Continuing discussion.
>>2845147
I have tested a 6D and I fell in love with full frame.

I don't benefit from apsc right now and I don't think I will until I can afford a very hefty set of lenses like 300mm for birds and wildlife where I live.

Gear question from a noob here. I have no photography skills, semi shaky hands but an ok sense of aesthetic(aka i think most things look like shit).

I want to buy a camera that will be used while travelling, I have no intentions of ever printing any of my photos and probably will never buy extra lenses. I despise photos with grain/bad colours. Most my photos will be cityscape and I really like low light photos. Would really like the option of doing timelapse. It will be used to show cool views to friends and family.

Things that are important to me is photo quality, stabilisation, low light performance, timelapese capability and decent to great compactness. Price point would be somewhere between $300-$600.

Been looking at things like Nikon B700, g7x. The B700 sounds amazing, but I assume there's a lot of bad things dragging the price down for it to be as cheap as it's launching at? I really have no need for the 60x zoom on it either, which I assume you're not getting for free without other drawbacks.

>>2845219
>I don't benefit from apsc right now
Because Canon is behind the competition by 2-3 EV in sensor performance.
The only thing keeping the market share is the (pretty nice) lens lineup. Try a Nikon or Pentax APS-C and you will see the huge difference. The 70D (80D) is a step in the right direction, but still not as good as the competition.

>>2845226
Pentax K-50 with a fast prime or two (or three)
35mm f/2.4 and the kit lens is a good start.
Same for Nikon D3300 with kit lens and 35/1.8

File: IMG_4125.jpg (609 KB, 1200x800) Image search: [Google]

609 KB, 1200x800

>>2845219
As long as AF is not a big priority for you than the 6D is still a great camera, mine has served me well and I've gotten away with some fucking stupidly lit shots due to the iso performance.

I used mine for semi professional stuff though so I can't help justifying it if you're just going to use it recreationally

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS M
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:02:02 21:11:52
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2845219
If you can't afford nice APS-C lenses, I've got some bad news for you regarding full frame.

>>2845241
umm... the K-3 has a better ISO and noise performance. Just saying.

File: 6d.jpg (71 KB, 1193x424) Image search: [Google]

71 KB, 1193x424

>>2845254
Sauce?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	User
Image-Specific Properties:

>>2845258
Real life applications. Also check that dynamic range.
BTW Nikon D500 laughs at your puny attempt at DXO trolling.

File: chart.jpg (203 KB, 3246x1284) Image search: [Google]

203 KB, 3246x1284

>>2845259
Okay, so let's see your real live examples that show it?

Also, fun fact, at high ISO, canon retains dynamic range better than Sony sensors do.

>>2845259
>Real life applications
go on

File: 6dk3.png (86 KB, 1186x984) Image search: [Google]

86 KB, 1186x984

>>2845263
SNR indicates it also has a cleaner image right through the ISO range :^)

>>2845263
>>2845266
Wow, more charts and numbers. What's the matter, don't know how to take a photo?

>>2845266
I think you might be confused.

Still going to wait for that "real life applications" though. I'd love to see you back that up.

>>2845268
We're still waiting for the real life applications since we clearly know nothing about photography :^)

>>2845231

researched a little and don't think the d3300 is for me, the pentax k-50 seems wonderful though. It has pretty much stopped selling or is super overpriced in my country. The shop that had it at a reasonable price is either sold out or discontinued. Some lesser known places has it at 25% above that price.

Found a barely used one(according to seller) with an 18-55mm lens for a little more than $300. Thanks for the recommendation, think I might get myself a camera today.

>>2845219
Dude, get a job, get the money, buy what you want. Don't care about what others are saying.
With that said going FF just because FF is a waste of money. Go to your local store and rent out a Nikon D7200 with a few lenses you have, for a day. Try it out and compare the results. You will be surprised, I can tell you that.

Just wanna get your opinion /p/ before I go through with a purchase, since I'm poor as fuck and I'm probably going to bite the bullet on a £450 lens, which is a pretty significant amount of money for me to be blowing on a lens.

I was thinking about getting the SMC Pentax-D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro WR for my Pentax K-50 camera.
I've heard it's a very nice lens.

If you had £450 and were in my shoes, would this be the purchase you'd go for too? Anything better for that price? And finally, does £450 sound like the correct price? I know I've been burned in the past because the price for certain things over here in the UK is significantly higher than some things Americans have recommended me (For example, I've had Americans recommend me, say, a monitor which is $200 for them which was going for no cheapter than £350 over here).

Thanks in advance!

Oh and just incase you're curious, the only lens I currently have is the kit lens that came with the K-50.

>>2845336
If you need the weather sealing, then yes. Optically it is the same as the FA 100/2.8 macro.
Also buying a lens just because "it is a nice lens" is stupid. Do you want to do macro outside of a studio? If yes then it is a good lens. It is also a good head and shoulder portrait lens.
If not then what are your needs?

What's a good prize for a used M8 nowadays?

>>2845343
>Do you want to do macro outside of a studio? If yes then it is a good lens. It is also a good head and shoulder portrait lens.

The reason I'm buying this is almost completely due to wanting to get into macro. I've never actually done any macro photography before.
Whatever else the lens is good at is just a bonus.

>>2845367
Then it is a good lens. See if you can get the older not sealed for a better price first. WR on macro suggests pretty extreme uses.

whats the best external light meter for unfettered cameras?

File: Huh_VinegarForYourHair.2.jpg (53 KB, 849x565) Image search: [Google]

53 KB, 849x565

I'm new to dslr's and just noticed if I listen closely I can hear my camera making this humming kinda noise when it's in live view, but it goes away in regular viewfinder mode

should I be worried or is that normal?

File: lolympus-mons-L-QvdyGw[1].jpg (19 KB, 460x240) Image search: [Google]

19 KB, 460x240

Simple question, maybe too general for the GEAR THREAD.

At this point, why ever go micro 4/3? The quality is truly tuberous compared to bigger sensors.

The original sell was size and cost, but an A7 is the size of a typical m43 camera, and it gets worse if you look at cheaper APS-C bodies.

Remaining reason that I see is the easy availability of smaller lenses, which is situational. Overall, it looks like m43 should die. Thoughts?

>>2845387
I think the idea was to have four times as fast glass.
ie: 25mm f/0.7, 12-35 f/1.4, 300 f/2 etc.
Which should theoretically be possible with a 2X crop factor, and not cost more than full frame glass.
But then they jewd out and overpriced the shit out of the faster lenses.

>>2845228
Canon is behind but not that much. About a third of a stop in high ISO noise. The "big one", dynamic range, they are behind by about 1.5 stops for APS-C.

Comparing top non Canon APS-C to top full frame Canon and the Canon wins big in high ISO and is about two thirds of a stop behind in DR. Non-Canon APS-C is the best value but if prices were equal, I'd go with the full frame Canon

>>2845254
No. Just no.

>>2845387
Quality isn't as good but there are some nice cameras there that aren't quite matched by others. Olympus has the best image stabilization and top tier weather sealing in the E-M5. Panasonic has very good 4K and weather sealing in the GX8. The Sony A6300 is the best 4K but no weather sealing and its image stabilization isn't as good. The APS-C cameras with weather sealing like the Pentax and many pro models don't shoot good video or have good image stabilization. Sony could crush m43 pretty easily by upgrading the alpha series with the combined IBIS+OIS system + weatherization so it's probably a matter of time.

>>2845378
If you're using Pentax then it is fine, it's the sensor shift stabilization system.

>>2845411
It's a Nikon d5500...is my camera going to shit on me?

