Previous thread:
>>4308015

>>4319497
One hand on the grip, one hand below the lens and press your eye to the eyepiece. Shoot on exhale.

>>4319497
Just like with shooting firearms, you can obtain the most stability by using bone support instead of muscle support. Your muscles are constantly twitching to and fro in order to hold your hands in one place, so the best way to reduce the shaking is to use your bones to support the camera, with the minimum amount of muscle strain. Lean against walls, use your legs to support your arms--anything to keep your muscles from working to hold you in once place. Practice taking poses or stances in which you can relax your muscles while the camera remains supported by your arms acting against each other to create more stability.

I've got a sony a7RIV and Im not sure which lens I want for it.

Im considering either the 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II or the Sony FE 100-400mm

Budget is anything less than $3000. I dont want an absurd $11k lens or anything like that. But my main goal is I really want a lens where I can just use it with everything, and I wont really have to bother changing my lens. Currently Im using a 24-70mm sony lens. But I want more range.

>>4319683
Well neither is much of a do everything lens. You've got a shit load of resolution to play with so get something like the 24-105mm or 28-135mm and then crop if you need more reach. There's also the 24-240mm if you don't want to crop.

>>4319683
20-70 f4

>>4319683
get the 70-200mm and a 2x teleconverter

poorfag here, which camera should I buy /p/?
Sony a6000?
Nikon d5300?
Nikon d3200?
Samsung NX2000?
Canon EOS M3?

my budget is 350$

>>4319712
The Sony is old but the lens ecosystem has built up around it nicely enough over the years. The m3 is nice but ef-m was stillborn and now officially dead. Samsung died too soon and was never even really popular despite being some of the better cameras of their time, so you’d be limited in lens selection without getting into the adapter manual lenses meme. The dslrs are not worth even thinking about unless you can get them significantly cheaper. The “joy of reflex” is a pathetic cope for sunk cost fallacy poorfags coping with being left behind

File: 1717229688853.jpg (215 KB, 906x900)

215 KB JPG

>>4319712
I still use my a6000 with 16-50 kit lens and Sigma 30 1.4 dc dn since I wanted a small, lightweight setup so I replaced my nikon D80 which is showing lens connection error since I dropped it. you can also get low cost chink lenses (tt artisans, 7artisans, viltrox) with AF or manual only aside from sony, sigma lenses. a6000 has crude face/eye detect but somehow works, focus peaking (outlines showing where it's focused), tilt screen, EVF, 1080p video
d5600 seems to have a more rugged body, a bit better sensor than a6000, traditional OVF, articulating screen, 1080p video, longer battery life. old nikon D lenses wont have AF since the d5600 has no built in lens motor so you'll settle for g lenses like 35 or 50 1.8g as the least expensive nikon prime lenses. you may also use third party AF lenses like sigma, tamron, or some chink brand lens, all with built in motor but there maybe issues with AF so research first. the whole setup may also be a bit heavier and bigger.
nikon d3200 has the same sensor tech as a6000.
samsung nx and canon m are dead mounts. samsung killed their dedicated cameras in favor of putting the focus on their mobile devices. canon killed the m mount and went r mount.
so it would be a6000 vs d5600. or maybe buy a used a6400 or a6100 if you can, just check the shutter count/actuation number the camera has (the lower the better).
nikon has also moved to mirroless z mount now.

>>4319712
It depends. Are you a beginner or are you just broke? If you're a beginner. I'm going to say the a6000 or the M3. If you know what your doing, I'm going to say one of the nikons or the m3. The samsung is quirky and interesting, but I would avoid it unless you are hunting for novelty, not a first camera

>>4319712
depends on how much of a poorfaggot you are
stop thinking like a retard
give us your life story what are your goals?
will you be upgrading in the future? do you expect to be able to up the budget in a few years?
or is this your "I'm poor and want something better than my phone to last me forever" purchase?

If you're considering upgrading, the ecosystem/path of your current buy matters
if you don't care about that, that changes things

most importantly
explain whether you want wide angle, telephoto lenses, or macro because lens choices vary and make the biggest difference in general

is your $350 for the camera or the camera+lens?

>>4319720
>>4319777
thank you for the advice
>>4319778
>Are you a beginner or are you just broke?
I'm broken and a beginner
>>4319779
>or is this your "I'm poor and want something better than my phone to last me forever" purchase?
this pretty much sums it up
>is your $350 for the camera or the camera+lens
camera+lens

well, I think Sony it is then lads

appreciate the help

I have a Sony camera.

1) Is there a way to make my jpegs look better out of camera like Fuji film simulation?

2) what free software should I be using to edit photos? All I have done in the past was use the level tool in Gimp.

3) The camera has two dials, but in Av mode, they're both set to change the aperture, which is fucking retarded. Is it possible to change one of the dials to Ev compensation or ISO?

>>4319862
>1) Is there a way to make my jpegs look better out of camera like Fuji film simulation?
No, fuji's on-camera noise reduction is extremely aggressive, almost phone tier. No other brand has jpeg NR that strong. For a reason. Fuji jpegs are much, much softer and more smeared looking than the sensor can actually achieve because of this. A camera can not run high quality NR without draining its battery - just look at phone smearing for an example of an attempt. It looks like shit compared to enhancing in lightroo,. Dedicated computers have more processing power and larger batteries/plug into the wall so they can run better algorithms to clean up photos like that.
>2) what free software should I be using to edit photos? All I have done in the past was use the level tool in Gimp.
The only good program for editing photos costs money: capture one. The second best also costs money: lightroom. Rawtherapee is insanely slow and has darktables issues as well. Darktable requires you spend hours building your own color and lens correction profiles and even arranging your own UI. It's not a good situation.
>3) The camera has two dials, but in Av mode, they're both set to change the aperture, which is fucking retarded. Is it possible to change one of the dials to Ev compensation or ISO?
Depends on the camera. Sony omits customization features from the cheaper ones like they omit video features from basically everything that isn't marketed as for video.

>>4319862
>like a Fuji film simulation
Disgusting. The problem isn’t your camera, it’s your eyes, clearly.

Beginner camera, buying used budget 100-300 euros.

>>4319876
For that budget just use your phone anon. You won’t be buying anything really much better except maybe some old dinosaur dslr with expensive lenses. And if you’re asking for some kind of compact fixed lens camera, what’s even the point then?

>>4319876
save a couple hundred more. You can't even get an original canon 5D for that much

>>4319890
NTA but I just looked at prices online and wtf happened? that shit used to be 75 bucks used

>>4319890
Thanks for not answering my question.

>>4319894
You not liking the answer isn’t the same as not getting one, you disingenuous faggot.

>>4319879
Well how about d3400 or eos700d? I've seen pictures with them and the latter's software's pretty good.

>>4319897
How is telling me to increase my budget anything but a dumbfuck answer?

>>4319901
How is you not getting a fucking job anything but a dumbfuck life choice? Put in some overtime, you lazy faggot. Contribute to society if you want nice things. The last thing we need is another burnout pothead faggot saying "ohhh u dont need moaaaar because i cant afford it, spending money baaaad maaaaan" because his entire life is the bare minimum and he's flat broke but "in tune with nature" (and is objectively, a worthless fucking leech that will be shot and butchered for dog food should he refuse to get his ass into the fields or to the front lines if a famine hits again)

GO TO WORK
TELL YOUR BOSS THIS
"I WANT AN EXTRA SHIFT"
NOW YOU CAN HAVE NICE THINGS, CHILD

DO YOU NOT HAVE A JOB?
IT IS MY HONEST OPINION THAT YOU SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO CONTROL YOUR OWN FINACNES UNTIL YOU DO. ASK YOUR MOM IF SHE'LL BUY YOU A CAMERA.

IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A JOB YOU SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A CITIZEN OR ALLOWED ANY RIGHTS. LAZY FUCKS ARE NOT PEOPLE.

t. The one who picks up you lazy stoner faggots slack while you're quitting because of your made up anxiety and made up depression
I work 7 shifts every 5 days because PEOPLE REFUSE TO FUCKING WORK
I am rich as fuck from 2 years of this but you really need to work. The rest of us are doing more than one mans work because positions arent being filled. GET A FUCKIGN JOB OR GET READY TO BE FORCED TO. IT. IS. COMING. SOON.
Society option A: Compulsory labor
Society option B: You starve as a homeless bum. The positions are filled by mexicans.
Choose!

