[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography


Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 105 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Image posting is back. Expecting a more permanent fix soon!



File: IMG_5355.jpg (925 KB, 2048x2048)
925 KB
925 KB JPG
Last: >>3289005

Read the sticky first!

Post anything gear related, cameras, lenses, filters, bags, tripods, other accessories (clothing, fancy straps, Leica) etc...
Post your question here, instead of starting a new thread about which lens to buy or what are the best beginner cameras.

And don't forget, be polite!
>>
Is there any affordable (~300) lens for e mount that covers wide to tele (~24 - ~200)?

There are plenty of lenses for A mount, very affordable, for example by Sigma, but I can't seem to find a good versatile lens for E that does not cost a small fortune
>>
File: images.jpg (15 KB, 384x384)
15 KB
15 KB JPG
>>3290637

A superzoom?

Cheapest is the Tamron I think.

But Superzooms are never any good, especially the cheap ones. You'd be better off with the new 18-135.
>>
>>3290637
You have to buy the Sigma MC-11 adapter at that point pretty much. It's worth it though, opens a lot of doors to you optically.
>>
>>3290641

MC-11 goes on for sale at $150 quite often too.

I wish the a-mount adapters would drop that low too.
>>
File: 1503528061491.jpg (21 KB, 405x289)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
>inherit a pair of FD zoom, a 35-70 f3.5-4.5 and a 75-200 f4.5, and get a fast prime
>compare the 35-70 to the prime
>the 35-70 is clearly shit, but it's the most handy one as a do-it-all lens
>also want a wide angle to complete the set
I can't decide between getting a 28-85 f4 to replace the 35-70 or get a 28 (24 if I find it for cheap) f2.8 and stick with the 35-70 as a midrange lens.
>>
Not sure if bags are considered /gear/, but...
I've been looking at a messenger bag for when I'm walking about in town, instead of always bringing a backpack. At first I was looking at the Manfrotto Windsor but I've got an opportunity to get a Peak Design messenger 15 for a fair bit bellow half price. With shipping it comes to about the Manfrotto Windsor retail price. Watched a lot of reviews about it, people got a lot of good and also quite a few negatives to say about it. I wasn't considering it at all for full price, but this deal is quite sweet.

Only thing I figured is that the 15 might be a bit too big for everyday carry. Going to pack a Sony A7ii with 28 or 35 prime + 85 prime and also an Olympus OM-1 with 50 prime.
>>
https://v3.polarr.co/
>>
>>3290665
https://www.adobe.com/
>>
I just impulse-bought a Canon 50D with factory battery grip for $175 on ebay. It has about 50,000 shutter actuations, but is in good condition without any issues. How did I do?

For now, I picked up a used 24mm STM pancake lens to act as a body cap, but I want to use the 50D as a telephoto body instead of shelling out $600 minimum for a telephoto lens on my Fujifilm X-T1. I'm thinking that with the 50D's 15 MP sensor, I can probably expect pretty similar image quality, at least under 1600 ISO, but the cost and utility of telephoto lenses was the biggest deciding factor. $600 will get me a gray market Tamron 100-400mm zoom for the Canon, but only a 55-200mm lens for the Fuji?

How is the "mark i" version of the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens? Should I be worried about any copy variation with these lenses? How quickly do they develop zoom creep? What should I expect to pay for a good copy?
>>
>>3290692
Get a used 300/4 prime and a 1.4xTC or 2xTC later.
>>
>>3290692
>>3290694
Alternatively if you want a zoom look for the Sigma 100-300mm f/4, I think pricing was similar to the 300mm Canon prime when I got mine years ago. You lose IS though.
>>
>>3290702
Sigma 100-300 while is one of the sharpest zoom lenses after the 70-200 and waay better than the Canon 100-400 is nowhere in IQ as the 300mm prime.
There is more to good IQ than sharpness alone. Had a zoom lens that was sharp but the bokeh was atrocious in a certain distance region, the telephoto image is mostly bokeh with the subject in focus. It doesn't matter how sharp your subject is when the bokeh is vomit inducing around it.
>>
>>3290618

what a shitty photo for a /gear/... what the fuck... A Canon would be less shame...
>>
>>3290694
>>3290702
>>3290705
The EF 300mm f/4 L IS USM is definitely in the cards, but I don't think I can afford one immediately. Right now, I'm just curious if I can get by with a used 70-300, mark i version.
>>
>>3290705
Yeah I know it won't stack up in terms of image quality, but being a zoom can be a big advantage and the guy was only looking at other zoom so that's why I mentioned it.
>>
File: 1491511600000_856064.jpg (124 KB, 1000x1000)
124 KB
124 KB JPG
I want a wide lens for my Nikon kit. I've previously owned the 28mm f/1.8G and the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s and both were really good. I think I'm leaning towards buying a used f/1.8G, but are there any other good options I should consider? I think I want a 28 for consistency with the other systems I use, but I would be willing to consider a 24mm also. I'm not really a fan of zoom lenses, either.
>>
>>3290716
A good alternative would be a G1 Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC USD, or the one before, the 70-200/2.8 Macro, without stabilization. A 1.4x or 2x TC works well with both and the image quality is good.
>>
>>3290719
The 28 is an amazing lens, and it could fit perfectly the in-between you would lack in 24mm and 35mm.

Get a look into Irix lenses (Blackstone) if you find even a 24mm not too wide
>>
>>3290747
All of them have slow AF but the X100t is manageable.
>>
>>3290747
First gen is junk, get an X100s at least.
>>
LUMIX g7 here. I know it’s mft but I’d like to get some lens action for it other than the kit lens. However I am still learning.

I was thinking of something wide angle. And maybe a secondary with high zoom.
>>
Is there a good way to mount full size (24'') tripod to the bike? I'm tihnking about buying one instead of travel-sized.

I was thinking about strapping it somehow to the top tube, but I'm afraid I will be smashing my knee with it all the time. Also I was thinking I could maybe fix it to the seat post and the rack.

Did you have any success with it?
>>
>>3290771
Strap it to your back.
>>
>>3290771
24 what? How big is it in 97% of the world units?
>>
>>3290778
~60cm
>>
>>3290776
This is one thing I want to avoid.

>>3290778
Since most of /p/ appears to be from USA I'm converting measurements it to freedom units, but here's a handy link for you, bud.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=24+inch+in+cm
>>
>>3290778
sad
>>
>>3290787
I hope you are consistent and use inches while describing focal length.
>>
>>3290792
>imperial units
>consistent
HAHA
>>
>>3290793
>US Customary System
>Imperial System
These are not the same thing, britshit.
>>
>>3290797
Oh, so you aren't even consistent in the naming of your failed system then?
>>
so I've been ignoring the sony shills for many years as they ignored all the things wrong with their cameras, but A7III specs look pretty impressive for the price (FF sensor, stabilization in the body, eye-tracking AF, 4k video), with the $150 sigma adapter for all my canon glass.

I don't normally care about mirrorless, but I know fuji and pentax are the main competition. The thread I saw for the pentax K2 or whatever said it sucks balls. Is the comparably priced fuji mirrorless FF anything amazing to compete with the A7III with adapter+canon-glass or is it a simple choice?
>>
I'm a beginner so I wasn't going to blow big bucks to get started. I have a Nikon D3400 (with the Nikkor 18-55 stock lens), tripod, gorilla tripod (or whatever they're called - those small ones with flexible legs), polariser, and remote.

Next on my list is a lens with a wide aperture (<= 1.8) but recently I've got into custom bokeh shapes (making my own shapes by hand for now) and I want one of those Lensbaby things.
>>
>>3290802
*We* (Americans) are 100% consistent. We never refer to it as the Imperial System. That's Brits.
>>
>>3290805
Oh yeah and I bought a hotshoe cover off eBay for £1.50 because it looks slick AF.
>>
>>3290806
You are saying that while you measure things in a long dead british king's shoe size
>>
>>3290808
It's much handier to relate the physical world in units that approximate parts of the human body. Measuring height, for example, is something we do every single day, but metric needs to use decimals for everyone. It's useful to look at someone's height and, at a glance, be able to categorize people 3 feet tall or shorter as likely young children, 4 feet tall as growing teenagers, 5 feet tall as likely women or third world men, and 6 feet tall as white men. The only thing metric does better is make penis size appear bigger, since centimeters give most people an ego boost by having a dick measured "in the double digits." (>inb4 you have a 9 cm penis).
>>
>>3290804
>pentax K2
You mean the K1 or K1 Mark II, neither of which are mirrorless. The only mirrorless from Pentax is the K-01 and the Q series, both of which are shit.