>>2845408
>Sony could crush m43 pretty easily by upgrading the alpha series with the combined IBIS+OIS system + weatherization so it's probably a matter of time.
lol

>>2845452
If the lens has IS then its probably fine.
I dont think the mechanics of the camera would be fucked if its fine out of LV mode.

>>2845456
yeah, it's a nikon VR lens...hopefully that's all it is then, thanks

>>2845455
Well they did have one weatherized dslr, the A99. And the A7RII has IBIS which works with OIS lenses.

So I thought you Pentaxfags might be interested to hear that I got to play around with the K1 today.

Seemed like a really nice camera, actually. It's surprisingly heavy and solid feeling, especially compared to the D610 and 6D (which I think are its closest competitors) and for some reason it reminded me more of a MF camera than a typical SLR. The tilty screen is really cool in person, and it's fucking huge and gorgeous. It was quick and responsive, the buttons all felt nice, and the viewfinder was excellent. AF was quite snappy with the 28-105, though I thought the lens itself seemed really cheesy compared to the camera it was on, like putting a D7000's kit lens on a D5.

I'm not a Pentax guy, but my first impressions of the camera were really good, and if I were looking for a new FF system I'd really consider it. It seems like every bit as good of a camera as the D810 at 1/3 less cost.

File: 33070_1_xl.jpg (47 KB, 675x450) Image search: [Google]

47 KB, 675x450

so in November of last year i bought an SL1 as my first dslr for stills and occasional video. I mainly shoot stills and video of my dog and other dogs at the dog park and pretty much everything else from portraits to astro etc.

I'm super interested in the 70d's auto focus system and wondering if it would be a good upgrade. My camera the Sl1 has 1 cross type AF and 9 af points. the 70D has like 19 af points all cross.

would i notice a good improvement as far as catching focus?

Just ordered the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD
Anyone here have any experience with it? I've read/seen good things on varies sites.

>>2845403
how far behind is canon in DR for fool frame?

File: 1463773254923.jpg (30 KB, 600x600) Image search: [Google]

30 KB, 600x600

>sony doing weatherization

that seems foolish since their demographic doesn't go outside

>>2845210
Question unanswered for the sticky. A buddy of mine recently visited and he had a nice sony camera. I had a blast using it on a nature hike and kind of want to get a real camera so I can catalogue the beauty of the WA woods. What are some suggestions? Prices can fluctuate, but I'm new to the hobby and it seems silly to get an expensive camera.

>>2845496

why buy an expensive car when you can just walk every where.

>>2845473
Two stops for best vs best though Canon takes the lead after ISO 3200 for DR. Canon's new plant is going online soon so they should be closing the gap or surpassing the RX1RII soon. Of course Sony hasn't put its latest sensor tech (Exmor RS) in Fool Frame so they have some easy room to improve.

File: 3451_941452742598612_2032665529967124847_n.jpg (57 KB, 640x960) Image search: [Google]

57 KB, 640x960

recently bought a samsung nx300m on the cheap cheap, got the kit lens, i want an all around stabilized lens thats good at taking portraits/ landscape etc. samsung might seem sub par to other companies but i couldnt turn down the deal

pic related

>>2845501
huh so don't buy any nice bodies from canon or sony for a while then huh

>>2845501
In many cases, canon catches up at ISO 400 or ISO 800, and stays right along side until around 3200 where it pulls ahead.

>>2845528
There's always going to be better sensor tech in the pipeline just like with computer CPUs and graphics cards etc. When to buy and upgrade is a very individual decision.

should I buy a Fuji x10 with a turn off problem? the cam doesn't turn off, you must wait 2min until the camera turn off itself

>>2845529
Yeah it depends on the bodies. Although I understand why DxO gives max DR in its scoring, I think it would also be useful to show the total area or average from 100-3200. The Fuji S5 would rightfully rank much higher in that case.

im thinking of selling my canon 70d to fund a purchase of a x100s

is it a downgrade in any way other than the lenses? i want to take more photos but i hate lugging around a giant dslr and dont really like taking photos on it

i got the 70d for the video but ive heard the x100s has really good video. thoughts?

I have a canon 60d what do you guys think of the 24mm stm vs the 50 stm?

>>2845608
EF-S 24mm and the EF 40mm
Both are great, the 50 STM is just too cheap on IQ.

>>2845470
Yeah I have mine in eos Mount and it's great, one quirk I suffer with is if you leave the vc on with the camera powered off it'll drain the battery. It should be fixed on newer versions of the lens but keep an eye out for it

File: panasonic-gm5-17-1-7.jpg (50 KB, 650x650) Image search: [Google]

50 KB, 650x650

A local camera dealer has a package of Panasonic GM5 and Panaleica 15mm f1.7 on sale for 500. Considering the lens itself goes for the same price locally I'm thinking this must be a good deal... Thing is I already have a camera body, Olympus M5ii. I could get only the lens from grey market at ~400. Of course the GM5 is fucking tiny so I might just find a bit more use out of that, for day-to-day point and shoot. Also, I like primes so I was thinking I might actually do some events with a wide lens on the GM5 and something long on the M5ii for candid portraiture. Thoughts on this? Is the GM5 good for anything?

>>2845387
>size
M43 is still on top, unsurprisingly.
>cost
M43 is failing horribly at that.
>but an A7 is the size of a typical m43 camera
m8 at least use quality b8
>cheaper APS-C bodies
The bodies might be the same size, the lenses sure aren't.
>quality
Quality at what? ISO6400+ compared to full frame? No shit buddy. ISO1600 against APS-C? It holds its own very well. Certainly well enough for people who print, shoot photos, and don't pixel peep. The exact opposite of Sony users, it'd seem. Muh DXO says at least 9 MP out of 16 MP for most of the good zooms and primes? Compare the pixel pitch to a D810, then realize that those lenses would be effectively resolving as much as 20-27 MP on the D810. The O12-40 does about as well as the 24-70G. The 42.5 Nocticron does about the same as the 85 1.8G. This is just straight math though. The P20 is wicked sharp for a pancake.
> Sony could crush m43 pretty easily by upgrading the alpha series with the combined IBIS+OIS system + weatherization so it's probably a matter of time.
They could. Arguably, they should have done it already. Why hold out? At this point, M43 is the only mirrorless system that gets ergonomics, size, ecosystem, hardware features, stills, and video all correct, but the stigma of "muh small sensor" is holding off gearfags and consumers.

>>2845649
GM5's good for being tiny. Also you'll be able to use the PL15's aperture ring on the GM5 but not the EM5. I'd get it, if I had $500 to burn. Put the PL15 on the EM5II, get a 14/2.5 or 20/1.7 for the GM5.

First time here
I just got this idea of getting a Camera, I know absolutely nothing about photography but I think having a camera wouldnt be a bad idea, especially because my phone's camera sucks.
So Im just going to buy something used and cheap (between $50 and $100).
What brands are good for that price? What kind of camera should I get?

My gf have a coolpix l100 but we couldnt fix it.

Is there really a big difference between taking pics with a real camera and a phone? I currently have a Moto X and I feel the photos quality is like shit and the focus is horrible especially when i leave the phone recording in a support.

>>2845655
For that cheap, I'd honestly just put the money toward a better phone. The cheapest worthwhile cameras start at like $3-500.

>>2845655
At that budget it is better to just use your phone. Read up on composition and other aspects of photography and save up some more money ($300-400) for a decent used DSLR and a nice 50mm or 35mm prime lens.

>>2845652
>Why hold out?

Why not? Pixel peepers are buying their cameras in droves so there's no rush to improve their system. Competition will force them to improve their cameras eventually though. I wouldn't say M43 is the best mirrorless system since that will vary according to people's needs but it has proven it's worth for sure if the GH4s reputation in the video community is anything to go by. But it is a hard value sell when you can get better low light, better dynamic range, better video, and some other advantages in the A6300 which is the same price as an EM5II.