>>4319894
I did answer your question. There is nothing worth buying for that budget. Your phone is better. It's like asking what full running car can I buy with $500. The answer is nothing

>>4319902
being that he stated the price in eur he's going to be replaced by a somali or arab, and then his country will collapse and be absorbed into the russian empire (no resistance after giving majority of military equipment to ukies) while xi threatens america with a nuclear barrage after unveiling quantum navigation systems that allow ballistics carrying nukes to dodge america's missile defenses. i'm pretty sure china also has orbital bombardment facilities that launch supersonic warheads up in space too.

the west is falling and that's a good thing
long live vladimir putin!

>>4319901
welcome to photography. you have to pay to play.

>>4319905
>>4319903
Are these >>4319898 not worth buying, they don't look better than a phone camera in any case

>>4319879
>or that budget just use your phone anon. You won’t be buying anything really much
The assumption here is always that someone with a limited budget already has an expensive new phone, and not that they have a limited budget and also have a multiple year old, entry level phone that has a camera on par with a Game Boy Camera.

>>4319907

Those cameras are not really that bad. They'll be better than a phone in terms of having aperture control but they will make noiser muddier images. If you just want to mess around with cameras as a hobby then they're ok but you might eventually find yourself frustrated when you are doing everything right but your images are still kinda subpar looking. I say this as someone who owns a Rebel T7

>>4319712
Poorfag first camera buying guide:

you can get a nikon d3100, a 35mm 1.8, a 18-55 and a 55-200 for less than the cost of a used a6000 or any lens you can buy for the a6000, and if you don't like it you can just sell it to some other poorfag and get your money back. If a photographer can't get the photo they want with that kit they aren't worth shit, that kit will cover 95% of cases.

The only reason I'd not recommend Canon is the lack of 35mm prime and lens selection is generally just a variety of slow zooms, they never committed to their crop mount like Nikon did. (they are also a cunt to use for beginners).

Don't listen to people shitting on DSLRs. they may be dinosaurs but they still have their advantages, being able to walk around all day with the camera on and only lose 5% battery, for example.

Nobody here can tell if a photo was shot on a Nikon, Sony, Canon etc, so ignore people saying otherwise. More importantly, you can't, and neither can anyone that you want to show your photos to.

>>4319909
Aren't they also better for having a bigger aperture to begin with? I'm mainly looking for something to start out with since my phone is absolutely shit and even if I do get a new phone, it just seems like a cluster fuck, like they're not raw and you also don't have as much control, though you can tell me how true these are (still not getting a phone for this and there are no phone that will cost 100-300 euros).
Also which brand has better software?
Also also what would be the next step from these cameras, one generation better or whatever?

>>4319908
A reasonable assumption to make given that in America most cell phone carriers provide new phones as loss leader anchor products, yes. Yes I assumed op was American, if not, then who cares, he should be.

File: cheap cameras.png (1.97 MB, 1040x1035)

1.97 MB PNG

>>4319911
surprisingly low light performance of those cameras isn't really better at all. One of the biggest reasons why I'll probably buy a new camera next black Friday.
Pic rel, cheap cameras vs a new FF body.
Again those cameras can still make good images but if I had to start over I would've bought a used top teir body from several years ago

>>4319914
>he should be
we're full

>>4319917
>new FF body
What's this and where that picrel from?
>would've bought a used top tier body
Well recommend me something, but I'm basically looking in that 100-300 range, since I need something cheap that will do the job than something very good, since it's a beginner camera and also since I might break it.
How do others like the d3500 compare, and also how do the cameras compare to one another, software and features and whatever else?

>>4319911
>which brand has better software?
all of the free, manufacturer-provided software suck, but they're free and they contain all of a given manufacturer's "secret sauce" so to say
pirate LR or C1 if you're unwilling to pay for them. please don't use the FOSS shit like RawTheRapist

>>4319920
>What's this and where that picrel from?
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen

Idk what euro prices are like but here you can just about get a canon 5D and a 50mm f1.8 in good condition for $300. 5D destroys any of those cameras in noise performance. EF lenses also adapt to basically anything newer so if you ever want to upgrade you should still be able to use your lenses reasonably well. I don't know a ton about software. You'll have to watch a bunch of reviews.

>>4319703
I've heard some issues with the teleconverter (light loss and the lens loses some sharpness.). I like zoom lenses rather than fixed focal because of the variety. I do have a canon mount if there are any other recommendations for lenses.

>>4319911
>they're not raw
If you shoot raw, smartphones do indeed give you raw photos.
Just have to watch out for the lying nigger bait.
Like, Apple ProRAW, GoogleCAM's baked not-raw-claiming-to-be-raw, but if you use the right apps you'll get your noisy raws complete with lens vignetting, the need for demosaicing, and the unprocessed sensor readout.

Getting raw on phones used to be easy, then the manufacturers realized most retards are retarded and don't actually want raw, they just want a JPEG they can diddle the white balance on so they falsely represent their processed images as some "enhanced" "raw" when it isn't raw at all.
You can still shoot raw if you know how to, though. Varies by phone/app/OS but is possible.

>>4319917
ISO 1600 vs ISO 6400
kek
that is a big difference

>>4319934
well light loss is a given. loss of sharpness is something you'd want to test out and see whether it's acceptable or even noticeable.
my ancient nikon 70-200mm takes a 2x teleconverter just fine, but then again I shoot on 16 MP

>>4319930
>canon 5D
Which version, not the one from the 2000s, right?
>>4319929
I mean onboard software and features, physical too.
>>4319943
>raw
Ok whatever, got it. Any camera recommendations though?
Any info on nikon vs canon?
Is the 3500 much better than the 3400?
Any of them fare better in bad weather?

File: cheap cameras2.png (948 KB, 1044x518)

948 KB PNG

>>4319946
Yes the original 5D. Obviously if you can get a mk2 that would be better. You can't demand the best technology and be poor at the same time anon. Even the old one is way better

>>4319946
>I mean onboard software and features, physical too.
beginner cameras mostly come with "idiot" controls that actually get in the way when you want more manual control. same with physical control points. as I look at the D3400, I'm thinking howtf am I supposed to change both aperture and shutter speed with just one control wheel. oh and no ISO button either
handle them and pick the one you like

>>4319947
>original 5D
Well I can get it for pretty cheap, don't know about the lens though, but I'm worried that it might not actually be as good as that in some way or another, I mean I don't know how much some autistic pic is meant to show.
>>4319948
Well didn't know that about the buttons, in the beginning I'll probably just want to do quick point and shoot until I assimilate all the autistic numbers, but later I'll probably want the hot wheels. What about the 700d? or the d3500 are those any better regarding that? Or the a6000?
>>4319947
>>4319948
What about the A6000? Any better than the ones listen so far?

>>4319957
I have the canon 50mm 1.8 it's pretty good given it's price

File: signature-zoom45-135_2_la(...).jpg (470 KB, 2000x1500)

470 KB JPG

Why is almost nobody interested in making normal to short telephoto 3x zooms? Something like 35-105 to 45-135 f/2.8. There's the 35-150 tamron which is heavy and compromises quality by being more than 4x and a bunch of $20k+ cine lenses which are even bigger and heavier.

>>4319964
I wish there were more. I rarely go wider than 35mm. Or even like a 35-85 f/2.8, but very compact would be sick.

>>4319964
I suppose manufacturers did their research and saw no real market demand for such a lens.
some of these "normal-to-short-tele" zoom lenses were made during the manual focus and early autofocus eras. I suppose image quality just wasn't very good and they didn't sell well. making them f2.8 would greatly increase size and weight and people who pack these zooms mostly want something lightweight.

>>4319964
Because wanting to go from 35mm to 105 feels schizophrenic. anon still makes the 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM you can buy brand new

>>4319946
If you're getting APS-C,be aware of the 1.6x crop factor on Canon vs the others who use 1.5x.

18mm lens on Canon becomes 28.8mm
18mm on Nikon/Snoy/etc becomes 27mm
that's considerably wider angle
also 1.5x crop has better low light than 1.6x

if you're serious about cheaping out you might wanna consider micro four thirds
3500 vs 3400 ain't much of a difference
most cheap bodies aren't weatherproof so you'd want to use a camera bag to protect from the elements

>>4319972
>Because wanting to go from 35mm to 105 feels schizophrenic
Nah, it's more like not being obese but still lazy.
35-105 would let you use it indoors and outdoors to take shots of skwerrilz n shit or portraits without having to change lenses, and require a bit of walking in general but nothing crazy since it's a decent zoom range.

