File: IMG_6691.jpg (106 KB, 750x639)

106 KB JPG

>>4392821
i like it when people know what they're talking about and dont screech shit
im thinking about buying soms fuji film instax mini 99 for my mother and i
just some "have fun" level stuff.

Other than than i plan at some point buying a 600mm sigma for my eos6d
pic real
taken in my 300mm lens

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 6D
Camera Software	darktable 4.6.1
Lens Size	70.00 - 300.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.1.6
Lens Name	EF70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:12:14 20:11:06
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/11.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	270.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	750
Image Height	639
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	AI Focus
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Unknown
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	192
Color Matrix	135

>>4392851
oh sweet the metadata stayed this time
usually doesnt when i phone post

File: 20241216_194057.jpg (1.88 MB, 2966x3270)

1.88 MB JPG

>>4392821
Got this lens from the late 1800s. Dallmeyer rapid rectilinear. Taking some film pics with it today.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	Galaxy S24 Ultra
Camera Software	S928U1UEU4AXK4
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	13 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Compression Scheme	JPEG Compression (Thumbnail)
Image Height	3000
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:12:16 19:40:57
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	4000
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Unique Image ID	K12XSPE01NM
Image Height	3000
Brightness	1.3 EV
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	83/5000 sec
Flash	No Flash
F-Number	f/2.2
ISO Speed Rating	320
Image Width	4000
Focal Length	2.20 mm
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

File: 5E7A6843.jpg (3.59 MB, 4608x3072)

3.59 MB JPG

>>4392859
The digital test shots I took with it are very promising.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 10.0.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	5760
Image Height	3840
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:12:16 19:39:46
Exposure Bias	0 EV
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Program	Manual
Color Space Information	sRGB
White Balance	Auto
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Metering Mode	Pattern
Exposure Time	0.2 sec
Flash	No Flash
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

>>4392862
very cinematic looking

File: 5E7A6837.jpg (2.8 MB, 4608x3072)

2.8 MB JPG

>>4392859
This is wide open and the first was with the aperture in place. I need to calculate the FL to see what stop the aperture slide is. This shot is from the center of the projection of a lens that has coverage for 15x12 film so it isn't at all representative of corner sharpness.

I plan to make a very small aperture slide for this to get maximum DoF for macro work.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 10.0.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	5760
Image Height	3840
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:12:17 09:13:51
Exposure Bias	0 EV
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Program	Manual
Color Space Information	sRGB
White Balance	Auto
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Metering Mode	Pattern
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
Flash	No Flash
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

>>4392864
>>4392862
>vintage large format lens has the same rendering as a shit tamron zoom

>>4392868
I think it looks great for a 150 year old lens with a projection over 100x larger than a 35mm tamron lens, and film lenses don't produce the same IQ with digital sensors as they do with film either.

This lens is going to be an absolute banger with large format film.

>>4392874
It’s hazy and has terrible CA

This is an effect lens for funkily lit womens portraits and does not flatter fruit and cobwebs

>>4392874
I'm sure it'll look much better on large format film with a chance to use much more of its image circle.

>>4392878
>surely, demanding even more of this struggling lens will work
heres to another hazy photo of a dead bug

>>4392877
You clearly lack experience with older lenses adapted to digital. That haze is typical on essentially all film lenses when used with digital. The filters in front of the sensor and the angle of the light hitting the sensor reduce IQ.

>>4392878
Yes. I specifically chose the rapid rectilinear because it has a symmetrical lens design that should be ideal for macro. My plan is to use it at very small apertures, so really, the sharpness only matters so much. Same lens design Weston used for his macro work.

>>4392881
I have used countless film lenses with digital and the only ones that were hazy on digital were also hazy on film. People never noticed because they were getting 4x6 enlargements with contrast adjustments from the paper and minilab scans being shit out a printer, not 36mp true color scans with just inversion

You’d have a point if this were about corner color shifts, smearing, and extra vignetting but high quality film lenses are high quality on digital. The only difference is coatings for digital don’t need to block any UV and IR film does not need to be a design consideration if the manufacturer does not make an IR ILC.

File: 5E7A6689.jpg (3.92 MB, 4947x3840)

3.92 MB JPG

>>4392885
You are simply incorrect. At least for my 5dm3, or maybe you have never adapted large format lenses to digital?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 10.0.1 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	5760
Image Height	3840
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:10:27 19:54:15
Exposure Bias	0 EV
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Program	Manual
Color Space Information	sRGB
White Balance	Auto
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Metering Mode	Pattern
Exposure Time	769/10000 sec
Flash	No Flash
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

>>4392886
Or maybe you just use crappy lenses

These look just like your film test shits

>>4392862
>>4392864
That's really impressive. Looks like modern IQ.