>>2845655
I'm gonna disagree with >>2845656 and >>2845657. Go to the following link which is a list of cameras sorted by oldest which have: manual mode, aperture and shutter priority, manual focus and try ebay. Smartphones have cancer ergonomics, no aperture control, and tricky focusing. I mean you could upgrade your smartphone but that's a lot of money and it's still annoying to use even if smartphones these days are capable of very good quality.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/search/cameras?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu#criterias=SpecsEffectivePixels%2CSpecsSensorSize%2CSpecsExposureModesSearch%2CSpecsManualFocus&sort=oldestFirst&paramSpecsEffectivePixelsMin=12&paramSpecsSensorSize=Compacts&paramSpecsExposureModesSearch=aperture-priority%2Cshutter-priority%2Cmanual-exposure&paramSpecsManualFocus=Yes

>>2845408
>IBIS+OIS system

The mkII series for the A7/r/s all have both.

Still no proper weather sealing, though some lens are rumored to be rain proof.

>>2845387
>an A7 is the size of a typical m43 camera

I have an A7 and I love it.

But that is not true at all. The A7 is huge compared to a proper m43 and even a normal NEX series.

>>2845567
Get the D3300. It had constant AF, an external mic jack, and a battery life that's more than double that of the A3000.

File: ProPhotoSupply_Sony_A6300_Kit_1.jpg (80 KB, 1080x1080) Image search: [Google]

80 KB, 1080x1080

I've been looking at the a6300. It seems like a good value for those doing both video and stills. 4k, 120fps, it's small, gets good low light performance, 11fps, 8fps in live view, good af, nice evf, and you can adapt pretty much any lens because of the short flange distance (keep in mind that will many lens you will lose af and automated aperture control). But has bad rolling shutter for video, doesn't have the in-body stabilization the a7 series stuff have, and no headphone jack. Feedback?

>>2845787
It's one of the very best mirrorless cameras you can get. It still has flaws (Strange ergonomics, strange lens ecosystem, overheating issues) but the image quality is pretty good, and the AF is better than any DSLR you can get for the same price.

>>2845787

I was considering it too, but ended up going with the A7II.

The reason I chose the A7II over the a6300 was because I have some nice A-mount lenses. The in body stabilization and lack of a crop factor (some great ranges turn weird of APS-C) sold it for me.

>>2845467
good to hear. im considering making my first array into full frame but im already heavily invested in canon glass (or at least a large investment for me, probably have close to $2k in canon lenses).

the k1 sounds amazing if you just want a full frame camera for no bullshit photography, and itd be amazing for studio work and astrophotography. but for me the dealbreaker is lenses and the pentax ecosystem...

...I really feel sometimes Im getting conned by Canon. its like they know i cant leave their system because it will cost me at least $1k even after ive sold my canon lenses and reinvest in another brands glass. and by then i may as well fork over the insane amount of money for a 1dx.

i cant imagine their 5dIV to be anything worthwhile, without completey negating the purpose of the 1dx or c series. i would buy the 5DIV in a heartbeat if it offers any 4K recording (as I also do pid video work) but i know thats very unlikely. gat dangit.

pretty much just need to hone up and buy a k1 for photos and a a7s for video. canon seems insistent on being mediocre on both fronts.

>>2845468
no, the SL1 is more than good enough. you will barey notice a difference between the sl1 and 70d.

your money would be much, much better spent on new high quality glass. you will notice the AF improve when you use better glass, as the lenses also play an important factor in focusing.

id recommend the 40mm pancake if you dont already have it for your SL1. they were practically made for each other.

>>2845841
I often use the new 35 usm canon lense, the usm motor kicks the stm all over.
thank you for the reply anon

File: IMG_1033-copy3.jpg (483 KB, 960x640) Image search: [Google]

483 KB, 960x640

I have never had a camera, whats the cheaper one i can get to take pictures of the sky?
I was on a resort some months ago and the sky was so beautiful at night and there was no way i could take a pic.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 60D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	Phillip & Lauren Kenney
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2012:12:14 12:27:32
Exposure Time	20 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	960
Image Height	640
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2845886
Night sky stuff is high stress on the equipment. You need good high ISO response, and a fast wide angle lens. Something cheap from Rokinon will be fine for that, but as far as the camera goes, you'll want something relatively modern. Maybe something like an X-E1, which is a slow difficult camera, but has very nice image quality and very nice high ISO, while being inexpensive.

>>2845888
that really ugly pentax they released a few years ago would be up for astrophotography I bet

>>2845888
>>2845886

Isn't a larger sensor generally better? Wouldn't something like a used APS-C DSLR or NEX be better?

>>2845638
Thanks for the heads up, I'll remember that!
How is the weather sealing?

>>2845910
The X-E1 is APS-C.

>>2845910
>nex better than x-e1
try harder sony shill

>>2845241
>>2845219
I shot a few clips for €€€ with 6D and the default lens.
Why do I get shitty quality even if I export h.264 & match video settings? The 5min video file is only 200mb tho.
Should I shoot RAW? 6D can't do raw without magic lantern.

>>2845841
As opposed to the EFS 24 pancake, which is actually made for EFS cameras?

>>2845956
It's time to install ML then. Or just get a Sony A7SII.

File: 23557-970-80.jpg (80 KB, 970x545) Image search: [Google]

80 KB, 970x545

Hi fellas, not really a huge photography enthusiast here but hoping to buy a camera for my wife. Im eyeing this mirrorless fujifilm x-t10. Any other cameras that are mirrorless considered beter on this price range? thanks fellas

>>2846013
It's a nice camera that comes with a nice lens. Giving better advice will require more details about what she will use it for.

If you need fantastic autofocus for things like high speed sports, or shooting in the dark, or if you need high quality video, the X-T10 may leave you wanting, but if she'll just need "normal stuff" photos, she'll be happy with it, probably.

>>2846013
The Sony A6000 is comparable and comes down to personal preference, usually I'd say go test both, but that won't help your wife.
Both are great cameras, the Fuji is prettier, the Sony cheaper, she'll be happy with both.

Looking for a small/smallish system camera like Olympus Pen e-pl7 that's good for 1st serious camera. Not much money to spend so used models would be main focus.

I've got a SL1 and a 40D, plus five lenses (Nifty fifty, Tamron 17-50, 70-200f4, 10-18, 24mm pancake).

I bought the SL1 and the last two lenses specifically for a trip last year. I wanted a light small kit but I learned that bringing fewer lenses is still a good idea, no matter how small the dslr is.
I saw the 80D review but I'm still not convinced in staying with Canon APS-C.

The logical step would be keep the SL1, 10-18 and 24 mm for a small kit that I can loan to my GF when we're travelling, and selling 40d and Tammy for around 250 € and looking for a used 6D.

I'll still have the nifty fifty and the tele, I'll miss a higher quality slightly wider normal walk-around lens, which would probably be a Sigma 35.

Opinions?

>>2846032
Try the E-PL5 if your budget is toight.

>>2846040

Forgot to add. I like to shoot reportage-style travelling. That is, I'm too busy and lazy to shoot anything that's not trips, being them day trips, weekend trips, or multiple weeks proper travelling.

>>2846040
>>2846045
What will you be gaining with the 6D that you don't already get from the SL1/40D?

telling us that you take trips is useless. That's like saying you need to buy shoes because you'll be going to places. What do you shoot? What's wrong with what you have?

>>2845958
sure, if you plan on sticking with ef-s

if you ever want to upgrade for a full frame though its nice being able to use all the glass at your disposal. both are good lenses.