Fuji has no full frame.
>>
File: screaming internally.jpg (68 KB, 976x549)
68 KB
68 KB JPG
>>3290804
>comparably priced fuji mirrorless FF anything amazing to compete with the A7III
Every Fuji buyer face when they will read this.
>>
>>3290805
DX 35/1.8 will do good things for you. I'd continue to make custom bokeh shapes by hand and buy a second battery for the cash you'll save on the lensbaby product.
>>
What camera did you guys start out with?
Which do you WISH you had?
>>
>>3290814
Great argument, Mohammed.
>>
>>3290828
>What camera did you guys start out with?
Pentax K-3

>Which do you WISH you had?
Pentax K-1II
>>
>>3290828
Started with Fuji X-A1

I wish I started with something with more physical controls, model is least important.
>>
>>3290828
>1100D

>D850
>>
>>3290826
I just saw a tutorial where someone put a bokeh disc on the front of the lens. It worked, but I tried that first and it didn't work for me so I tried the other end and that worked.

If I could put it on the front I would because a bigger shape = more precision. What am I doing wrong?
>>
>>3290837
Hard to tell without the example, I'm also not the expert in it. I think maybe it was a light leak? Or maybe it was not enough light for proper exposure and it was all too shaky to hold it still for this long?

You could try to DIY a cardboard "lens cap", sealed with the gaffer tape like here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OevhZbURF8
>>
>>3290833
>Pentax K-1II
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4280893

pentax k-1ll is a piece of shit that performs noise-reduction with your RAW without your consent, even when it would ruin the photos.
>>
File: 7diid500.png (830 KB, 587x1073)
830 KB
830 KB PNG
What's going on with the 7D Mark II at high ISO settings? I was going to get one of these cameras for birding because Canon's telephoto lenses are really sharp and really affordable, but now I'm hesitating because the D500 looks so much better. I fully expect to have to use ISO 3200 for low light wildlife photography.
>>
>>3290692
>How is the "mark i" version of the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens? Should I be worried about any copy variation with these lenses? How quickly do they develop zoom creep? What should I expect to pay for a good copy?
Expect it to be a little soft wide open at 300mm. It might not be soft enough to matter on your 50D, but if this is just a place-holder lens until you can afford L glass, as you suggested in >>3290711, then there are cheaper options. For example, the EF-S 55-250mm isn't really any worse optically (just in build quality) and will cost you about a third of what the 70-300mm USM costs. I'd get that or get nothing and just save up for the 300mm f/4 prime.
>>
File: sony-tears-in-battery.jpg (188 KB, 600x597)
188 KB
188 KB JPG
>>3290841
>>
>>3290849
>What's going on with the 7D Mark II at high ISO settings?
It's a Canon. Noise performance isn't much better than the Mark I and dynamic range is still poor. Shit's comparable to a modern Sony 1" sensor (much better dynamic range at low ISO, not far off when it comes to noise performance across the range).
>>
>>3290853
How come all pros use Canon? I only see Sony with tourists and some late boomer dads. There must be something else than raw sensor performance. I heard Canon doesn't corrode on it's own either.
>>
Can I use an modern YN560 flash on an old film camera with hotshoe, say a Mamiya DSX-1000?
>>
>>3290859
CPS is excellent. The selections of lenses and accessories is incredibly thorough. The bodies are durable and a known quantity. These things really matter when you're making your living from photography.
>>
>>3290659
Pls help
>>
>>3290863
Unless you're neistat, dudes broken so many.
>What about panasonic? I was at bestbuy and only Cannon/Sony had decent lens choices.
>Must be nice to have that kind of money
>>
>>3290867
Get the prime, 28mm or 24mm. Get a 35mm if you got the 24, then a 50mm, then throw out that garbage zoom shit.
>>
>D750 and D610 are exactly the same price on amazon
>$1500

how can this be? I might as well buy the 750 even thought I was initially going to get the 610
>>
>>3290877
Get the D750
>>
>>3290828
Rebel T3
Fuji GFX
>>
>>3290828
panasonic g7
canon 80d
>>
>>3290828
I started with an olympus EM-10 II
I'd like an EM1-II. I want the extra configurable buttons, high-res mode and phase detect.
>>
File: .jpg (46 KB, 582x407)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
ah fuck it im just gonna get both lenses. don't use 16mm all that much but im able to get both for $550 total. 16mm has the better AF either ways.
>>
>>3290967
They are going to release a 1,4/50 later on as well.
>>
>>3290970
eh i already have the old sony 50mm f/1.8 and it's good enough for me.
>>
>>3290967
>sigma
*nervous laughter*
>buying a sigma
*stops laughing*
>buying two sigmas
pic related
>>
File: 1526179364044[1].jpg (69 KB, 850x850)
69 KB
69 KB JPG
is the arri alexa plus a good camera for intermediate cinematography? i want to get into higher dynamic range and wide angle landscape shooting for various films.
>>
>>3291013
FS5 has better wide angle lenses.
And Electronic ND filter built into the camera.
>>
>>3290967
I already have the 30 and currently adapt a tokina 11-16 from my nikon days. the 16 is very tempting, might also buy one.
>>
File: 1498248622820.jpg (167 KB, 1024x768)
167 KB
167 KB JPG
I was saving up for Sigma 18-35 f1.8, but i'm currently have an opportunity to buy 17-40 f4L in mint condition (really mint, not ebay-tier mint) for ~280$.
Should i keep saving up or should i fall for FF upgrade path meme? Cucknon 77d.
>>
>>3290828
>Starting
Canon Rebel t2i

>Wish
Fuji X-A5

Even though photography is my obsession I don't ask for much out of a camera. I'm just happy I have one.
>>
>>3290640
>>3290641

What if I'm willing to reconsider my needs. let's say, 35 - 135?
>>
>>3291046
The 18-35/1.8 is a micro four-thirds standard zoom lens adapted for APSC and the 17-40L is a full frame ultra wide angle zoom. Neither of them make much sense on your 77D. Why do you want them? If you just want a cheap standard zoom, then get the Tamron 17-50.
>>
>>3290719
>I've previously owned the 28mm f/1.8G
D lenses tend to be sharper and cheaper than their G counterparts
>>
Should I buy a Minolta x700 and 50mm lens for $40 or just save the money
>>
>>3291068

Yes.

Pick up some X-tra 400 and have fun.
>>
I want to start doing portraits in my spare room. I already have a Yonguo speedlite and wireless trigger. Anyone have any recommendations for umbrellas/poles?
>>
What's the best general-puropse prime lens for the fuji X system? i have the 16-50 kit, debating wether i should get the 27mm or 35mm as my first prime.
>>
>>3291075
I have the 27mm and am very happy with it.

Go through your pictures taken with the 16-50mm and see which focal lengths you have used the most. Limit your search to the pictures you think came out good.
>>
>>3291066
D lenses are cheaper yes but in pretty much every case I can think of the optics are worse. There isn't even an equivalent D version either, the closest would be the 28mm f/2.8D which is nothing special.
>>
>>3291066
>pro-use prime lenses designed and made in the early 90s are sharper than ones made in the 00s
Are you having a brain hemorrhage right now?
>>
>>3291066
That's just not true, particularly in the corners.
>>
>>3291075
Of the Fuji primes I've used....

18mm f/2 - Brilliant little lens, very lightweight, although not a true pancake with the hood attached. Very useful (27mm in 135 equiv) field of view. AF is pretty quick, but noisy (which would only matter for video). Can focus pretty close up. Not tack sharp wide open, but sharpens up nicely as you stop down. Capable of very contrasty and sharp images. Build quality only feels OK, but the hood adds extra points for looking cool.

23mm f/2 - This lens is often my choice walking around when I don't know what to expect - just a little wider than a human eye perspective, and it can focus pretty close too. AF is snappy and silent. Sharp from wide open, although images tend to look a bit clinically sharp and lack character. Only negative is that after a while, it gets a little boring to always take pictures at the same perspective as the human eye.

35mm f/2 - I owned this for only a week when I first got the camera and decided to trade it for the 23mm f/2 (for utility). It was sharp wide open, but again, not much character to the photos. Since I don't use 35mm primes as much, I traded it without a second thought. AF was snappy and silent. Bonus points for the cool metal lens hood...if Fuji didn't charge extra for it.

35mm f/1.4 - I borrowed a friend's for a couple days, but liked it so much that I plan to buy one next. Soft wide open, but probably the sharpest lens I've ever used stopped down. You can get really beautiful, contrasty and sharp images with this lens. AF was like on the 18mm, noisy but quick enough.

