I've come into the ownership of a beautiful Nikon F2AS. I love shooting with it but the only lens I've got is a crappy Series E. What are the absolute best lenses I can put on this thing?
>>4517142>Make long post>hurr AIKill yourself nigger
>>4518455if you wanna say things authoritatively about an improbable amount of lenses without any uncertainty with no ownership history and no creds i'm gonna call you ai no matter what
>>4518532>authoritatively about an improbable amount of things without any uncertainty with no ownership historySame can be said about almost anything in hardware-centric hobbies but do mind i've had a third of those lenses, the others are mostly well known in this board and other forums as they were favs of the fat bald angry photographer that was memed a decade ago. You can see formal tests and day-to-day uses in sites like Flickr, your ignorance is no excuse and the AI argument is just retarded, might as well say half our reality is AI.
>>4516131so, should I buy the E series pancake or wait for a regular Nikkor one to appear?
The 105/2.5 gets commonly recommended for a good reason.
Thought the sky looked really beautiful and haunting so I took this photo with my phone. An hour later the thunderstorm arrived.
>>4503753This looks amazing. It feels like being there. It looks real just like real life.
Not sure how visible it will be after compression, but there's a skydiver with a huge American flag in the distance.
>>4516497Nice drunk driver friendly street design
>>4516497This would make a great creepy photo. Like add a man running at you from the house on the left with an uncanny valley face.
I don't want to buy a new flagship every two years. I just want to have a nice pocket camera and keep my midrange for a while. My old olympus pocket camera lasted for almost a decade. Preferably nothing more expensive than $700
>>4518432>>4518433Get a 6D; it falls right at the $200 mark and it has in-body lens corrections (unlike the 5D2).The 6D isn't a "pro" body; it's also an enthusiast, hence, why it uses the x0D body size/layout.The original 7D can be had for around $100, but I'd push you towards the 6D due to the cheaper film-era lens for it.
>>4518351Smartphones rule for day to day shapshots because they're always with you. Next are pocket compacts when you feel like bringing them from time to time. Bigger cameras as specialized tools with tactile dials, plus other specific requirements. If a smartphone can do the job, then no issue there.
>>4489626Which of these can fit a 64 GB microSD?
>>4518518Anyone compatible with the SDXC standard.
>>4518520Thank you. I've been specifically looking for a new camera to last me the next decade or more while travelling. My first camera ever was a Kodak EasyShare C143 which I used for more than a decade or maybe even 2 decades, until new Windows couldn't run its software or something. The last camera I had bought was this chink scamera from Facebook Marketplace for $40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiH4Ay7YezE. Before that, I had a Minolta MN12Z from one of my shitty relatives, and it was such a shit camera even when taking regular photos. I swear, all I want is to take CLEAR and FOCUSED photos of things like placards in museums, as well as video of me and friends and places when I travel, but these cameras can't do any of that. I am holding the fucking camera as still as I can but just by using the dumb "digital zoom" and zooming in to take the shots, they become pixellated blurry messes no matter what sort of size I pick. I could try taking photos in 5000x4000 size, but they'd still look like an indecipherable glitchy pile of pixels. The Minolta felt trash to use too. My old crap Samsung phone's camera was actually better because I could have finagled the retarded unchangeble auto-focus of it to take the photos when they were actually clear.Anyway, I just need>camera that can fit 64 GB MicroSD>has a focus that actually works to take clear photos of detailed things>has a decent video capabilityThat's it. I don't want stupid effects, filters, scene moods, or whatever useless filler "feature" trash. I just want something that WORKS. But what is one that works?
200mm wide open1siso 2000
>>4516503This one isn't bad either although it's not very bright
>>4516541I like it that way. It makes the fireworks look like stars or galaxies
>>4516503Why are the fireworks jewish
>>4516398Really like this one
How do you guys find this type of camera like nikon and cybershot tx1 i cant find them to buy
>>4517954So it's not waterproof?
>>4518054This camera is very waterproof, if it failed, it did so because the doors weren't shut properly
>>4517991>road trip holidays in Europe>be called a thirdy on 4chan of all places neck yourself faggot >>4518054The battery doors weren't closed properly I think, holidays were mostly near the coast and we had a camping car (which after a few weeks becomes full of sand) so when we charged it some sand probably lodged itself in the joint
>>4518067No waterproof camera or underwater camera housing is userproof. (This is for Olympus TG but applies to any waterproof)https://learnandsupport.getolympus.com/learn-center/photography-tips/underwater/maintaining-the-waterproof-feature-of-your-camera
>>4517447buy from a boomer
imagine glasses but just for photography. photography glasses.
That's literally what Meta Raybans are. I guess they can play music, too.
>>4518343If they weren't Meta, I'd probably have a pair already. Still might, if I can find a good deal.
>>4518194You already have a camera with you everywhere you go. It's called the eye. And brain. You can snap a picture whenever you want. I took one just now. Try it.
Leaf shutter adapter for mirrorless bodies to adapt SLR lenses
>>4518397
Recent foto thread
>>4517501Alright nerd.(thanks for educating me)
NEW THREAD HERE!>>4517511>>4517511>>4517511
>>4516169>Shania Twain
>>4516244what are we looking at?
>>4510615>fotoNever read 'Roots' I take it.
QOTT: What is the most expensive thing you've broken? Was it your fault?
