Just ordered my first p1100 superzoom. What should I expect? Will my new zoom addiction be satisfied?
https://youtu.be/Xky4d24xC0s
>>4527100>>4527102>>4527107Those are small res sampling. In thelow probability that you are not trolling (like Ambush did with the P900) , for a good photo you will want the megapickles and the fine detail. You won't have any fine detail when everything is mush from haze and atmospheric effects. I have been chasing this shit for a decade and no matter how big of a lens you go you cannot rule out the physics and atmosphere
>>4527125I used to make pictures with a 10Mpix Canon camera. You don't need more really.
>>4527126Not with that price. That same 10MP camera costs about $40-100 today depending if it comes with a kit lens or not.
>>4527129You pay for the 3000mm lens.
I want to get back into shooting film. How's the film and film camera market looking since 5 years ago?
>>4526665Yep I don't see the harm in making money while also enjoying a hobby. Most of my kit was also bought at 50% or less of market value.
>>4526532Why do you think people own multiple bodies?
>>4526512Don't assume, baby boy>>4526513This is what I figured. I got out of it and went digital because I had not the budget at the time to keep shooting film. I'm just hoping it stabilized instead of continuing the pace I saw 5-6 years ago>>4526532I don't hoard. I've got one working camera already, sure, but I want a Pen F. It's been in the back of my mind for the better part of a decade, but I've never pulled the trigger on buying it. I have an Agat 18k, but I don't consider it to be working since it's only questionably reliable.
>>4526705> I'm just hoping it stabilized instead of continuing the pace I saw 5-6 years agoI'd say prices are still pretty garbage but availability isn't as bad as it was during COVID.
I buy Sears KSX 1.7s for around $20, low-ball if you have to
Insta and whatever else thread for wherever anons post their photos.https://www.instagram.com/mondatta.photography/Do any of you tend to go for certain themes and styles? Or just try anything?
>>4525281nice referral link, shlomo.
>>4496839https://www.instagram.com/horgen_foto/Mostly just wedding photography, stage shows and travel photos.
>>4496969This simply isn't the case.It's the Instagram algorithm. I basically ONLY follow other photographers, and yet I basically NEVER see any of their posts pop up, even though I like them every single time.Also, the algorithm will ONLY show me reels (videos), not pictures.It's also impossible to search for anything that doesn't already have a million views. It's completely impossible to find smaller accounts.The whole thing is broken and useless.
>>4525471I honestly expects attempts in near future of making new social network sites dedicated to photography or revival of old ones. IG got completely broken, as you said, by "influencers" and algorithms. I, too, when opening main page on web browser, see maybe one or two posts from people I have in observed and everything below is "sponsored" content, "what might interest you" and other completely unrelated stuff.Fun little thing - last weekend, at anime con, I ran into booth of fan project of such site, aimed at both cosplayers and photographers, guys here specifically mentioned IG problems as one of inspirations and that they already had some interest from abroad. So IG frustration is real and I hope it will only grow.
Flickr user establishing.https://www.flickr.com/photos/128338818@N03/>>4506800join bro. Free your aspect ratios.
Summer 2026 editionAll video related questions and discussion is intended for this thread. Here we discuss techniques, gear and anything else related to capturing video footage. Please don't pretend to be an expert if you don't know what you're talking about. Kindly leave your ego at the door.Posting short films/scripts or other work you've done is encouraged.We tend to use and recommend DSLRs/mirrorless cameras because they provide phenomenal picture quality for their price, have large sensors (ie the same size used in high-end cinema cameras, and larger) and have interchangeable lenses.In contrast, consumer camcorders often have much smaller sensors and a fixed lens.>STICKY - https://text.is/QZ1J>Helpful guide, additional books and more in-depth FAQs - https://web.archive.org/web/20200926115310/https://pastebin.com/kG0gRmTZ>NO ONE CARES WHAT AN EXPERT YOU THINK YOU ARE. IF YOU’RE ASKING BASIC-AS-SHIT QUESTIONS, YOU CAN’T BE ALL THAT GREAT. SEE ABOVEPrevious thread >>4499500Quick FAQSComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Blackmagic have a massive discount on cameras right now, if you’ve been waiting for whatever reason I’d jump on this shit
Just found out the camera I bought does not allow me to use autofocus while shooting at 1080p 120fps. Also does not allow focus peaking while shooting. I bought this camera primarily for photographing wildlife, but I also want to video them as well and I wanted to use the 120fps mode. Now I'm faced with a dilemma, should I just try to shoot in 1080p 60 and go for a paltry 2x slowmo while being able to use subject tracking c-af, shoot in 4k 30 with no slowmo while being able to use autofocus, or shoot in 120 while having to either manual focus with no peaking when my subject moves, or having to stop filming to do s-af/peaking then restart filming.
>>4526341>Also does not allow focus peaking while shootingexternal monitor
>>4526341Solution's easy: get good.For real though, do you *really* need 120p? Almost every camera that does 1080/120 looks kinda shit. Like noticeably a lot worse than 1080/30.Back in the old days, we didn't have focus peaking or autofocus. I was manually focusing on my 550d in low light, accepting that 10-20% of my shots just wouldn't be in focus. So if you must shoot at 120p, get better at manual focusing.
