Gear Thread
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
Gear Thread
Doing exams on the weekend edition.
If you have questions about a new camera, what lenses to buy and anything related to gear or wondering about getting into photography, post it in this thread.
Do not attempt to make a new thread for your new Rabal, broken glass and being new. You have been warned!
I repeat, ANYTHING GEAR RELATED goes in here!
And don't forget, be polite!
Previous thread: >>2713038
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software paint.net 4.0.6 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 2000 dpi Vertical Resolution 2000 dpi
I just bought an A7rii.
How much better am I now than all of you?
>>2715525
You have a camera that can take photos, just like everyone else on this board.
>>2715526
No I don't think you understand. I'm DEFINITELY better than you now, I just want to know how much.
>>2715528
Gear does not make a good photo. Just a reminder some people made award winning photos with their iPhone. The first one.
Don't get me wrong, I know you are just trolling.
>>2715525
Congrats on the meme camera, cockdestroyer.
Not a gear related question but are we going to have a book this year?
Trying again,
Sold a lot of stuff, consolidating digital down to a new a7II. Just have 35 skopar, 50 cron-m, 50 1,2 AIS now. Need some lens recommendations. I much prefer on the small side, don't care about autofocus or weathersealing (preferably metal construction tho). Keeping the skopar (love the size), but would be nice to consolidate the 2 50's down and possibly add in something at 85mm or 135mm. Any suggestions? M, E, or F mount highly preferred (still have film bodies for the M & F).
>>2715597
That 85mm f/1.8 zeiss for e-mount that just came out is supposed to be nicer than Kate Hudsons Tits.
If you're looking for a portrait lens for your A7ii that's maybe the single best lens.
I'm going to wish for a camera this xmas. I'm a producer and my friend's a rapper and we're going to need someone to shoot our music videos. Since I have already have some experience with video editing and editing softwares I'm going to have to do it(I want to do it).
So I was just wondering if someone could give me some tips as to how to get started, or if there's some books (webpages?) that could put me in the right direction. I have zero to no experience with actual photography, but I really want to get into it, so instead of just producing, I want to be able to take photos for people and such.
Thanks.
>>2715647
I think I might be getting a Canon EOS-M camera. Will a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens?
>>2715697
Will a Canon EF 50mm f1/8 II lens work on a EOS-M?*
>>2715698
Found out I shouldn't buy a lens until I'm more used to the camera and have learned the basics and mechanics of photography, so I'm just going to buy the eos-m that comes with a 18/55mm lens attached to it.
>>2715697
... not sure why you'd go with like the worst of mirrorless camera systems.
Seriously, get a Sony or Olympus or something?
Hey /p/ee,
I just bought Pentax K50 Kit, including a 18-55 and a 50-200.
Did I do good or did I fuck it up?
Owned a 1100d so far, but I hit the limits pretty fast.
Have a nice day
>>2715720
It's a decent choice for in the low price range.
I'm sure you'll be doing okay with it.
>>2715718
As I said, I have no idea what most of these terms mean, I'm obviously going to check what mirrorless means now. And I can really only afford cameras in the 500-600 dollar price range.
>>2715718
I thought the EOS-M was a DSLR?
>>2715733
Why?
>>2715720
How much did you get yours for? I got mine last black friday at a steal and I absolutely love it
I've been using the 50mm DA 1.8 lens on it and it's great
>>2715720
The 50-200 lens can do stuff like this. If those lenses are the WR ones, you can go out shooting in a hurricane, there is no better than the complete weather sealing on the Pentax.
If you ever start running into limitations on the kit lens, your first upgrade should be the 35/2.4 and the 50/1.8. Much better IQ than the canikon equivalents.
>>2710514
>>2710516
>>2710518
>>2710519
>>2715755
It said that somewhere, idk. But is it really a such a big deal?
>>2715761
Not really if you enjoy taking photos with it.
>>2715763
I don't really need all the features and everything. I'm just starting out. Haven't even bought it yet.