50mm f/2 - I sold my XF 16-55mm f/2.8 zoom to get this lens because I would often use that lens at 55mm anyway and the size/weight was just enormous. The 50mm f/2 Fujinon prime is smaller than the zoom, but still very dense and feels heavy on the camera. I was surprised that the AF is not as quick as either of the other Fujinon primes (at least on my X-T1). I'm pleased to say that it's tack sharp wide open, though.
>>
>>3291062
>Sigma 18-35 f1.8
the sigma 18-35mm F/1.8 Art is one of the best APS-C lenses in existence so you're absolutely fucktarded. It's a perfect lens for a 77D provided the person asking is a dude and not some 16 year old instagram girl with tiny arms.
>>
>>3290618
Everyone always says good glass is more important than the body, but what the fuck does that even mean? There really aren't that many options for a given focal length, there are like 3 different generations of nikkor lenses for the same focal length/aperture with slight differences in optics, carl zeiss has a few obscenely expensive lenses that aren't even that good according to dxomark, and then there are chink lenses that are just straight up trash. wat do? how do I find the good shit? does it even exist? you guys seem to shit on nikkor lenses but what else is there?
>>
>>3291193
Body is more important than the lens. You can take good pictures with half decent lenses but if you don't have a good body with a decent sensor and features you aren't going to get good pics.
>>
>>3291204
Alright let's just say I have a d800 and I want to get a 50mm prime and a 28mm prime. What make of what lens should I get if I don't want to spend thousands on one?
>>
>>3291193
>carl zeiss has a few obscenely expensive lenses that aren't even that good
The Zeiss lenses are the best there is.
If you look at Loxia 21, Loxia 25, and Loxia 85, the image quality is exceptional in all three.

It's too bad the Japanese lens makers dominate with high Aperture lenses that are easier for marketing.
>>
>>3291193
There is no perfect lens, only a combination of what you -really- need, what you can pay and what you can carry with you. Some Nikkors are alright. Never trust Dx0mark. Carl Zeiss is one of the best lens maker, WTF are you smoking?

>>3291075
The 23mm. Then regret buying Fudgy and hate yourself for wanting a full-frame.
>>
>>3291207
Look at Samyang and Tamron lenses they are relatively cheap and good quality. You don't have to buy new either, just make sure if you buy used you can return it if there any scratches etc.
>>
>>3291207
Any nikkor 50mm 1.8 are all right. Except the pancake in E serie with 0.6m MFD.
>>
>>3291154
>nonsensical 27-52mm equivalent zoom range on APSC is just wide normal to tight normal
>”it’s soooooo useful, though”
Literally just pick a prime and use it. The lens was designed to make sense on MFT, where it’s a 36-70mm equivalent.
>>
>>3291229
How does that make any more sense? It's not as wide but a little bit longer, that's it. Personally I'd rather have the 27-52mm option and then crop in tighter if needed (although I'd rather just go for a 17/18-50/55mm f/2.8 with IS).
>>
>>3291235
I can put a 35mm or 40mm prime on my APSC camera and have 99% of the utility of that zoom
>>
What are some of the best websites or tutorials for learning proper settings such as iso/af/zoom?
I want to make higher quality photographs and videos but i'm basically a beginner to this.
>I got a lumix g7 from a buddy who upgraded, it's in good condition. Came with the generic lens kit.
>I bought a used rode videomic for $20 so it sounds great.
>>
>>3291241
Are you seriously saying that 35/40mm is 99% as useful as an 18-35mm zoom? That's easily the dumbest thing I've heard all week.
>>
>>3291245
There are plenty of videos on youtube. The best way to learn is to get out there and take pics.

Photo Tom on youtube is good to watch, he doesn't shill anything and just gives good advice. On the odd occasion he mentions his lightroom guides and photo tours but he doesn't shill them like faggot Jared Fro knows.
>>
>>3291249
Also Peter McKinnon on youtube. He has a quite a few good video making tips.
>>
>>3291251
>>3291249
Thanks i'll start watching Tom. I found some Mckinnon videos already.

>>3291254
Not all google searches bring the best results and people with more experience should be able to tell me better resources from their past research.
>>
>>3291246
Do you even own a camera?
>>
>>3291262
Do you? I'd rather an 18-35mm over a 35/40mm any day unless the prime had IS. There are plenty of situations where you can't just move backwards to make the longer prime work, it's the same reason that no one would be retarded enough to say that an 85mm is 99% as useful as a 35mm.
>>
>>3291229
Because you're an autistic retard, I'll try to make it clear.

It is very and better image quality than a 25mm prime or 35mm prime or 50mm prime.

It does the job of all three of them without having to swap glass.

A 35mm doesn't give you 99% of the utility of a 50mm. You lose 42% resolution if you crop a 35 to 50mm. And the 1.8Art is sharper even before the crop.

Please keep posting, you're making yourself look like the biggest retard ever.
>>
>>3291274
Honestly i'm not going to bother responding to you after this post. I got the camera for free, I will give it back to my friend before I sell it.
>People who look for a more experienced opinion on resources are never going to make it.
I wish you the best, oh and also share with me some of what makes you capable of saying such sage advice. Show me some of your professional work.
>>
>>3291207
50mm f/1.8G and 28mm f/1.8G are both excellent. Nikon lenses are all at least decent and plenty of them are very good especially the modern AF-S G versions, whoever told you Nikkors are bad is retarded. And glass is a way better investment than bodies in like 90% of cases.
>>
>>3291278
>being assraped by a noob with micropenis
>absolute state of p
>>
>>3290828
Fuji Xe2

I wish I had started with a fixed lens like the x70 or the x100t because I keep buying lenses like an idiot.
>>
>>3290828
Nikon D90. I was really happy with it and it was a great camera, but at the time the D700 was the hot new camera to have and everyone was crazy about the first generation of full frame digital.
>>
>>3291154
>the sigma 18-35mm F/1.8 Art is one of the best APS-C lenses in existence so you're absolutely fucktarded. It's a perfect lens for a 77D provided the person asking is a dude and not some 16 year old instagram girl with tiny arms.
>>3291276
>>It is very and better image quality than a 25mm prime or 35mm prime or 50mm prime.
>
>It does the job of all three of them without having to swap glass.
>
>A 35mm doesn't give you 99% of the utility of a 50mm. You lose 42% resolution if you crop a 35 to 50mm. And the 1.8Art is sharper even before the crop.

Sigcuck fanbois are probably the most embarrassing idiots on this board. Much worse than Sonyggers.

>hurrdurr, it's BETTER than a prime
That is flat out false. Enough with the lies. This lens is soft wide open, which would be understandable if it was actually a fast prime, but it's not. It's only f/1.8. To top it off, the autofocus is notoriously unreliable. Even if you stop it down, the result could still be totally out of focus due to lolsigmAF.
>>
File: 1520952230692.jpg (199 KB, 861x1000)
199 KB
199 KB JPG
Is it worth upgrading my Fuji X-T1 to an X-Pro 2 or should I stick with my X-T1 for a bit longer?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3480
Image Height4640
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2018:03:13 14:40:55
Exposure Time1/33 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness0 EV
Focal Length4.26 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width861
Image Height1000
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image ID3c4dc6e10932383e0000000000000000
>>
>>3291433

Pro2 viewfinder sucks a bag of dicks.

Go X-T2 instead.
>>
>>3291433
you should know better than anyone whether your $1000 equipment is not meeting your needs.
>>
>>3290618
I need the cheapest 70-200 lens for my Pentax k50.

I say cheapest, because I only have a price range of up to 150€ and I don't expect much in this range. So should there be no super secret bang for the buck budget lens in this price range, just recommend me the cheapest I can find used. Thanks.
>>
>>3291450
Why is it too hard for you to look at their product catalog? https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-DA-Zoom-Lenses-c43.html
>>
>>3291453
Because, just maybe, I don't want to limit myself to pentax lenses.

Why is it so hard for you not be a passive aggressive little shit? Anyway, have a nice day.
>>
>>3291462
>150 bucks
>thinks he can afford something better than a kit lens
You're delusional.
>>
>>3291450

here, cheapest. buy an adapter.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Professionally-used-TAKUMAR-A-ZOOM-70-200mm-F4-Zoom-Lens-27317/253573876247?hash=item3b0a2e4a17:g:iVIAAOSw1uRZquKE
>>
>>3291465
>implies I'm looking for something good
>so salty he's samefagging now

Just to make it clear, even for you, I fully accept that I don't have much of a budget and would even be happy about some analog lens.

If everything you want to contribute is "there is none" just say so and don't act like a salty little bitch.
>>
>>3291467
Thank you so much, that's exactly what I was looking for.

>>3291465
>Fuck you
>>
Nikkor 10-20 4.5-5.6
Or
Tokina 11-20 2.8?