File: IMG_3366.jpg (193 KB, 1549x1033) Image search: [Google]

193 KB, 1549x1033

>>2846040
I'm>>2845468

as other anons have pointed out the bodys really dont matter unless youre going from crop to full frame. if anything lend your gf the 40d and a lens and keep your sl1.

unless youre making money off your gear, going full frame isnt justifiable imo

sounds to me kind of like you just want nicer gear which i can sympathize with, but im learning that a $700 body >70D in my case
wont improve enough over my dirt cheap $250 SL1

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL SL1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:21 21:51:04
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	200.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2846048

I want better dynamic range for landscapes. I also like the effect of really shallow dof on normal to wide angle lenses.
I like to shoot while hiking, walking around in cities and small towns.
I'm not sure if linking an album of a traveller from reddit is frowned upon but I'm basically aiming at this style:
http://imgur.com/a/1cJcO

Actually my style is already something similar but I really miss a wider dynamic range and that shallow dof for some shots. I'm not sure if I'm just convincing myself that I need full frame, I really don't think so and I think it would actually improve my photography.

>>2846055

I already have nice crop lenses. The 24mm is super sharp and the 10-18 is very nice too.

I agree with you that Canon crop sensors are basically all the same and I'll only benefit from a jump to 6d

>>2846076
>I want better dynamic range for landscapes.
You've moving from about eleven and a half, to about 12 stops of dynamic range between the SL1 and the 6D.

As in, you won't notice in practice.
As for depth of field, work on getting better lenses for what you have and you'll get thinner depth of field. For instance, the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8.

>>2845956
Show us a clip

>>2845654
> Put the PL15 on the EM5II, get a 14/2.5 or 20/1.7 for the GM5.
Yeah, especially liking the latter idea. Would make for one tiny package.

File: samsung-camera-memory.jpg (30 KB, 400x300) Image search: [Google]

30 KB, 400x300

Is it worth to buy samsung nx100 to have better image quality than phone? I plan to always have it with me because its pretty small and use it with old manual focus lenses and just photo random stuff.

>>2846104
for 75$

should i buy a clone Yongnuo AF-S 50mm f/1.8 or wait for the real nikon thing ?

>>2846275
kai from digitalrev posted a video on youtube. I'm on mobile at the moment and can't be arsed for it. his review is only a google search away

>>2846275
What body are you putting it on?

I'd get the 35 1.8 instead if you're on DX. If you're on FX, get the old 50 1.8D, used if you have to, instead of the Yongnuo.

File: DSC_0378-2.jpg (1 MB, 1620x1080) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1620x1080

>>2846278
i'll look into it! thanks

>>2846284
D3300 User here!
This will be my first lens purchase , currently using the 18-55mm VRII , here are the price around . I want to get more portrait and low light
50mm af-s is 250 CAD$
35min af-s is 270 CAD$
Yongnuo AF-S 50mm f/1.8 is 110 CAD$

considered buingy the Yongnuo for the summer and maybe wait for blackfriday/boxing day deal for the 35mm DX. I guess im a poorfag!

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3300
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.6
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	762
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	30 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:02:06 18:20:29
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	220
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	20.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Portrait
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

So I'm thinking about buying a d500, I'm an amateur that wants to shoot random wildlife shit and zoo stuff etc.
Also, is Nikon about to die? I was reading that cameras are dying and Nikon is on a slide.
I really like the d500 but I don't want to buy a dead system.

>>2846357
Nikon is doing just fine, and with a good lens on it, the D500 is incredible.

>>2846361
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/grim-nikon-financials.html
how? The only way they will do "fine" is by marking their shit up to the max if their sales keep dropping, I don't want to have the ultra premium brand because they can't sell anything anymore.

>>2846082
>For instance, the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8.
being able to focus is a key part of a thin dof though

>>2846365
how are canon's financials

>>2846373
Better? I only showed that nikon is in the shitter, I'm not claiming canon is better (it is, they make things other than cameras)
If you want to show how shit canon is I welcome you to compare.

>>2846380
i just want to know how they are doing by comparison

editors note : buying cameras from a consumer electronics company which at any time will gladly axe their entire product because their CEO doesn't care about cameras, is a bad, bad B.A.D. idea for anyone caring about longevity

>>2846385
Then look it up.

>>2846389
those kinds of financials that nikon blog has are incredibly obscure though

Does anybody here schedule their camera gear with their home insurers?

I have a fair amount of gear that I'd like to get covered, but I'm not sure if it's worth the hassle of digging up all the invoices and calling my insurer.

>>2845696
Yeah which is the point. You can get weather sealing, top class image stabilization, or good 4K video but not all in the same package whereas you can with m43.

>>2845697
>The A7 is huge compared to a proper m43

Not really. The A7 (127 x 94 x 48 mm) and E M5 II (124 x 85 x 45 mm) weigh about the same. Or maybe you only consider the really small m43 cameras proper?

>>2846104
Hell yeah $75?!? Samsung lenses are pricier than average but wow. I'm looking at eBay prices for the nx100 and for some reason they are super cheap. Good times.

>>2846308
Get the Yongnuo 50, it's actually pretty high quality, much higher quality than the 35. 50mm is the best bang for the buck low light portrait though if you have the cash, the Rokinon 85 1.4 is worth a look. Manual focus and typical screens like on the D3300 are not tuned for manual focus. Live view sucks on it too so that's something to think about.

>>2846357
Nikon will never die. If the company goes under, someone will buy the rights and develop for the mount just like Ricoh did when it acquired the Pentax camera division. And Nikon's userbase is much larger than Pentax so it's basically inevitable.

>>2846513
>>2846513
>You can get weather sealing, top class image stabilization, or good 4K video but not all in the same package whereas you can with m43.

that doesn't exist either for m43. The GH5 will probably offer that but the next A7 or even A6400 might too.

File: Sony-Alpha-7-II-vs-Olympus-OM-D-E-M5-II-top-view-size-comparison.jpg (36 KB, 720x280) Image search: [Google]

36 KB, 720x280

>>2846513
>Not really. The A7 (127 x 94 x 48 mm) and E M5 II (124 x 85 x 45 mm) weigh about the same. Or maybe you only consider the really small m43 cameras proper?

mkii versions are bigger and heavier. The E M5II is a whole 130 grams lighter.

Combined with the larger APS-C lenses, you end up with a pretty big camera.

>>2846520

I thought the a9 was supposed to do all that? Gonna be a ridiculous price though.

>>2846513
So should i jump for this samsung? I plan to use old manual lenses anyway

>>2846571
Yes, sure, just keep in mind the crop factor is 1.5x so for a standard focal length you will need a 35mm, the abundance of 50mm lens will become a 75mm, more of a portrait telezoom lens. Not that it is a bad thing though.

>>2846578
>telezoom
I meant telephoto.

>>2846578
I'll be using 28mm with it, it's my first camera not including phone, well its aps-c so alot bigger than galaxy s4 sensor, it just has to be always with me and allow for random snaps, thx anon
Im getting it for 75$ with m42 adapter and sd card

>>2846581
Go for it.

>>2846520
You can get 2 out of 3, and if you consider the GX8's dual IS as top class (i don't), 3 out of 3.

>>2846357
>I'm an amateur that wants to shoot random wildlife shit and zoo stuff etc.
>wants a $2000 camera body
>doesn't even know what to shoot

Buy a D40 and get the fuck out

File: AF_Nikkor_2885mm_early.jpg (30 KB, 341x432) Image search: [Google]

30 KB, 341x432

Pic related my lens is having back focusing issues. It has problems with autofocusing as well.

