>>4335313

The cost of film cameras is going through the roof, especially point and shoots above all else.

I actually might have to cancel the plan and just skip it.

>>4335314

but yeah I agree, why the fuck is an extremely dodgy old point and shoot film camera selling for $500? The price is totally ridiculous for something that prone to breaking down.

File: Screenshot 2024-07-10.png (372 KB, 1262x868)

372 KB PNG

>>4335312
>>4335313
this is one of the nice early models you want, just sold with the lens filter/cap/case for less than $189
if you're paying $500 you're actually retarded.

File: IMG_2165.jpg (137 KB, 1284x468)

137 KB JPG

>>4335524
I’ve also seen Olympus mjus and Pentax espinos listed for 4-500 dollars. But if op watches those ads he’d see they rarely sell. Just needs to keep looking and wait it out a (relatively) good priced one eventually comes along. Sniping eBay listings is a fun time. Picrel bagged this today

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	216 dpi
Vertical Resolution	216 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1284
Image Height	468

>>4335312
>taking a fucking cosina made meme licensed brand dog shit over one of the best minoltas
ngmi

>>4335284
because normie consoomers don't get a lot of mileage out of their rational mind, duh

>normie consoomer living life moment to moment and paycheck to paycheck: it is my duty to buy and lose money on garbage before buying something nice. once i reach the limits of the R8 I will buy an R6II.
>high IQ: if i was wasting money on trial garbage i'd spend closer to, oh, i don't know, $100, not $1300. olympus om-d for me, or actually i'll sit and think and decide if i really want to do photography then i'll buy a nice camera and use it for years.

>>4335398
>Went from an old D7000 to a T7 when I was broke after college
>Had it for years, felt severely limited after having shot with some professional cameras
>Finally decide to upgrade
>R8 and R6MkII as my choices
>Not sure if the extra price of the R6 was worth it
>Try out my friend's R8 for a day
>fuckno.jpg
>Bought the R6MkII and never looked back
The R8 is basically a camera for beginners who want to brag that they have a full frame sensor. I grew out of the T7 immediately, and the R8 was no different.

>>4334990
Heh you can see a lil ant on the 'comb, quite neat

>>4334990
>Enhanced-NR
You know what would actually perform the same as an r6 in the hands of a total retard who uses AI cope? a micro four thirds setup for 1/4 the price

File: IMG_1153-85.jpg (2.39 MB, 5100x3400)

2.39 MB JPG

>>4335464
Here's the same image without the AI "cope"
Can you pinpoint the difference?

Also absolute retard take, since both the R8 and R6II have the same sensor and the same image processor

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS R8
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:11 11:54:46
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	85.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: DSCF5653.jpg (1.69 MB, 2160x1440)

1.69 MB JPG

F-35

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-H1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	345 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:01 00:14:37
Exposure Time	1/4000 sec
F-Number	f/6.7
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/6.7
Brightness	9.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	230.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: IMG_20240710_182944952.jpg (2.71 MB, 4096x3072)

2.71 MB JPG

I'm airport ops. I'm a fucking moron with no idea how to take good photos and my Thinkphone takes ass pics from a distance.

I will contribute if I get gear recommendations for a first timer at photography with a $3-400 budget, since I have access to everywhere other than stuff that will put me in danger or active runways. There's a lot of things I see with my two eyes that look fucking cool but my phone cannot capture without looking completely underwhelming

>>4335484
Used D3400 (or D5x00/D7x00) + kit telephoto zoom lens (get the one with VR if you feel like spending a bit more, it's worth it)

File: Screenshot_20240710-225758.png (1.1 MB, 1080x1922)

1.1 MB PNG

>>4335572
How important is a telephoto lens? I was gonna do this >>4335593 but I'm now realizing from reading that the R50 is a great body with expensive lenses. I'm not scared to buy used...but mind you that's $600 for a refurb R50 just not sure if the 18-45mm lens gonna be enough.