I want I use it for street photography with my D7200. I feel like the 2.8 aperture would be useful because I live in tokyo and would like to take some low light street shots. However, I can get the Nikon for roughly 300 USD used while the Tokina will run me around 400 USD used. Is the 1 mm really going to make a difference?
Anyone use either of these that can give me some input?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width317
Image Height463
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3291468
You don't understand what samefagging means.
>>
>>3291467
>>3291469
>manually focusing a 200mm lens
I seriously hope you don't think this is a good idea.
>>
>>3291468
Dumb Pentax users can't believe I almost fell for your memes

I cringe everytime
>>
What affordable film camera should I get to test out the fad?

It would be nice if it were compacty
>>
>>3291654

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 6D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.10.1 (Macintosh)
PhotographerTrev Lee
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2017:10:24 07:49:34
Exposure Time1/200 sec
F-Numberf/5.6
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating6400
Lens Aperturef/5.6
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
I'm looking for a backdrop stand for under $200 CAD that doesn't need to be light, it just needs to be sturdy.

Canadian amazon site is filled with the standard chinese model only rebranded, and filled with complaints about them breaking easily "But oh it's so light!"

Any suggestions?
>>
>>3291654
There's thousands to pick from, just search "compact film camera" or "film point and shoot" on ebay and take your pick. The camera doesn't matter as much as your choice of film stock.
>>
>>3291654
Inb4 "what's da best film to buy"
Watch this and buy whichever film that makes you tickle in your funny bits.
https://youtu.be/cnymzP6bL-I
>>
Newfag looking to buy a camera priced around £100-200. Any ideas? I don't know anything about /p/, so please forgive me if I posted in the wrong thread.
>>
Has anyone ever made a google sheets doc to categorize cameras into sortable qualities like price and features?

It's hard to keep track of all the camera lines.
>>
>>3291740
Try at £400-500
Or just use your phone
>>
>>3291742
You mean like those countless comparison and specs sheet sites like Snapsort and such?
I know Pentax Forums has an extensive database about everything Pentax and compatible with Pentax, maybe there are similar things for other brands... didn't the PF guys started a similar site for Canon as well?
>>
Does anyone here buy cameras for parts or do repairs on broken cameras? I've been tempted to start picking up some of the for-parts systems on Ebay. You can get insane deals, last week I saw an XT-1 for $300 because the LCD stopped working.
>>
>>3291740
Nothing is worth getting at £100-200 except maybe something on Gumtree, a photographer selling all his shit cheap. You could get a used Canon 40d or Nikon D80 as a starter camera.
>>
Taking a trip to Florida soon. Planning on shooting landscape/astro/night photography and anything in between. Thought about renting a lens I haven’t used before to play with something new.

What would /p/ suggest?

I only have three lenses: 24 1.8 G, 50 1.4 G and 85 1.8 G
>>
>>3291742
Here is Nikon's bodies:

>APS-C:
-*D40-60 (*discontinued, now replaced by the D3xxx and D5xxx lines): consumer line
-*D70-90 (*discontinued, now replaced by the D7xxx line): enthusiast line
-D3xxx: consumer line, most basic, most hobbled, most feature-poor
-D5xxx: consumer line, like the D3xxx but with a flippy screen
-D7xxx: enthusiast line, has more features, abilities and direct controls than consumer lines, but not as many as the prosumer line
-D100-500: prosumer line, current flagship APS-C camera, most feature-rich at the time of design, oriented for sports, with maximum abilities and more direct controls; marketed as a miniature Dx series

>Full frame:
-D600-700: enthusiast line, slightly smaller sensor than D8xx series, fewer features, slightly more consumer-oriented control layout
-D8xx: prosumer line, has a high resolution sensor, lots of features and abilities, while not eclipsing the Dx line
-Dx: flagship sports camera, has a built-in vertical grip, uses a bigger battery, highest frame rate and largest buffer for burst firing, best AF system; marketed as Nikon's best of the best

Bonus points:
-*Nikon 1: (*now discontinued) small sensor mirrorless camera oriented toward consumers
-Nikon F6: high end film SLR
>>
>>3291753
I'm looking for a sortable spreadsheet that includes all dslr's from all the major companies that would include things like: what consumer category it's in, its original mrsp, it's current price on amazon new, it's current lowest price used on amazon, whether it has an articulating screen, whether it has a touch screen, it's original release date, the release line its in, whether it's been discontinued, its dp review score, whether it supports video etc etc etc. Just like a mega spreadsheet that contains all this information.

I know there's a lot of comparison tools out there, but what's the most comprehensive? I'll check out snapsort
>>
>>3291769
Why don't you just make it yourself? You can ask questions here, but the most motivated person to create something like this right now is none other than you. Turn your momentum into a finished product.
>>
>>3291769

Stop trying to get people to do your job for you

The information is all out there
>>
>>3291763
Yeah, this sort of information is helpful

>>3291774
Yeah, I know it's out there, dummy. I'm asking if it's been collated anywhere.

>>3291753
snapsort is pretty good. are there any others like this?
>>
>>3291769
>>3291777
Rather than bother with a spreadsheet of every model, it might be more beneficial to learn a few things about how camera manufacturers design and market their cameras. As I indicated in >>3291763, manufacturers actually build cameras for specific types of buyers, and you can usually tell from a glance at the spec sheet and ergonomics what a camera is and what the manufacturer thought of it when they released it.

>Consumer tier (defining characteristics)
-WITHOUT EXCEPTION, these cameras will always have a max shutter speed of 1/4000 sec
-usually lack a top LCD
-usually only one command dial

Although sensor technology has improved over the years, the gimping of the controls, AF, shutter, etc. does not change.

>Professional tier
-WITHOUT EXCEPTION, these cameras are made with an integrated vertical grip and large capacity battery that fits in it
-they represent the best hardware* and smartest technology that a camera manufacturer has to offer, for the given period
-new cost in the $6000 range

*The only exception to the "best of the best" rule is that because of the orientation toward sports shooting, these cameras prioritize burst shooting speed and buffer depth over high megapixel sensors.

>Prosumer and enthusiast tiers
The line between these two tiers can get a little murky, but they are mostly defined by what they are not (i.e., pro tier or consumer tier). Cameras in these tiers almost always have a 1/8000 max shutter speed (with certain exceptions, like the Canon 6D or Nikon D750). They usually have a top LCD and two command dials. They usually represent a good balance of performance and ergonomics against price. The prosumer cameras will be perfectly capable of most professional work. In limited respects, the prosumer cameras can exceed (even vastly so) the pro tier cameras, like in megapixel count. Unless you're a highly paid sports photographer, most cameras that are worth buying are in these tiers.
>>
>>3291763
Nikon said recently that their 1 system isn't dead, just sleeping.
Makes me think, what if their Full Frame mirrorless body is called the Nikon 1 Z1?
>>
>>3291826
Just imagine, the entry level would be a redesigned 1'' Nikon 1 series, the intermediate/enthusiast would be APS-C D7x00 equivalent etc...
>>
Now that it is sunny as fuck in the UK i'm finding it hard to get decent pics. Should I go with a low grade ND filter to cut back on the light or a polarizer?
>>
>>3291833
They do completely different things so there's no point picking between them. I'd say ND is more useful in general but I'd honestly get both so you have that versatility. They're dirt cheap on AliExpress and ebay anyway.
>>
>>3291835
Think I might get a polarizer to start with, the sun just causes pics to looked washed out and lot of detail is lost. A polarizer should bring the color and detail out more.
>>
>>3291833
Weak ND filters allow the use of fast lenses at maximum aperture in sunny conditions, as well as the converse, achieving a slow shutter speed in sunny conditions. Is either of those specifically what you are trying to do?

If not, then is there a reason why you can't just stop your lens' aperture down a bit and use a fast shutter speed? I've never *had to* use an ND filter for general shooting, but they do have uses.

The polarizer can help improve contrast in the sky when its cloudy, as well as making water and foliage a bit less reflective. It will also affect exposure, but only as a side effect.

>>3291838
>the sun just causes pics to looked washed out and lot of detail is lost.
That's just called shooting in unfavorable lighting conditions. Direct sunlight will do that to any photo and there's not a whole lot you can do to save the composition, although there are certain workarounds if your subject is moveable, like if you're doing portraits of people. This is why the so-called "golden hour" lighting, at sunset and sunrise, is considered so great, and why photographers actually really like cloudy conditions. There's enough light in the sky to give you lots of options with exposure, but the light and shadows aren't harsh.
>>
File: IMG_20180514_172840.jpg (282 KB, 1200x900)
282 KB
282 KB JPG
I got a new toy. I'm impressed with how much more comfortable the D810 is because I never thought the D700 grip had any room for improvement. The shutter is also incredibly quiet.
>>
>>3291945
>me and muh gf
>facebook
Fuck off normie scum, I'm not making a fb account for your shitty group.
>>
>>3290618
fa/tg/uy here, can anyone recommend me a tall tripod mount for an action camera? I don't need anything fancy, I'm just looking to record games. 3 feet tall would probably be fine, ability to go to 4 feet wouldn't be bad though.