>>4392885
Impressive confidence for talking out your ass . I can learn from this example.

>>4392892
Dallmeyer was a true G. Kinda cool having a lens made in/near London...
The rapid rectilinear came after the petzval and made shooting wide open better with a flatter focal plane. I think.

>>4392890
Well, my test worked perfectly and I can just ignore you now.

>>4392893
I took this picture with a modern 300mm Rodenstock APO sinaron se/sinaron-s lens that is without a doubt a world class lens.

The IQ degradation is very very similar between this image and the vegetable ones I posted earlier. There's a reason LF lens manufacturers all have digital versions of their lenses with updated optical designs...

>>4392896
To sell more lenses ofc

>>4392899
At first, yes. Rodenstock or schneider tried using their old LF film designs, but in MF focal lengths and people got really upset at them because the IQ was not acceptable. Afterwards they updated their lens designs to work well with digital and all was made well. :)

>>4392896
Because most LF film shooters don’t actually enlarge their photos so every 35mm slice is its full 30+ mp. Digital sensors are smaller and automatically produce huge enlargements. This is what demands better optical designs.

LF film doesnt diffract at smaller apertures for example, its just no one ever enlarges it so much that the airy disc goes beyond the circle of confusion except landscape photographers comparing gear at max grain peep. In normal use 4x5 is enlarged 3x tops which is like producing a palm sized print of 35mm. The flaws are invisible and the contrast is fixed in printing. Your average world class LF lens is actually just getting away with being shit because 4x5 geeks rarely pixel peep (noone wants a 5tb scan anyways)

>>4392908
(Except doghair, who would get 10x less shit if he didnt post crops and worked on taming global contrast issues)

>>4392908
So an entirely apples to oranges comparison is why it's shit even though it is objectively not shit?

>>4392911
Huh?

Boughted 105/2.5 and 35/2.
Cheap glass is curse.

what's the video autofocus on the a7rv like? I primarily do photography but I want to also film some vids where I'm in focus when moving

File: 001.jpg (1.81 MB, 2000x1333)

1.81 MB JPG

they use an EOS R3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS R3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:12:18 14:29:03
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/3.2
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/3.2
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1333
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: WhatsApp Image 2024-12-24(...).jpg (177 KB, 1600x803)

177 KB JPG

Going overseas for a semester abroad in a photography program and this is what I'm bringing, still unsure how much studio or event I'm doing so covering my bases. I could probably cut a couple lenses from the digital stuff without even noticing desu

big wish is either a new K1 coming out so I can justify a 70-200, or a new 50-135 to replace the uh, 15 year old? SDM model
otherwise im debating a 105 and the 35 fisheye for the 6x7 for portrait and astro work respectively

>>4394571
>photography program
>Pentax
lol

also, you are bringing too much stuff.

>>4394571
>SD card cases
really though

File: gearfag.png (92 KB, 1830x626)

92 KB PNG

Anyone else keep a list?

>>4394611
No but I made one for you because what I do have is pretty similar:

Nikon D40 w/ kit lens
Nikon AF-D micro 105mm f/2.8

OM System OM-5
OM System OM-1
M.Zuiko 60mm f/2.8 macro (<3)
M.Zuiko 40-150 f/4-5.6
M.Zuiko 12-45 f/4
M.Zuiko 20mm f/1.4
M.Zuiko 75-300 f/4-6.3 (might sell)
M.Zuiko 40-150 f/2.8
M.Zuiko MC-14
Samyang 7.5mm f/3.5 (should use it more, it's insane how sharp this is)
Panny 20mm f/1.7 (might sell, hate the AF)
Voigt 42.5mm f/0.95 (might sell, just don't use it enough)

Yashica C I've put 2 rolls through and never developed ;_;

Godox TT350o x2
Godox transmitter
Olympus FL-LM3 (<3)
Some folding diffuser

Carbon steel tripod forgot the brand
Ball head forgot the brand

>>4394611
what do the colors mean?
i surely hope you dont still own all of that

ive only made lists for insurance, but it's easy to remember all the important stuff

>>4394632
The colours of the text? It's for whatever brand the item is/is associated with. The colours of the columns don't mean anything they're just there to visually separate the columns. I have a separate sheet for stuff i've sold, I own all of that.