I just need it for filming HD music videos(not really professional, just some good visuals) and HD pictures, and then move to a better camera when I get more comfortable with photography, you know?
Guys. What do I do? I don't have 350...
How much is this worth
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Right-Hand, Top Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2448 Image Height 2448
>>2715765
Get a 60D instead. Think of the EOS-M as the 60D liveview function only. 60D is better for stills and the same with video. Also look into Magic Lantern, gives you a hell of a lot options for video.
You won't need to replace it for a while, but with the EOS-M you will run into limitations pretty soon.
Is there anything out there that doesn't cost an arm and a leg that can protect DSLRs from hard falls, rain, snow, etc?
>>2715773
Yes, not being a clumsy bitch and buying Pentax.
>>2715771
Bro, it's like over a thousand bucks
>>2715770
Anyone? Isn't this hipster shit worth 1,000+?
>>2715771
A Nikon or a Canon?
>>2715756
bought the whole kit for 475€ on amazon.
Its white, aint bothering me. Pretty good price I guess.
>>2715777
i dont have a pentax, i have a canon t5 coming into the mail. My first DSLR.
I am not asking to like dunk it in the ocean and take pictures. Just asking if theres maybe any cheaper plastic cases out there that can make the camera survive longer in harsh conditions or a fall.
>>2715788
Then just use the first option and a plastic bag with a hole in it.
>>2715770
Bump.
What do? How much is this worth? Can I get away with selling it for like 1500 after buying? KEH doesn't even have this listed.
>>2715810
Google it
>>2715812
Neat answer twat. I've seen prices between 556-2500.
Now what fucklord mcgee
>>2715819
Can't know
A lot depends on if it works
>>2715770
Is that the DRP ELW? My friends dad owns one and he let me shoot a couple photos with it. Though the lens wasn't that particular one, his was a Summitar 50mm f/2.
Shit was somewhat cash.
Transformation is over, Phase One fully absorbed Mamiya.
Mamiya doesn't exist anymore.
>>2715771
Nevermind I found one that suited my needs. The Nikon d33000
>>2715860
im on weed so i dont feel shit.
but this is indeed sad news.
>>2715860
I shall use my Mamiya/Sekor 500TL more often from now on in honour of their Mamiyaness.
>>2715770
Steal that bitch!
Send help /p/
www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=sony_a6000&products=samsung_nx500
I was set on the a6000 until I found this
Looking for a prime lens. The choice now being between just getting the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art or getting two Canon primes (50mm 1.4 and a 85 or 35mm). First DSLR. Any recommendations?
Also debating whether I want to get the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L with IS or get the one without IS for half the price.
Any thoughts? First time full-frame DSLR owner looking to build my lens collection. Couple G's to spend.
>>2716004
if you're getting a 200 mm lens get IS. I wouldn't on a shorter lens, but on something like that I would. Can't help you on the prime lens question, I inherited an old 50mm canon lens that I use on my DSLR
>>2716004
Are you just collecting, like Pokemon? Or do you actually have photographic goals in mind?
I actually just got a a7rii on Cyber Monday to compliment my 5D3. So far I've been impressed by the resolution and how well it adapts EF lenses.
B&H was doing a deal that bundled an extra battery, a $200 gift card AND a Metabones adaptor that was worth $400.
I already expected the battery life to be abysmal but this camera's rendition of colour is a lot different than that of Canon's, which I am already accustomed to.
I might put that gift card into a M mount adaptor, but do I REALLY want the Voigtlander close focus adaptor?
>>2715998
1. go to store
2. try both in your hands
3. pick the one you like better
Seriously, it's not this fucking complicated. If you were really set and are seriously changing your mind over that link, you should never buy a camera, period. Every fucking camera from every fucking brand these days is capable of great fucking pictures. Unless you have very niche, specific needs (in which case you should just know what camera you need), just fucking pick the one you like using most.
Fucking gearfaggots are doing 100% same thing as pic related, just with cameras. Jesus fucking christ.
>>2716012
Well, I figured I'd like a prime to take portraits with a shallow DOF and also for shooting low light and at night (part of the reason I brought a full-frame).