Thanks fellas.
>>
>>3291950
That's tabletop games, by the way. It won't be moving, so no stabilization or anything like that is necessary.
>>
Is there anything really wrong/flawed with the control layouts of either Nikon or Canon?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width675
Image Height450
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2012:02:29 11:21:17
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width675
Image Height450
>>
>>3291954
Nah, their controls layouts are fine compared to the ergonomic nightmare that is most Sony cameras.
>>
File: 5DSR0483-back-left.jpg (232 KB, 1200x978)
232 KB
232 KB JPG
>>3291956
People always say this. What's wrong with Sony's control layout? Aren't there enough custom buttons to solve any potential issues people could have with the default buttons?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>3291961

Just poeple nitpicking for a reason not to use it.

Sony menus have been fine since the name change to alpha really.
>>
>>3291961
I don't have experience with their full frame cameras, but the Nex 5n and A6000 aren't built for human hands. The button placements are annoying and the menus are insanely unintuitive at first, especially on the Nex 5n. The bodies don't feel great to hold and I always feel like I have to use this quasi-claw grip to have access to all functions with my hands even after extensive remapping. I mean, like anything you can get used to it, but when I try Canon or Nikon cameras after the difference is night and day ergonomically. They've put thought and R&D into how their camera feels in the hand.

>>3291962
>Just poeple nitpicking for a reason not to use it.
Or people who have had experience with more than just Sony cameras in their lives.
>>
>>3291948
not a group, a page, what if I told you you get free tendies?
>>
>>3291968
So you're just promoting your dogshit page you've made with your gf, not even a group where we can shitpost together? Why even bother?
>>
>>3291969
why even bother? because you can ask all your shit to me instead of drownin this board.
>>
Should I buy a 750d with the kit lenses for $570 or a a600 with kit lenses for $580? I'm planning on mounting some old mf lenses on them anyway
>>
>>3291971
$580 gets pretty close to an og A7 does it not? If your primary plan is to adapt MF stuff then it’s nice not to worry about crop factor.
>>
>>3291972
Yeah but finding a OG A7 in great conditions in my country is pretty hard(Vietnam)
>>
>>3291972
>If your primary plan is to adapt MF stuff
How badly do you have to fail in life that this is your "primary plan" in 2018?
>>
>>3291971
a600 or a6000?
>>
>>3291975

You don't want an OG a7 anyway, too slow.
>>
>>3291977
A6000
>>3291975
3rd world country mate,average wage here is $2500/year
>>3291978
Yeah so I'll probably buy a a6000 then
>>
>>3291976
It's a lot of fun tho.
>>
File: image.jpg (340 KB, 1500x1000)
340 KB
340 KB JPG
Is this lens worth it? Could I earn the price of this lens back? Any reason I’d need such a fast zoom lens? 200-500mm f/2.8 with possibility to extend range to 1000mm using teleconverter. Want to take photos of both birds and celebs /w it? Is it worth it, or should I just use a bargain under $300 lens with same zoom range but with a slower f speed.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1500
Image Height1000
>>
best wide angle lens for MFT? Was thinking about Rokinon 12mm T2.2 Cine
Unsure if that's my best price point/quality.as i'm still learning and acquiring lenses.
>>
I got hold of a Canon T 50 with a Vivitar 70 - 210 MC

When I turn the aperture ring and look inside the lens, bupkis happens. No visible iris. The viewfinder does not darken or brighten as I change aperture either

However, the viewfinder detects if the lens is put on A.
So, is the lens defective or why can't I see the iris?
>>
>>3290828
>What camera did you guys start out with?
Yashica FX3 and then Nikon d3300
>Which do you WISH you had?
Nothing more at that time, as a complete noob
>>
>>3290828

>Starter

Nikon N2020, then an NEX-3 to use the lenses on digital (screw drive Nikons were too expensive).

Also had some old Minolta screw drive lenses I was excited to adapt too.

>Want

a7iii

Hooked on e-mount and a-mount now. A-mount for film, and I can adapt easily to my e-mount bodies. Shoulda just gone with Canon for their dirt cheap used lens prices though.
>>
File: image.jpg (213 KB, 960x639)
213 KB
213 KB JPG
>>3291961

There is nothing wrong with the current line of a7 series. The button layout is great, and almost everything is customizable.

Their older NEX, earlier a6k, and even the first gen a7 were kinda rough though. The NEX due to a flat lack of controls, and the a6k due to convoluted menus (though not much of an issue with their FN quick menu, though it does take time to set up).

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width960
Image Height639
>>
>>3290828
Nikon D80 with the 35 f2 D
loved it and never wanted something else till it died
>>
>>3292100
Except the weather sealing is worse than any other FF manufacturer. I do not have faith in them to go shoot outside when it rains. It's a shame, if the built quality would be better I would get two of the A7III in a heart beat.
>>
>>3292114

Has anyone tested the a7iii weatherproofing? It isn't rated for anything, but hopefully it beats the a7riii.
>>
>>3292118
I was able to videotape my wife getting fucked as the bull sprayed semen all over me and the camera and it still works fine. You can tell Sony really had it’s core user in mind when developing this camera!
>>
>>3290828
Nikon d5100, just wanted something where you don't have to go into menus to change iso and other simple settings so like a d7100. I ended up buying a d610 eventually with a 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 for 3500 Canadian
>>
So I've got a D3300 with Sigma's 17-50mm f2.8 and Nikon's 35mm f1.8 and I've been recently thinking of getting a compact instead because it's a bit of a hassle to carry such a bulky camera around for what it gives.
I was thinking something in the range of the G7X mkii, Lumix LX10 or Sony rx100 mkIV. My question is, am I in for that much of a quality loss? Sure the sensor is smaller but the d3300 doesn't seem to be doing better than those in low light, however I have no idea about overall picture quality as most people seem to focus on the video capabilities, which I don't care all that much about. Can someone enlighten me on the matter?
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (43 KB, 294x525)
43 KB
43 KB JPG
Any difference between the Made in Japan and the Made in China versions of this lens? Looks like they both go for about $180 on ebay, used.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>3292295
I was in a similar situation to you, I rarely used my 40D so ended up getting an RX100 IV which has pretty much replaced it. However my decision was easier because the 40D is quite old so the RX100 actually performs better, where as you would be taking a bit of a hit in terms of noise performance and dynamic range at higher ISOs. Bear in mind the RX100 has good IS and a fast lens so there may even be cases where you're using a lower ISO than you would with the D3300.

Also, a photo with a compact is always going to be better than no photo because you couldn't be bothered to bring a bulky DSLR with you (and also better than any phone, at least those options you've listed).
>>
>>3292309
Yes that's what I've been thinking too, too many times I haven't taken it with me because I was maybe restricted to one small luggage on a plane or I would've had to walk around with it up a mountain. I think however you're overestimating what a low level DSLR can give in terms of dynamic range and low light noise performance, my raw files often show noticeable noise already at ISO 400 and the difference between highlights and shadows outside makes it often almost impossible to see in the shadow without post processing, so I think all in all I'm fine in those regards. What I was really worried about is sharpness and stuff like chromatic aberration but I guess those differ with each camera.
Thanks for sharing by the way, I think I'll switch up when I find a good deal for either of those.
>>
>>3292295
Consider Sony APSC stuff. Good lowlight (outstanding on A6300/A6500), APSC, and fairly compact.
>>
>>3292058
Or the panasonic 25mm f1.7 I read on a few reviews that it is panasonic's nifty 50 except it's not 50.
>>
>>3292316
Oh yes I thought about those too at some point then forgot, isn't the good high ISO performance however hindered by the fact that the kit lens is fairly slow thus making you dig deeper in the ISO range by default? Getting an A6300 would already be slightly above my budget so getting a better lens straight off is not really an option.
>>
>>3292314
The RX100 and LX10 (G7X II isn't on DXO mark) match the D3300 on dynamic range at ISO 100 but it holds that same range to 200 where the others fall, so they're about a stop behind. Like wise with noise performance they're also about a stop behind, the RX100 pulling ahead of the LX10 slightly in both areas at 3200 and above.
>>
>>3292118
My bag beats the Sony A7RIII weatherproofing. Without the rain cover.
>>
>>3292306
Both have somewhat unreliable AF, can hunt or misfocus in various situations. Get the Sigma 17-50/2.8 instead.
>>
New Canon 6D or a used Nikon D610 with 10K clicks?
>>
>>3292359
>getting a sigma for reliable AF
lel
>>
question for nobody incoming because i am the only person on earth who uses canon mirrorless cameras

i have a canon eos m right now and i'm thinking about upgrading to the m5, but i've seen some people complaining about the autofocus. people also complained about the eos m's autofocus, but i find that after the firmware update it's decent enough. the m5 has a new autofocus system though, so does anyone know about how the upgraded eos m vs m5 autofocus compare?
>>
>>3292406
The new bodies have dual pixel AF, which is a big upgrade from the original EOS M. I have used an 80D with 18-135mm STM lens, and it focused quite fast in live view, albeit not quite as fast as through the optical viewfinder, using phase detect like a normal DSLR.
>>
>>3292413
yeah, i also just found this video which seems to indicate that autofocusing speed is not worth worrying about