Can it still be repaired?

>>2846585
Is it screwdrive focus or in-lens focus motor AF?
If the latter then it can be repaired. If the former then it is more likely you have problems with the AF motor in your camera. In this case check with another screwdrive AF lens, if it works alright then the lens is faulty.

>>2846571
>So should i jump for this samsung? I plan to use old manual lenses anyway

The NX100 lens lineup makes the E-Mount one look healthy.

Still a good camera, especially at that price. Plus you can adapt non-native lenses.

File: dunder copy.jpg (237 KB, 1904x712) Image search: [Google]

237 KB, 1904x712

>made mistake of buying a bridge camera
>get a dslr after missing a decent shot thanks to lack of manual control of shutter (pic related, lightning tree sunset)
>sell coolpix on gumtree for price i bought it at
>guy can't speak english, sat in car for 40 minutes texting me before coming in
>going to send it to his brother in iraq

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON
Camera Model	COOLPIX L340
Camera Software	Photos 1.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.1
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	23 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:04:03 05:57:29
Exposure Time	1/2 sec
F-Number	f/3.1
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1904
Image Height	712
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Night Scene
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Poorfag here. Buying a 1.8 50mm STM soon for my 550D.

Any "recommended" polarizing filter for that 49 filter size? I mainly shoot toys/models/figures in controlled light environments.

>>2846701
Polaroid, Hoya etc...
Stay away from chinese cheap shit.

>>2846743
>Stay away from chinese cheap shit.
Are they known to screw up shit like the screw on or some other shit?

>>2846747
No, but it's wasted money and time. The filters are simply just poorly made, loose shit with tonnes of aberrations, flaring and heavy vignetting.
49mm filters are not expensive even from the top brands.

>>2846749
Thank you for the response. I won't cheap out.

where do i find luts without paying? I searched for torrents but they are 200gb each or something like that.

Is olympus e-pl1 still a good camera, I could get one used at 100 euros with the kit lense? Shoud I get it?

>>2846747
get one if you like flares.
point at sky.
flares.
indoor with window.
flares.

>>2846753
i cheap out with a pl filter.
cheaper than cpl but i use an eos m.
so it doesn't effect focusing.
workd if you're focusing in liveview only.

>>2846790
it's shit.
but if you don't have money and no camera with sensor bigger than a peanut, sure, buy it.

>>2846794
umm it's 17.3mm x 13.0. Is that really that bad?

How often are there new cameras or price drops in current cameras for canon? Curious because I might try to buy one within a year or two, so waiting isn't an issue.

>>2846797
/p/ has a tendency to shit on cameras based on sensor size. You're in a thread for nothing but gearfagging so I recommend you take everything with extra salt. An MFT sensor means you're losing out on ISO performance and probably dynamic range when compared to APS-C and, especially, full frame. However, the latest MFT sensor offering is quite reasonable in terms of absolute image quality and many are willing to make the trade off for a combination of small camera and small lens.

That said, the camera is *6 years old*. That's a fuckload of time in sensorland. I'm quite certain that you'll be able to snatch a perfectly useable APS-C kit from ebay for 100e that will disappoint you way less.

>>2846797
What >>2846803 Says. M43 isn't bad if you buy the current stuff, losing about 2 stops ISO and DR to full frame, and 1 stop to APS-C. APS-C itself is about 1 stop to FF. It all works out.

If you buy a EPL1 though, you might as well shoot on a potato.

>>2846802
buy used

Hi /gear/,

So I'm a complete newbie and was about to get a Nikkon D3300 at the store (as some of you guys told me) and saw an offer for a Pentax K S1 for 229 pounds (which is quite good, I think). The catch is that they just have two last cameras of that model and those are the ones being in exposition at the store that everyone can try (the white one is quite dirty, the blue one probably too but you cant see it).

My question is,

Is still a good offer, despite being touched and used, and probably a lot of shots done already shortening its life?

Should I just go for the new, reliable D3300 at 299 with a VR II lense?

Other option?

Thanks in advance everyone

Brazilian /p/hriend here. Where do i go for them american sources on used lenses?

>>2846585

i've seen these go for like $50 on ebay, so you might want to compare repair quotes

>>2846850
ebay.com

File: ricoh-wg4_silver_frnt.jpg (214 KB, 1300x800) Image search: [Google]

214 KB, 1300x800

I want a tough camera for a trip to South East Asia this year.
So primary desirable features are:
>water, shock, and dust-proof
>charge battery in body
>better than potato IQ
The lolympus TG-4 seems to be the standard choice and RAW files would be nice but it's currently beyond my shoestring budget.

Currently considering the Ricoh WG-4 for £100, which I've heard uses the same lens and sensor as the lolympus, should I get at least comparable IQ? Has anyone used one that has some opinions or suggestions for a similarly priced system?
Cheers

I want a portrait lens and a lens for landscapes. can you guys give me a recommendation for the K-50?

>>2846934

You don't need a meme camera. Just a good one that you will take care of like a normal person.

>>2846938
DA 50/1.8 and DA 35/2.4, the latter is good for panorama stitching.
Should be costing around $150-200 in total.

>>2846934

>I want all these things but can't afford them so I bought a Ricoh.

does it matter where I buy them from?

thanks for the recs

>>2846944
meant for >>2846940

>>2846946
try ebay, or your local shop

Is there any reason to get a Leica M3 over an M5?

>>2846951
A E S T H E T I C S

File: 83617612addc794dfdb6790bb8537a73.jpg (122 KB, 736x736) Image search: [Google]

122 KB, 736x736

>>2846953
Oh and shitposting aside, the M5 is larger and heavier than the M3.

>>2846939
What in the hell makes it meme tier? I might not always have the option to take care of it like I normally could. Especially if I'm on a motorbike in a monsoon rain in Vietnam, and I can't justify the cost of the likes of a pentax.

>>2846942
It does all those things, IQ being the only issue, I don't expect even good point and shit level but significantly better than my phone. Back illuminated CMOS, F/2 and decent looking spherical lens assembly.

>>2846957
Thanks, appreciate the input

>>2846958
Why on earth would you use a camera when riding a motorcycle? That shit is dangerous, man.

>>2846958

>what is Ziploc bag

I've done wildlife photography (innawoods for up to 3 weeks at a time) for 15 years, with nothing but SLRs and DSLRs, half of which weren't weather sealed at all.

-25C, snow, rain, +30 with 100% humidity... yep, been there many times. Just care for your equipment.

>what in the hell makes it meme tier

Everything... look at it. You should cringe well before noticing the "adventure proof". You are purchasing a meme. Instead, just purchase a good sensible compact camera and don't treat it like shit.

>>2846967
Not whilst riding, but I'd still prefer if it's durability was not dependent on the packaging it is in.

>>2846972
I have a micro four turd for everything else, but it has downfalls too when wanting to travel as light as possible. I don't give a shit whether I look "pro photog check out muh gear" or "hurr adventure proof", I just want semi decent pictures for the memory. I intend to do some SCUBA diving and this theoretically should do the job for shallow dives, can't see any DSLR doing that without shelling out a fortune for purpose built cases, adding again to the weight and volume to carry. And who the hell would want to steal it, another plus in my case.

Regardless of these dumbass comments about how it looks or that I should carry a DSLR, which I don't have nor can afford I would like to hear from someone who actually has one or something similar.

>>2846992

Who told you to carry a DSLR? That is a stupid idea.

>>2846996
Sorry, not sure where I got the DSLR thing, browsing through a few tabs at the minute and laughing at some DSLR vs SLR vs Rangefinder argument.