>>4526341>>4527082If you really need perfect focus buy a smallhd monitor or if you are a trust fund kid or rich crypto bro buy a leader scope with the focus assist option.
>it now cost $20 to develop film only with no prints or scansAHHHHHHHHH
>>4521800>color>darkroom
>>4468303If you can do C41, you can do E6.
I can currently get it done for about $18 a roll. Still a shitload compared to years prior but it's easier than filling my home with more shit and I also get a choice between a Noritsu scanner or Fujifilm Frontier.
>>4521800Anon, the only difference between B&W and C-41 is the temperature control and one extra wash. Throw it into paterson like any other film.
Send it in to Memphis film lab in Cleveland
Reply if you're a real mf'er
>>4527027Me when her camera is too humble
>>4527027bronicas are fucking ass. mine randomly skips the first two frames. no one repairs the backs or the bodies so theyre disposable.
Got two rolls of expired ektar 100 as a gift (I don’t care about expired film but free stuff is free).Am battling real hard with Color correction. Not a fan must say.
>>4527060Before
>>4527044yeah kindaI got mine for free so I can’t really complainwhen the weather’s less than completely warm it’ll sometimes decide to not fire 95% of triggersI have to use a motor grip because it didn’t come with a battery holderbut I’ve had to start keeping a piece of tape on the power switch because it tends to switch itself to continuous and run through entire rolls of film in my backpack
Well... I tried to find liminal and unsetting places in my Russian city.Post your liminal photos here
>>4526727I personally feel just limited by my weakness and mortality
>>4526732Take some photos. I heard through the grapevine that being creative can cheer you up.
Mall Shots
More mall...also these captcha are preposterous
Sick mall
The price of classic cameras is getting outrageous. The 7ii is now $6,000. >just film on digitalSome of us consider ourselves camera historians, but now it is literally impossible to get most of the classics due to zoomers buying them up and cranking up the costs.
>>4526962MFW got to plow through a roll of Velvia 50 in the Florida Keys at sunset on an RB67Feelsgoodman.tiff
>>4527006Did you get any good pics?
>>4527032Yeah got a nice one of your mom blowing me on Tri-X 320 pulled to 200
>>4526818It's expensive only of you are a GAS fag
>>4527006Kino
Dusk encounter edition
>>4526699Thats quite the small bird or quite the large cow
>>4526790Cool photo, pretty bird, crisp feathers. Nice job, anon! What rig? What distance?
Will update as images are processed, will be Speedweek and a bunch of other stuff I did over the months.
>>4526978Cute one shug.
You may recognize this one if you were a fan of Roadkill before Motor Trend sold them out.
What has the consequences been since everyone has access to either a digital camera or a smartphone with up to 200 MP sensors? Snapshits were easy to identify in the 80s because they were often shitty point and shoot, or Polaroids, but what gear does the snapshitter use now other than smartphones? Has the ubiquity of photography destroyed whatever strange, new artform was budding?
Photography isnt artIts simply documentation
>>4526891A gorillion people on flickr have in fact learned how to do this on digital. It's still hard to do as a 4x5 enlargement. The gear just can't be separated from the photo for the same reason a cool pic taken with an actual camera is more significant than an identical image generated with AI. And doing it as a 4x5 enlargement still won't hit the same ever again, because ansel adams was an environmental activist that joined an art movement, and he was the only one promoting photos like these as much as he was.>gear>novelty>topic>public relations>institutional connectionsHopelessness and despair was already there. You just need to open your eyes to it. If anyone here got into photography expecting to be an equal to good painters with just skill, lol sorry. Photography is a social game as much as it is an art.>Don't underestimate your local art scene and make the highest quality physical prints you can!A significant segment of young up and coming approved-good photographers are actually doing this, increasingly with 8x10, and it's full of the usual topical shit. Photography is inherently journalistic so it always will be. Pure art is a passing curiosity, like "cool, but if it were painting..."
>>4526893The camera is just a tool you can use to create visual media. Photography can 100% be art.>>4526895Sad to see you've given up. Hopefully you don't spread your despair to many other people.
>>4526893if you have to still make it look cool it's an art, even if it isn't the highest artif it was just journalism you could take a dogshit tilted blurry photo with the wrong colors and it would still be newsworthy if it was about the thing
>>4526883>>4526884>>4526887>>4526895>Photo a 100 years ago was just getting the exposure right and level the camera.is what digital users say, because it's all they have to do on their device to create a forgettable digital file that will never become an actual object. But 100 years ago you couldn't do that. You had to try a little bit to go from camera to enlarged image. But that's not part of photography according to digital shooters. >Anyone is just as good as Ansel Adams nowadays.lmao. ok. >...if they were to use the same gear and techniqueYeah because everyone knows how to use a large format camera, to develop and to print. It's not skill. Anyone can do it.>Photo is actually about being rich and knowing peopleYeah as opposed to painting where you become famous by mesmerizing everyone with objective talent. It's only in photography that rich people with connections succeed.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Previous Thread: >>4408437My astronomy club is doing an outreach on smart telescopes in a few more months so I decided it pick up an S30. Its been delightful so far; setup is a breeze compared to my primary rig. Think it will be a great little thing for more casual imaging. We're not in the best time of year for my FOV, but I was able to get a little time in on M5.