>>4394634
oh duh
well, you have a hoarding problem, no doubt
its too bad you opted to hoard such a mish-mash of brands and junk gear

>>4394645
Ok

>>4394647
>12 digi point & shoots, 13 digital ilc bodies (6 alone for m43), 8 film bodies
>dead mounts like samsung NX, Sigma SA, and actual 4/3 glass
>most recent ilc body is 7 years old, most recent ff is 16 years old
>every focal length under the sun
why not sell most of the junk and consolidate down to some good stuff?

>want to get into photography
>cheapest beginners
>$1600 x100
>sold out all the time
>$2000 for the non-externally sold out version
>look into entry level
>Fuji X-M5 $800
>people doing comparison with iphone
>most of the pictures are objectively worst on the Fuji
FML it’s like a catch-22 with this hobby, stand alone cameras tech just can’t catch up smartphone tech.

>>4394678
>not even into photography yet
>already a gearfag
It really isn't a catch-22 at all. You get a camera you like and take pictures with it. It's not that hard. Maybe even buy a couple lenses if you wanna go a little crazy.

>>4394680
What’s the point of if it performs equal or worst than a phone I already own. The only time a camera is superior is when that camera is closer to twice the price of an iPhone.l not including the lens.

>>4394678
Buy something a few years old, maybe even used. I'm using a 7 year old full frame body and it absolutely blows away any phone and even the very latest APS-C and 4/3 body (except for AF, but still decent). Phone images may look good at first glance and when you're seeing them on the internet and through videos but they're processed as fuck (phones being able to do all that "in camera" is the only advantage they have) and the sharpness and lack of noise only holds up at low resolution.

>>4394682
It doesn't lol. Simple as.

>>4394682
Any interchangeable lens camera will be better than a phone if you know how to use it.
If you don't want to think and just point + click, just stick with your phone anyways.

>>4394683
I have a hand me down D3200 with a few cheap kit lens. The only time it looks better than an iPhone is if I have a tripod attached and used a really slow shutter speed.

>>4394687
Opposite experience w/ d3400.

>>4394687
skills issue

>>4394687
skill issue for sure, but you should prove us wrong and post photo

File: are-these-scratches-too-b(...).jpg (74 KB, 640x853)

74 KB JPG

I picked up an a6000 from a guy online recently but didn't realize I should check the sensor until after

Is this level of scratching ok?

>>4394691
if this is bait should have been its own thread lmfao

>>4394692
it's from a 2 week old reddit post
but that was probably bait too

anyone here used the canon ef 24mm f/2.8 prime lens? thinking about buying it for a *wider* portait lens on my t7i, but I want to ask if there's anything I should know before buying

>>4394687
Well first of all you're now comparing to a 12 year old crop body. Secondly that's still far more capable than any phone, if you know how to use it.

>>4394591
More just so theyre in something for this pic, I have a soft case I keep them loose in normally
>>4394588
Fair cop. The 6x7 is for personal stuff, same for the ME Super, and as I said, I can cut stuff out of the digital lens selections easily if I need to, just trying to cover my bases

>>4394697
No IS. Not fast enough for maxbokeh. Probably too wide for portraiture unless we're talking group portraits. Would rec a 35mm instead.

>>4394678
A used full frame like a z5 or z6 plus the 24-70f4 S or the z 40mmf2 will get you started much better than any fooji.

You poorfag? Buy an old dslr.

>>4394687
Don't listen to the dinosaur >>4394743 he thinks it's still 2018 when mirrorless was still expensive

If you get an old dSLR your options are limited to old dSLR gear, a lot of which is old and questionable quality (more risk of lens fungus etc). Remember you're buying into a lens mount ecosystem not just a camera.

Buy any cheap canon/Sony/Nikon mirrorless FF camera second hand (1-1.2k) and a cheap 50mm prime. Total cost will be under 1.4k USD

Then if you still enjoy photography pick up more lenses, if you don't like it you can still sell your mirrorless gear fast for minimal loss unlike the dSLR shit.

How do I stop being a retarded gearfag and thinking I made the wrong decision, and just use my camera and not worry?

>>4394747
Know that IQ never defines a good photo. A good photo evokes something in the viewer.

I shoot with a z8, but some of my best photos this year were taken with a five year old phone.

>>4394652
Because I like it, they're cheap systems and I don't need modern stuff.

>>4394571
Gigaboomer detected

>>4394768
You also don't need all of that shit, you don't use it all. You're just a hoarder.

>>4394801
I use it all, and I'm going to buy more.

>>4394798
Not actually, main reason I even have a pentax is I was given a film body by family a few years ago, and when I wanted a new digital, the K3iii had just been announced and did everything I wanted while not having a shitty EVF like other options in my price bracket
In hindsight, I do wish I'd gone for a Canon or maybe a D500 Nikon. But I might swap systems in a year or so when I run the warranty out on the K3's shutter

File: 2iNfHSrnKQDbT6ABVWceL9f8Z(...).gif (961 KB, 300x200)

961 KB GIF

>>4394802
You actually might be a hoarder, anon.