>>2846849
An entry level camera usually has like 80000 shots in its useful life, I really don't think they have used that much just lying there in the store, and the K-S1 is much more than 229 usually. Besides, if its broken or something you still have the guaranty, so...

>>2847003

Haha, who is winning? Wait, let me guess:

Nobody.

>>2846934

Sex Tourism is illegal.

are bridges ever a good idea? or should i just save up for a real DSLR?
i played around with a nikon coolpix p530 today, alongside a fuji finepix s1, and the nikon felt cheap and plasticky, and had an objectively worse lower quality viewfinder, whereas the fuji handled nicely and felt more complete
i still think ill be cucking myself with limitations of a bridge
i shoot mostly animals, buildings, streets, some macro stuff and nature, i like doing post with LR
has anyone on /p/ actually enjoyed a bridge purchase and used it with good results?

>>2847172
A point and shoot is super compact, bought at the expense of image quality.

A DSLR (or equivalent) is great image quality and control, bought at the expense of size and convenience.

A bridge camera is the worst of both. The image quality of a point and shoot with the inconvenience and size of a DSLR, with the advantages of neither.

>>2847173
are there any cheap decent DSLRs within the 500 range that you would recommend?

>>2847178
A D3300 can be had for that. Also a used K-5. A used a6000.

Lots of pretty okay options, really.

>>2847180
Also Canon SL1.

So I'm taking a photography class come the fall, and I need a standard 35 mm SLR camera. As in, film shit.

>inb4 faggotry
>inb4 every film meme ever

All I want is some helpful input. Commence the attack after some useful info, if you can control yourselves that long.

Currently I've got a Nikon D3000 and a couple of half-decent lenses... As of now, I'm looking into keeping with the system and finding something I can keep for the duration of the class and beyond. That means Nikon.

>inb4 Nikon is dying

I've been looking at a few options, and I'd like to hear what /p/ thinks. My budget for just a body is preferably about $200.

>F100
>F5
>F4
>N55/F55

As a final question... Is it worth it for me to try to stick with my system?

>>2847173
>A bridge camera is the worst of both. The image quality of a point and shoot with the inconvenience and size of a DSLR, with the advantages of neither.

So like the exact opoosite of a MICL?

>>2847216

That long ass post and at the end of it nobody can even tell what you were trying to say.

>>2847216
X-370

>>2847216
this really depends on the lenses you already have. If they're APS-C (like the 18-55 that's likely one of them), they're no use on film, they don't cover the full frame. If they're G lenses (that is, no aperture ring) there's only a very few film bodies that can use them. If you have some nice pre-G glass its worth getting a Nikon body, but you probably don't have that since a D3300 can't autofocus screwdrive lenses.

If I were you I'd just go get an ME Super and a 50/1.7 for like $60. Cheaper version of the ISO Standard Photo Class Camera, the K1000.

>>2847232
Thanks...

I would have gone off and wasted my monies.

File: 24-105-AY1C9725_USE.jpg (1 MB, 4896x3264) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 4896x3264

>>2845210
>>2845210
I have a 24-105 f4 & 50 1.8 for my 5dmk3.

my 24-105 sometimes has issues. im thinking of selling it to pay for a24-70 2.8 ii --- any thoughts??? I shoot a lot of models for their agencies and some weddings

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1D Mark IV
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2012:12:02 11:03:34
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/4.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	51.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	4896
Image Height	3264
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2847254
Sure.

>>2847216
Do you want to:
>use G series lenses
F100
>carry a boat anchor
F4E, F5
>use AF lenses
F5, F100, F90X, F4
>best AF and MF capability
F4
>manual focus
FE2, F3, FM2
>mirror lock up
single digit F

>save money
any dead system body. Minolta, Canon, Olympus

File: 1463487849111.png (177 KB, 367x321) Image search: [Google]

177 KB, 367x321

>digital will never be able to approach the sheer untouchable godly IQ of LF or even MF film

>>2847268
K

File: 1461430965437.jpg (243 KB, 812x810) Image search: [Google]

243 KB, 812x810

>>2847267
>nikon literally going out of business
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/grim-nikon-financials.html

>nikon completely cucked of sony sensors, the only thing keeping them alive at all
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/bad-news-sony-forecasts-significant-decrease-of-digital-camera-sales-due-the-earthquake-damage-ar-komamoto/
>>2846613

it's over for nikucks

>>2847268
pls, Phase One

>>2847284
>50k gimmick
>still way worse than LF

face it, most """epic""" as fuck photos like ansel are only good because they used supernormal stimuli film like LF with abnormally high IQ/resolution

>>2847288
stfu noob

>>2847291
mad because he can't refute it

LF/MF is a meme format because it makes images artificially good

literally give any decent or better 35mm/FF user a MF/LF camera and their pictures instantly become 10x better after only incredibly minor adjusements

it is an artifical barrier to "epicness" that people circlejerk about in landscape and such

File: 1461444232126.jpg (43 KB, 339x339) Image search: [Google]

43 KB, 339x339

aiasdgfasdfAS
DF
OF FUCKING COURSE

ALLL THOSE FUCKING FILMFAGS

THEY'RE NOT CIRLCEJERKING OVER FILM ITSLEF

THEY'RE CIRCLEJERKING OVER LARGE SIZED (MF/LF) FILM

THEY FUCKING ARE LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH ABOUT 'MUH FILM' WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY ABOUT "MY _____MEDIUM / LARGE_____ FORMAT FILM"

IT'S SO OBVIOUS NOW

why did i _EVER_ /p/haggots the benefit of the doubt

File: CSC_0015.jpg (3 MB, 6000x4000) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 6000x4000

>>2847292
Can a MF/LF camera match the quality of these bud pictures? I think not.

420 blaze it faggot

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>2846013
get the fooji.
women will love it for the design.
they don't care about image quality or all that spec sheet.
also look into the fuji xe2, olympus pen f and em10ii.

>>2846104
older samsung?
they're shit.

>>2846107
$75
i guess why not.
also look for older sony nex.

do not buy anything with a sensor smaller than 1"

File: camera1.jpg (149 KB, 750x1000) Image search: [Google]

149 KB, 750x1000

What is going on with this camera? It's a Speed Graphic, but somebody ripped out the bellows and put on this lens with no focus marks and a ridiculous focus throw. I have no idea what mount it is.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2448
Image Height	3264
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	2016:05:25 01:41:32
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	750
Image Height	1000

File: camera2.jpg (155 KB, 750x1000) Image search: [Google]

155 KB, 750x1000

>>2847375
Lens + focusing screen that slides in where the 120 back is. Every example I can find of the lens is in a different mount

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2448
Image Height	3264
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	2016:05:25 01:42:16
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	750
Image Height	1000

File: camera3.jpg (147 KB, 1000x750) Image search: [Google]

147 KB, 1000x750

>>2847375
>>2847378
The mount.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
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	2016:05:25 01:47:17
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	750

>>2846592
>If the former then it is more likely you have problems with the AF motor in your camera.

It's a screwdrive focus. I was suppose to sell this lens for cheap and found out it has back focusing issues. Maybe my camera is fucked but then again I already sold it.

File: studio8.jpg (290 KB, 1570x1000) Image search: [Google]

290 KB, 1570x1000

I'm looking to buy some studio lighting, looking to buy 3-5 C-stands and a couple of einstein e640s. Need advice on what type of equipment to invest in.

I want three strobes, appropriate stands, sandbags, but don't know much about modifiers. I've fucked with 2 speedlights and some shitty stands/diffusers but want to get good shit, and dive right in so I need some gear setup recommendations.

My budget is 3,500. what do I get /p/?

just got an a6000 from a door prize at this college art sale. what are the best lens for this? i shoot a lot different stuff. should i just sell it and buy more glass for my shitty d5200?