>>4319975
18-300mm super zooms got memed out of existence. I Image more modest zooms would still have a bad reputation

>>4319869
>>3) The camera has two dials, but in Av mode, they're both set to change the aperture, which is fucking retarded. Is it possible to change one of the dials to Ev compensation or ISO?
>Depends on the camera. Sony omits customization features from the cheaper ones like they omit video features from basically everything that isn't marketed as for video.
I have the a6600. I think I figured it out. I found the "Dial/Wheel Ev Comp" setting that lets me switch one of the dials to Ev Comp by default, so I'm happy.

hey my /sqt/'s

i recently came into some money, and want to treat myself to a new camera. Digitally, I've been a nikon shooter for years, but my d3500 is getting dated and i want to try something new. I shoot film most of the time, but want to go back to digital for awhile.

I had my eyes on one of the fuji x100 series, especially the x100f. however, prices have gone up so high I dont think it makes sense to get one. My budget is around 700 or less. Is there another fuji camera I could pick that does rougly the same thing? I love the rangefinder look as most of my film cams are RF's, and i love the film simulations and build quality that fuji brings. Their lineup is sorta confusing, could I get any help?

Ill post some pics as a thank you if anyone responds.

>>4319497
Keeping your camera strap extended and tight is one technique that works.

>>4319978
Nothing beats the sheer performance of optics.
Even though zooms are shitty IQ letting you actually frame as you intend to without swapping 17 different lenses makes up for them, at least for the casual snapshitter.
Even with how bad they are, they're still better than shooting photos with a smartphone lens caked in semen and sweat from being pulled out of pockets of jizz, sweat, and lint.

If anything superzooms only got memed out because they were overpriced, not because of lack of demand or people willing to use them.

>>4320003
>at least for the casual snapshitter.
yeah part of the anti super zoom meme eas to stop being a snapshitter. 70-200 is still popular

>>4320014
The IQ meta for me is keep a zoomer on APS-C/MFT, and choose primes for full frame.
Zoomer weakness is often edge details and cropping works in your favor with that, plus smaller lenses for smaller sensors are nice.
Also nobody shooting crop cares that much about IQ, full frame is already setting the bar low vs medium format so it's kinda silly to hate on zooms for small bodies.

>>4319964
here's a workaround, put a 24-70 on a crop body or in crop mode

>>4320015
“Medium format” is borderline indistinguishable from FF unless you pixel peep so hard each image pixel is at least 4 monitor pixels

If “M”F were the 1x benchmark FF would have a crop factor of 1.2. Nuttin.

how do I into using models? how much knowledge / confidence do I need in order to direct their poses? I feel like I don't know shit about how to direct models. how much are they expected to know in terms of making interesting / expressive poses? how can I get the most out of someone with high confidence in themselves and are willing to model, but probably has limited knowledge in modelling beyond posing for instagram snaps?

>>4320025
MFT means micro four thirds
also full-frame medium format (53x40mm phase one) is leagues ahead of crop medium format (44x33mm fujicope), which is "macro four thirds" at best

>>4320032
>full-frame medium format (53x40mm phase one)
>full frame
>still not even 645
Anon, are you retarded?

Considering that 70 is the long end of many zooms (example 24-70) and the wide end of others (example 70-300), why are 70mm primes not more common?

File: 1711254360040640.png (534 KB, 1046x603)

534 KB PNG

whats the name of the type of distortion where it's red yellow and blue around the edges?

>>4320034
>thinking 645 measures exactly 6x4.5cm
Anon, are you retarded?

>>4319957
>or the d3500 are those any better regarding that
D3500 controls are identical to d3400.
All low-end nikon dslrs have only one control wheel, you have to hold down the exposure comp to change aperture while in manual mode.

>>4320044
It’s bigger than 53x40 so I guess everyone’s retarded. And I expect a “waaahhh 53x40 is close enough to 56x42 reeeeeee” type of response but unfortunately, no, it’s not.

>>4320039
that looks like a filter but what you are describing is chromatic aberration. Two main types longitudinal and latitudinal.

>>4320054
by that logic, many of nikon's "FX-format" cameras are not "full frame 135" by virtue of one side being 23.9mm or 35.9mm

>>4320056
thx

>>4319972
>24-105
That's f/4 and >4x zoom

>>4320014
>70-200 is still popular
70-200 isn't a super zoom. Super zooms get memed on, because of IQ.

>>4320024
There's already plenty of options if I don't care about IQ.

File: file.jpg (57 KB, 733x1000)

57 KB JPG

>like every manual wide angle lens ever
>focus from 0 to 2m takes like 6cm of the focus ring, nice
>focus from 2m to infinity is less than 1cm of the focus ring
>making it a nightmare to get perfect focus
There aren't any way around this, is it because of how focusing mechanics werks? This is annoying as fuck. Yes, I know, muh hyperfocal meme. It werks until it doesn't when the sun comes down and I can't shoot at f9 or whatever aperture. Yes, I also know about putting an infinity mark, it also werks until it doesn't when upon manipulation and shit you find out 15 minutes later that it slightly moved without you knowing.

>>4319947
>>4319930
What the fuck are you talking about?
The 5D Mark II now sells for around $200 as a good price.

>>4319989
>Their lineup is sorta confusing
Do you want a "rangefinder"-style body or an "SLR"-style body?

>>4320191
>There aren't any way around this, is it because of how focusing mechanics werks?
Manufacturers can make the focus throw whatever they want it to be.

How are the Olympus TG7 and the Samsung S23 cellphone both rated IP68? Can I go swimming with my Samsung? Or do these IP ratings mean jack shit?

>>4320214
reread

>>4320290
Just Youtube [cameraphone name] and water. All the main flagships have absolutely mogged "weathersealed" cameras for years. It's easy to seal up a smartphone unlike cameras with all the ports, dials, and buttons let alone an ILC. IP ratings are legit but if you look at the actual levels, some of them anything could pass e.g. IP10 which just means you cannot stick your hand in it.

>>4320388
yeah but the photos look like shit, they are ass to use, and have a 24/7 connection to globohomo hq so
*puts plastic bag over camera*

>>4320290
if you want to go swimming or go shoot underwater, get a dive housing. same with heavy downpours or sprays like big waterfalls. IP ratings and "weather-sealed" mean "water ingress not covered under warranty"
truth is, some richfag really needs to take camera makers to court over promises of "weather sealing" in their marketing materials

How do I STOP LOSING MY GOD DAMN LENS CAP? GOD DAMN.

I lost it for the 2nd time in the last 24 hours. Last time I've walked all over the house and this time I've given up and have just set the camera down on the lens hood.

>>4319862
if SOOC jpeg, use sony presets in-camera
if desktop, use lightroom, download paid VSCO or RNI plugins for free
if mobile, use non-gimped Snapseed, before the 2023 update
or VSCO, lightroom apps: modded versions if not free

>>4320597
I just put them on the same clothing/bag pocket/location spot so I know where to find it. or put a string and find a way to tie it around the lens, but it will dangle.

>>4320597
superglue a strong magnet to the front of it
surgically cut your forehead open with a scalpel
slide a magnet in there
suture the wound shut
let it heal
congratulations
this is called body modification
now when your lens cap isn't on your lens, you apply it directlt to your forehead and can no longer lose it

you could also put the cap in your pocket
but habitually losing one means you probably want to apply it to your forehead for proper safekeeping

>>4320597
I just use a chink mcuv filter instead as transparent lens cap. I only take it off when shooting for max autism on tripod.

>>4320597
I use the lens cap strap "lens cap keeper, apparently), it has an elastic strap you can put around you lens / body / wrist when you're shooting so you don't lose it.

File: file.png (351 KB, 1179x652)

351 KB PNG

With a $30 off $219 coupon, this gets a lot cheaper than the Samyang AF 12mm F2.

This review says it's better than the Samyang too.
https://sonyalpha.blog/2024/02/01/yongnuo-yn-11mm-f1-8s-da-dsm-wl/#4_Comparison_with_other_11-12mm_Comparaison_avec_dautres_11-12mm

Should I do it?

>>4319497
>>4319497
Two stupid questions in one:
I want to buy a cheapo 25mm lens for my fuji to practice manual focusing, should I go with the pergear 25mm f1.8, 7artisans 25mm f1.8 or the ttartisan 25mm f2. I'm open to trying vintage lenses with adaptors or other options as long as they are similarly sized tho those other 3.
I need to get myself a new printer for the house to do normal document printing things, but I also wanted to start printing my pictures. I'm not doing anything professionally, it's only to give them to friends/family or hanging on the wall. What kind of printer should I get, or should I get a normal printer and a specialized one for the pictures?