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVTKdRLjgE0
>>
>>3292415
Keep in mind that Canon has put a big emphasis on the video features of their mirrorless cameras, as well as of their DSLRs now, which has some people speculating that the reason DPAF autofocus is the way it is (smooth, decisive transitions with minimal hunting, but not the kind of snappy quick AF that could compete with a DSLR) is because they've optimized the technology for video.
>>
>>3292318
>25
>wide
>>3292058
Olympus 12/2?
>>
>>3292417
Hey /p/ I'm doing a night course in photography which has gone very well, I've learnt heaps and it's been fun. We have a weekly task to complete covering lighting, metering, iso, aperture, etc and have to bring in photos demonstrating certain knowledge of how the camera works on Manual mode. For the final assignment we need to complete a 'photo documentary' consisting of 8 images. We have three topics to choose from 1. Climate change 2. A person of interest 3. The underground (homelessness, drug and alcohol abuse)

If this assignment was for you, which would you choose, WWYD & why?
(To the guy about to say "we won't do your homework for you" just gtfo)
>>
>>3292444

A person of interest

Go on a date and document her over the night with photos. From picking up the chick, to the wild sex at the end.
>>
>>3292444
1. Is surely fun if you got a camera quadcopter. Travel to glacier or whatever and take those shots.
2. Who's gonna have time for that and what but basic bitch portraits are you going to provide them in return?
3. What underground? You mean some kids taking drugs? But documenting your own drug and alcohol abuse ought to be interesting, go with that.
>>
>>3292459
1. Im in Australia, the closest glacier is in Antarctica. 2. One lady is doing hers on a bunch of old guys who have small tractors, or a person and their job or hobby. 3. Yeah social issues etc
>>
I need an entry level laptop that can run a trial version of Lightroom. I don't have alot of money around a few hundred dollars. I've bought secondhand before and every time the battery or computer is stuffed. Any suggestions on the brand and size. I'll eventually want to be able to travel and take photos so being able to transport it and charge it from a 12 volt setup.
>>
>>3292467
Do you have any idea what kind of a laptop you will need for even basic photo editing? Especially since the power you need depends on what camera you have and whether you shoot RAW or not? Have you learned nothing from buying cheap trash before? My advice to you is simple, do your homework and STOP TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING FOR CHEAP. STOP TRYING CUT CORNERS. STOP BEING POOR.
>>
>>3292444
>We have three topics to choose from 1. Climate change 2. A person of interest 3. The underground (homelessness, drug and alcohol abuse)
I find this mildly rage-inducing. You can either choose from a political fiction, absolute degeneracy or a vague "person of interest"? The sad thing here is that, having taught at universities myself, I can even understand why those topics were chosen. The professor actually thinks that the three topics at the top of her students' minds are leftist political talking points, drugs and sex.

If it were me, I'd just use the "global warming" topic as an excuse to do landscape photography. You could even slip in a portrait and say that the person would be affected by global warming or something like that. Don't worry about trying to photograph global warming, since you wouldn't be able to capture gradual changes in mean oceanic temperature in a photograph anyway.

>We have a weekly task to complete covering lighting, metering, iso, aperture, etc and have to bring in photos demonstrating certain knowledge of how the camera works on Manual mode.
Metering and lighting are basically the same sort of concept. Do some landscapes in the golden hour or with a colorful sunset/sunrise and say "this is our Earth which global warming affects." You could do a portrait of a "global warming denier," i.e., some fat dude with a prison pussy on his face that is wearing a Trump hat, with dramatic lighting from the right side. You can say that the dark shadow on the left side of his face signifies his ignorance of leftist talking points ("dark" has an archaic meaning associated with ignorance, which is preserved in idioms like "kept in the dark"). For shutter speed, do a long exposure of a river with an ND filter. Aperture: do some macro photography of dead insects at f/16 and say that the insects died from global warming. Etc., etc.... The most effective thing you can do is use your pictures to tell a story.
>>
>>3292468
Well yeah I like to shoot RAW, is this laptop good value anyone?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera ModelNokia 8
Camera Software00WW_4_39B, 8.0090.11, NORMAL -1 , V000.0000.00, V000.0000.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4160
Image Height3120
Image Created2018:05:16 14:27:44
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure Time4998763/125000000 sec
Focal Length3.58 mm
FlashNo Flash
Metering ModeAverage
ISO Speed Rating200
Image Height3120
White BalanceAuto
Image Width4160
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3292472
Price in $aud
>>
>>3292467
>>3292472
Just get a used Thinkpad x220/t420 (your choice)
probably best value you'll find for a laptop
>>
Anyone here have fuji x100t? Thinking about getting one. Any good as a general purpose travel sort of camera?
>>
How good is the lumix gh5? How does it compare to a Nikon d7200? Is it worth switching, or should I just wait a while longer?
>>
File: viltrox.jpg (38 KB, 503x501)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
Are these viltrox flashes equal to yongnuo?
Used to get YN flashes for about the same price (~30 dollarydoos), but now the prices have skyrocketed.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
PhotographerHenkka
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: IMG20180516143753.jpg (2.01 MB, 3120x4160)
2.01 MB
2.01 MB JPG
How did i do /p/?
>>
File: 20180516144025_IMG_8893.jpg (1.25 MB, 1920x1280)
1.25 MB
1.25 MB JPG
>>3292512
Test shot

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 80D
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 1.0.1
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2018:05:16 14:40:25
Exposure Time1/50 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/inf
Exposure Bias0 EV
FlashFlash, Compulsory
Focal Length0.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1920
Image Height1280
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ModeManual
Focus TypeAuto
Metering ModeEvaluative
SharpnessUnknown
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Shooting ModeManual
Image SizeUnknown
Focus ModeManual
Drive ModeSingle
Flash ModeExternal Flash
Compression SettingFine
Macro ModeNormal
White BalanceUnknown
Exposure Compensation3
Sensor ISO Speed160
Color Matrix135
>>
>>3292512
>mounting an EF-M lens on an EF-S camera
>using a Chinese knockoff CARON brand flash
>paying $750 for a new 80D instead of for a used 6D
>>
>>3292512
High level faggotry.
>>
>>3292364
What sort of subject matter do you plan on shooting?
>>
File: images (20).jpg (25 KB, 512x288)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
>>3292527
>CARON Flash

kek
>>
File: unnamed (1).jpg (37 KB, 511x288)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>3292527
>6D
>still relevant
>>
>>3292535

Travel photography mostly but wanna get into street portraits and shit. Why? Which has what and which hasn't got it?
>>
>>3292545
>sony
>relevant
>presence of sony in photo threads is a complete opposite of the gear threads
You see, shilling outside of gear threads don't work because you have to put actual work into producing photos worthy of presentation, even on a third world basket weaving forum like /p/
>>
>>3292364
>>3292546
Both are alright, though the 6D has a better AF coverage despite having less AF points.
Whichever you get, put a 50/1.8 on it and a 35mm in your pocket. If Canon, get the 40mm pancake.
Maybe an 85/1.8 later on.
I would get the Canon just for the pancake, but I'm strange like that.
>>
>>3292545
>quality of camera is suddenly defined by how little volume it consumes
take your twink hands somewhere else
>>
>>3292557
This is why I usually recommend to "Use your phone" so they can practice composition and vision.
You have to be able to see the photo before taking it. This is why the photographer is more important than the camera and specs sheets.
>>
File: image.jpg (87 KB, 443x332)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
>>3292552

Canon 40mm pancake is so good, I bought the MC-11 just for it.

Replacing it soon with the m-rokkor 40mm though.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width443
Image Height332
>>
Has there been anything new and affordable to the sony 18-105/4?

I'm starting to see the need for that range with AF.

Been out of the loop for a bit.
>>
>>3292585
>Has there been anything new and affordable to the sony 18-105/4?

The 18-105 is already dirt cheap. Not sure what more you want.