>>2847410
>implying the D5200 isn't a capable camera
The joke is that there are no lenses to buy for E-mount because
>sony
>good lens ecosystem for APS-C E-mount
There's the 35 OSS, one and only mediocre telephoto option, two mediocre pancakes, and a pile of superzooms that'd make a Nikon exec blush.

>>2847410

Stay away from the kit zooms (though the new one is okay on a modern body, mainly because its small and modern NEX bodies have a good lens profile for it) and the 16mm pancake and you will be fine.

>>2847408
The end result dictates your equipment requirement. Can't tell you buy xyz without knowing what you're trying to create.

The main benefit of strobes is being able to overpower bright constant light (the sun). In a studio setting they're nice because being mains powered you don't have to worry about batteries, but the power output is overkill indoors.

If you already have speedlights and they're not adequate then either you're dealing with lack of power or recycle time. If neither of those are the case then you'll have to explain the issue you're having.

To be clear, there's nothing stopping you from using speedlights in large modifiers provided the power output is sufficient for the application.

Modifiers aren't very complicated, but there are a lot of options.

TL;DR modifiers

Big light source relative to your subject - soft shadows - light will wrap around your subject

Small light source relative to your subject - hard shadows

Umbrella vs softbox - window light on a stand - umbrellas typically spill light everywhere, softboxes are more directional and easier to feather light where you want it

Grids, snoots, barn doors - used to direct light into more of a focused beam, allowing control of exactly where the light falls

Go read about the inverse square law and how it applies to light

http://strobist.blogspot.com.au

>>2847421
How's the Sigma 19mm f2.8 Art?

>>2847440
im wondering this as well

>>2847445
>>2847440
you're the same person, fuck off, this boards slow

>>2847440

Haven't used personally, but I hear good things about the Sigmas. They are pretty darn cheap too.

They are all APS-C only though.

>>2847446
Nuh uh.

>>2847447
Thanks, on a relatively low budget, pretty much around 200-300 for a lens after I buy an A6000, so I don't know that future FF capability rates very highly on my list right now.

>>2847380
>screw mount
That is fucking strange mate, I think the lens is an olympia sonnar but I cant find anything about screw mount versions either

>>2847463
That probably is the screw for a helicoid without the mount.
Lots of cheap lenses with no helicoids on ebay.
But I'm just guessing.

>>2847380
Isn't that an adaptall or T-mount with half the mount still in the body?

>>2846934
Get the Nikon AW130, the Ricoh interface, zoom, and operations are sloooooooow and the Nikon's got a much better depth rating, longer lens, and optical IS. I was seriously considering the WG-5 myself until I tried one. Not only is it glacial but there's nowhere to put your thumb on the back so it's awkward to hold, and it comes with a janky carabiner clip thing on a wide ribbon instead of a normal wristband or attachment point.

Also the WG-4 and WG-5 are pretty much identical to the old WG-3 and the dated menus really show.

File: aDeRnUnxzhqXlP9tLPiNhDs5hjyEfwK1qEzxxRjRYk2ap7skIF6BXwUrOCaYRLtoMtRNWBXH=s918.jpg (113 KB, 918x918) Image search: [Google]

113 KB, 918x918

>>2847380
>>2847483
>>2847463
>>2847475
The lens came from an Agiflite aerial camera so it was originally fixed-focus, but I am still unsure about what's going on with the mount. The mechanism seems similar to a helicoid acting as the focus. I wonder what the original owner's motivation was. Pic related.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:

>>2845226
>>2845308

Just bought my first DSLR camera, Pentax K-50+18-55mm kit lens. ($320)

Now I want to buy a nice bokeh lens for city shots, problem is I don't really want to pay >$100. There's a lot of good cheap ones in the 50mm range, but I think that might be too large for my usage.

Are there any ~35mm lenses <$120(no problem buying used) that can compete with the quality of Pentax-M 50mm F1.4 / Takumar 50mm F1.4 / Helios 44-2 58mm F/2?

>>2847651
Fixed focus lenses (usually) use a T-mount or Telescope mount that may or may not have built-in focusing.

>>2847670
DA 35/2.4, Shops practically throw them at you, with such low price they are extremely good value.

>>2847685
>>2847670
I bought mine for $80 used, doesn't cost much more new.
Also look here for other suggestions on what you want to sell your car, house, spouse, kidney etc...
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

For later upgrading your kit lens I suggest go for a used DA* 16-50 or a DA 16-85

>>2847408
What kind of photography do you want to use studio strobes for, and under what conditions will you be shooting it? (i.e. permanent studio, travel between set-up studios, actually out in the field, etc.)

>>2847753
Just guessing... studio photography? Portraits and still life art?
Basically if you build a studio you will need studio lights and strobes, that tiny flippy-uppy flash just don't cut it.

>>2847764
Of course, but which strobes, modifiers, and stands he gets depends heavily on how he's using them. If he's in a permanent studio, he can use C-Stands, big octas, and stuff like that, but will want smaller modifiers and folding stands if he's doing location fashion shoots, for example.

>>2847440
It's a really good lens. The only downside I have found is that the autofocus system makes a clicking noise when autofocusing in video.

>>2847802
Why on earth would you use AF in video? Are you too retarded to turn the focus ring by hand?

Thinking of buying a Panasonic G7 and getting the Metabones speed booster to use my 16-35MM 2.8 L lens
Hows the video quality at 1080p, i'm a bit scared of the 28mbps

>>2847829
Because some of us would rather be enjoying moments with friends while recording rather than pretending that we are professional cinematographers and hiding behind a fucking NEX/a6000 screen to manual focus. And because contrast AF-oriented mirrorless cameras are actually pretty good at AF in video.

>>2847829
>>2847896
Not to mention that pulling focus well is hard enough that people actually get paid to do it as their full-time job.

Also, sometimes AF is simply the better and/or more practical solution. It's much easier than manual focus when shooting handheld, especially if the camera is on a stabilizer, and it's better at tracking fast-moving action than just about any focus puller out there. It's also nice to have if you're shooting solo and want to set up a tripod and film yourself, especially for stuff like review or instructional videos where you need to be in front of the camera and move around a lot.

Since I fucked up and someone corrected me, heres where this should go.

/toy/ here. Been looking for a decent, cheap-shit lightbox to try and better photograph my shitty little weaboo figures.

Anyone know something cheap and decent on Amazon or something similar? Figure you guys would know more about this than /toy/.

>>2847922
Pretty much anything that is semi-opaque that you put between your light source and your subject will work. People make them out of cardboard boxes and cut up white t-shirt material and they work perfectly. Truly they're hard to mess up. Look into one that fits your size needs, and budget, and you'll be okay.

>>2847922
I personally use one of these http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/80300066/#/50300039 , and a couple of desk lamps that I have around the house.

>>2847892
If you wanted 1080p then why not just get the G6 instead of the G7? The G7 can do 4k, use the thing to its full fucking potential

>>2845210
I upgraded from a D3200 to a D610 yesterday. Have I made a bad decision?

>>2847996
I want to know if the 1080p is good to do cinematic slowed shots.
I am not dumb xD. If I buy a 4k camera I will downscale the shit out of it !

>>2848014
If you had to ask, then yes.

>>2847550
Thanks man, you're the guy from the underwater can thread right?
I would like the aw130 but its at least another £70 to buy and I'm not sure I can justify too much money for a camera which might not see too much use. IQ vs price is my biggest concern, do you know if there is there a big difference in the Nikon and ricoh?

>>2847008
Why people who doesn't know shit keep answering newbies here? Is this /b/ and you enjoy lying to people?