>>4320215
rangefinder. i like the optical viewfinder and the look of it

>>4319989
The X100 series seems to have gotten quite overpriced for what they are worth, If I was you I'd either spend 4 to 5 hundred and get an Xpro1 or spend the same that an x100f/v is going at now and get an xpro2, then you can take advantage of your film camera lenses.

>>4320694
the issue is that you can't return it if it's fucked

>>4320811
There's supposedly free return with 15 days of receipt.

>>4320868
to a warehouse or all the way back to china?

>>4320798
I have the a ttartisan 25/2
https://sonyalpha.blog/2022/10/21/ttartisan-25mm-f2/
aside from sony users, this is also a great website for other brand users especially fuji users who look for third party lenses.
I bought the ttartisan for a very specific reason, for zone focusing plus added a very easy to diy finger buckle ring for muscle memory focusing.
but I had to calibrate the lens (since they are not factory calibrated) to align the distance scale with the actual distance (from camera to subject) by putting paper spacers between the metal lens mount ring (back of lens) and the lens body itself. I assume the other chink brands may also need calibration.

if you have further questions with my DIYs, just let me know.

>>4320798
Depend how much money you're willing to spend. The canon g500 / g600 series is good considering the price and low operating cost and probably fine for your purpose. The next step up will cost you 2-4x as much (canon pro 200, one of the A3 epson 5 / 6 color ecotanks). The pro 200 also has higher operating cost, so it's not geat for doctuments.

File: IMG_4099.jpg (204 KB, 695x565)

204 KB JPG

Anybody know the make/model of this camera?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	216 dpi
Vertical Resolution	216 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	695
Image Height	565

>>4321545
Google image search. Agfa Ansco Memar or Silette Pronto

alright fags, looking for a photo backpack to hold two gripped DSLR bodies with a 16-35 zoom, a 70-200 zoom and a couple of f1.4 primes
here's the twist: this backpack also needs to have a compartment for personal shit like a jacket and water bottle
it doesn't need to look understated or some shit. it'll be used in the civilized parts of east asia so idgaf about the rob-me factor
thanks

>>4321545
AGFA? it says on it

>>4321565
Put dedicated camera bags inside a normal backpack

>>4321571
see I thought about that, using a kind of liner, but the problem is an additional step to pull the "inner camera bag" out of the backpack before having access

>>4321565
Gripped bodies narrows down your options a lot, many cubes aren't deep enough. Anything that can fit the PD cubes should be fine, or the Deep WANDRD cubes. I use a WANDRD Fernweh and been pretty content with it.
Shimoda Action X40 or Explore V2 35 would work too.

File: DSC06720.jpg (350 KB, 1616x1080)

350 KB JPG

What would happen if I were to mount a mirrorless camera to a cheap ball-head mounted to an insta360 invisible selfie stick mounted to a tripod?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6600
Camera Software	ILCE-6600 v1.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:05 21:25:15
Exposure Time	1/13 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	1.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1616
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

When it's overcast, can a white object on the ground be brighter than the sky?

>>4321769
No. But it could appear brighter due to contrast, like a white object on a dark surface.

>>4321771
On a cloudless day a white object can be brighter than the sky though, right?

>>4321773
How could an object be brighter than the light source it's reflecting? Unless it emits it's own light or there are additional light sources focused on it.

>>4321785
The sun is the light source, not the sky. If the sky was always brighter than a white object on the ground then you would never be able to photograph a landscape with a visibly blue sky. It would always be blown out to complete white.

during the film era, canon released a bunch of innovative lenses featuring stuff like asphericals and floating groups and fluorites. why didn't anybody else make those?

What's the best way to extract the jpg preview from a raw?

how does the DXO raw developer compare to LR and C1?

need a good lens for recording music performance videos, mainly drum videos. The one I have right now is garbage. https://a.co/d/903KK4v
I can't get far enough in pretty much any room for a good stationary shot. I think it has to do with being 12mm. Can anyone recommend 1-3 lenses that are more useful for this around the same price? for what it's worth. my phone can get a better angle if I zoom below 1x

>>4321815
New lenses tend to be massively optimized for sharpness and production cost.
Fluorite in particular is expensive and difficult material so other alternatives are prefered. Also modren lens coatings allow using much more lens elements.
So the fancy expensive lens may have huge lens profile file to fix that wonky unlinear distortion while also being ridiculously sharp from edge to center wide open.

>>4319497
my father's stupid ass tried to clean his sony a290 sensor with a wooden clothespin and some wool attached at the end. Now, you can see black marks everywhere especially if the picture is too bright.
I have no clue about photography but I thought of having this camera accompany me along my walks and see how it plays out.
I have tried searching for a290 sensors to buy online to no avail. Is it over for this old piece of plastic? Pls no bulli

>>4322270
What mount, you moron?

>>4319712
Go for the Sony.
The Nikon and Canon cameras will be more money for less value.

>>4319862
1)
>jpegs out of camera
>good
Pick one.
2)
Use darktable or rawtherapee to edit your photos. If these are not satisfactory, pirate lightroom.

File: P1080566-Edit.jpg (4.47 MB, 3648x2736)

4.47 MB JPG

>>4319876
Panasonic Lumix LX3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-LX3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:13 22:50:36
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	5.10 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

Is there such a thing as a conversion lens that's just for gathering more light? So the diameter would be much wider than the existing lens, but the optics would be arranged in such a way that instead of providing extra magnification like a telephoto, or extra fov like a wide angle, the resulting image would be the both the same magnification and the same fov only brighter. Sort of like the opposite of an nd filter.

>>4319974
I agree with this Anon.
At that level of price, you're going to get better results from a decent (used) micro-four-thirds over a shitty APS-C.

>>4322307
talking about FILM lenses, canon made AL and L lenses with aspherics and floating elements while nikon and minolta never made anything really comparable to canon's FD 24mm 1.4L and FD 50mm 1.2L for example

>>4322359
you're talking about a telecompressor

>>4322367
>telecompressor
But these still widen the fov, and from the images I've seen, the lens diameter doesn't seem much different to the lens it attaches to.

>>4322359
>>4322370
You can't get more light without taking in that light over a wider field of view, with that field of view being projected onto the sensor. You can't take that light from that wider field of view and magically add it to just the original field of view.

>>4322373
But isn't that how it works with telescopes? For example, you can have two different telescopes of the same magnification and apparent fov, but one will have a larger objective lens and as a result, a brighter image.

>>4322374
I get what you're trying to say, it's gathering more light from a larger front element, but the difference is that's the way the lens is designed. You can't just go adding on a larger front element to a lens that is already a complete optical formula, without changing the focal length and field of view.

>>4321815
Nikon definitely did have dozens of FLE and aspheric lenses back in the 70/80s. Minolta was first to patent FLE I think, and Nikon's first was the 24mm f2.8 in '67 (CRC is Nikon's term). Nikon's earliest aspherical were the 10mm f5.6 fisheye and the 58mm f1.2 Noct.
There's an old and very unconfirmed rumor that part of the reason NASA stuck with Nikon, was early Canon fluorite lenses breaking during testing.
>>4322270
Oly 7-14mm f2.8.
>>4322346
Take neat pictures with it, or garbage. Not worth fixing, it's ancient.
>>4322359
No. If you need more light, add light, or get a faster lens.

File: 20240607_100627.jpg (4.37 MB, 6016x5242)

4.37 MB JPG

How do you test for imperfections on your lens and how should you clean them. Like say my photos has no noise but dots like smudges or something.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-A525F
Camera Software	A525FXXS6EXC3
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Sensing Method	Not Defined
Image-Specific Properties:
Compression Scheme	JPEG Compression (Thumbnail)
Image Height	6936
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:06:07 10:06:29
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	9248
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Color Space Information	sRGB
Unique Image ID	F64ESNGR1SM F64ESNGR1SM
Image Height	6936
Brightness	2.7 EV
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
Flash	No Flash
F-Number	f/1.8
ISO Speed Rating	80
Image Width	9248
Focal Length	5.23 mm
Metering Mode	Spot
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

>>4322405
Also forgot to say I took this photo of my pc screen and the photo is of a dslr. The lens is old I have had the camera for about 7 years or so.

>>4322405
Those are on your sensor, not lens. Clean the sensor.