I also like taking wildlife photos, which is why I'm going for the telephoto. I guess I'd really be better off with the IS, but twice the price of the one without.. I guess I'm just trying to justify getting the cheaper one really.
As for wide angle, I like taking some landscape photos as well, so I'd like a specialty lens that will be able to get a lot in the frame.
I figured the 85 might be nice for something like concerts or something, situation where I can't get as close as I like in a low-light environment or where I want to get really sharp focus.
>>2716004
If you want to do portraits, get the Canon 50 or 85. I had the 85 f/1.8 about ten years ago and it was a great lens. Sigma is hit and miss.
For the 70-200 f/4, IS is nice, but becoming less important now that cameras have clean performance at absurdly high ISOs. Plus we all used those lenses for years before IS was even a thing and it't wasn't a problem. If it were 25% more I'd say go for it, but at double the price I wouldn't bother.
What is your dream lens, /p/?
Pic related is mine
>>2716102
For that price you might as well just buy a Zeiss Otis...
>>2716131
Nah, besides, the Otus lenses suffer from the Sigma art-lens syndrome, meaning the are all too big for their focal length and are designed for technical sharpness over actual overall quality of the image and background blur, as well as having else pop to them. There's no reason for you to justify not getting a lens that is both faster and smaller for the same price
I want mirrorless with 150-200mm effective range. Stabilised, of course. For now i possess nikon 1 family with it's short primes, but whole idea of mounting FX lenses through adapter isn't looking fun or cheap for me. Legacy f mount isn't af, or stabilised.
What 4/3, aps-c can offer not being huge or shiny golden?
Wanting to get a good cheap macro lens. Was thinking about getting an Industar 61 L/Z. Has anyone had any experience with this or anything in a similar price range?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 40D Camera Software Digital Photo Professional Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.1.1 Owner Name Adolfo Jose Longarela Fernandez Serial Number 0930532720 Lens Name 55-55mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 200 dpi Vertical Resolution 200 dpi Image Created 2009:11:11 12:10:21 Exposure Time 1/4 sec F-Number f/1.4 ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/1.4 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 55.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 900 Image Height 600 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Spot Sharpness Unknown Saturation Unknown Contrast Unknown Digital Zoom Unknown Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode Manual Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode External Flash Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 33
>>2716181
a6000, fuji, any APS-C DSLR etc...
>>2716185
Did this with 61 L/D (M39 version) and macrotubes
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 50D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:07:10 00:04:32 Exposure Time 1/200 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 500 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
I bought this for one euro on a german flea market
is it any good for anything?
RAYDAWN VIDEO ULTRA MACRO WIDE 0,6X
MADE IN JAPAN
SER-VII 46mm JAPAN
MACRO LENS
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make QCOM-AA Camera Model QCAM-AA Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi ISO Speed Rating 0 Focal Length 4.60 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1920 Image Height 2560 Time (UTC) 12:49:00 Date (UTC) 2015:12:06
>>2715819
if you're buying it to use it, that's not a great deal. if you're buying to sell on, you might make 50$ as long as it doesn't need any work done to it.
Know, that you don't deserve my help because you're a Cunt.
>>2716186
I'm asking about mirrorless _lenses_ in range 150-200mm. Dslr is not an option.
>>2716207
why?
>>2716208
Why mirrorless only? In that focal length range the whole thing isn't smaller or lighter than a DSLR with the same setup, not to mention mirrorless has less options for lenses in that range.
Are you a gearfag?
>>2715525
Yeah, well, I have a 1dx.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n5aAYpwB5zc
>>2716228
shoo troll
I'm not sure how complex of a river I'm treading here since I'm still fresh in the clouds and looking down into photography, but if I were to get a decent or at least not-so-shit mirrorless or such that gives me the option to change lens;
What's one lens I can possibly springboard off of? Just for general shooting and learning?
I've seen a lot of people saying at least 3 lenses, but for someone who isn't ready to plunk an extra few hundred just yet, what's maybe one I can subside on for a time?