>>4394804
Ok

>>4394802
No, you don't. The point and shoots are likely all trash. You don't use the 10D when you have the 5Ds and you're not carrying around two 5D classics when you have a Mk II. Neither are you carrying around four similar 4/3s bodies. Chances are you're not using all those film cameras either unless you have each one loaded up with a different type of film. The only shit that you might conceivably actually make use of is all the lenses but even then it's doubtful, hell you have a couple Nikon lenses but no F mount body.

The fact you were autistic enough to make a spreadsheet shows that you're just collecting, which would be fine but it's mostly just cheap boring crap.

>>4394807
I'm not reading that retard
I'm gunna keep buying shit and never selling it :D

>>4394807
He's just a hoarder. Let him enjoy his collection.

File: 581.gif (56 KB, 570x537)

56 KB GIF

>>4394809
>He's just a hoarder. Let him enjoy his collection.
No. I Can't Let Anyone Enjoy Anything. It's MY Choice How Everybody Lives. He's Hoarding And That's Not Allowed. I WANT THAT STUFF. ITS MINE. HE CANT JUST HAVE IT.

>>4394809
Like I said I'm fine with collecting, I do it too, he just has shit taste and wastes money on multiples of the same crap.
>>4394811
>implying it's jealousy
I don't want most of that shit. I wouldn't say no to the Fuji or Sigma bodies but I have no lenses that would fit them and I don't buy stuff I can't use. There's nothing else on that list to lust after or that would be unattainable for me.

>>4394812
I'm not implying it's jealousy, you cave person. I'm informing you of the objective fact that you're a developmentally disabled ten year old in the body of a balding adult.

>>4394812
Totally agree. His collection makes no sense at all, but he doesn't care. In all likelihood he doesn't care about photography too, like most of /p/. So who are we to tell him to align his gear with a pursuit he doesn't care about?

>>4394811
Lmfao, why did he say this?

>>4394812
Do you actually believe this? He probably just buys shit that's cheap, why else would you have duplicate bodies that old? How is this not immediately obvious to you?

>>4394747
Go look at the best pictures people have taken with your gear (or worse / older gear). Then you'll know the only difference between their shots and yours, is skill, not gear.
Also, try new techniques with your gear. Want more more resolution and less dof? Brenizer, etc.

File: IMG_20241225_180008.jpg (1.74 MB, 4608x2301)

1.74 MB JPG

Sup guys look at this stuff I got from my aunt's.
Grandpa was a bigshot photoreporter for a communist newspaper in Greece so he left a bunch of slav cameras and slav camera accessories.
I like the exa and the zenit TTL Moscow Olympics edition the most. He also left a vintage light meter, all of the writing in Cyrillic.
Noone does film development around me, is it hard to get into developing shit at home ?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Xiaomi
Camera Model	2310FPCA4G
Camera Software	MediaTek Camera Application
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Height	2301
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:12:25 17:52:43
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	4608
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Not Defined
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Height	6144
Brightness	0 EV
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	59999/1000000 sec
Flash	Flash
F-Number	f/1.8
Image Width	8160
ISO Speed Rating	350
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	4.27 mm
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Other

>>4394627
>>4394611
Dear lord. These are the people giving you advice. Blind geeks with mountains of ewaste, just poor ken rockwells.

>>4394819
i did this and came to the following conclusion: gear matters a ton. low end digital doesnt produce good photos. is it the users or no? just building corners and backs of heads and everything is blurry in a very bad, nervous way with nasty colors. you need film or the newest sony (so you can fuck it up with film sims) to be a good photographer.

>>4394825
Sweet stuff! Black and white is very easy, colour on the other hand is much more difficult

>>4394825
>Grandpa was a bigshot photoreporter for a communist newspaper in Greece so he left a bunch of slav cameras and slav camera accessories.
Awesome stuff. If you didn't know, the two cameras on the right are what are colloquially known as 'scameras'. They're like chinese knock offs.
https://youtu.be/Hu72sLmvl8w?si=3KvcJmJleoRHeeCP

>>4394826
>don't do things you like, you have to do things I like
Ask me how I know you were the kid no-one wanted to play with

>>4394826
Wrong I never give people advice. I'm here to have fun.

>>4394830
Lol hoarder

>>4394841
I have no issue with hoarders, because >>4394840 they don't make trouble.