>>4322347
I'm using a bmpcc 4k. I didn't mention it in this thread because I suspect it deters responses

What's a good method to determine whether your photo is oversaturated? I thought maybe average the image and then check the saturation of the resulting color, but you would have different ideal results based on the type of scene, so it would be hard to know what to aim for. Also, how do you desaturate an image without making it look worse? Selective adjustment of different colors seems like the obvious approach, but are there guidelines for this? And what about shadows, midtones and highlights? Should they be adjusted separately as well?

>>4322606
you're thinking about this too hard. If it's oversaturated then turn it down

File: 1717582098565931.png (1.49 MB, 1025x2525)

1.49 MB PNG

>>4322607
Sometimes that will make it look undersaturated no matter how how little you turn it down. Simply desaturating an image also isn't as straightforward as it seems. For example, in phototshop, different desaturation methods will give you different results. All four methods in this image handle the brightness of colors differently. This is significant because the brightness value of a color will change how saturated it seems, so you'll get some colors appearing to desaturate less depending on which method you choose.

>>4322397
I forgot about nikon's CRC system. clumsy me!
also the fluorite crystals breaking on canons don't surprise me

Alright I'm getting back into photography and have a Pentax K1000, I think the rewind is a bit rough but I may have messed up how I did the socket placement because I'm dumb. Anyway I practiced some shots on my cats and hopefully they will look okay. While I know its a dumb and bad thing to do, I don't wanna mail my film out to get it developed because I don't have faith in this batch, which of the two dogshit companies wont fuck my pictures as bad Walgreens or CVS? I just wanna see how I did on exposure and if I have remembered bokeh so thats why I want something fast and don't give too much shit about the quality CVS or Walgreens returns.

>wat do?

copying this from film general so I can get a broader sense of answers on my situation

>>4322640
Are you sure they still develop in the store in your area? I thought the “photo” dept was just digital prints and they ship the film out.

>>4322649
my local one does, they charge $16, so says the website. Guess I need to walk in and verify that they do

>>4322405
Lens:
Rocket blower + brush + disposable lens wipe

May substitute disposable lens wipe with a clean microfibre cloth + distilled water / reverse osmosis water.

Sensor:
Rocket blower + maybe lens brush + solution. But I haven't tried this.

File: file.png (3.12 MB, 1899x1651)

3.12 MB PNG

Is the dot from my lens or from my sensor?

>>4322606
check it on your phone, it's most likely how it will appear on other devices.

File: P1570764.jpg (750 KB, 4592x3448)

750 KB JPG

How much AI denoise should I apply in Lightroom to dark underexposed images, and normal well lit images?
As I understand less is more but what are some numbers to stick to?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-G81
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.3 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	800 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:04 11:40:02
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	250
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	400.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4322745
none. Cameras have noise

>>4322747
>Cameras have noise
yes, which im removing you purist retard

File: _DSC9735-2.jpg (3.82 MB, 7008x4672)

3.82 MB JPG

Am I doing something wrong? I know it's not a proper test, but I can't say "wall tests" are suited for wide angle lenses.
- Zeiss Loxia 21mm
- Photo taken at f8.0
- Focus at infinity (a little bit around the stop for maximum sharpness in the center when focus magnifying).
- With those settings, hyperfocal markers say everything should be in focus from 2 meters to infinity at that aperture and that focusing point.

Full jpeg with minimal compression: https://files.catbox.moe/sg9umk.jpg

Pretty sure the extremities shouldn't be this bad. For the extreme corners, yes, no problems about it, and the floor is close to me <2meters anyway. What I'm not sure of is the extreme right and left of the pic. Up until like 15-20% into the photo, they look like shit. I mean, even that tree on the left that's further away looks like shit, not to mention the pyramid trees. Even part of the structure with the windows on the upper right looks like shit, and it's quite far.
Am I retarded and doing something wrong, or did I roll a complete dud? Because it really feels like I rolled a complete dud. No reviews show something this bad at that aperture.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7CM2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	21 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	240 dpcm
Image Created	2024:06:08 15:09:18
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	10.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	21.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft
GPS Status	Measurement Interoperability
Geodetic Survey Data	WGS-84
GPS Differential Correction	No Correction

>>4322796
I would say you've got a shit lens. It's certainly not a focus issue, the centre of the wall at the near side of the pond is in focus and that's closer than those fancy ass triangular trees yet you can also see that the wall gets soft as fuck towards the edges. From reviews it should be sharp wide open with marginal improvement at the edges up until about f/4-5.6.

>>4322796
looks like misalignment to me.

>>4322796
IBIS?

File: _DSC5614-Panorama_r.jpg (3.73 MB, 5913x2500)

3.73 MB JPG

>>4322833
Yes, IBIS, I only turn it off when on a tripod, but I doubt it's the issue here. Plus, it would be well known at this point. And I don't have such issues with other manual lenses when using them in combination with IBIS

>>4322825
>>4322831
Thanks, guess I'll try to get rid of it through MBP or something and take the loss. Repairing would probably be like the price of a lens, and I can't see myself scamming anyone directly, even though I got scammed myself (got it used). I got some nice pics from it as long as you don't look at the borders, or if I close it enough, but still.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7CM2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 24.6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	21 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	8016
Image Height	3389
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	240 dpcm
Image Created	2023:12:27 12:58:35
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	7.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	21.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5913
Image Height	2500
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
GPS Status	Measurement Interoperability
Geodetic Survey Data	WGS-84
GPS Differential Correction	No Correction

>>4322796
ALL sony cameras up to the A7RIV have weak plastic ibis mounts that break and spontaneously decenter the sensor and exaggerate already existing parallelism issues (50% of lens copy variation = tweaked mounts lol)

Consider this.

>>4322674
Looks like lens to me. Sensor dust tends to not have the edges like that.

>>4322846
Just curios why you would turn IBIS off on tripod? It doesn't hurt anything.

>>4322846
See
>>4322865
Do decentering tests with the camera in different positions. Sony sensors unironically come loose. Some lenses are hit worse than others.

File: 1699460014471064~2.jpg (59 KB, 568x404)

59 KB JPG

>Click on local photographer page
>Obviously underexposed pictures of birds get hundreds of likes
>Insanely overprocessed sunset photos get thousands
Why the FUCK do normies have such shit taste in photography? This dude literally makes hundreds of dollars per print on photos that are literally so underexposed they're half black.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	568
Image Height	404
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:05:04 18:48:13

>>4322878
It's the NPC problem.

>>4322878
>why is art subjective? why doesn't everyone else copy steven shore like me? don't they know that the only actual jewish conspiracy on earth said steven shore was a master of photography?
based normCHADS disregarding the opinions of the jewish "art" world and keeping the spirit of pictorialism alive

Never owned a camera and got a trip with some fellow chan members to Japan next year and need something nice that I can take pictures with and film a little. I really like neon tokyo aesthetic so I will be taking a lot of photos around Tokyo and other places like it. I want to be in on the camera and lens for under $2000. But closer to $1500 would be nice. Don't care if it's used or anything. Was looking at the Lumix S5 with a 20-60 lens but wanted other options.

>>4322885
sony a7c+40mm f2.5 g
sony colors are very cold and drab, which is good for cityscapes desu

>>4322865
He has an A7C II

>>4322889
Damn that does look insanely nice. Thanks for the recommendation.

>>4322649
>16$
what the fuck

how do I cope with a lens that is slightly decentered in one corner at certain focal distances but unnoticeable unless you're autistic like i am and already figured out where it's off-kilter and otherwise wouldn't notice unless it was pointed out

>>4322907
>cope
>autistic

your options are
>return it and get another copy, hoping it's better and doesn't have another flaw.
it's a mass-produced zoom. it WILL have flaws here and there.

>send it to some repair service to hopefully get it realigned correctly
this will cost you and there's no guarantee that it comes back any better

>open the lens yourself and try to realign it
KEK

>sell or dump it and try something else
you wouldn't be here if you did this already

>accept that all things have flaws and move on, ie. just cope
the best option but you can't do it since you're autistic

>>4322928
it's a prime and the issue is at focal distances, not lengths, but yeah coping seems like the only realistic option

>>4322930
sounds like the focus group is very slightly tilted. I suggest you just live with it!

>>4322936
i mean as a poorfag i don't have much of a choice, lacking the budget for the 'buy sell buy sell trade return buy sell buy keep' rigamarole to find a perfect copy, i just have to force myself to not think about it and instead think about when i'm outside having fun taking photos without even remembering the 'bad corner'
god i wish i wasn't an autistic retard

>>4322946
what is it even?
the "buy-exchange-exhange-exchange-exchange-exchange" hell mostly applies to people who buy sigma and tamron or chinkshit lenses.
you will find countless posts of "I went through five copies of this fArt lens to get a good one but it's so worth it!!!" these people have zero self-respect. I shoot niggon, I exclusively buy niggor lenses because I've been through that hell with sigma and tamron. everything niggor I've bought just work out of the box, even the chink and thai ladyboi made niggors.