Only other similar lens is the 18-135.
>>
>>3292586
Just figured that maybe sigma had made something like a 70/200 2.8 with their contemporary series. All those lenses are very impressive.
>>
>>3292592
Tamron has the 70-200/2.8 which are sweet, especially the G2 and there is the new and cheaper Tamron 70-210/4 which is also sweet
>>
I took my D5300 and the AF-P 18-5 with me to the local fair about a month ago and there was some of the dust blowing around and now the zoom and the focus ring make this sort of grinding sound when I put my ear close to it, is there anything I cn do to fix this? Some dust got in around the mode dial but I doesnt make anything really loud after I held it upside down and spun it around a few times
>>
>>3292708
Don't go to dusty places without a properly sealed system.
I don't know how your lens can be DIY cleaned, but unless you know exactly what you are doing (since you asked, you don't) I suggest sending it in for a through cleaning, mention the dust blowing at the fair. And I mean the body too.
I don't know why manufacturers do this, some basic o-rings and gaskets placed at the critical areas can make a huge difference. I don't mean Pentax level sealing, but it would make many photographers lives easier.
>>
>>3292557
>>3292551
> 2018
> still repeating the Sony user base doesn't shoot pictures maymay
Flickr alone has 54 million A6000 photos.
https://www.flickr.com/cameras/sony/?s=photos#models

And /p/ quite often has A6000 shots.
>>
>>3292747
Canonbros what do we do????
>>
>>3292747
Really, is that with or without the smartphones? Also how much does Nikon and Canon have on Flickr and /p/?
>>
>>3292751
Accept defeat
>>
>>3292753
Well, I did link you to the statistic that shows the individual Sony devices, so that question is pretty strange? The Sony smartphones are separately listed there.

What you can't immediately see in that linkage is however that as far as I can tell, without the Galaxy S7, the A6000 and 5D III are tied for the cameras with the highest activity factor.

So that their respective users would post nothing is pretty much the opposite of true.

[No doubt the 5D III shots look nicer on average with the better lenses and all, but that's not what I'm responding to.]

>>3292755
Yea, but it gets used on /p/ too.

And again, apparently the people who own it post plenty on much bigger sites with better statistics coverage, so really, the suggestion is justifiably solid.
>>
>>3292763
Market shares aren't fixed to begin with, Sony obviously has been eating some of Canon's/Nikon's plus smaller manufacturer's to get where they are at now - particularly noteworthy on the IL cameras.

Either way, the A6000 has pretty significant numbers of published photos even if it doesn't rival the smartphones, and more to the point, the people who have one shoot with it and publish a lot on average. (Activity factor)

Go click through the brands, you'll see it too.
https://www.flickr.com/cameras/

Lastly, just FYI, you know who makes most (all?) of the iPhone sensors, as well as the sensors on a lot of the Galaxy S series (Samsung actually mixed them on some)? Yup... this one shuffled pretty fast.

Of course if Sony wins completely there, I think we all loose, but your looking down on Sony's market share is rather unwarranted overall.
>>
>>3292772
> yet the majority of the photos posted aren't from Sony
As if any camera had the absolute majority. Even on Flicker of course they are not the majority of cameras or photos, unless maybe you count the Sony smartphone sensors, too.

What you observe is the simple fact that those who *DID* get an A6000 post a lot of photos. And that it's not a tiny number overall. So the idea that this is a camera where people wouldn't bother to post with IF they get it is the thing that is false.

Again, that doesn't mean they beat the iPhone, Samsung, Canon, Nikon and scanned film all at once or anything else. Just that it's a good camera that apparently encourages posting photos.
>>
What do you guys think about lighting? How much should I spend on lighting if I want higher quality indoor photos of objects.
>>
>>3292781
> we're talking about shilling vs photos uploaded on /P/
Unless /p/ is special and the only place where people can post photos, it doesn't relate to why the A6000 is a good suggestion and statements like
> this is the problem with recommending "used Sony A6000"
> no skill in using it and no confidence in their work to upload anything.
> shilling outside of gear threads don't work because you have to put actual work into producing photos worthy of presentation

Maybe people only come here for the gear advice and then post on flickr?

> Sony users shill more in /gear/ than the amount of photos they upload.
Numbers then? How many people have an A6000 and how many posted photos on /p/? How many did they post per user? How many wrote in gear threads?

> The shilling is louder than the uploading.
Not in the places like flickr where we have statistics for this.

Go complain about how there aren't enough webm / linked YT videos when the video thread has like 1/4 or so of the posts of the photo gear thread,
>>
Anyone having any experience with Panasonic's 2.8 zooms? I'm thinking of getting both. That along with my 50 mm prime should be a pretty versatile hobbyist setup, no?
>>
>>3292790
Any recommendations based on a $50 for one lamp/light budget? I'm reading reviews on amazon but it seems a lot of them are very similar in quality at that price.
>Obviously not super professional, I just want to up my game.
>>
>>3292785
I think I got another possible explanation.

So people ask a gear question and the A6000 users think it is a good suggestion from their experience. Somehow this triggers a bunch of people like you and since you apparently don't acknowledge numbers from sources where they exist, there's no real way for me to objectively end this discussion.

We could go on for quite a while then, and that'd fill the thread, and it'd be about half about the [maybe few] people defending their suggestion.

> It's sad but your shilling for them with Flickr stats is also backing up the meme
More like you just say these are invalid because you got nothing better.

This simply shows [a much bigger sample of] people apparently use their A6000 and post a lot when they have it.

This thread isn't exclusively to suggest cameras to only use on /p/ anyhow. So even IF you were actually right about people then not posting "equally" much on /p/ [which I have no actual numbers to judge], it'd not necessarily matter to the suggestion. So they went to [mostly?] post on /g/ or /a/ or /diy/ or even flickr. That's just fine as far as I'm concerned.
>>
>>3292792
With that budget, it's not that easy - basically probably get those Chinese CFL lights from Ali or [typically costs more] Amazon.

If you were willing to spend slightly more for portability and adjustment, I'd suggest getting YN660 manual flashlight(s), they currently cost ~$75 each. [Constant fluctuations with exchange rates and all that.]
>>
https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/pentax-news/ricoh-releases-sdk-for-pentax-cameras.html

Interesting news. Does this mean we will see some actually thought out pieces of software for PC/Mac and Android/iOS?
>>
File: panasonic-lumix-g7.jpg (68 KB, 750x750)
68 KB
68 KB JPG
Is there a better compact camera for under $600 that has a flip around screen?

I didn't love the G7 when I tried it out in person, but can't find anything else that has a flip screen. Was looking at the a6000 and the m10 mark ii until I realized their screen don't actually flip all the way around.
>>
>>3292744
I'm not sure if it really needs to be cleaned, there's nothing affeccting the images and the sensor's totally clean
>>
>>3292921
>>3292927
You won't find many (any?) bodies with EVFs with tilting up screens, just to the side like the G7. That's why the A5100 can do it. Is an EVF important to you?

By compact camera you just mean mirrorless right and not an actual compact? They're not really that small once you've got a lens on them unless you stick with a pancake prime or one of those extending electronic zooms. If you wanted something that's actually small enough to be pocketable an RX100 has an EVF and a tilting up forward facing screen.
>>
dear /gear/,

i'm looking at cheap, used 16mp point and shoots as a beater. what models are recommended as having enduring or quirky photo quality? and by cheap i mean garage sale cheap.
>>
>>3292772
>>3292781


The people asking for baby’s first dslr aren’t usually the people who would continue to post to /p/. There may be few a6000 shooters on /p/, but there are quite a few here who post a7 shots.

Honestly, you just sound extremely butthurt that someone would buy a camera you don’t like.
>>
>>3292929
Sure, wait a few months when you will have to buy a new camera instead of a cheap cleaning service because the dust chewed up your dials and electronics.
It will also chew up your lens' precise mechanism too.
>>
>>3292964
On the contrary, you are the one who is butthurt that no one is taking your favourite brand seriously for serious work and continue to use their Nikons and Canons, even for hobby.
The most A7 shots I saw was from the chosis troll. I wouldn't bring that up as an example.
>>
>>3293029
Is there really any evidence of that happening before? 'm not really sure who I should take it to for cleaning if it's really that big of an issue
>>
File: vUlpO0M.jpg (759 KB, 3657x2650)
759 KB
759 KB JPG
>>3293034

>https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/05/how-to-ruin-your-gear-in-5-minutes-without-water/
>>
>>3292960
> and by cheap i mean garage sale cheap.
The camera you get at a garage sale, or your current smartphone.
>>
File: 81UMg%2BP5eqL._SL1500_.jpg (375 KB, 1500x1500)
375 KB
375 KB JPG
>have an older canon flash
>it works on my fuji
>look for a cheap transmitter but seems like none of them are specifically made for fuji

anyone have experience with these sort of things and fuji
might look into a more solid variant later on i just want to see what i can do with this playing around
>>
>>3293060
I think Godox also had Fuji compatibility and they're relatively cheap.