Brandfags, gearfags, and pretend-pros are the worst.

>>4394845
Doesn't mean you can't make fun of them. He can do what he wants, I don't give a shit if he's wasting his own money, but I'm still going to call him a spas and criticise his decisions.

>poorfags seething at others owning and using gear they enjoy
lol that's rich (not you, you're poor)

>>4394845
the worst are the ones that do shit like pay leica $4000 for leica brand gaussian blur and say it makes them a real artist, and then proceed to write some vile shit accusing people of being incapable of abstract thought

absolute worst
they are the photography version of men who think anyone gives a shit about their watch

>>4394851
Oh yes that kind of guy
>durrr if you dont own a rolex by 30 you are a failure of a man with no soul and you arent white
>-sent from my $250,000 cardboard house

>>4394848
But he doesn't use it, it's just a pile of trash collecting dust

>>4394855
Even better.

>>4394851
>has to buy their edits baked into the gear instead of doing them in the darkroom
>calls other people uncreative
Do photographers REALLY do this? Sad

File: images(6).jpg (10 KB, 225x225)

10 KB JPG

>>4394857

>>4394827
Sorry to hear you are visually illeterate

>>4394571
is that the 150-450 on the top right
why lol

>>4394859
sorry to see you are visibly illiterate

>>4394894
sports and wildlife

File: IMG_1667.jpg (784 KB, 2528x2009)

784 KB JPG

e-waste collected

>>4394905
See, now that's actually kind of interesting as a collectors piece being the second four thirds body released and not having a regular pentaprism.

>>4394907
It's a pretty interesting little thing. The form factor is quite pleasing, it's a lot thicker than a camera of its size should be. I want to get a compact lens for it but I don't really want to pay for the Leica one.

>>4394858
>Film dial
Wtf am I looking at?

>>4394918
Basically a filter selection dial, they're "film simulations"

>>4394928
Oh damn, that sucks.

>>4394571

Too much shit.

I did a week in Ireland with nothing but a D800 without grip and 35 Smegma ART. I'm the biggest gigagearfag here and even I traveled light.

Don't be a gear nigger, I'd bring the digilol with a single 24-70 and the 67 with one lens. You don't need all that shit.

>>4394571
all of that to take sub quality pictures to post on 4chan

>>4394930
If it was a quick holiday sure, I'm going away for 5 months, and doing a semester of courses in photography. I get its a lot but it makes sense to me.

File: 1554947546572.jpg (907 KB, 1300x1300)

907 KB JPG

What are my options for FF bodies priced up to or around $2500? Decent battery life and handling is a must, don't really care for sports and wildlife features. Ideally 30MP and above...
I have a lot of good EF and old Nikkor Ai-S glass.
Pretty much just a7C II and a7 IV, right?

File: Screenshot_20241226_16344(...).jpg (100 KB, 994x896)

100 KB JPG

Is there some nice thing you can put on your hotshoe to hold a small LED light?

>>4394935
Just get a light meant for the hot shoe
Are you doing video? If not, why would you need one?

>>4394934
What are you interested in shooting anon?

A7c and A7 series are very different feeling cameras. Might even be worth looking into Nikon Zf

>>4394936
In Nordic countries it is dark most of the day this time of year. I was thinking I could still get some photos while exposing for a few minutes. The LED would help with composing before turning it off and opening the shutter.

>>4394935
dont ttartisan make an led light for hot shoes

>>4394938
If you are exposing for a few minutes, you don't need the flashlight.
Is it so dark you can literally not see at all through your camera? Because I can use all mine at night time without a flashlight no problem.
On camera constant lighting makes sense for video, not much else.

>>4394944
I pretty much can't see anything. I use a DSLR.

>>4394937
Travel, hiking, casual portraiture, social documentation, product and marketing, and film digitization, in that order of importance. Also want to get into printing.
As a result I tend to shoot in low light very often so I appreciate good stabilization, fast lenses, and noise performance at >1600 ISO. Battery life, build quality, and weather resistance are also important. Also need decent to good eye tracking AF.
The >=30MP requirement is to give me enough tolerance for cropping the edges of digitized film and some potential for decently sized prints.
I was given an X-T5 and it's almost perfect for my usage besides being APS-C and having weird RAW decoding no matter what software I try (compared to my traditional full frame DSLR which I'm trying to replace here). It also looks approachable which is a plus when taking pictures of people.

im genuinely considering buying a hassleblad just to shoot some instax

>>4394946
Can you post an example of the types of pictures you are taking? That are so dark you can't see at all?

>>4394571
Personally that load out seems a little light. I'd bring a few more lenses to really make sure all my bases are covered. Maybe 2 additional cameras that fit in your pocket nicely.

