The one you have with you

>>4346978
Should I get the 360mm rodenstock sironar-s?

>>4347017
Fuji x100vi

All other gear is a psychological crutch for bad photographers

>>4346978
Fuji x100vi

>>4347019
Lmao. Not shooting large format is a waste of your time. Can't wait to hear your cope.

>>4347021
I don't want to haul that shit around to take my usual snapshits, cheers. What's your LF setup?

I have a question for yall: I use a canon rp and I have yet to take the plunge and buy some quality glass. The best lens i have is the RF 35mm which i fuckin love, but I'm looking into buying a few longer lenses. I have a shitty plastic canon nify fifty 1.8 II, a 17-40mm f/4 (for my real estate gigs), an AWFUL canon 70-300mm, and some old olympus zuiko glass. What would y'all be saving up for in my situation? My real passion is creative portraits and landscapes, I was thinking either a Sigma 85 ART, or one of the ol' canon 70-200s with IS. I heard the 135mm Macro is great for portraits but im a little on the fence about that one. I recently got an adapter to use my Olympus OM lenses on my RP which has been neat, but it's a little primitive for my liking and i'm not sure im overjoyed with the results. The lenses ive tried are the 75-150mm f/4, a 28mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.8. Are these worth keeping and using for portraits/street? The zone focusing ability is appealing to me, but in the few test shots i've done, they just dont look too great. Probably user error but yeah lemme know what y'all think and what you'd do with this gear set

>>4347226
"Quality glass" is the biggest scam in photography.

t. went through all the g master S L noctitron leicalander meme lenses before realizing the standard double gauss is king and the only real way to get better rendering is to increase the imaging area

What strength ND filter do I want for wide open bright daylight portrait photos with my xf18mmf2 and xf35mmf1.4? Ideally one since they're the same filter size

>>4347042
Sinar P with many accessories. Found a sinaron-se 300mm f5.6(41mm equivalent) and got that instead of the 360mm. About 1.3k cheaper, lol.
I only had a 180mm sironar-s lens(21mm equivalent) that was too wide for many applications on 8x10.

>>4347019
Anything less than medium format is for bad photographers
>i need infinite exposures!
>ok, can we compromise on 36 a roll
12 or less or you suck bro. Digital cameras are just for practice photos.

When you really get good you can upgrade to sheets

>>4347295
wide open bright daylight, assume ev16. if you step down the fstop/shutter chart assuming iso100, you'll need a 3 stop ND (8?) to hit f1.4@1/2000.
Note: i take no responsibility for how close or off these numbers are, but you get the idea. look up the charts and work it out, it's not difficult.

>>4347323
If you werent a shitty photographer you could pump out straight bangers shooting one 8x10 a month

File: IMG_3299.jpg (1.2 MB, 1722x1377)

1.2 MB JPG

>>4346978
Bros, I need second Snoy E camara to use with my Sigma 150-600 for birdwatching.
So what would be the best cheap option for this?
I am looking at 5100 or 6000 or maybe even some NEX, but I don't know how good(bad) and FAST they are.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7C
Camera Software	ILCE-7C v2.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	600 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:23 08:45:46
Exposure Time	1/640 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Brightness	10.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	600.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

what's the lightest mirror-less body with IBIS? I want to mostly take street photography in afternoons/evenings. Toss it and a 30mm to 50mm 35mm equivalent prime into a bag and go on a stroll.

>>4347323
Based. Like Ansel Adams famously said,
>Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.

>>4347588
Forgot to say, IDGAF about the viewfinder, I can't really use one with my glasses.

E-PL10?

>>4347588
>smallest mirror less with ibis
Surely, the griii?
>but it’s fixed lens
So what faggot it’s got no mirror as requested

>>4347596
Not sure what warrants the aggressiveness in the response, but yeah, that camera seems to be some something I should consider.

What's the cutoff for you where you use a lens so little that you end up selling it? e.g. getting a decent macro lens, finding out macro isn't really your thing, and selling it off for a nice zoom or a fast prime that you'll end up getting more use out of.