>>4518382>Profoto/buff aren’t actually better or THE upgradeGood way to discredit yourself lol
>>4518394He’s rightThis is /p/. No one here is operating a studio or even working with a business license. They’re shooting for friends and family or doing a wedding here and there. Profoto’s only practical advantage is first party support and guaranteed turnaround times on repairs. Godox has no support. Otherwise a flash is a flash.
>>4518414If all he said was Godox was good enough for most people, no disagreement there, I agree Godox makes good flashes and would recommend them to like 99% of peopleJust silly to pretend Profoto isn't better, and mentioning Buff is a red flag, they haven't been relevant for like 10-15 years ool
noob here again... there are a bunch of stuck bright pixels on my d3200, should i be worried and is there a way to fix it? should i contact kamerastore and ask about it? its my first dslr
hi /p/ - pentax just got my first 70-200mm f2.8 and it feels like i raped the seller ended up being $194 ($150 + $30 ship + $14 tax) seems pretty minty wasnt really looking for one but between this and the $120 55mm f1.4 da* sdm im done for a few months unless a <$220 28-105mm f3.5-5.6 d-fa hd wr pops up (or a really cheap limited; but i'd like the k1 kit lens for my k1 since its REALLY good as a do-everything zoom) i sold a bunch of lenses in the last few weeks too to make up for it, mostly minolta shit + macro lenses i never used, stuff that i literally didnt touch more than 2-3 times after buying. i have a k200d im gonna list up soon but im not expecting to get shit; it has 100k+ shutters. sold (not shown: $7.99 ship for all)-Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD ASPH IF Pentax K A09 - $109.99-Minolta AF Macro 100mm f/2.8 Lens Late Model RS - $84.99-PENTAX SMC FA 50mm F2.8 Macro Lens - $119.99-JCPenney 28mm f2.8 Multi-Coated Optics for Pentax K - $12.99-Pentax SMC FA 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens - $19.99Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Be a doer not a dreamer otherwise you will end up old and looking out the door at the world you lacked the courage to take by storm.
>>4514380can you be more gay ?
>>4514372Level not legal. I doubt the canted picture was an artistic choice
>>4514405Kek a lot of posters speak less english and more of their native language (ie: hebrew, spanish, russian) these days. I’ve noticed ESL fuckups and obvious overlooked recomposition errors are on the upswing.
>>4514176>tfw waiting for the doggies to finish their business
>>4514176You can tell she owns a snoy
Black skies from the cataclysm.
A thread for all such varmints, critters and such-like as ye may find crawlin' on they bellies round about these parts. Furry or skinny it makes no difference at all to me. I pray to the Lawd we may reach image bump limit in due time. AMEN! Let's ride, boys.
>>4517028Mindo, Ecuador
>>4517029Sumatra, Indonesia
Near Tena, Ecuador
Rishikesh. India
How to fix cricketing in the audio on s5mkii?I use rode shotgun mic and record on sd (if that matters) and there is a weird high pitched cricketing/pulsating noise/buzz. While video is goated, the audio issue ruined (made audio annoying to work with) in 2 of my films :/
>>4515914Its really only sony that has any semblance of reliabilityAs long as it came out after the a7iii and a7riiiAnd you don’t use the shutter as a dusr cover
>>4514255>and fuji have better autofocus than panasonic.he keeps saying this but it's such an obvious lie to anyone who has used both Fuji and Lumix.
>>4515925>i couldnt afford an x-e5: the post
>>4515942Nobody wants x-e5 bro
My fx3 also had thid problem, but the cable clamps fixe it
using darktable since i switched to linux and needed to edit photos. had fun with these.
I think you messed up this pictures dont have any color!
Seems like pretending to be so sick that your eyeballs barely see color, koodos for effort
Love these picrures. I also use DT.
>>4517849what?
>>4517714Some of the pictures are very nice, and the effort for composition can be seen through and trough; while some others should have been curated out and kept for yourself… We get it! But you could also break from the B&W and gain from using color when it appears to be more relevant. Half of these don't work with your preset and adjusting the curves and contrast appropriately would still create inconsistency between your images and style anyway. Do justice to your pictures, don't smear narcissism all over them. Stop larping, use color.
Since I'm unlikely to ever get any kind of Xpan camera, I thought it might be interesting to post some wide crops from two cheap digicams and a phone (Fuijfilm J20, JX500 and Nokia Lumia 520) taken over the last few years. The JX500 has a scratched lens but nice colours and I think it does OK.Some of these I've posted before, some I haven't.
>>4514643Thanks.The whole thread is just my experiments in getting an XPan look from old, broke (and often cheap) digicams and phones. The Nokia Lumia 930 I'm now concentrating on has a Zeiss lens and can give DNG (Raw) files. Someone who understands editing could get a lot from these files, but even with my limited skills, I can get them looking better than their standard jpegs.I've also printed some of these photos and they look OK. I'm not someone who cares that much about the technical quality of photos (I sort of share the philosophies of Daidō Moriyama and Dmitry Markov and a number of the early pictorialists).Digicams had their moment. I wonder if cheap camera phones are next? Still plenty of good deals out there for early Android phones (and some iPhones).
>>4515243I particularly like the last of the sequence.
>>4495236
>>4495236Nokia Lumia 930.
Who the fuck likes this focal length? What is its purpose?
>>4462881very nice tits and feet ; I nutted to this
>>4462866>Who the fuck likes this focal length? What is its purpose?Great for construction and indoor photography, and sky/astrophotography.
idk mane
>>4462866im too poor to afford more lenses