I can set myself 5-700 feet from centerline of most runways here I would love to take a few pictures of planes on touchdown. It's a major airport so I'll get to photo 747/777/A380s.

The dual lens Nikon is uncommon, when I find them they're like $600-800

>>4335633
EF adapter for $60. EFS 55-250 IS STM for $350 new, $150 used. Sure it's old glass and not the best telephoto but you want a budget option, there us ho

>>4335503
kek I use linux on and off(primarily for work), but those types are fucking awful, they made /g/ turn to shit over a decade ago.
I don't even have pricey camera gear, hell my most expensive lens is the rf100-400mm lmfao, I don't know what it is with this board and actually giving a fuck about what brand they and other's use.
As long as you're having fun, getting out there and shooting, doesn't matter if it's a phone or the most top of the line shit.
It's like their camera is a fucking fashion statement and their brand represents them, when in reality normal people could not give a single fuck lmfao.

>>4335373
>Turn it off if you shoot with a tripod though
Don't the more recent lenses automatically detect a stable mount and turn off the IS group?

>>4335396
>>4335397
>That mile long surveillance link trailer
What are you doing, friend?
Drop everything starting with the question mark.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/275965142944

>>4335577
That would be news to me, but how recent are we talking cause homie is getting an EF kit

>>4335610
>how recent are we talking cause homie is getting an EF kit
At least since stepper motors were introduced, I think.

File: catcomp.jpg (2.13 MB, 1500x3009)

2.13 MB JPG

Okay, to use same thread instead of making new one, did some tests with installing new Darktable version on laptop (normally I work on 2.6, it now have 4.6 or something) and Im honestly feeling both irritated and helpless.

No matter what settings I try, each time I attempt to use color profile extracted from Nikon photo with NX Studio, it always ends up with either all colors washed out greatly or way too dark (and attempting to use "unbreak input color profile" function ends with overblown lights no matter what. Worse yet, each new DT version seems to replace, add or remove modules which means I can't even use same methods as with 2.6 to get colors close to original Nikon ones. When I try to find answers on search egnine, I 7+ years old posts about people using default settings or importing color profiles without fuss and getting same results. DT manual explains nothing and even refers to some old sister project "for more info". Not to mention YT "tutorials" with 1.5h lectures about color theory instead of just telling what needs to be done.

Either Im stuck with old Darktable and different colors or I will have to do bulk if not all the work with NX Studio now. I honestly don't now what to do. Here is one example.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D750
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.34
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	5502
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	120 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:09 23:19:06
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	120.00 mm
Image Width	3008
Image Height	2008
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
AE Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
Focus Mode	AF-A
Lens Range	24.0 - 120.0 mm; f/4.0
Lens Type	Unknown
Noise Reduction	OFF
Image Quality	RAW
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Single Frame/Off
Camera Actuations	46407
White Balance	AUTO1

File: noise2.jpg (2.16 MB, 3000x1503)

2.16 MB JPG

At the other hand, I don't see much difference in noise reduction. Except washed out colors mentioned earlier.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D750
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.34
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	5502
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	120 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:10 19:55:27
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	120.00 mm
Image Width	3008
Image Height	2008
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
AE Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
Focus Mode	AF-A
Lens Range	24.0 - 120.0 mm; f/4.0
Lens Type	Unknown
Noise Reduction	OFF
Image Quality	RAW
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Timer/Off
Camera Actuations	54747
White Balance	AUTO1

>>4335413
in other words, nx studio gets slightly better results for less effort

you even have a 3 part sharpening control and a tone curve

>>4335413
you're using way more noise reduction and different sharpening. the settings aren't equal.