Or you could use manual flashes like a YN660 and the 560TX. Also cheap.
>>
>>3293060

Fuji has piss poor third party support for things like that.

You could just get a cheap goddox or nissin flash though. Pretty sure they have Fuji variants.
>>
File: 1_oly.jpg (42 KB, 720x479)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
Sup lads, I've seen a Olympus 35SP in fucking mint condition in my city, here's some photos. Should I take the plunge and sell some bitcoin to buy it?
They are super rare in Argentina and I've never seen one in such good condition, also at a good price
>>
File: 2_oly.jpg (29 KB, 720x479)
29 KB
29 KB JPG
>>3293077
Seller also said it needs a cle because 1/4 and slower run a little bit slow and focus is a tad stiff, but since i cle every film cam I buy that's no concern. Anyone tried one before? All I read about them is praises
>>
>>3293062
>>3293069
gues i'll stick to setting up reflection cards for a bit
>>
>>3293060
Cheap yongnuo triggers work fine in manual, i have old sets of rf602 that work flawlessly. They were like 20 eurobucks a set.

>>3293069
That is not true at all. Nissin has a complete wireless system, godox has one of the best systems on the market, cactus triggers let you use canon or nikon flash systems with fuji.
>>
>>3293096
Just to be clear, I >>3293062 wasn't making a hesitant suggestion against these. They're both pretty great.

The YN660 is like a $500-600 Canon flash unit without TTL (but that light output used to cost that much on a portable strobe), for $75 or so. Very nice operation on the back interface and with RF triggers.

And the Godox system also is neat.

And not least of all, both of these allow you to switch camera systems or sell parts to users of other camera systems.

The other anon (>>3293069) has a different opinion.
>>
How much does scratches in front element effect to picture quality?
>>
>>3293154
In strong direct light, they might reduce contrast or exacerbate flare.
>>
>>3293060
If you care about manual only, you don't need any compatibility, it's a universal standard, you just need a simple trigger signal.

Only thing to be aware of is, if you're using a leaf shutter fuji, the highest shutter speeds might be faster than the flash's duration.

You can check the timings in the manual, but many flashes have a duration of 1/350s at full power (and shorter at decreased power), so be careful if you're using 1/500 shutter speed or faster.
And same for some transmitters, the cheap ones might not trigger accurately and reliably at 1/500 and faster.
>>
>>3293157
Ok. Does scratches in back element effect more?
>>
>>3293163
I don't know. Why or how would you manage to scratch the rear element?
>>
Anymore comments on this lens? >>3290692
>>
>>3293164
Old lenses aren't always in mint condition
>>
>>3293041
Yikes.
>>
Next thread: >>3293171

>>3293171

>>3293171

Use it when this one caps out.
>>
>>3293162
oh thats good to hear, yea i don't care for TTL and it barely makes 1/125th on the camera itself
>>
>>3293041
Alright, I'll get it cleaned I'm not sure where the best place to get it done is
>>
>>3290812
It seems to you that describing the height of a person in feet is easier because you are used to that system and were given no alternative. Also because you are a fucking moron.
>>
File: 1520058511567.png (2.17 MB, 543x4640)
2.17 MB
2.17 MB PNG
>>3293191
You could say that, but I'm not alone. Euros don't think it's easier to use metric either.

This is why I think that you're probably an American LARPing as a Euro.
>>
>>3293192
>anecdotal statistics of one
I bet you also believe the earth is flat
>>
>>3293198
Post a screencap from this thread that includes one of your (You)'s on /int/, and then link it here. I want to see your flag.
>>
Is it an absurd move to trade a Ricoh GR for a similarly priced medium format camera? totally different setups, but I'm thinking about moving to film for a while, and ive never shot mf
>>
>>3293199
I don't need to, magyar vagyok, te gennytarisznya
>>
>>3293201
you'll miss having a compact, if the gr is the only one you have.

mf is great, but there are also lots of cheap entry points into 6x6 and 645 that you can get after without giving away other gear.
>>
>>3293202
>posts a phrase from google translate
>refuses to do such a simple task as I have described
You think I don't know how my fellow Amerimutts try to save face online?
>>
>>3293201
Just buy the MF camera, that's what I did and its fun having both to play around with. Ricoh GR is such a nice camera you'll really miss it. Which MF camera are you thinking of?
>>
>>3293201
these
>>3293203
>>3293206
Also you can use the GR as a lightmeter too
>>
>>3293206
>>3293203
>>3293207
trust me, I'd love to keep the GR and ALSO buy a MF setup, but funds are a bit too tight :/

ive only been shooting w/ compacts lately (the GR and an XA2) so the allure of MF has been tempting

I've had my eye on a few Pentax 645s, but I'm totally open to suggestions
>>
File: x-mount.jpg (263 KB, 880x442)
263 KB
263 KB JPG
Is this enough lenses?
>>
>>3293201
Since they're completely different, it's going to be a very personal decision.
>>
>>3292927
guess i'll take another look at it. was close to getting a 6000, but thought the 5100 was an unnecessary step down

>>3292933
don't care about the view finder at all. I'm looking mainly at the mirrorless cams just because of their size in comparison to a dslr, and because they have interchangeable lenses (already have a half decent p&s).

I'm really just trying to find a compact interchangeable lens camera that has a flip screen, good build quality, good iq, but isn't more than like 5 years old. I'm willing to buy used, but don't want to spend more than 600. The G7 is 500 right now, but I don't love the build quality.

Gonna look into the a5100 a little more and the Samsung NX500, which I just noticed on dp.
>>
File: sony e 18-135.png (339 KB, 1009x727)
339 KB
339 KB PNG
Yikes.
>>
>>3293229

all of sony's cheap lenses have terrible native distortion and problems that get fixed in-camera.
>>
>>3293231
That's not a cheap lens.
>>
>>3293163
Yes.
>>
>>3293229
>look at this superzoom lens having horrible amount of distortion at the wide end
>am I cool now?
All superzoom lenses have some caveats, the bigger zoom range always comes with compromise. It's totally normal, a single push of a button gets rid of it in any processing software
>>
>>3293232
I just checked and it's currently going for $500 new, not exactly expensive as far as lenses go either.
>>
>>3293272
It costs more than an a6000.
>>
Getting into wedding photography. I shoot sony have a good 50mm, good 35mm and the 24-70.

I'm thinking of getting either the 24-105 f4 or the 70-200 f4.

Any hot takes on which I should get?
>>
>>3293281
The 70-200 allows you to be further away from your subject which makes taking a few creepshots later if that’s your thing
>>
>>3293229

How many times are you gonna post this?

At least post the test shot and not a screenshot of a youtube video?

And a quick google shows the Canon version to have about the same amount of distortion.
>>
File: nikon-1.jpg (415 KB, 1890x1384)
415 KB
415 KB JPG
Hello /p/! I am a new fag when it comes to photography, and im looking into getting my first camera. I've been looking at Nikons mostly and I think im gonna go with the D3400. Any thoughts or recommendations?
>>
>>3293480
Stock lens is only gonna get decent pictures outdoors on bright sunny days, consider investing in a better lens, like the 35mm f/1.8 if you want something different from your smartphone's pictures.
>>
>>3293480
Consider investing in a macro lens. It comes in handy if you want to get good close up shots of stuff you plan on selling on eBay, and extreme close up photos are cool and unique.
>>
so a good friend of mine wants an instant camera for their birthday, are there any nice ones out there that aren't too pricy? I've come across the instax mini fujifilm one, but i wanna know if any of you guys can recommend a more solid option.
>>
>>3290828
>D50 (2005)

>Not sure, don't remember what my options were. Maybe a D2H or D2X

Have a D7200 now.
>>
>>3290828
D7000

Nikon FF mirrorless :(
>>
>>3295673
instax mini 70 or 90 (the 90 uses rechargable battery).

If your friend would like a square format one, the instax SQUARE SQ6 comes out this week (square film cost roughly 60% more than the mini one and the picture is 35% larger).
>>
A6000 or Oly EM-10 Mk 2? that's what i can currently afford second-hand, unfortunately. not interested in full frame, want something as small and fun to shoot with as possible around 35-50mm focal lengths. oly annoys me with its slightly worse shallow DOF capabilities, sony annoys me with the lack of ibis. what do, anons?
>>
How useful is a 70-200 or 80-200 f/2.8 as a general purpose lens? I'm shooting a relative's wedding and was going to bring these:

>Sigma 10-20 f/3.5
>Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 (image stabilized)
>a 50mm f/1.1 (on APS-C, it's equivalent to 80 which is for portraits)

I keep seeing people suggesting a 70/80-200 but for a wedding is this necessary?




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.