Can you take amazing shots and get good at photography with just a point and shoot? I'm getting sick of carrying around my bulky setup everywhere, even though it's M43
>>4516386Quality will be worse than a cell phone a lot of the time but if you are like me, using a cell phone for photos is not enjoyable. If you can find a point and shoot you enjoy using, then you will take more pictures and get better at photography. The 1/2.3" cameras are going to blow highlights a lot and no camera company is smart enough to make a point and shoot that automatically brackets and keeps the skies like cell phones and action cams do so there's that. In theory you can expose for the highlights and shoot raw but your subject is not going to look as good when you do that. There are HDR modes but they never look as good as the smartphone version.However, if you have a TG point and shoot, you get a real flash, physical controls, and peace of mind not worrying about getting it wet. One other thing I like about the TG type camera is the internal zoom compared to non-underwater point and shoots. There's no lens that has to extend before shooting and no barrel sticking out so you can switch it off and stick it in your pocket without thinking. A lot thicker than a cell phone but if you are using a system camera, it's nothing.
>m43 >Bulky Sounds like your a weak bitch
>>4516732Then why are all the movies now made on digital?
>>4516386I thought of this analogy: a formula one pilot is gonna be an amazing pilot no matter what car, but you won't train a formula one pilot on a cheap consumer car.
>>4518685They are not.>I'm sorry anon I was being a dishonest birch, what I meant to say was "why are most movies shot on digital?"Because it is much more convenient in many different ways and much cheaper. Because consumer don't care, don't see the difference, and also because shooting a good movie is often not about getting the cleanest highest resolution image possible. Actually, you can watch a movie in low resolution and you will forget about it if there is good sound, but a movie in high resolution is unwatchable if the sounds is not clear. Anyway, it's very different from what you would want on a still image.
5.4 is out, what do we think bros?
>>4518603oh darktable has a great tool for that, the tone equalizer
>>4518503>there is an objectively correct to display a raw file’s colorsand what is that "objectively" correct way?
>>4518611Thanks. I hate it. I spit on it. The classic tone curve is all I need.
>>4519303The tone equalizer module is fantastic. Regardless of your ability to drive a nail with your fist, a man of his craft will use a more precise tool for the job.
Call me a shitter but no matter what I do, I cannot get same saturation of colors in DT as my camera (Z5II) produce on its own JPGs. After dealing with AgX, all colors seems desaturated or "washed out" and when I tried to correct that with color balance module, it always result in odd looking results. Yes, I heard that recreating JPGs in DT is stupid but I simply find them more pleasing to the eye. I appreciate all the work with DT and still use it but it also makes me sad.
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 does /p/ feel about zines?They seem fun. You print your stuff, distribute it however you want, and people look at it. They might toss it in the trash but at least you made an impression.You can make them for pretty cheap. I made some lo-fi DIY-style ones with my visual art at home using just an inkjet printer, and I've been dropping them in random places for people to find.Anyone ever make zines?
>>4449618I love the cover photo
>>4514256Cool stuff Anon. Looks great.
Just bunch of snapshits on laser printer with two stickers on pocket thermal printer, it's fun to make random throwaway album someone might look at. Will try to make bunch of postcard sized darkroom prints and stitch them together into zine next.
>>4517770Hell yeah man, looks neat. I need to invest in a decent printer for home use, I'm tired of waiting nearly a month between ordering something and it arriving.
>>4518392Basic PiXMA will do the job if you don't print large batches. But also just look around libraries for colour laser printer, it's perfectly acceptable for zine to be lofi like that.
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
Please rate. 0: uninteresting snapshit1: deeply flawed2: decent, interesting, cool3: striking image
>>4518468> I feel like they probably won't be loved by others for the same reasons that I love them.I think that's the point of surrounding the great photo with a series that prepare the viewer to see what's to see. Else, photography is quite a weak mean of artistic expression. Here I'd like to showcase the OP pic, but I didn't have anything quite like it.> it's a bad idea to make what you love become your day jobThanks for the recap. I think the issue with photo is what earns money is not what's great about photo. I think I'll just try to build a fine art portfolio alongside my normal job and try to sell prints. I'll realistically never "make it" but at least I'll do only what I want.
>>4518469>I think that's the point of surrounding the great photo with a series that prepare the viewer to see what's to see. Else, photography is quite a weak mean of artistic expression. Here I'd like to showcase the OP pic, but I didn't have anything quite like it.Good point. I might post a thread of my work someday then and see how it goes. I'd be very interested to see more of your work too.>I think I'll just try to build a fine art portfolio alongside my normal job and try to sell prints. I'll realistically never "make it" but at least I'll do only what I want.Man I never even thought about prints. Maybe I should consider doing that, though I don't know where to begin with that exactly. I know sites exist but I don't know who uses what or what is a good choice.Making it is a rich mans game imo, don't worry about it. I know people go on about nepotism or being rich and all that but it is accurate. I've known a few other photographers over time and the ones that had stuff in displays typically didn't have jobs and were supported by their parents. I knew one guy that used film exclusively and all types of odd cameras and had his work on display, and it was all on his parents dime. Same with a girl that made and sold her pottery online, she's never had a job and spends most of her time traveling around Europe when she's not at home making pottery.
>>4518470Likewise, cheers. I think being a namefag is retarded but I'll use a similar name for the thread when I post more.I think photo printing and most art practice is meaningless without community. I would never actually print stuff if it wasn't because my friend who's doing photography as well wanted to go to the fair. I would never feel like I could expose my photos if I didn't have an opportunity to talk with volunteers at the local photo gallery.I guess you're right about money. But for now I don't even have 1 finalized project so I'll just start there and see what happens at the local gallery.
>>4518476>I think being a namefag is retarded but I'll use a similar name for the thread when I post more.Anon you can just trip yourself without a name to make you unique in a thread then drop it afterwards instead of becoming some insufferable namefag.
>>4518480Yeah the issue is more recognizing me in my next thread. But those days there is so few curated photo threads it won't be so hard anyway.
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
For the past couple of years I have been practicing photography with "circuit bent" cameras I have built. I am gonna share a few pictures, give some explanations as to the hows, and hopefully inspire some people to pick up this form of photography.Just a disclaimer here, I haven't edited these photos at all besides maybe cropping them. These are how to the photos come out of the camera.
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.
>Go to Japan>Only shoot Kodak Portra 400
>>4517917Japan is fucked, and I have lost all illusions of japanese superiority.
>>4517946it’s funny because some other japanese hobby markets are the complete opposite>CONDITION: POOR (outer box seals broken)
I'm going to Japan and planning on only shooting HP5
>>4518055It’s just Tri-X with inferior tonality. Don’t bother.
>>4518055Lmao same
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