>>4322952
lolympus, so chinkshit with a fancy name (only the 25mm was made in japan iirc, everything else was china numba wan)

>>4322900
idk man, I live in a town where nobody gives a shit about film or pictures outside of the stuff you can take with your phone. So I gotta suffer that before I start getting a bit more serious and sending my stuff out to get properly developed.

>>4322953
never used any. good luck

>>4322956
thanks

>>4322959
if it makes you feel better, a decade ago I bought a tamron 24-70mm f2.8 (model A007) since that was the only stabilized standard zoom for nikon at the time.
it had a well-documented aperture miscalibration issue. mine had it too and it somehow took three warranty repairs to get it within a sixth of a stop (it was wrong by 2/3 of a stop out of the box and overexposes)
then I saw one side was wildly soft. that took yet another warranty repair to maybe improve by 50%.
in the end I sold it at a loss of 700 bucks to a local recycler. "why didn't you return it?" because the shop doesn't take returns. no such legal requirement here
"made in japan quality" tongue my anus

>>4322885
Buy your stuff there. 2nd hand lenses are quite cheap.

I just bought a used olympus om 10. I haven't tried shooting with it yet, because I have no film at the moment, but I have been trying out the functions of it without film, and I noticed that the shutter triggers sometimes when advancing the film with the lever. Anybody here experience this before? It happens quite frequently, and it would suck to have every 3rd or 4th picture to be taken like that

Is there no way to connect a cheap single button bluetooth shuttle remote to my Sony a6600? I put both in pairing mode and they don't connect.

The bluetooth remote works fine with my phone.

>>4322984
I want to learn the camera before I go.

>>4322988
serious olympus people tell everyone to avoid the double digit models and consider them junk fyi

they are non repairable and riddled with problems

>>4323002
read the manual and watch yt videos

>>4323003
What about not so serious olympus people? Do they have a solution to my issue?

>>4323024
Not so serious olympus person here
Just buy an om-1n (works without batteries) or om-2n (needs sr44s) and "zuiko" (no letter in front) 50mm f1.8 and call it a day. Prism rot and light seals are a DIY level repairs, that's it. the endgame of olympussy. dont bother with anything else.

>>4323028
I'm not looking to buy another camera. I am looking to resolve the issue.

>>4323049
You bought a broken film camera. The fix is to sell it and buy a working one. Welcome to film!

File: rf50mm.jpg (480 KB, 1500x844)

480 KB JPG

I'm a n00b somewhat but I'm looking at lenses and the higher rated ones tend to be primes. Is there a specific reason to get prime lenses other than the size and weight?

Also would like recommendations on lenses. I like street photography, portraits or live models, would like to try auto/rolling photography. I have the R6 Mk II. I don't have a specific budget in mind.

>>4323057
the iq is crispy, it’s why you use an ILC. its not just bokeh.

>>4323057
>street photography
>portraits and models
Kinda on opposite ends of the lens spectrum conventionally. You got money to drop on both?

>>4323061
I know but I like doing different things. I don't have money for both right this second since I just bought the body and kit lens. but I could swing a lens for one or the other right now most likely and save up for another one.

>>4323057
Size, weight, price, image quality, sometimes more durable (less gaps and moving parts for crap to get inside them, fewer parts to wear out), and they can be faster (you won't find many faster than f/2.8)

What 85mm lenses work with a pentax k1000? I have no clue and feel dumb as shit. I wanna have something for portraits

>>4323107
Anything k mount and I believe m42 adapts easily with a ring.

>>4323109
awesome thanks!

>>4323110
make sure it has an aperture ring or you'll have to shoot wide open

>8288x5520 resolution
>open RAW in darktable
>enable lens corrections
>exports a 8287x5519 file
what the fuck how do I stop this?

>>4323112
disable the lens corrections

>>4323112
darktable likes taxing one pixel to bank for later
try exporting to 1000px and watch it spit out 999 every time

File: file.png (459 KB, 1190x688)

459 KB PNG

So I bought the wireless mic on the left. It was buzzing when I plug it into my camera, but not when I plug it into my computer or my phone.

I did some research and I think it's because my camera jack is TRS and plugging TRRS into it causes issue. I noticed some mics come with two cables, TRS and TRRS depending on what you want to plug into.

Would an adapter like the right fix the problem?

File: fuji-xt2.jpg (352 KB, 1720x1148)

352 KB JPG

I've recently gotten back into photography and I want to buy a modern camera. I have an old Canon 600D with the 18-55 kit and 55-250 kit lenses. While it's in good condition it's also slow, bulky, heavy and I never want to take it with me anywhere.

I've been looking into the used camera market for a while and I have couple of options in mind (not in particular order):

>Fujifilm xt-2 with Fujinon XF 18-55 f2.8-4 | 800€

>Sony a6000 used and then buy the sigma 18-50 f2.8 ~800-900€

>Sony a6000 with 16-50 kit lens | 350€

>Sony a6400 with kit lens | 500€

While I absolutely love the look of the Fujis film simulations I'm not sure about shelling a hefty 800€ for a rediscovered hobby right away. Also I'm not sure if the a6000 with the sigma lens would be a better option to the Fuji.

Are the Sony kit lenses total ass? I want to do everyday photography and also I ski quite a lot in the winter and I want to capture some high speed tubular sends. I'm also going for a month long trip at the end of the summer where I would bring the camera.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7R
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	180 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:23 17:32:49
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	2500
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	2.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	180.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4323114
but I want them on?...
>>4323115
I tried exporting at a custom res and it keeps diddling my numbers, 3000x2000 turns out to be 3000x1998.

This shit drives me mad. Also the crop module is shit, doesn't give you pixel level control.
Is there really no way go make it stop this?
I'd rather have the 1px edge be distorted or filled in pixels or whatever the hell kind of artifact they're trying to avoid rather than have it be an odd value.

File: 1717932845789.jpg (48 KB, 1110x363)

48 KB JPG

>>4323150
>A6000 with kitt lens
if lightness, compactness for EDC are priority and you count per grams, also cheapest. downside: sometimes, color needs to be tweaked via post processing for better skin tones. AF isnt A6400 level. kit lens has OSS, isnt that sharp as Sigma but very usable for EDC snaps.
kit lenses can be a total ass for people who require sharpness, but can be somehow mitigated by increasing the sharpness in post.
>A6000 with 18-50 2.8 sigma
if sharpness, 2.8, macro are of importance. bigger, bit heavier than kit lens.
in the apsc world, sigma is the lightest, most compact 18-50 2.8.
>A6400 with kit lens
lighter, more compact than 18-50 2.8 sigma. body AF with AI, body is a just a tad bit heavier than A6000
>A6400 with 18-50 2.8 sigma
best setup if you want the more recent tech, the sigma sharpness plus 2.8 and macro, and if you're fine with the size

it will depend on budget and your perspective on what size and weight is acceptable for you. but coming from a dslr, sony apsc bodies are considered small.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#535.360,535.1049,809.360,809.1049,ha,t
you can also get a fuji body and sigma, viltrox lenses if you want the film sims SOOC, or just websearch and download paid for free VSCO or RNI presets for lightroom and you should be good for sony, even a6000 which I use.

>>4323158
>increasing the sharpness in post.
biggest lie ever told

Very stupid, does anyone have that terry richardson picture of him taking a photo of a model who's offscreen, except her legs which are up around his head? I can't find it for the life of me

>>4323158

Thank you, great info!

How do you feel about fuji + 18-55 vs a6000 + the sigma? Which one would you get?

At the moment I gravitate more to the sony + kit lens corner. Price being the only reason desu.

File: 1716297050909946.jpg (43 KB, 640x640)

43 KB JPG

>>4319497
Can someone give me some reading material to get good at photography?
I just bought an old 35mm camera, and I have sole basic notions of the speed, and aperture and composition, but somenthing more in depth would be nice

>>4323114
It is really that simple.
>>4323114
>but I want them on?...
You can either have the maximum pixel resolution, or let it correct the distortion at expense of a few lines of pixels. You could manually correct the distortion but the result will be worse than using the lens correction data.
>>4323151
Pixel aspect ratios are not universal, it may be scaling the best it can to keep the image ratio.

