considered, I've already got a sd reader but one of the reasons I don't like it is I'm lazy. The manual steps are annoying and I feel the automation will help me trim down the photos rather than just keeping every shit photo.
>>4084279How does the automation help you trim down stuff?I don't follow.
>>4084282essentially because I'm skipping the whole lightroom/editing steps, so I'll review on camera more harshly rather than keeping nearly everything
Is it possible to use my laptop as a monitor for my camera to review photos?
>>4083984Might as well go with the M100 if that's all you're willing to spend.
>>4084335Laptop as a monitor, like HDMI out, likely not, but you could HDMI to an actual monitor for most cameras.You should look into "tethered" shooting. Camera connected to computer, take pictures, and pictures pop up in your software of choice. LR and C1 are great at this and compatible with most cameras. Some brands have specific software for it too.
>>4084435I want to review photos I've already takenViewing from the camera is so much nicer because I get to see focus area and for some reason it just loads so fast compared to my laptop
>>4080603yeah it's not a good idea to let it hang off the body like that, you want to either tie the strap around the tripod foot or get something that anchors to the 1/4"
Are old primes still generally sharper than a modern zoom? I've got a nice zoom lens and a 10 year old prime and I'm wondering if the prime is still better to use inside of it's range.
Are there any differences between a teleside converter and a normal TC? In terms of contrast, loss of light and so on.
>>4075862is the EOS 5d Mk1 a good cheap full frame camera or am i better off saving up for a new one
>>4076092its blurry with too much editing to fix it which doesnt really fix it
>>4084670in general yes, but it also depends on your budget. some modern zooms will be very sharp compared to primes, but 10 years old is still modern optics for a prime.
How many cycles (completely written + formatted) do you use an SD card before tossing it ?
If a FF lens has a 1.25:1 macro ratio, is that ratio changed when used on a crop sensor?
finally buying a real camera after years of doing family photo shots with whoever had the best phone, or a camera on them (usually a generic film camera). I asked my friend for advice and he suggested a D7500 due to> features> environmentally sealed (outdoors a lot)any other suggestions? saw the D800 thread and I'm looking into that now as well. Also been comparing stuff on dpreview but still new to the terms and doing research. 90D also seemed like a good choice.
>>4085606P E N T A XENTAX
What is the best canon camera for wildlife videography?
Can anyone identify this camera? All I can tell it's Sony
>>4086032then one you have with you :^)
Wtf is the deal with this oil in the lens? Can this be fixed?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelM2101K6GEquipment MakeXiaomiSensing MethodNot DefinedFocal Length (35mm Equiv)25 mmMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.9Image-Specific Properties:Image Width2252Image Height4000Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2022:10:04 08:35:51Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiISO Speed Rating402Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramF-Numberf/1.9Exposure Time1/33 secFocal Length6.04 mmFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryLight SourceD65Metering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Bias0 EVImage Height4000White BalanceAutoBrightness-1.0 EVImage Width2252Exposure ModeAutoLens Aperturef/1.9Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4084335Yes just buy one of those cheap usb hdmi capture cards from chink websites