>>2848032
Yup, that's me. I'd say the image quality is similar with a few exceptions. The Ricoh has more chromatic aberration problems and it definitely loses out for IQ underwater. I'd venture that the Nikon is smoother and has nicer colors and the Ricoh is a little grainier. I'd recommend checking flickr for sample photos. There's not a lot for the WG-5 but plenty of samples from the WG-3 and WG-4 which are optically identical. As far as I can tell the newer versions only add improved WB and minor features.

>>2848038
Cheers, at the minute I might just cheap out and go for the WG-4, a lot of complaints on amazon about water resistance issues on the Nikon but I'll see how funds go first, then I might get the AW130. Really wish it shot RAW though.

>>2848034
Do people think that standing in the corner and pointing at someone and saying "wrong" does anything? refute the statement with evidence, or shut the fuck up.

File: IMGP8524.jpg (177 KB, 862x1000) Image search: [Google]

177 KB, 862x1000

stupid question time

is it true that you can tell something about how much CA a lens will suffer from by how far the IR focus mark is from the regular one? Or is that just an old wives' tale I heard somewhere on the internet?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-50
Camera Software	K-50 Ver. 1.02
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:25 19:22:07
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	862
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

New to photography my budget is 800- 1500 i would like to do portrait photography mostly what would you guys recommend?

>>2847288
Bullshit.

Ansel's pictures are so good because the guy was a darkroom god. Straight prints of a lot of his photos look bland as fuck, but he was capable of looking at a scene that most photogs would ignore and recognizing something that would be spectacular after hours of printing work.

>>2847293
Dunno about other filmfags on /p/, but I've always been totally open about this. I only shoot film for MF/LF, and if I could afford a digital back for my Hassy I'd be using that instead of film.

File: 1461503578790.png (192 KB, 283x352) Image search: [Google]

192 KB, 283x352

>>2848103
>ansel adams was the first photoshop expert

File: Z.jpg (4 KB, 200x150) Image search: [Google]

4 KB, 200x150

I've been shooting film for a long time and I want to get my first digital. After reviewing quite a few options I think the Nikon D5500 is the best bang for the buck in my price range. I have two questions for /p/
1 Lens recommendations?
2 Warnings about the 5500?

>>2848121
>>2 Warnings about the 5500?
It won't autofocus screwdrive lenses, and I believe that it won't meter with manual-focus lenses.

if you want a crop-sensor Nikon you should be looking at a D7x00 instead, most especially so if you have any lenses from the film era that you're planning on using.

>>2848121
The D5500 won't AF with film-era AF Nikkors, and won't even meter with manual lenses. I'd consider a D7x00 if either of those is an issue for you.

Other than that, it's a solid camera. Nikon's kit lenses are decent so you might as well get the kit, and after that the 35mm 1.8G is great. I haven't owned a DX body for a while (switched to FX in 2011), and most of the glass I had back then is probably outside your budget, so other anons will have to tell you where to go from there.

>>2848132
What exactly is a D7x00?

As for old film lenses, all of mine are for pentax so I don't believe I'll be using them with a dslr.

>>2848147
D7000, D7100, D7200, etc.

>>2848150
>if you want a crop-sensor Nikon you should be looking at a D7x00 instead, most especially so if you have any lenses from the film era that you're planning on using.
The 7200 which is the one I was considering in that line is a full $500 more expensive. I assume that with some research I can find a lens that AF with the D5500 and then I have an extra 500 to spend on it. Thoughts?

>>2848143
When you say it won't meter with a manual lens, does that mean it only meters with autofocus lenses in autofocus mode or will it meter with autofocus lenses being manually focused?

>>2848154
It'll meter fine with any lens that has electronics in it, to AF lenses in MF mode are fine, and technically there are a few "chipped" MF lenses out there that will work as well. (Some of the Rokinons, for example.)

But yeah, if you don't care about using old lenses on the camera, the D5500 is pretty much fine. Most lenses you'd want to use on it will work fine, and there's definitely an argument for a cheaper body and more expensive glass.

What kind of stuff do you want to shoot with it?

File: Scan 8.jpg (216 KB, 1000x784) Image search: [Google]

216 KB, 1000x784

>>2848170
First of all thank you for all the help I'm DSLR illiterate.

I shoot primarily landscapes and architecture, I am currently moving into portraiture. What affect does this have on camera choice?

I added an image of the kind of portrait I want to take with this camera. It's an image I shot on film about a month ago.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1000
Image Height	784
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:25 23:01:51
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	784

>>2848174
It affects lenses more than bodies, although if you're getting into portraiture it may be worth noting that the D7x00's pop up flash can control a remote speedlight and the D5500's cant.

If you get the D5500, what would your total budget for lenses be?

>>2848178
Max at $550, keep in mind that I am very much a bang-for-the-buck kind of photographer I consider the artistic side of photography the more important half (than gear), And aim to spend my time (and money) accordingly.

That said I would prefer to get away under $350 but I can swing $200 more if it is a significant quality jump.

>>2848147
You can. Pentax DSLRs work just fine with pretty much anything K-mount back to the mid-70s. A $10 adapter lets you use screw-mount M42 lenses back to the late 50s. You get focus confirmation and metering with all of them - though for some variants you have to press a button to stop the lens down.

>>2848187
>DSLRs work just fine with pretty much anything K-mount back to the mid-70s. A $10 adapter lets you use screw-mount M42 lenses back to the late 50s. You get focus confirmation and metering with all of them - though for some variants you have to press
I will definitely be looking through all the pentax dslr options tomorrow.

>>2848180
Buy the D5500, it's the best bang for your bucks and perfectly fits all your needs and there's plenty of quality glass for you in the $300 range.

>>2848197
Same for a Pentax K-50, K-S2 and K-3 with the added option of using old lenses.

Hey guys, did anyone here use a a first a7 with a Canon 85mm 1.8 with a commlite adapter? Could someone describe how the autofocus works in good lighting conditions and in bad lighting conditions.

File: DSC_0069.jpg (1 MB, 3008x2000) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 3008x2000

Im having problems with a nikon d100 i have just been given to me. i know its an old out of date camera blah blah but the person who gave it to me only used it a couple of times and left it sitting there until now, it was purchased brand new. the problem I'm having is every photo i try and take with it is coming out like pic related and neither myself or my photography teacher can figure out why.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D100
Camera Software	Ver.2.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	888
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2002:01:01 00:33:50
Exposure Time	1/10 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3008
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
ISO Speed Used	200
Image Quality	NORMAL
White Balance	AUTO
Image Sharpening	AUTO
Focus Mode	MANUAL
Flash Setting	NORMAL
Flash Compensation	0.0 EV
ISO Speed Requested	200
Tone Compensation	AUTO
Lens Type	Nikon D Series
Lens Range	35.0 mm; f/1.8
Auto Focus	Center
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Timer/Off
Color Mode	MODE3
Lighting Type	NATURAL
Noise Reduction	OFF

File: DSC_0064.jpg (3 MB, 3008x2000) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 3008x2000

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D100
Camera Software	Ver.2.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	888
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2002:01:01 00:22:27
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3008
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
ISO Speed Used	200
Image Quality	FINE
White Balance	AUTO
Image Sharpening	AUTO
Focus Mode	MANUAL
Flash Setting	NORMAL
Flash Compensation	0.0 EV
ISO Speed Requested	200
Tone Compensation	AUTO
Lens Type	Nikon D Series
Lens Range	35.0 mm; f/1.8
Auto Focus	Center
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Single Frame/Off
Color Mode	MODE3
Lighting Type	NATURAL
Noise Reduction	OFF

>>2848262
Sensor has cancer. Sorry bud.

please elaborate more