>>4323183
I'm not familiar with xt2 + kit lens, especially with it's AF reliability, compared to the a6000. you may want to websearch the AF comparison. a6000 is a bit old, but I continue to use it since I was looking for the lightest, most compact camera+kit lens that has 24mp, EVF, built-in flash, apsc milc.
I have a pants-pocketable fuji xf10 which fuji gimped so the slow AF lens + slow xt100 processor combined produce slower AF even when compared to the old a6000.
yeah, you may start with the a6000 + kit lens. then maybe get a 1.4 or 1.8 prime lens to go with it later, or a zoom tele, depending on your needs.
I just also pair mine with a sigma 30 1.4 for tight spaces, lowlight, portraiture if I need more background blur. I also wouldn't mind getting a used sony 35 1.8 oss which is smaller, lighter. it's stabilization (oss) might be very useful esp. for video work if needed.
mind you, I just shoot casually, just a hobby.

>>4322867
>why you would turn IBIS off on tripod?
on my camera, IBIS is auto-disabled when you turn on the built-in shot timer
it's also supposed to turn off when you plug in a remote shutter release but the firmware is bugged
I assume it's because the assumption is that if you're shooting with timer and/or remote then you've already made sure the camera is steady and want as little moving on the camera as possible

>>4322867
>Just curios why you would turn IBIS off on tripod? It doesn't hurt anything.
most likely it causes micro jitters since it's still active

File: Title.jpg (1.82 MB, 1920x1080)

1.82 MB JPG

Don't know much about cameras but I know I want to take pictures like on the right, and big lenses cost as much as the cameras themselves
What's the cheapest brand of camera + telephoto lens combo that is still good quality?
eBay has a bunch of Japanese & Chinese 900mm lenses for like $70 but reviews say they last a few months before being useless. not sure how a lens breaks on its own but yeah preferably good quality, its a big purchase and I want it to survive for years. Last time I asked this someone recc a Sony a6000 and everyone said he was trolling

>>4323288
You're going to need to spend at least $800, if you can't do that find something else to do.

Get a Nikon APS-C DSLR, any one is fine, then get a telephoto lens.

>>4323288
sony a6600
la-ea5 adapter
minolta af 500mm f8 reflex
SOVL.

File: fb83c1b578617c5dda633f230(...).jpg (32 KB, 735x413)

32 KB JPG

>>4323294
>at least $800
for both camera and lens together? that's no problem, damn
clicking around this board seems like many of you have $2000+ setups, I didn't have a budget in mind but for just wanting to occasionally take pictures from far away I'd prefer to not drop thousands right away is all

>>4323316
A6### and a tamon 18-300
Good enough to make the news
https://www.registerguard.com/story/news/local/2024/04/30/blue-rock-thrush-pictures-oregon/73505974007/

>>4323317
>make the news
>literallywhere, oregon local news blog
555-come-on-now

>>4322988
Apparently this only happened when I was using a particular lens. Problem did not occur when using camera without lens or with other lenses. Weird

Say you've got an external grip for your camera, but it's flat metal instead of any type of texture. What's the best material to wrap around part of it to both give you better grip and protect the camera body a little? Gaffer tape? Hockey stick tape? Fabric tape (do they make that in black)? Bondage tape?

File: Untitled-1.jpg (2.49 MB, 3312x828)

2.49 MB JPG

I converted the xml files from here https://github.com/abpy/FujifilmCameraProfiles into dcp to use in ACR, but I'm not sure if they're working correctly. Left image is camera neutral, middle is velvia, and right is pro neg hi. Do these look right?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:10 18:28:44
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3312
Image Height	828

File: 20240610-125501.png (1.29 MB, 1920x1080)

1.29 MB PNG

How was this footage captured? Was it a phone or a camera? Screenshot from about 2 seconds of footage from here:
https://youtu.be/cOME1mp0_A4?t=621

Is the stabilization that a GoPro has any more advanced than a recent mirrorless's IBIS?

>>4323499
I know this is the stupid question thread, but can you at least try not to be stupid?
Be more direct with the question what is it that you really want to know?

Nobody knows if it was a phone or a camera. That bit doesn't matter. These are bright daylight scenes. Phones do fine for videos in that scenario.

>>4323499
Was probably capture on actual camera. Some of the DoF looks a bit too shallow for phone in some shot. The credited author looks to primarily be a stills shooter, which explains the relatively poor video quality.
Doesn't really matter though, nothing there was challenging on a tech level video wise, and you could certainly still capture something even better with a modern phone. If that's your quality standard goal, you have like unlimited camera options.

>>4323566
any particular setting that would enhance this effect?

>>4323620
*for stills specifically. I would not want to replicate video footage like this.

>>4323620
What do you mean by effect? What effect? What part of the video? We can't read your mind.

I'm considering a practical nikon full-frame wide zoom:

>AF 20-35mm
ancient screwdrive focus, shit corners at every aperture

>AF-S 17-35mm
infamous for motors crapping out

>AF-S 14-24mm
huge specialized lens with little practicality

>AF-S 16-35mm
huge and VR is pointless on wide zooms

>AF-S 18-35mm
made in china plastic turd, variable aperture

opinions?

>>4323620
there is no effect there
they took a series of still photos in quick succession from a moving car, with a low shutter speed like 1/10 or 1/15
then they put them back-to-back like a GIF and played it in the video

>>4323772
There are also 2 versions of Tokina 16-28 f/2.8

Currently using a t7i and I'm trying to get into portait photography. My two options I've narrowed down to are the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 art and the tamron 24-70mm g2 lens. The pros of the sigma art is the fact that it's cheaper and specifically built for aspc, but it doesn't have image stabilization, whereas the tamron g2 does as well as being able to use it on full frame for future use, but comes at a higher cost. I'm not sure which to go for, so I'd like to know what you guys think

File: why.png (4.58 MB, 1842x937)

4.58 MB PNG

If you go to a location on Google Maps and open uploaded user images fullscreen, do you see them high res, or do they appear like pixelated dogshit like here? No matter which browser I use, it looks the same, so I don't think it's my browser settings. Could it be my privacy setting with Google? Or does Google reduce the image quality and that's just what they look like on full screen? I find this fucking annoying.

>>4323900
had the first one (before the 'opera), also huge but the multicolor flaring around point light sources was the biggest fault

>>4323951
also not interested in third parties
18-35mm looking to be the most practical right now desu

>>4323941
The quality of user uploaded images will vary like this because of dumb niggers uploading thumbnails instead of higher res images.

It's that simple.
No, it won't ever stop.
No, you (or Google) can't fix anything.

>>4319497
If you have shaky hands, a heavier camera/lens will help since you'll rely less on fine motor control. A heavier camera will also be less affected by your movements in general, dampening more vibration. Just be sure to avoid something heavy enough to cause strain or you'll be shaking again.

Here's a stupid question. Explain how this gear meme works
>Most people have a dead simple fixed lens wide angle crop sensor point and shoot as their only camera
>This has never made anyone a better photographer
>Photographers often think that they will get better if they switch to a fixed lens crop sensor point and shoot because it will totally force them to stop buying shit and focus on content, composition, contrast, and color
>But they never use their phone - it has to be a leica Q or x100 thing or ricoh GR with an FOV that's basically the same as their phone

>>4324038
I hadn't thought of that. Seems obvious now!

File: up.jpg (1.11 MB, 3060x3463)

1.11 MB JPG

Is it possible to replicate natural daylight cheeply? I love to make toy photogaphy for meme replies but I can do only nice photos during the day... the ones in the evening fucking suck since i don't have any nice light sources. My camera is a shitty phone camera too so it doesn't help much either but it gives this nice chalky outline and I like that a lot now. How much would I need to spend to get this kind of light and what do I need to buy?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-A236B
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	26 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	3/50 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	1250
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	D65
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.00 mm
White Balance	Auto

>>4324083
Phones suck to use and dedicated gadgets are cool.