>>4347610
>selling gear
Smells poor in here. Just keep it for the 1 time every 3 years you will use it, simple as.

>>4347619
I am poor, yes, and also figure someone else could get more use out of it than I am.

Is M43 really as bad as people make it out to be? I've been toying with the idea to make the switch to it from APS-C because I shoot wildlife and there's barely any difference in the size of your setup between APS-C and full frame so you have to go M43 for there to be a significant size difference

It's mostly printing I'm concerned with, will the prints hold up when you blow them up to 16x24 and bigger?

>>4347645
>printing 16x24 minimum
>and larger
Er... I actually quite enjoy using MFT but yeah stick to APS-C/Full Frame for those larger print sizes, especially since you shoot wildlife

You get much cleaner and more detailed pictures even on APS-C vs MFT at "high" isos (above ISO 800)

>>4347645
Yeah, it is.

MFT was invented for a time when a larger sensor meant a DSLR and weather sealing meant top of the line canon/nikon, so they were fairly unique and had some advantages. Now that that's not the case, mft = digishits unless you're into stuff like compact f5.6 macro primes and f8-11 telezooms. Bridge camera tier glass.

>>4347645
They can get you a fair bit more reach, if you've got a sharp enough lens. I don't know how many are actually capable of taking full advantage of the pixel density but I would guess not many and not cheap. To give you an idea a 26mp APS-C sensor is as demanding as a ~60mp full frame one, (24mp=54mp, the R7 with 33mp is the same as 74mp full frame). However four thirds tops out at 25mp and that's the same as having a 100mp full frame sensor.

>>4346978
I'm not sure if it's still the best in its class, but I loved mine when the Canon 7D was my main camera. Sharp to the edges wide open. Be aware that there is copy variation with this model, i.e. some of the test sites have awful copies. If you buy used, look for a good one.

One of my friends shot a D300 at the same time I shot the 7D. The D300 basically forced Canon's hand into adding a pro crop body, the 7D. Great camera in the Nikon lineup.

>>4347685
Look up pixel shift tests. For film scanning or critical architecture where texture is very important.

Most lenses are really not very good, compared to what you can do with a full frame camera, but with pixel shift it's still better than the 20mp/25mp if you spend on a nice lens. There is however no point going beyond ~50mp.

>>4347698
Those 80MP shots are objectively impressive in their own right especially given the time they came out

>>4347710
I'm just saying, if you want to scan 4x5 sheets or medium format film, m43 is not it. It can't resolve it. You need FF/macro four thirds pixel shift especially for the finer grained films if you want all the negative you paid for.

For 35mm it's fine tho.

File: samyang35-150.jpg (985 KB, 2000x1810)

985 KB JPG

so I've been looking to get a fast zoom for an upcoming trip
to avoid carrying both the panny kit 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 + sigma 50mm f/1.2
I'm looking at the sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 art mk2 which is on sale at one of the shops here but then I saw they had the samyang 35-150mm f/2-2.8 for even pess
I vhecked out a review and it doesn't serm half bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ5-RoYkWf8
questions is, has anyone here had any experience with the sigma 24-70 or samyang 35-150?
thanks

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5DS
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 25.9 (Windows)
Photographer	SAMYANG
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5599
Image Height	8393
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2024:06:04 14:14:26
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/13.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/13.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1810
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4346999
checked

>>4347744
>zoom for a trip
>35-150mm
greedy nigga.

File: om-system-tough-tg-7.jpg (437 KB, 1050x612)

437 KB JPG

Looking for the best compact camera under 500$.
Rugged is not important, but it should have a decent video mode for short videos.
I am decided for the TG-7. Am I doing a mistake ? Or should I get instead something like the Sony HX60 or others ? Any suggestion.