Thoroughly enjoyed your pics OP, looks like a fun time all in all
Can't get over white people rp'ing as japs though, so weird lmao

File: 307008617-R1-067-32.jpg (2.03 MB, 1818x1228)

2.03 MB JPG

>>4334808
Nice one anon. In an alternative reality, I took a photo of that same car, right here. :)

>>4335231

I have a II. I used Ikelite silicone grease, but really any dielectric silicone grease will work. Do the main ring and all the rings on the lenses. They have a separate seal on the back of the lens where it mounts on the body. Also doesn't hurt to put a very thin layer on the seat of the lens mount where that seal goes.

Fresh and salt doesn't matter but after salt water use you will want to clean it in fresh water or let it sit in fresh water for a day to get the salt off of all the seal surfaces where it interfaces with metal.

>>4335974
should I get it serviced, if the rings look good and not flattened?

>>4336713

It's probably fine but remove them and put some silicone grease on your fingers and run it across the seal and its surfaces.

>>4336794
I'm talking about the non-user serviceable seals in the camera, like spindle, advance lever and film counter

>>4334887
Optics are more or less same in all cheaper real microscopes. Non-toy microscopes are limited by diffraction and lightning. Expensive microscopes have massively sturdy mechanics and fancy lightning systems. Optics also may have sightly more aperture which helps with diffraction and pass polarized light unmolested.
You do understand that depth of field through microscope is really thin? And anything you put under scope needs to be in mounting medium (which can be water in lower magnification) between a microscope slide and cover slide for optics to work properly. If you want anything but 2d slices of "tiny shit" a microscope is not ideal tool.

>>4334749
This, though it probably won't be that cheap. Otherwise just get a cheap CH-2 or some such and take photos through the eyepiece with your phone. The optics that matter the most here are the objectives anyway.

OP here. Forgot to explain that by "photos of tiny shit" I meant documenting my penis.

>>4334889
you shotposting days are near the end when EU starts reporting your hohol ass back to ocraina to be FABed and droned by Russians

>>4334825
A good cheap microscope is significantly cheaper than a good cheap telescope.

>>4334739
Cat surrounded by catseye bokeh balls would be peak kino
The distracting part there is the soap bubble balls and busy nervous looking bokeh

>>4334739
I think the soap bubble effect is more distracting than the cats eye effect

>>4334568
>it is the self interference of light waves within a lens which creates this pattern
really? coz I'm pretty sure it's because of the "ridges" or unevenness on the surface of the asphere due to imperfect molding or polishing

>>4334773
Poor quality finish on the optics. I bet it's sigma

File: 33648612570_503b1fa1ba_k.jpg (227 KB, 2048x1363)

227 KB JPG

Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>4326524
I just got Affinity Photo 2 (actually, the whole bundle) and I'm pleased with it as a lightroom alternative for my needs.
It's not a lightroom alternative for everyone's needs -- e.g. no batch processing, the tools aren't as deep.
But I'm just a hobbyist and focus mostly on the artistic side of photography, I'm not trying to process 1000s of wedding photos. I want to edit my photos and have fun and make some nice results, and I think Affinity Photo 2 does a good job of that. It might also be my style -- I tend to take more time on fewer shots vs. just spamming the shutter release like most of you all do.
For the hobbyist, the main missing feature IMO is library management. You'll need a different tool for that.
Definitely something I recommend to hobbyists as a Lightroom Developer and Photoshop alternative in one software package.

>>4321868
Darktable is a great example of why open source software will never properly take off. It's dominated by autistic developers who shouldn't even be in the same room of anyone with a say in UX.
>darktable is created for photographers, by photographers.
Correction: by autistic photographers for autistic photographers.
Sure, it's "technically correct" in practically any regard you examine it.
The software works great if, at the beginning of the process, you can look at the photo and know just about what modules and settings it's going to need to get a desired final result. That works great for optimizing fidelity of over-the-horizon wind turbine pictures and other autistic photographic obsessions.
It fucking falls apart for the vast majority of photographers who need a degree of explorability in their developing process, because frankly, the vast majority of good art is inherently ambiguous and has too many variables to consider with various compromises and no right answer.
This makes the autistic photographer seethe, of course, who'll find ways to dismiss this art on technical grounds then blame women as to why 99% of people prefer that photography over their autistic train photo collection carefully curated for maximum sharpness and details present regardless of any compositional considerations.
And that's the kind of photographer Darktable works well for (and generally, the example of the failure of open source software to succeed).