>>4523601based shot, anon
>>4525733Thanks, Anon!This is from May 3rd, 2025. The Moon, Mars, and M44 (the "Beehive"). Nikon D780, ISO-1250, 10 sec riding piggyback on a scope with equatorial mount and clock drive.Oshiro 500 mm f/6.3 T-mount lens.
The Sun two years ago... Single frame captured from video.
Uranus in Taurus.
>>4526967Finder chart for image above.
Why do companies ship cameras with the viewfinder missing? What causes this behaviour? Why do people buy them? What is the use case? I can't think of any reason to intentionally design or buy a camera without one. It's not like the viewfinder somehow makes the camera worse, or makes it appreciably heavier/bulkier, or appreciably more expensive. It's just useful with no downsides.
>>4526862The camera industry is decades behind. Look at the old low res LCD panels Sony cameras are still using today.
>>4526828It's better than a shit EVF or a non-TTL optical finder>>4526835No, LCDs in the 2-3 inch range are incredibly cheap and don't require any optics. An EVF is also additional parts because you can't sell a camera with no rear display to normies.
>>4526869What extra piece? A plastic magnifier for in front of it? Yeah. Cheapo evf is less than a larger lcd. Good to know thanks
>>4526872You've got the display, optics, the extra plastic to house it and the larger mould to accommodate it, and some extra circuitry to drive it. In some cases you'd also have sensors for automatic switching but you could go without that. Sure, it may only be something like ten bucks to add a shitty EVF but that's money for a feature that normies don't care about or use, ten bucks less profit on a camera they would have still bought if it didn't have that feature. For those people that do want it they still make cameras with it, it's not like they're being phased out or that cameras without finders are anything new.
>>4526898Just put it where the lcd screen would have been, dog. You gotta think outside the box a lil.
Will they finally announce tg-8 on 9th? Any leaks?
https://explore.omsystem.com/us/en/pen-body-silverNoooooooooooo!
>>4526864>$1000 for a phone sensor>IPX1 (IP53 already effectively means nothing and performs on par with or worse than non-IP rated cameras, IPX1 means it's screwed together somewhat tightly)*eBay searches for Sony a7c condition:used intensify*
>>4526864>>4526880Both these cameras are irrelevant to the topic. What the fuck are either of you on about. MFTards and Snoyggers competing against each other is like watching the tranny disability hire and the import Bangladeshi fight over a girl.
>>4526882its p relevant. olympus doesn't make new cameras. they re-release old cameras with gimmicky firmware updates so now a six year old sony is a threatening image to m4turdies. asking when they're going to make the new ____ is pointless. they don't make new anything.
>>4526882Thry were supposed to announce new cameras and they came out with this PEN shit. Fuck that, I'm buying a Nikon.
>The Ansel Adams Publishing Rights Trust has raised concerns over what it describes as the unauthorised use of Ansel Adams’s name and work in an “AI-generated colour version” of his iconic photograph shot in 1942 Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico, which was recently exhibited and offered for sale at a major international photography fair.>In a statement, the Trust said the work “exploited Ansel’s name, reputation, and his most iconic image, while failing to identify any human artist responsible for its creation. The Trust did not authorise, endorse, consent to, or acquiesce in the ‘AI-generated colour version’ of ‘Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico’ exhibited and offered for sale by Danziger Gallery at The Photography Show presented by AIPAD in April. The Trust was not consulted or notified before the work appeared. Once alerted, we reached out to James Danziger in real time, notifying him of the Trust’s rights, and asking for the work to be removed. Correspondence shared with the Trust shows that, despite our formal notice, Mr. Danziger subsequently leveraged Ansel’s name, ‘Moonrise,’ and the AIPAD presentation while pursuing a proposed commercial AI colourisation venture involving other artists’ estates.”>James Danziger made a response on the Danziger website to Ansel Adams Trust's condemnation by not only mentioning that the image is technically in the public domain, but also wrote: "As for the print itself, while A.I. served as the starting point, the final image involved extensive human intervention, editing, proofing, and refinement over many months."
>>4519286>age-related color sensitivity loss kicking injust check your scopes bro
>>4512754Ruined. I'm a colorfag but colorizing is fake, gay, tasteless and kitsch (the bad type of kitsch). Involving clankers only makes it worse. "Keep Ted Turner and his goddamn Crayolas away from my movie" is a quote from the 80s attributed to Welles, and it only rings even truer today with everyone having access to technology that's even more destructive, cheaper and quicker.
>>4512792Ken knows the value of black and white. There's even some silver gelatin prints of his around.
>>4525596what should I be looking for
>>4513113reminder that he ises AI (and previosuly PS) to change basically all the skies in his photos. This one is patently fake