>>4347789
forgot to mention I'll be bringing a 70-300 either way
but what matters more is which is the better lens between those two regardless

>>4347809
It really isn’t worth getting a compact with a sensor smaller than 1 inch, unless you need a feature like rugged that you can’t get otherwise. Those tiny sensors, you might as well use your phone, your phone will probably be better. I recommend look for an older RX 100 mark four or something.

>>4347810
Sigma is always better. 28(4)-70(5) f2.8 is the most based zoom of all times. It is wide enough for indoor and tight enough for portraits. 70-150 is kind a useless almost always,
Sony G>Sigma>Tamron>basic Sony>everything else

>>4347812
I just ditched my nice smartphone for a bad one, pics are awful.
That’s why I need a compact camera.
Is the GX7 on the same level as the rx100 ?

>>4347822
For still photos yes, the later rx100s have the edge in video modes and features. But for the basics either would be decent.

File: Chris-Gampat-The-Phoblogr(...).jpg (507 KB, 3000x2000)

507 KB JPG

I am looking for a camera body to potentially replace my 5D MK4 for travel and hiking. The 5D is bulky and the lens selection is poor when it comes to portability. A rated 900 shots per charge is amazing for travel but it's just physically cumbersome.
The most important criteria:
>full frame or above
>not exceeding the 5D's weight and size
>having access to high-quality small lenses
>ideally 1500 EUR (body only) give or take but budget is flexible both ways
My current shortlist:
>Original Leica SL with some native Sigma L-mount lens and/or adapted M-mount Voigtlander
>Some Fuji GFX 50MP camera
>Nikon Z f with native Voigtlander lens and/or some small Nikkor

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro3
Camera Software	Capture One 21 Macintosh
Photographer	CHRIS GAMPAT
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Brightness	-1/20 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4347829
GFX is only worth it for the 100mp models. 100S will be physically smaller but same weight and most of the lenses are large and heavy. If your plan is to then just adapt FF lenses (or the 50 f3.5), might as well just go with FF. I basically went GFX to Zf for that reasoning, Zf + voigt glass has been one of my favorite all time setups.

>>4347829
I know /p/ hates sony, because the a7iii didn't have a gimmick feature that means literally fucking nothing and doesn't even work on the top end nikolmypus (all weather sealed cameras still get wet inside, lol)

But the a7cii and a7cr are the best travel cameras of all time. Small, high quality, and most importantly, they actually have small quality lenses instead of just janky plastic shit.

Nikon doesn't have small lenses and the ZF is huge. The leica SL is huge. Fuji GFX is huge. None of these will fit your needs. Even the a7iv and a7rv are smaller than the zf, and unlike any nikon, have small lenses. Otherwise you might as well go for micro four thirds or a canon R8 because nikon doesn't do portable (also, IMHO nikon color science is puke and new sony is much better) and fuji doesn't do functional autofocus.

File: sddefault.jpg (40 KB, 640x480)

40 KB JPG

>>4347841
aye

canon actually has a way better small prime selection than nikon (rf 28mm mogs z 26mm, rf cheapy IS primes mog the z mount plastic shit), way better dslr mount adapters (ef-rf is a passthrough and adapters add control rings and drop in filters), and the r6ii is not much bigger than a z6ii or zf in real life.

>muh canonikon garbage
grow the fuck up

>>4347847
Canon, sony, olympus: Cameras for people that just want to take the fucking picture
>Autofocus works great
>It's quite small
>I take mine everywhere

Nikon, fuji, panasonic: Cameras for people that want to argue about cameras on the internet and have dpreview, photonstophotos, pxlmag, and jim kasson's blog bookmarked
>nooooo technically
>thats fud
>u dont need that feature but yes i did actually spend more money than you.

File: Untitled.png (48 KB, 328x1006)

48 KB PNG

>>4347829
Instead of investing in a whole other system, why not look at the mirrorless revolution? An R8 or R6 means you could use your current lenses.

What is the best mirrorless system to adapt my M42 glass

File: IMG_2261.jpg (52 KB, 501x502)

52 KB JPG

>>4347874
Pentax q, without a doubt.
Dat 5.6x crop hnnnng

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	501
Image Height	502
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4347596
damn, they're out of stock

>>4347809

Nikon Coolpix A

APS-C sensor

>>4347871
It's really the lenses that make the 5D unwieldy, so getting a mirrorless Canon body and adapting wouldn't make sense for me. Hence Leica SL being on top of my shortlist - the access to small lenses is great.

>>4347910
If you want small primes, RF has quite a few of them and they are very good. If you're aware of how much of a gimmick IBIS is, the R8 is one of the lightest FF cameras period.

SL primes are typically big, and SL bodies are big. It sounds more like you want an M.

>>4347910
My rebuttle to that would be the RF 28mm f/2.8 or an adapted EF 40mm f/2.8, but that's a whopping two lenses so I understand why you'd still go for a new system if you were going to want other FLs. I myself find those pancakes to be peak sovl for what is otherwise a blob camera.

Does anyone know how i can use my canon 600-ex RT II flash units and transmitter with my Olympus OM-1 35mm Film SLR w/hot shoe mount? I tried mounting the flash, setting it to manual, and shooting like regular, but the flash would not trigger.

>>4348245
I feel like i've read about people using this combo, I'm not too sure. I have one canon 600-ex rt II and 4 of the yongnuo clones. I cant get any of them to work. Wasted 2 shots of portra 800 testing it out :/. The goal is to be able to use my flashes off camera in softboxes and shoot editorial style portraits.

should i get an af-s 300mm f2.8 or af-s 200-400 f4 VRII? ill mostly use it for birds and planes. longest lens ive got right now is an af-s 70-300 VR and while ive shot both subjects with that lens, i feel like 300 still isnt enough. ive got a tc-20e iii too, which is why im leaning the 300 2.8 more since af will work guaranteed with the teleconverter

>>4348269
Are you always at 300 with the 70-300? If so then go with the 300 and a TC if your body won't AF at f/8

>>4347809
i use tg7s for work documenting, theyre not great. if you absolutely need the ruggedizing then its an acceptable camera, otherwise, use your phone like >>4347810 said.

>>4348279
yeah i typically am at 300. still not quite sure if my zf focuses at f8. i think? gotta try it when im home.

>>4348281
Yeah seeing as you've already got the TC you can just used the 70-300 at f/4 (or any other lens you have) and see how it does. From a thread on dpreview people were saying the Z6 and Z7 would focus at f/8, but not that quickly and it required some good light. Might be adequate if the birds are perched but planes in flight might be asking too much.

>>4348316
the tc doesnt mount to the 70-300, i found that out the hard way lol. but yeah if the z6/z6ii can focus at f8, the zf should too considering theyre similar internals. i might bet on the 200-400 just for flexibilitys sake but justifying anywhere from $1-2k+ for either lens is tough

>>4348327
Oh right, it's usually the wider lenses that won't accept TCs because the rear elements are too close to the mount. For a cheaper alternative have a look at some of the 150-500/600 Tamron/Sigma zooms.

i have an e-m5 ii
it is not a real camera. actually the worst designed camera you'll ever use. digishit tier. c-af barely even works and the ui is such clunky shit a snoy a7c feels like a spaceship.

therefore i can claim i am not a digislug and don't own a digital camera, because it's not a real camera, just a camera shaped object
thank you micro four thirds

>>4348522
>m43 raped my dog!

>>4348527
weird thing to say.

it was free its just a really bad camera. i hear the om-5 (reskinned em5iii to fuck em5iii owners out of further firmware updates) isn't even that much better.

>>4348522
They really are that bad. At least you dont have a lumix, or else your camera wouldnt even work.

Poorfags who want good cameras should get apsc dslrs. M43 is just jacket pocketable at a huge cost… unless you get the ff sized and priced gimmick machines.

>>4348522
Works on my machine.
t. E-M5.2 owner
> the ui is such clunky shit a snoy a7c feels like a spaceship.
Read the manual and set up your MySets and you'll never need the menus again.

>>4348536
Using snoys and nikons for work with the i menu is so much better and more flexible than the autistic myset shit

The best way to use this camera is single point af-s + exposure triangle, like a discount x100v.

>>4348529
>>4348531
skill issues

>>4348539
>skilled people dont complain about rusty half broken shit!
yeah thats why all good photographers use premium, highly polished leicas?

olympus ditched their imaging division due to their inability to compete with low priced sony and canon milcs

File: tichy2.jpg (67 KB, 620x383)

67 KB JPG

>>4348540
>skilled people dont complain about rusty half broken shit
exactly, as I said.

Skill issues

>>4348540
They do, that's why most professionals do not use junk

>>4348542
This guy's talentless. I admire his resolve but he was never a good photographer, just a clever self taught engineer. Mind you I prefer to shoot with film cameras that have less than 3 settings. These things are just digital junk. No small wonder fujifilm completely destroyed olympus as a brand, with god tier shit like the x100 series mogging everything.

>oops you changed a setting here check out 10000 jpeg mode options you'll never use because its not exactly a fuji lol!
>turn that off? why would you do that? we dont even have an option lol
merely functional, it takes pictures, it's not exactly elegant or a photographers camera and im glad i paid $0

>>4348548
>No small wonder fujifilm completely destroyed olympus as a brand,
Very good social marketing and Olympus getting shot in their own foot with a multi million dollar scandal that led to shuttering almost half their plants and the eventual selloff of the brand?
>Mind you I prefer to shoot with film cameras that have less than 3 settings.
>merely functional, it takes pictures, it's not exactly elegant or a photographers camera
hm

Speaking of Micro Fun Thirds: been using the Oly 17 1.8 and it's a nice little lens but the decentering my copy has (ancient first run China copy) is starting to get annoying. Thinking of replacing it with the PanLeica 15 1.7 rather than roll the dice on another 17; mostly I'm interested in the 15 being darn sharp right out to the corners and doing a bit better in harsh light than the 17. Still, I'd miss the 17's funky little focus clutch and know the Panasonic's aperture ring won't work, and in the same wallet range there's the much lauded 12-40 Pro with the funky clutch. Or hell, the Voigtlander 17.5 but I don't know if my balls are that brassy. Thoughts?
>sell everything and buy X setup
No.

>>4348555
It's a computer, there's pointless complexities and they are not well executed as they are on a fuji or a leica digital m

>>4348588
>fuji
>well executed
You know back in my day trolling outside of /b/ was a bannable offence.

>>4348558
If you can deal with the size, weight and slower aperture the 12-40 is a beautiful lens. It actually pairs well with a fast little prime like the Panny 15 or Oly 17 so I'd get it anyway. If you get a Vietnam made 17mm (just look at a shot of the back element if you're buying used) they tend to be much more consistent. That said the Panny is better from what I've read.

>>4346978
test

>>4348658
Yeah, I've seen stories the Vietnam ones are better, or at least have better quality control/less duds, but if even a perfect 17 is interior to an average Pana 15 then it seems like the 15 is the right choice anyway (plus it's not the end of the world going from 35 to 30 as much as I like the former). Seems like it'll just be a matter of getting one before the other or vice versa regarding the 12-40 or a shorty prime, then. I guess there's also the 12-45 since I'm not sure how the 12-40 will handle on an EM5 even with a grip, but the size/weight difference doesn't seem worth the f/4 floor.

File: DSC_1799.jpg (210 KB, 1200x800)

210 KB JPG

top keks

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	G8441
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.38
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:07 00:45:35
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	160
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.40 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1200
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4348593
film emulation including the weekly presets from that app are the reason for crazy demand for x100v/vi

>>4348732
Zoomer brainrot and meme image adjustments? Stop the fucking presses boys, fuji solved photography

>>4348744
>Zoomer
no zoomie can afford them, also, DxO sells FilmPack for so many years it must be profitable.