People seems to recommend Phocus but is it actually working with other camera systems?

apple photos, hit a few sliders, crop and export... i don't get what y'all are on about, make better photos

>>4334932
sunk coast fallacy imo
It's perfectly usable if you aren't braindead, you are just salty you overspent on something that's hardly any better

>>4329862
Shooting jpeg is not really different than shooting film and having someone else develop it for you exactly the same every time. You do relinquish some measure of control but it's not inherently good or bad.

>>4331278
scanning/printing is where the jpeg, raw+jpeg, and raw analogies exist

development only matters for B&W and lomoshitting

>>4331251
Install GIMP and darktable/rawtherapee instead.

>>4332013
Bloatware

How to actually apply colour profile properly in Darktable? Each time I try to apply my Nikon one, extracted from NX Studio, I get very dark photo instead and trying to "unbreak entry profile" at any setting leave it either overblown or washed away from colours.

>>4334934
Hello Saar,

This is the joke

Thank you Saar

this isnt a repair service board you fucking pajeet
saged

File: ebussay.png (269 KB, 512x512)

269 KB PNG

>>4333460
You don't needful that lens.

>>4334934
Saar Sony camera is outside budjet, please advice other camera to me.

>>4335055
saars get a medium format philm camra its better than daljeetal and also very chep

>>4332928
Yeah, I rotated it a little, and it looks much better.

File: IMG_5161.jpg (2.45 MB, 1512x2016)

2.45 MB JPG

Some sort of carving

>>4313920
Very nice gallery here OP. Do you have any site to share? A friend of mine just got into B&W and I would like to show him your work.

File: DSC_3123-sm.jpg (2.44 MB, 2400x1600)

2.44 MB JPG

First time seeing a mole. Think he was sleeping, or maybe sunbathing

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>4324845
With super-telephotos you're better off upping your ISO speed a bit and speeding up your shot. The barrel jiggle is significant at 500mm, even if you're holding on tight, or even on a tripod.

File: IMG_5875.jpg (1.55 MB, 1920x1280)

1.55 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 90D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/6.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:30 08:55:09
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	400.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4331027
That nigga dead

>>4335224
>>4335224
New bread for images

>>4334948
>was a gift from my sister
Cute; why'd she get it for you?

>>4334947
>do you have an anime figure
This is the part that needs to stop.

File: IMG_8307.jpg (749 KB, 1575x2100)

749 KB JPG

>>4334961
She went to Japan and knew I was watching NGE. It was a blind box and I got the best pull, but I'm more of a Misato guy.

>>4334949
Not posable sry.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1575
Image Height	2100

>>4334966
What'd she go to Japan for?
Too bad she didn't get you an Asuka themed Pentax Q.

>>4334962
But anime figgers are goted

>>4332872
Why would he? LED continuous lights are relatively cheap, no need to go flash route

>>4332885
I never said anything about flashes but nevertheless, you're wrong.

>>4332872
I loled imagining the dude moving lights and the camera kept readjusting his settings until he got absurdly close with it that it looked goofy

>>4332861
I'm an entrepreneur by profession and back in the days before I picked up photography as a hobby, I used to go to a professional near my house who took photos of all my products that I sold. He sat and manually removed the backgrounds from all the photos and then started saving them as JPEG files. I asked him; "Hey, can you not save them as PNG instead? Since you removed the background. If you save them as JPEGs, they will be generated with white background. Also the PNGs will have higher quality". And he said: "No, JPEG is the highest quality. Those are uncompressed files".

>>4332885
Most LEDs have shit CRI compared to flash.
Most flashes are much more bright than LEDs you can find.
LED makes sense for video, not so much for photo.