>>4394947
If it wasn't for the low light requirement I would say stick with the Fuji and get more into flash. I used a XT-4 once and it was good fun while still portable enough with primes.

If you're a big joystick and custom button autist I think go for the A7, if you can do without it I think the A7cii because it's more fun and incredibly light. But some people don't like the viewfinder in the A7C, the EVF is a lot worse than the A7IV and the XT-5. (big flippy screen somewhat makes up for it shooting in the dark).

Go to a brick and mortar shop and play around with them. Buying blind online you might be disappointed.

>>4394947
The a7c is the camera you will end up with regardless as you slowly realize most photographers just like playing with cameras and dont have their priorities straight. On full frame, the a7c series with sigma and sony’s stock of compact lenses is unbeaten and as close as you can get to a real film (as in, film in a modern SLR like the 1v or original alpha 9) replacement, and fuji is a terrible value proposition because their nornal cameras just exist to scam zoomers to fund GFX series R&D instead of to seriously compete with FF themselves. Fuji instead competes with 1970s film cameras for people who cant afford or figure out how to use them.

And then you’ll slowly stop taking it out unless to use a special lens and switch over to a rx100, ricoh GR or film PNS for most photography. You will then sell the a7c, to trade for a better body for all the special lens stuff like an a9ii (fyi, cheapest good sony with focus bracketing).

>>4394964
>Snoyphoto
Opinion discarded.

>>4394965
Canon and nikon are not even trying to make their shit smaller, and keep cutting dynamic range which is increasingly the only thing distancing real cameras from phones and compacts. They just want the newspaper photographer market because they genuinely believe hobbyists wont be around in 10 years.

Fuji does not have the funds to keep up with sony or the balls to abandon the xtrans mistake and its color resolution cut and weird nervous looking squiggly shit, which is why they seem to be aiming to switch to the studio wanker market and take advantage of hasselblads death and phase ones pricetags while the x100 trend is still pumping money in.

Sigma could have saved digital photography but didnt have the money so the future is phones running in 24/7 pixel shift mode. Panasonic and leica do not have the funds to compete and are essentially re-releasing sony cameras.

Ricoh has the GR and this camera for all its flaws remains unbeaten because sony couldnt build an RX1 series to last more than two years and unlike the fuji purse camera, actually fits in a pocket.

Cameras are dying, bruh, no cap. If you’re down to settle for the big camera segment and something less than the best sony has, you really might as well ignore mirrorless because the canon 6d is still good. And sony products other than the newer, g/gm lens, post 2019 body shit break on their own and have shit colors so you better like DSLRs. Lol. Beats spending $2000+ on second rate blobs and rattly plastic dials.

>>4394930
>tripfag opinion
Ok so do the exact opposite of whatever this guy says and maybe your photos will turn out alright.

>>4394969
its so funny the canon 1dxiii still shoots faster with flash sync than the $$$$ r1 and has better autofocus in low light studios with off camera flash enabled
you can leverage that to make capturing stunning fine art action portraits that todays available light mirrorless sports snappers just dont. canon cant beat themselves. cameras stagnated technologically and started focusing on being more accessible to interns in journalism.

>>4394975
>to make capturing stunning fine art action portraits that todays available light mirrorless sports snappers just dont
can you post some examples of this?

File: 2024-12-26 19_03_48-Window.png (11 KB, 563x218)

11 KB PNG

>>4394957
>some people don't like the viewfinder in the A7C, the EVF is a lot worse than the A7IV and the XT-5
Good to know, thank you for this info.
>>4394964
>switch over to a rx100, ricoh GR or film PNS for most photography
I already own a GRIIIx which is the reason the X-T5 was not originally in my shortlist. I made a place for the Fuji as a platform for casual shooting with adapted F glass, and the WR + excellent kit zoom made it a more attractive option for hiking in strange weather. On the last walk I had the GR in my pocket as a backup the whole time and didn't take it out once, nor wish I left the X-T5 at home.
So what I need is not necessarily another semicompact camera. I basically need a mirrorless version of my DSLR (5Dmk4) that fulfills the previously stated objectives.
>the a7c series with sigma and sony’s stock of compact lenses is unbeaten
E-mount is certainly attractive but if Canon comes out with an R6mk3 that's over 24MP then I would likely get that as I also value the perfect adaptability of my existing EF glass. The counterargument is that I could trade my Sigma 50/1.4 and 70/2.8 for the E-mount versions of the same and sell the 5D and remaining EF glass to recoup some of the cost of an A7Cii + an all-rounder zoom. See pic rel for context. At the same time I prefer Canon's handling and the only real thing giving me pause is their unwillingness to open the RF mount on full-frame.

>>4394989
Adapting DSLR lenses on mirrorless is a miserable and front heavy experience

File: IMG_0988.jpg (586 KB, 803x1080)

586 KB JPG

>>4394985
Almost every decent dance photo, and every art study of an athlete in a studio, taken in the past 10 years was shot with reliance on high speed mechanical shutters to cut down on studio time ($$$$$$)

And it is genuinely sad that mirrorless cant beat a cheap 1dxii for this, and most mirrorless dont even AF as well as DSLRs in studio conditions with dim ambient light and a small aperture set on camera, even with exposure preview off.

This also has implications for trying to focus stack on living animals but that’s kinda gay. We lost some cool shit so newspaper homos could more reliably get ball catch/smack/toss moments at sportsball games. Instead canon is investing in on camera AI NR so sportsball shooters can keep their ISO at 12800.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark IV
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4664
Image Height	6274
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2018:07:09 12:33:56
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	250
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	85.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	803
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: 2024-12-26 19_22_02-Window.png (522 KB, 910x690)

522 KB PNG

>>4394991
I don't really care as the only time I would be adapting EF->mirrorless is for specific situations like product work or film digitization, neither of which require good portability (and in some cases it's not like the native mirrorless versions are any better - pic rel). Plus the Voigt 40/2 is a tiny lens even when adapted so there will be no issues there, and likewise the Nikkors are also small enough to be OK (as I find on the X-T5).

>>4394995
If its for scanning why does perfect adaptability matter? Perfect adaptability is for AF-C performance that can go beyond brides walking forward and maybe force an aging AF motor to get a 50% hit rate at a football fame, it matters less than you think. You could even put the lenses on a nikon in this case.

>>4394999
Not only scanning.
In this event I'd most likely sell the EF 24-105/4 (likely for a native 24-70/2.8) if it won't see use because as you say, it's front-heavy and will be especially so on mirrorless. But for all of my other lenses it is a non-issue and the reportedly excellent performance of EF->RF adaptation is just very nice to have. If I can get better AF performance with continuous eye-tracking out of my 50/1.4 while shooting wide open, why shouldn't I?

sony a6700 or lumix s5 ii?

>>4394993
I wanted some example pictures, not more claims and anecdote. The picture provided is with a 5DIV.
Is it your contention that a 5DIV will also outperform modern mirrorless?
I was hoping to see an image that a 1DXIII could take, that modern mirrorless could not, like you said. How about, could you just point me to some contemporary photographers using a 1DXIII for the types of shooting you mean? I can go research myself then.
>most mirrorless dont even AF as well as DSLRs in studio conditions with dim ambient light and a small aperture set on camera, even with exposure preview off.
Factually not true. An R8 has a 2-3EV advantage for lowlight AF over a 5DIV or 1DXII/III. Not all mirrorless focus stopped down either.

>>4394934
D800/D800e/F810
Ar that budget you could even get a D850 with some nice glass, though it's really no point in doing so.

>>4395019
It’s from a photographer that did a lot of his set with a 1dxII.

>believing low light AF figures
They make these with a f1.2 wide open.
Canon Rs focus stopped down. They will also automatically stop down even if you’re wide open if the lens is too soft for on sensor AF. Also, annoyingly, dual cross points are gone in lieu of whatever-detect.

>>4395042
You didn't answer my questions.
>Is it your contention that a 5DIV will also outperform modern mirrorless?
>could you just point me to some contemporary photographers using a 1DXIII for the types of shooting you mean?
Cool, well seems like 5DIV is also good enough for him too then. What's their info so I can do more research?
>They make these with a f1.2 wide open.
And? That's why said ~2-3EV because other Canons use f1.4.
Canon mirrorless have mixed AF stop down behavior, depending on the model and setting. Many are capable of focusing wide open.

>>4395050
It’s tyler stableford
>mixed AF behavior
This is a huge problem, if you’re really shooting in low light it needs to be configurable. DSLRs let you hard select between different AF mechanisms with their own pros and cons (live view AF is better for subject tracking and closeups, OVF AF is better for flash, high DR scenes, and low light). I have major doubts about the glories of RF mount, especially since the mirrorless are the same size as the DSLRs and could conceivably be repackaged as DSLRs, and for canon, lens performance hasn’t actually changed much. Sigma arts were the first modern mirrorless style lenses and went on mirror boxes no problem. Canon has only released one "rangefindery" lens design (rf 28 pancake), and the rest that used mirrorless quirks actually abused them by relying on live optical corrections to sell optically awful lenses like the 10mm zoom and 24mm f1.4 to name the most dramatic examples. They’re not improving, they’re cost cutting.