>>4323931
who cares about lens/camera for portrait
just get the fov and character you want, then focus on actually important stuff like lighting and posing

File: 1709323991636845.gif (2.69 MB, 320x240)

2.69 MB GIF

>bought a used e mount lens
>cannot recognize lens
>attach it properly

File: _DSC9499_r.jpg (3.12 MB, 4500x3000)

3.12 MB JPG

>>4324129
True daylight is true daylight. Sometimes it's best to not try to replicate perfection, but just play with what you have. Here in my pitch dark room with just my 10 bucks Ikea floor lamp with an Ikea LED bulb, and my TV as the background. Nothing else. I don't think you need to spend much to get workable enough lighting.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7CM2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 24.6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	90 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	7008
Image Height	4672
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	240 dpcm
Image Created	2024:06:12 02:07:22
Exposure Time	1.3 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Brightness	0.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	90.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4500
Image Height	3000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft

>>4324196
Oh wow that looks nice. Yeah I guess you are right. I should experiment a bit more first

I have a z5 and a handful of old manual minolta lenses I'd like to use together. if I buy an adapter, how would the lens aperture work? I'm assuming it'll be stuck wide open?

>>4324250
no, its actually stuck stopped down

folderpill: zeiss super ikonta, agfa super isolette, maybe something else? the fuji GF670 is stupid expensive for no reason

>>4324250
I have some adapters I used to mate my old Minolta AF-A lenses to my Z7 II and the aperture works great. These are cheap adapters I'm talking.

>>4324281
my rokkor lenses don't stop down until you release the shutter, so I'm not sure how I'd control the aperture when mounted on my Z5

>>4324381
Adapters tend to be designed with a part that will hold down the aperture actuation lever, so it will stop down to whatever aperture you set on the lens. Some will even have a secondary ring you can quickly turn to switch between stopped down and wide open.

File: pic.jpg (225 KB, 1080x1129)

225 KB JPG

First time ever shooting with film. After finishing the roll I rewind the film. This is where the camera refused to rewind any more. Is this to much sticking out? I mean it shouldn't matter since there is no actual photos on that part, but it's always good to check with you guys.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1080
Image Height	1920
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Light Source	Unknown

>>4324493
rewind it all back to canister, unless you are developing it by yourself

What do you store your photos on? I'm torn between getting a 4-8TB HDD or a 2TB SSD.

Beginner here. I am new to this but I have gotten some nice photos of local nature here and want to get it printed and hung up. How do I know if the quality is good enough on print in different sizes? is there a way to know so I don't waste money on shitty prints? I want some larger ones and they might be a problem.

>>4324493
If it’s an auto winder, Some cameras leave the leader sticking out purposefully so it’s easier to process the film without having to crack the can or use a picker, etc.

>>4324597
If you are just doing photos, SSD. They are a bit more reliable and it's just nicer not to have a drive spin up or make noise. But backup to HDD every year or so.

One of my lenses, the "newest" one I own, 2yrs, already has a bunch of dust inside of it. I have never had dust inside a lens before. This one was fresh from the manufacturer, so I'm annoyed it is already garbage.
I hardly even use this lens, and it has been stored with the caps on inside a zipped camera bag. I don't know how it could have gotten all that dust inside at all, seems like bullshit.
Anything I can try to get the dust out or at least reduce how much is in the middle of the lens?
I'd rather not pay to get it cleaned, because I am mad.

>>4324261
I have a super ikonta that belonged to my grandfather, but it has light leaks :(

>>4324622
Depends how large and the content. An old rule of thumb is 300dpi but if the photo is good, it doesn't matter. Get cheap prints of some crops with different sharpness and color settings to see what works best for you before doing the big print though.

>>4324129
that "chalky" outline you seem to be looking at just looks like camera shake, denoising, and sharpening post-processing due to not enough light to take an in focus sharp pic without blur or smearing

if you want to take good photos of figs like these light is key but you're doin it wrong
consider getting a light tent or tabletop photography setup with a few lights you can adjust
that'll let you build a little scene, and drop in your figs to photograph with controlled lighting nicely
also
invest in a tripod and phone holder, you acn get them for like $20

hellooo! i heard from a wise anon this is where i can ask camera questions .

so, im planning to buy a canon eos 300d with an cf card adapter, i heard they can be pretty bad (listing below),pter-support/dp/B0791FL6FS/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top

It should work though right? And im only gonna be taking a photos slowly, no burst mode . But im worried it may not work in general or with multiple photos at diff ev compositions. or that it may break easily. Should i just buy a cf card and use an cable to my laptop to get the photos from? Also about the canon eos 300d does it have a mini usb port, because it looks like it from the photos but i wanna make sure it is isn't an annoyingly similar looking proprietary cable like those sony motherfuckers use.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Extreme-Compact-Memory-Ada


Unrelated question, i heard some pk adapters for ef mount focus past infinity, will this cause photos to get out of focus? I plan to use zone focusing and am wondering if this will affect the shot, i dont plan to do anything like astro but i plan to possible use telephoto lenses and an all manual prime lense.

>>4324762
Why are you looking to buy a 21 year old 6MP DSLR?
Is it even coming with a lens?
What are you paying for it?
You can buy a brand new T7 for $480 with a lens, or for $600 with TWO lenses (one being a 75-300mm zoom), with 24MP and the ability to use SD cards.


If you're getting this relic with some kind of warranty and assurance that "it works" for like $50 sure grab it but otherwise find something newer.. from at least 2010 or so.

>>4324786
heyya! yeah i was thinking of adapting my pk lense collection to it but honesty realised its probs worth it to buy a pentax camera because of the sd card slot, like you said. Or maybe a canon 450d if its perhaps cheaper. But regarding the price for the 300d it was like £25 quid including battery and charger, just no lense.

>>4324811
>pk lense collection
first of all, it's "lens", not however the fuck you're spelling it
second of all, where did your K-mount lens collection come from if you only have 30 quid for a camera?

>>4324811
>worth it to buy a pentax
good one lol

how can I know that a japanese ebay seller, either an individual or a business, is selling a lens in his possession, and is not actually some korean/chicom living in japan who buys the lens from mercari then sends it to me when I place the order?

>>4324823
You don’t. Look at the pictures and see how comfortable you are rolling the dice, essentially. Can’t trust any listing descriptions or rating systems or any Engrish shit they put on there.

>>4324815
i got a 50mm f2 rikenon, 28mm f2.8 sigma ulteawide and an 80 to 200 f4 tokina for £20 with one of my slr and i have an f1.8 50mm pentax smc a that i got for £8 quid, with another slr. Also Im not poor just terrified of spending money on digital incase i dont like it . but i spoke with some other ppl on another and they basically made me realize i should stop being stingy on the body lol.

>>4324876

ffs i should rlly proofread before i type
*ultrawide
*spoke with other ppl on another thread
also that means it was like £28 for my lenses and 2 pk slr's so honestly idk what your on about, buy old slr's coupled with lenses and you get some for bangin' prices, its not a secret!

>>4324876
You're going to want something with live view to focus those prime lenses, the default focus screens on DSLRs won't show depth of field narrower than f/2.8

>>4324876
>Im not poor
>terrified of spending money on digital
sounds like you're poor

>>4324879
lmao what

>>4324889
The way an SLR displays an image in the viewfinder is by focussing the light coming through the lens onto a textured focus screen, similar to a piece of tracing paper. The fineness of the texture determines how dark or bright it is but also how shallow a depth of field it can display accurately (I won't get into the physics of it, it's unnecessary and I'm not an expert). Because all DSLRs have autofocus being able to manually focus fast lenses accurately was deemed to not be as important as it used to be (also why split prisms disappeared from focus screens) and so the compromise was made to have a brighter viewfinder (being smaller and cheaper pentamirrors instead of pentaprisms would have made them dimmer than film SLRs). For many of the more professional DSLRs you could actually get replacement focus screens that will show a shallower depth of field or even add split prisms.

File: IMG_4365.jpg (4.01 MB, 4000x6000)

4.01 MB JPG

I can’t find the gear thread, so I’ll ask here:

What is this guy shooting?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6400
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.3.1 (iOS)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:14 13:37:16
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4000
Image Height	6000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4324896
Add to that cheap DSLRs often have tiny viewfinders, so even with a proper focus screen, not ideal.

>>4324902
Leica M6 or maybe like M4-P. Lens is Voigtlander 35 f1.5 nokton. I've shot a lot with the same lens, but don't actually like it that much.

>>4324902
Doubling down on a black chrome M4 variant. Could be older M6 with red dot removed / covered, but looks more like the top screw of an M4 / M4-P / M4-2.

File: DSC06746.jpg (717 KB, 1616x1080)

717 KB JPG

I bought a strap off Aliexpress and it came with rings and circular pads. What are they for?

I have a Sony camera. Should I just detach the triangle shits that came with the camera and thread the strings directly through the holes on the camera body?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6600
Camera Software	ILCE-6600 v1.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	61 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:14 10:35:48
Exposure Time	1/10 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Brightness	0.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	41.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1616
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal