What camera do you have /g/?
IPhone 6s
Literally the best mobile camera no contest
>>51837365
Cameras are technology, fag
>>>/v/
I have an old logitech 720p webcam somewhere but no real camera
>>51837418
How many megapickles?
>>51837383
Bullshit!
>>51837387
so are a lot of things that have their own boards. /p/ has a running gear thread specifically for people with this interest.
you're taking a permissive approach to deciding topicality. that's fine for /b/, but the other boards have a restrictive model. if you want a permissive model, go (back?) to /b/.
>>51837457
Yeah, and I'm not asking /p/ for what camera they use, I'm asking /g/
Nikon D3300
Not a photographer nor do I intend to be but it's handy for trips.
>>51837358
Nikon D5300
i don't know shit about cameras, i just bought one because i wanted something better than my phone camera
>>51837454
Except its not? Name a better phone can, go ahead.
Just look at this: http://www.apple.com/iphone-6s/cameras/photos/
>>51837466
yeah, the "oh but I'm interested in sampling this particular community" excuse is retarded. Asking /a/ what computers they like or /ck/ what tv shows they're into just because you claim to be interested in their specific responses is stupid.
This is /b/ shit. If you want an arbitrary cross-section of people, you're lolRaNdOm and you belong in the shit board.
>>51837503
Calm down, autismo, hide the thread if it triggers you so much
Do you bitch this much whenever someone posts anything in regards to video game playing or windows here?
I need a decent camera for ~$100 that is not ugly as fuck just to take pics for ebay and maybe some nature
any suggestions?
>>51837503
Computers aren't anime and TV shows aren't cooking. Cameras are technology.
You wouldn't ask /g/ what their favorite photo books are, but asking for gear is board related.
>>51837358
Canon EOS 7D Mark II
>>51837358
D7100.
>>51837491
http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles
>>51837503
stop trolling troll!
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 L II USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L USM
>>51837491
>sends a link to an apple website
Wew lad
>>51837491
Does anyone else really hate the way the photos move as you scroll down?
this q might be better suited for /p/ but what's a cheap alternative to the finepix x100
i really want one but i don't want to splash out because student life etc
This motherfucker right here.
![OlumpusOM2nAdoramaA[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/gMNAUva.jpg "OlumpusOM2nAdoramaA[1].jpg")
pic related but not using this lens
instead i am using a tokina 33-35mm f/3.5-4.5 macro lens
>>51837672
i like this thread topic so i decided to not be lazy and just take a pic of what i use. i would recommend that other anons also do this
Zenit ET with
Industar 50-2 50mm f/3.5
Helios 44-2 58mm f/2
Canon 6D and a nice combination of USM lenses that I cba to list.
I started out with the 1100D then the 650D because flip out screen then the 6D because full frame and I can take handheld shots in really low light now.
I am into Urban Exploring in a pretty big way so often in dark places.
Remember that 1liek =subscribe.
>>51837788
What's the difference between film and digital?
>>51837864
You mean aside from the blindingly obvious?
>>51837864
Where you put the SD card
>>51837383
5x and 6p cameras literally best the shit out of any iPhone
>>51837545
Why mk ii? What was wrong with the original one?
Canon 6D. Had it for 2 years and haven't taken it on a proper photo shoot yet. My wife uses it to do the odd studio portrait or wedding gig.
![50mm[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/OC5tAOT.jpg "50mm[1].jpg")
>>51837864
>>51837788
this me, well this is an slr so you can see through the lens directly which allows for more control over the photo, not to say that you cant achieve similar control with a dslr or anything but also with film you develop the photos into prints, but other than those kinds of things there isnt much difference between them, photography is very vast in either digital photography or film photography. one is newer than the other and thats pretty much it.
nikon d-something
>>51837905
Nothing was wrong with the 7D it's just that years down the line improvements are expected.
The 7D was just good, but the mkII is an amazing camera, in fact, for distance shooting (sports/wildlife) it's probably the best camera you can get today.
>>51837864
>>51837964
also forgot to add that in one the photo is burned into a film strip and in the other (digital) the photo is a pile of information via sensors!!!
>>51837989
Sorry mate but no.
>>51837468
Me 2 m8. Picked it up recently for an absolute steal of 270 dollarydoos. Awesome camera for the price but fuck me if the autofocus isn't retarded.
>>51837788
Do you usually develop your own film? If not, how hard is it to find a developer in your area?
>>51838056
I meant "if so". I fucking hate when I do that.
Fuji X-T1 and some film stuff.
>>51838056
Not that anon but I develop it on my own. Pretty easy but takes some time to get the films processed and scanned. There are some stores which develop and/or scan the film if I want to for relatively little money.
Canon 700D. Happy with it, even if I'm a noob
>>51837989
>>51838030
this anon right, go with 6d or something like Nikon d7xxx lineup if u don't have dlsr yet.
>>51837530
Thank you for common sense.
Sony Rx100 here
Nikon D70 with Sigma lens.
Also have an older Fujifilm S2 Pro.
Panasonic GH2, I mainly do video and considering I got it for $200 it was one of the best deals I ever got.
>>51838056
yeah i am a cc student and i use my uni's photo lab most of the time, the materials are pretty expesive and i do not have a dark room at home or any tubs so i go to like walgreens usually but other places develop them too. cvs does but they send them to fujifilm in japan so it takes one week to get them. walgreens does 1hr photo lab, you can then blow those small prints into bigger ones if you want or change the coloring or scan them and edit on the computer in ps
>almost 2016
>not having mirror less camera
I really don't get kekoldry.
This came highly recommend elsewhere yet nobody on /p/ uses Samsung anything. I mean I guess it's a rather dead system, but it's cheap and has enough for an amateur.
>>51838300
I like mirrors though.
>>51838300
>tendency to overheat
>reduced processor speed
>EVF lag, smudgy in low light
>usually lack a second card slot
>AF speed not up to SLR levels yet, esp in low light
Mirrorless is nice for video shooters and hobbyists, but SLRs are more dependable for when you need to get the shot. Even a high-end mirrorless like the A7RII drops into 12-bit mode to compensate for a lack of speed in certain modes and using lossless RAW slows the camera down considerably while doubling storage requirements.
>>51838100
>>51838202
Thank you for the information.
Got this, any good?
Sony NEX-5N
had a 7D with grip when it was the hot new thing. had fancy L glass, fast primes, radio triggers, studio lights, battery packs, huge softboxes, the whole fucking nine yards.
sold it all. as much as i enjoy working with models there's really no money to be made and it's an incredibly expensive hobby.
shooting weddings sucks. shooting them without a modern full frame camera sucks even more. if you don't have at least a 5D3 or 1Dx you might as well call it a day.
sonyfags are the worst though.
>>51838388
>tendency to overheat
They use the same sensors, batteries and processors.
>reduced processor speed
They use the same processors
>EVF lag
Why do you assume that they don't have an optical viewfinder?
>usually lack a second card slot
Most dSLRs lack those too.
>AF speed not up to SLR levels yet
They use the same phase detection as SLRs.
My dad just passed his old Nikon F along to me, to go along with my D3300. Thanks Nikon, for using the same lens mount since 1959
>>51837989
Don't throw your wallet at them just because they've released a new camera that has a 2 next to its name. Get a moderate camera and invest the rest on 1-2 good lenses. Having good glass goes a long way
On another note, for canon fags, is magic lantern free as in freedom and rms approved? It's definitely open source and doesn't include any nonfree code as far as I'm aware...
Olympus PEN Mini.
Also picked up this recently.
>>51838422
Yes.
Next question.
>>51838545
>They use the same sensors
Which is part of the problem, a small camera has to work harder to drive that thing
>batteries and processors.
No way, a DSLR can easily last for 800+ shots per charge while mirrorless cameras struggle to get 250.
The processors are also seriously underclocked, many mirrorless cameras can't maintain burst shooting with automatic adjustment of settings, and some can't even do continuous AF in burst, whereas SLRs maintain control of all settings in any shooting mode at full 14-bit color depth.
>Why do you assume that they don't have an optical viewfinder?
Rangefinders are for fedoras
>Most dSLRs lack those too.
The cheap consumer crap does, but anything mid-range and above features at least CF+SD, whereas even $3,000 mirrorless cameras may not.
>They use the same phase detection as SLRs.
On sensor PDAF vs dedicated AF sensor. Same base technology, but the way it's applied in mirrorless cameras is still slower since it has to share real estate with the imaging surface.
>>51838140
6D compared to 7D mk II is crap for wildlife. The 6D has bad autofocus and slow shutter. Also the crop sensor helps you get closer.
Overall though 6D has much better image quality.
>>51838728
>work harder to drive that thing
What?
>>51837358
A 6D and a GH4
>>51839072
More pixels = more processing power needed to make it work. Sensors also generate heat.
Larger camera bodies have a greater capacity to dissipate heat, and some even use multiple processors, neither of which are applicable in compacts.
>>51837358
Canon 50d, just purchased (it after several months of using old 350d) - used, with grip and other oh-so-pro accessories. God, semi-pro cameras are just the best - this accurate autofocus, this bright and large viewfinder, this usage comfort. And i can even fool around with video capture after i installed Magic Lantern. Best $200 i ever spent, even if i was expecting just a little bit less night iso noise than i got.
I feel kinda overwhelmed with it though - i feel like i'm too bad for this camera, like i should be shooting way better photos with this one than i do. But well, i'll get better with time.
>>51839565
50D is a great value since it's aged a lot.
only dslr i've got left is a 20D. can't give it away.
dslr tech is intentionally crippled and run by jews so i quit giving a shit. once the 50MP 5Ds bodies go down in value i might pick one up to satisfy my pixel peeping.
>>51839057
>crop sensor helps you get closer
you're an idiot
>>51837418
>interpolated MEGA PIXEL
oh god
>>51839923
It crops it and usually you're left with more megapixels than a comparable crop in software from a full-format, so you can crop it more.
>>51840255
>you're left with more megapixels
nope
Running on low end, Nikon D3100.
>>51837358
Canon 7D
I have been itching for the Sony A7r II though.
I want the Light l16 when it comes out. Picture related.
>>51840723
wtf?
>>51840792
Yeah, that is what I thought as well, but it uses tons of different kinds of lenses and put it together as one photo for superb tweaking. Look it up
>>51837383
http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Column-right/Mobile-Scores
>>51840792
>Alright gentlemen, our company is falling we need new ideas
>MORE MEGAPIXELS
>it's already a thing
>BETTER IMAGE QUALITY
>are you dumb
>BETTER LOW-LIGHT PERFORMANCE
>dude, just stop
>MORE CORES
>processing power race in cameras? i don't think even our PR can push this kind of retardation
>MORE CAMERAS
>OOOOOOHHHHH
i think that's what happened
>>51840824
I am glad an option like this is going to be out there for people. I take simple pics for my simple life so camera phone for me. If it really produce what I think I understand for the price of 199 then that is extra nifty.
>>51837358
A fujifilm x30
>>51837491
One of those lumia windows phones with the great Camera. Amazing low light out of that sensor.
>>51837649
Got a little bit too much noise in that photo m80
Canon 450D
EF 50mm f1.8/II
EF-S 18-55mm IS
EF-S 18-135mm IS
This camera is way better than what I'm capable of using.
I need a telephoto lens for doing close-ups with flat angles. In hindsight the 18-135mm was not suitable for that (only a bit better than the 18-55mm). I'll probably find a cheap older EF 75-300mm for that purpose and sell the 18-135mm.
Sony a6000, it's pretty nice.
A comfy sony nex-3, plus a Nikon FM2 for shooting film. Not my pic, but have the exact optics pictured.
Amazing camera.
D3300 (with AF-S DX 18-55 VR II)
>>51837358
DIGITAL:
Canon 20D
ANALOGUE:
yashica fx-d
FANCY:
Leica M6
Due for an upgrade but still takes decent pics.
>>51837468
I got one also its does the job for me only do quick lighting edits on photos anyways nothing special
>>51837545
Full frame faggot
Pentax Q-S1 02 w/ zoom kit.
Just got this. How'd I do?
>>51837358
D3200, with a stock zoom lens.
It does the job, and is a shape that I don't find annoying.
It's not like I'm not the amateur of amateurs though.
>>51840723
Holy shit thats awesome as fuck.
But they claim dslr quality I highly doubt that as the sensor size for each different lens is tiny af.
Still cool to just pocket and walk around with on a normal day.
Nikon D90 I bought on a sale a couple of years ago. It's a great camera, even though I'm probably using it like a pleb.
>>51840723
>>51840824
This is actually quite an interesting idea.
>>51841285
Get a prime with a large aperture,something at f1.8 is good and usually cheap, it will really bump up the quality.
iPhone 3GS
>>51841364
I've been eyeing off a 35mm prime for a while, but I'm literally broke.
>>51837468
I got D3100.
>>51840394
aye me too!
A friend of mines is in a particular situation and maybe someone knows the answer to this one.
Right now he needs to take pictures of stuff, basically he sells things online and so having good pictures makes it easier to convince people that your stuff is good and they'll buy it from you. He also needs a new phone since his is a POS and willing to spend up to a Nexus 6-ish in terms of price.
My question is, are there any sort of cameras that are better than a typical phone camera at the $300-500ish price point or would he be better served just buying a good phone and using the camera on that?
The pictures don't have to be perfect, he isn't any sort of professional photographer, but obviously they need to be decently better than webcam pictures otherwise he's not really giving credence to what he's trying to sell
Canon 6D, 1D mk II, Eos M and various lenses, microphones and flashes. All the flashes are yongnuos though but one is TTL.
>>51841723
>yongnuos
poorfag detected
>>51841737
You should be able to tell that by the tamron 24-70 instead of Canon and the 80-200 2.8L instead of a 70-200, also by the fact I own a 1D Mk II instead of a Mk III or 7D instead.
![19-50cm-Photo-Studio-Collapsible-Box-Light-Cube-Tent-Diffuser-4-BACKDROP-Black-White-Blue-Red[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/oMZhGKw.jpg "19-50cm-Photo-Studio-Collapsible-Box-Light-Cube-Tent-Diffuser-4-BACKDROP-Black-White-Blue-Red[1].jpg")
>>51841628
What you need more than anything else for good images is good light, you could spend $200 on some bottom end lights and diffusers and get great results when paired with a decent phone camera.
You can get diffuser boxes specifically made to light small objects for product photography.
>>51841247
Somebody pls respond...
>>51841975
Pentax is usually good
Two Sony a99's.
Canon and Nikon photographers get rekt at the club thanks to SLT + EVF
>>51841339
"DSLR quality" is a meaningless qualifier. 99% of people probably couldn't tell the difference anyway, and there are a lot of older 4-MP cameras still in wide use. If you're dealing with simple snap shots in good lighting with a wide focus then a modern smart phone can give you a better picture. The magic of pixel binning is worth a lot even when dealing with a physically smaller sensor and comparatively tiny lens.
What the Light device has going for it is numerous sensors. When you're dealing with one sensor that has a native 4000x4000 resolution and you're using fancy processor voodoo to create a sharp 1000x1000 image it ends up looking pretty good. Add more sensors and you get even an even sharper image when you average them out to extrapolate detail.
D70 and D200 I got handed down by my father, totally outdated but they shoot very smooth portraits due to the shitty sensors. Saving money for a mirrorless camera atm. Sony's alpha 7 series looks good, but I wanna see what 2016 brings in terms of mirrorless technology.
Nikon D5300, but I'm a total noob. I'm still learning.
Original before crop.
Megapixels matter.
>>51843239
Where the details at senpai
>jpg
woop woop
ive got a 60d
>>51837491
Lumia 950. Are you faggots really outdated or just straight out shilling iFag devices?
>>51839565
The art in a photography is not a function of the camera. The image quality is.
>>51839923
Crop sensors give you a multiplier on your lenses vocal length.
Nikon is 1.5x, Canon is 1.6x.
A 35mm lens on Nikon crop sensor is equivalent to 52.5mm on a full frame.
If both cameras are 16mp then you get a more zoomed image on the crop than the full frame from the same location, with the same resolution.
Now full frame sensors have advantages over crop sensors in general but using a crop sensor may mean you don't have to get as close, which can be an advantage for wildlife shooting.
>>51843617
Yes, that's exactly what i'm saying.
'Back then', with those ~$50 i've paid for my 350d i didn't felt any 'pressure' to be a good photographer, i was happy with every anyhow appelaing generic picture i've took like pic related.
Now, if i paid more and bought semi-pro 50d, i really feel like i should get good as a photographer. I fear that my newbie photos will be less satisfactory.
But screw it, having bright and large viewfinder is awesome and it was worth it anyway.
>>51841472
The Nikor 35mm f1.8 DX is cheap as fuck, probably one of the cheapest lenses you can get, and has great quality for the price.
If you can, give it a try. It's really nice to shoot with.
>>51843716
I get what you're saying about the viewfinder. I wish mine was brighter and bigger.
I own pic related
>all these DSLRs
It's almost like you wanna be part of the botnet
>>51843889
>implying the nsa can't track you via the silver film composition interference on the cosmic ray over the cell phone network
Want to cop the A58K as my first DSLR, anything inherently wrong with it oh almighty /g/?
Canon EOS 1000D with the original >kit lens.
15 000 shutter operations and counting since 2009.
40D and NEX-3, also a 20D which I don't use but could be considered a backup. The early NEX models are dirt cheap these days (like, in the nifty fifty price range), would highly recommend for beginners, manual lens users, as a backup/second body, or even just as something new to play around with.
Unfortunately, whilst I have plenty of knowledge and a fair amount of equipment I lack motivation and creativity.
Canon 7D
>>51844155
i haven't used it too much but:
AF is shit, rarely gets it right
feels kiiiiinda cheap, but not like it's falling apart in hands. just kinda cheap
Other than that, i guess it's alright - alright as first dslr, literally anything can be first dslr and do the job. But as i said, I haven't used a58 too much though, i just had it in hands for a while.
Also: if i were you, i'd buy some older used DSLR. Old used camera in similar price would definitely be better than this one, but maybe "user-friendliness"/other perks of having brand new device appeal to you.
>>51844547
Needs more ROT, that composition bugs me and there's too much sky. Nice colours though, that shade of greeny blue is one of my favourites.
>>51841211
>full frame
>>51844594
Yeah, I wish I would have shot it to take up more of the frame as well
Had a Sony SLT-A65 and an NEX-3N.
I've sold my A65 and plan on doing so to my NEX.
Honestly my Note 4 is decent enough for day to day shots, and it's always on me.
Will probably buy an A7 variant sometime in the future.
All hail Sony.
>>51844547
>>51844594
almost everything about that picture is shit, stop being a pretentious cunt
>>51844660
Crop, that's what all those megepixels are for.
>>51838528
Good thing you sold your camera and quit photography, 'cause obviously you're fucking retarded.
>>51844694
It's nothing amazing, the subject matter is boring, but I like the colours and geometry.
>>51844700
>he thinks cropping is a solution to bad composition
>>51844802
It is if that shot really is that good but you should always try to fill your frame.
Also personally don't like that shot, It's a fucking roof.
>>51844802
In many cases, such as that one, it is. It's not always helpful but it's a valuable option to have.
>>51841025
I just bought a used 350D and kit lens (18-55mm non-IS) from a friend for peanuts. It's already immediately obvious that it crushes my cell phone's camera, despite having 10 year old sensor.
I do mostly macro photography (electronics and the like), the kit lens seems to be doing fine at this - is there a lot of improvement to switching out the lens, or would I be better off with a ring flash and/or better lighting setup?
>>51842137
>>51843239
horrible fucking picture
>also dat watermark
>>51844814
>it's a fucking roof
isn't photography (not only, but also) about showing dull things in interesting way? I mean, i like pic related, i think it's good and yet it's just a fucking tree. You can't always have interesting and unique subject.
Not like i'm defending this guy photo. I can't pinpoint why (i think it has something to do with hut perspective), but it's not good in my book.
>needing a way to remember things and being narcissistic enough to think other people give a shit about your life and what you've seen
>>51841027
Nice. I have the A5000, but I've used my mom's A6000 and can appreciate the extra features.
Only complaints are in the software; the RAW format is terrible (lossy?!?), it's a bitch to process (UFRaw doesn't do it right for some reason, Sony's newer software is a pain and can't disable a lot of unnecessary processing, Sony's older software doesn't handle it right, and Adobe Lightroom costs money), and video recording is restricted at 29 minutes (because apparently setting that as a regional software flag is too hard, but 50/60 fps is not).
Canon EOS M
Best pic I've ever taken was with it
>>51838651
Why are you throwing unwanted advice at this guy. The mk2 is a better camera.
>>51845080
Too bad it's not level.
>>51844970
yes
god yes
this kit 18-55 II is shit. It's good for first days, but after making a switch you won't even understand how could you live with it so long.
I suggest nifty fifty (50mm 1.8 II). I was in exactly same situation, 350d and first steps with real DSLR - and nifty fifty was entire new quality for me. Although if you're into "macro" (i doubt it's "real macro", like insect-size), you may want something with long focal and macro function - still, nifty fifty is dirt cheap and ultimately awesome. Everyone has one.
Pic related is my macro from super cheap (it was actually cheaper than 50mm 1.8) used Sigma 70-300 APO. It may be interesting choice for you if you're really into this macro thing (i still think nifty-fifty is a must whatever you're doing but well, you may be some kind of only-macro-extremist)
>>51845143
Yeah I know :/
Took it from a moving car though so I was still pretty proud of it.
>>51845552
All these 'photographers' that think they're cool just because they accquired image-capturing machine.
>>51837468
same
What's a good and cheap compact camera?
>>51838588
Now that's cool
What's the real difference between Nikon and Canon, quality-wise (ie not considering personal preferences in look, menu, navigation etc).
Every link that claims "the final answer for Nikon and Canon" or something always ends up saying they're equal. Is that it? Is not one more suitable for a job than another?
>>51845605
all these 'painters' that think they're cool just because they acquired pigments
I travel a lot, but I've never taken pictures since I don't think (cellphone) cameras ever properly capture what things really look like. Especially landscapes.
Never owned or used a big expensive digital camera. They're all way too big to carry around, although some of these mirrorless camera seem reasonable. Can any of them do 360 panoramas?
All of those film camera guys in this thread, how are you developing your films? I was wondering about buying one of those dirt cheap film Canons EOS bodies and trying to fool around with film (never actually used film camera properly, only point&shoot in later elementary school), but i'm afraid of developing. I know basic concept, i'm just afraid that process materials/tools will be too expensive.
I have a 5D Mark III but i'm getting an A7S II
>>51844560
Ok thanks m80, not looking for a used one, since it will be more or less something I'll buy for christmas for my sister and me.
>>51840723
>Light l16
So it used a bunch of smaller sensors/lenses and stitches the image together to produce a higher quality final... would that actually work?
A bit like an insects eye I suppose.
>>51842496
pic
>>51845941
what lenses are those on the left?
>>51845862
why the S?
>>51840723
...OK, watched the video on the website. Genius fucking idea if it works, although I don't get the advantage of having the sensors at the end of those long barrels at right angles to the lens... why is that better than just having the sensor behind the lens?
>>51846005
not this guy, but probably because a7s have 12 megapixels and therefore it's a fucking beast when it comes to low light.
>>51845993
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D
10 years old
>>51845118
The better part is placebo. It's like what audiophiles do with their headsets. Better lens always beats better camera.
>>51846071
impressive
>>51843889
feels good man
my random assortment of junk.
>>51846054
this, the camera can see in the dark.
https://youtu.be/RDiNBZFAnO0?t=200
Is this a meme lens?
>>51846079
And when you already own a set of the best lenses available for the system? I have three Canon L lenses that cover the whole range I'm used to shooting with, at this point I'd only care about better dynamic range or noise performance.
>>51838422
Yeah i ve had mine for a few years. Low light shots need extremely steady shots for any sort of clarity
>>51837358
Camera's I still have in the order I got them:
Canon FTb
Canon EOS 1n-HS
Canon Powershot a630 (modded firmware)
Nikon D2x
Haven't bought a camera since the d2x, and rarely use it anymore.
I've probably spent more than 30 grand on lenses and hardware, and I've had many more cameras than I've listed, but the ones listed are the ones that withstood the test of time. I was a big fan of Canon while I grew up, got into NIkon with some older SLRs, when I bought the d2x it was mainly for action photography, but it ended up great in the studio as well. The Nikon d2x was the camera that converted me from Film to Digital, but I've been retired for a good 6 years now.
>>51842137
>that hand
What the flying fuck?
>>51846130
No, why should it be?
>>51837358
Intel Realsense F200
>>51845914
Its a sound concept, the issue is the processing over head. A little ARM SoC isn't good enough, high performance SoCs actually have an image processing ASIC on die specifically for handling camera and video recording functions, but none that I know how can handle stitching and pixel binning with this much data. Unless every photo takes a couple seconds to fully process I think the only way for it function without slowing to a crawl would be a custom ASIC.
>>51846026
It lets them use a larger and more complex element without making the device thicker over all. I think either Sony or Apple will be putting the same type of element in their future smart phones.
>>51837358
EOS 5D mk 2 with 5 lenses and 4 flashes. Makes easy money.
>>51846112
sound like a perfect camera for urban exploring
Any suggestion on a first Dslr camera ? Under 500 CAD ?
>>51846344
Get one of the starter kits for ~$200
>>51846353
Any brand/model specific?
Thank you
Nikon D3000 since 2009.
Got it as a present since I was getting into photography. Enjoyed it a bit, it was great for trips and all that.
The card slot cover broke, but other than that it works just fine.
I intended to buy lenses and shit, but photography is an expensive hobby and since lower end nikon models have no motor in body it means old glass is manual focus only (terrible with a small viewfinder and no focus thingy besides a shitty dot that lights up).
I then got an old fuji slr from my grandpa. Works great.
Then I got an OM-1 and holy fuck it's super clear, I love the viewfinder.
I stopped taking shots as a hobby over time, I might go at it again but right now I don't feel motivated.
Thinking of getting an old DSLR with in body motor for focus so I can buy shitty old lenses.
Probably Canon because it's fucking everywhere and cheap.
>>51846376
Canon or Nikon.
Canon gear is usually cheaper than Nikon.
Sony has retarded propietary stuff as always, it's harder to find things for them online, their mirrorless stuff is alright but it gets shilled more than it deserves.
I don't know if they still sell them but Pentax is shit now with the only advantage being that old pentax hardware is easy to find, quality, and cheap.
>>51846208
After I bought it my photographer friend was like you paid $20 for a meme lens but I like it
What use does someone who only goes outside to go to work and who hasn't had a picture taken since middle school have for a camera?
I can't think of one, but I need something to waste money on.
>>51846798
Take pictures of things to post online, record crime footage for liveleak, harass officers while they're arresting black people.
Get with the times, gramps.
Pic related, they need some maint work.
I might shoot some stuff with the slr, I found an expired (2013) BW roll.
>>51846798
If you have a hobby, it's cool to document it with nice pictures.
Like taking pics of "dolls" if you buy figurines, mechs, tanks, etc.
Or for family gatherings.
Maybe the odd trip.
Or start getting into photography, it's an expensive money if you go full buyfag.
Or get a super tele and take pictures of high school girls from your window.
>>51845144
Thanks for the advice! The 50mm 1.8 II seems to be quite reasonably priced on eBay.
And you're right that it probably isn't real macro - I'm remembering my old digital compact camera where "macro" meant "anything less than 1m". And using the zoom greatly increased the minimum focus distance. This resulted in extreme frustration when trying to photograph various projects and the like.
A Nikon D80...its so old...but it still works like a champ. Ive had it for 5+ years now.
>>51845759
They are fairly equal. Sometimes one of them will slightly edge out the other in certain areas but it changes all the time as they bring out new bodies. The options are far more varied than it was in the past, if you want a high res full frame body for studio work then they both offer that, if you want a body that excels in low light they both have it, if you want something super fast for action and sports they both have it.
In the end it really does come down to personal preference, budget, and in some cases one or the other will offer an advantage that appeals to you (specific lenses and backwards compatibility for example).
>>51845941
Why the Magic Ball? I looked it up and just don't get it, it's an overpriced ballhead that lacks basic features and it's only benefit is extended range that really shouldn't be needed.
>>51846130
Pretty much, although that doesn't mean it's bad. I've had three of the things (all came with bodies for stupidly low prices), two more modern ones like that and an older version and they were all fairly good (especially for the price).
>>51847061
For macro work a longer focal length, around 100mm, is generally better. It gives you a larger working distance for the same magnification, the downside is it requires faster shutter speeds if hand holding so a decent tripod and head will help or a good lighting setup if you want to hand hold.
Sony Alpha 65
It's a nice camera
Considering going A77 or A77II when i have money
>>51847061
Just word of caution, 50mm 1.8 isn't macro at all - it starts focusing from ~40cm. But large aperture will definitely give you lots of bokeh, and i think you may like bokeh. I just shot this one with nifty fifty and it's perfect for this kind of task, but you probably wouldn't be able to shot those electronics from 15cm.
>>51843356
I'm colorblind and even I think those colors look nice
Fuji X10
Cheap little thing. Very impressive performance for the price. Small, lightweight, all metal construction and very durable.
I used to have a D300 but sold it off and use this instead. All I really do is street photos and convention photography, so a bigass thing with multiple lenses isn't useful. A 24-70 equivalent range is all I need.
Might get an x100t.
How much would you guys pay for a Konica Pop?
I see people buying them for American Apparel Lomo money, but I don't see how they are worth more than a few bucks.
Is 15 alright, or a lot? I see ebay listings at 30, 50, and so on.
>>51847995
if it comes with the hexanon lens, they're worth around 50 bucks. I've got four(two in this pic >>51846103 )
They can take very beautiful pictures if used right. That hexanon glass is legit.
>>51848395
Awesome, it does have a hexanon. The one I found needs a foam replacement in the back, but since that's easy to fix I'll pick it up then.
D7100 (for a year now): fucking better than I could ask for, seriously overkill and will keep it for prob 7-10 year :D
And since some time I also shoot film with a F3 wich is fucking awesome too.
Basically all my needs are fullfilled
>>51847237
OK - that's somewhat farther than the 0.28m that my kit lens has. I tried setting the kit lens to 50mm and took some pictures - it's surprisingly more telephoto than I thought, which does mean I don't have to be as close.
There's a new 50mm STM out that doesn't look much more expensive than the eBay prices of the II and focuses closer...
>>51837358
Canon 600D, would recommend for a cheaper DSLR
>>51844802
He's not wrong.
>i have this photo i am going to downscale anyway but i should go and take a new photo because my composition is a bit off instead of cropping it
That's just retarded.
I used to have a Canon 50d but now I have a Sony a6000 w/ zeiss 16-70mm.
I kind of miss the feel of the 50d until I remember what it was like lugging that fucking behemoth around.