>>4395052
nikon took a dump too, and they knew it which is why they sold the d780 (corporate version of "oh god, we’re sorry, but the video surge and zoomer retardation plague is making us do it"). a couple of S lines are a bit better than F mount gold lenses but it’s all within what could have been done on a DSLR and most of the improvements are coming from new lens manufacturing technique. the dumb mounts sole contributions are negligibly less vignetting and less focus breathing (the video craze made them do it). sorry to canon RF bros, canon is so lazy the lenses now vignette noticeably more.

only sony improved because A mount and SLTs were awful and anything would have been better

>>4394973

I said the same thing as

>>4394588
>>4394591
>>4394798

are you implying they are wrong too or are you just looking for attention because you're a faggot

>>4395052
>It’s tyler stableford
Hmm, well his most recent stuff was with the R series, but he also kinda dropped photography in 2021 it seems
Not sure he's a good example for the state of modern mirrorless performance
Got anyone else? Or just more rambling claims and anecdotes?

>>4395057
I'm not implying anything. It's an objective fact that your photos are some of the most mediocre uninspired dogshit to ever be posted online and taking anything you say about the topic seriously is retarded.

>>4395106
You sound jealous.

Nikon FM for 20 bucks lets go.

>>4395106

The quality of my work has nothing to do with this thread and was never mentioned until you brought it up.

You have TDS, Trip Derangement Syndrome. The cure is to KYS.

>>4395149
Your results show how much your process and advice should be valued. You have GRD, generalised retardation disorder. The cure is to put your helmet back on and stay away from doorknobs.

>>4395152

ad hominem, good day sir

>>4395153
>a-ad h-hominem!!!
Says the guy giving you driving advice from the window of a car rolled into a ditch. Retard.

>>4395154
You have mentally lost it. Get BTFO'd

>>4395057
>tripfag accusing others of attention seeking while mass replying in hopes of getting (You)s
ISHYGDDT

>>4395155
>arguing with a pigeon
Do not post here again.

File: hq720.jpg (58 KB, 686x386)

58 KB JPG

my copy of the sirui 40 came in today, pretty neat
af is totally fine during actual recording, but kinda noisy when not recording
or taking stills with af-c, af-s is fine
surprisingly light weight, bulk feels just about right

>>4395175
Noob here but what's the guys phone attached to the rig for? What's the other thing?

Is the camera screen not good enough ?

>>4395176
No.

>>4395176
In this case, mostly larger screen. Some cameras lack video features like waveforms, false color, anamorphic de-squeeze (relevant with this lens), previewing LUTs, etc, that a secondary screen can assist with. Could also use it as a secondary recording or streaming the camera footage. Orange is an NP-F style battery, just to keep the camera/phone going all day.
For what he was doing, not sure it makes much sense to me to rig like that.

What should I grease a focus ring on an old MF lens with? It's really slow, presumably because the grease went bad with age.
The only thing that could work which I have is brass instrument tuning valve grease.

>>4395552

Japan Hobby Tool #10 or #30 for most lenses. You will have to do a full disassembly and remove all the old grease, I use naptha or WD40 to remove the old grease and Japan Hobby Tool helicoid grease.

You want to specifically use helicoid grease because it doesn't outgas when it gets hot and won't leak down into the aperture.

Which lens is this?

Just put in an order for a Ricoh GR IIIx HDF to complement my GR III. Wont get filled until Jan 6 most likely.

File: 1735552953826.jpg (1.52 MB, 6016x4016)

1.52 MB JPG

>>4395645
This one
>>4395216
>>4394422
>>4394420
I finally managed to take it apart yesterday after much hammering and repeatedly dousing the screws in penetrating oil. Picrel is photo of my monitor (featuring some random image from /fgt/) I took with it pressed against my nikon DLSR in mirrorless mode.
>Japan Hobby Tool helicoid grease
Hmm, I'll try to find something locally (cz), though it's often a pain when I don't know the common translation.

So if I have a lot of EF glass I should just buy a mirrorless Canon and use the adapter?

>>4395729
If you’re just going to use EF glass then why upgrade to mirrorless? That being said if you’re going to do that you don’t necessarily need to upgrade to canon mirrorless, they make EF adaptors with autofocus and everything for Z mount, E mount.

>>4395725

Hand cream with over 50 percent petrolatum would work, something like Cera Vie, I did one lens with it for fun to see if it would work and it's going on two years now, no outgassing or anything.