Or should I just go for some of the enthusiat point and shoots and see where that takes me? Like the Sony RX100?
Sorry if I'm using the wrong terminology.
>>2716233
The one lens other than your kit zoom lens is a fast standard focal length prime. 50mm for full frame, 35mm for APS-C and 24mm for micro 4/3 systems. It will unlock a lot of options and possibilities both technically and in compositions. From here you can try wide/ultra wides, portrait tele, long tele for wildlife/sports or you can get into macro which is a whole new world in itself.
Any Billingham owners? I am debating between the Hadley Large and Hadley Large Pro. I've seen the Hadley Large on Amazon for £154.
>>2716286
>fashion oriented accessory
go away
>>2716233
Go for a prime with equivalent focal length anywhere from 35mm to 50mm. For APS-C cameras (entry SLRs, Sony & Fuji & Samsung mirrorless) this would be 24mm to 35mm. For m43 (Panasonic, Olympus) that'd be 17mm to 25mm. For Nikon 1 series, that'd be the 10mm or 18.5mm.
I've shot almost entirely on a 35mm equiv (35mm on full frame) lens for the last 2 years. It's just a tad wider than what your eyes will typically see (~43mm). The Fuji x100's are all fixed at a 35mm too and are widely popular.
I would recommend going to any camera store, try any SLR with a kit lens and try zooming in and out. Make note at what focal length you like the framing best.
>>2716134
> are designed for technical sharpness over actual overall quality of the image and background blur
But technical sharpness *is* actual quality. What else would be? "Creatively" damaged information?
And the out of focus areas with their bokeh look really good on an Otus, too.
>>2716208
Sony 70-200mm f/4 G is one of the best zoom lenses like that.
Costs about as much as the Nikon (comparable) / Canon (worse) competition, too.
Have anybody used that thing?
Thinking about it to work with manual focus lenses.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2013:07:26 19:47:51 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 500 Image Height 500
>>2716338
It's meant for video... So you can use an "eyepiece" while camera is mounted on a shoulder rig. Really won't do anything for MF except make you look dumb.
>>2716321
There is a lot more to image quality than sharpness. Aberration and distortion correction, color and contrast rendition, etc. All of it more important than sharpness.
>>2716357
I tried:
-eyepiece magnifier
-focus confirm chip
But none of that really helped me to shoot with 85/1.4 and same fast lenses. I'm wearing glasses and focusing screen shit don't really interests me, so there is a way.
>>2716362
Did you try: A focusing screen meant for fast manual focusing?
Did you try: A mirrorless camera which makes using manual focus much much easier?
Did you try: Stop being lazy and find a pleasant background so you can stop down a bit?
Did you try: use lenses actually designed for your camera so that you can use the highly accurate autofocus system?
>>2716338
if you plan to use your dslr for video it is quite comfy, nothing more than this
>>2716213
>whole thing isn't smaller or lighter than a DSLR with the same setup
It is smaller, and quieter for my works+no flapping mirror. Because i need just a 100mm lens on body like OM-D5 to get 200mm close-up. Some 14-140 look not that even bad.
>>2716324
Uuh, if i only were familliar with E mount, and it's possibilities.
>>2716364
Jesus christ...
>Did you try: A focusing screen meant for fast manual focusing?
Did you try to use split screen for normal shooting with AF lenses? So fucking fun to change focus screen just because i want to use old lenses.
>Did you try: A mirrorless camera which makes using manual focus much much easier?
Lold, not going to buy fucking overpriced sony a7. Show me another fullframe and cheap mirrorless
>Did you try: Stop being lazy and find a pleasant background so you can stop down a bit?
Especially while shooting portraits in lowligh, f5,6 is definetly what i need!
>Did you try: use lenses actually designed for your camera so that you can use the highly accurate autofocus system?
Designed for camera...Tell it to sigma with AF problems.
>>2716376
A new focusing screen doesn't affect AF at all.
why are you shooting portraits in low light?
Sigma lenses work just fine on my camera. Which Sigma camera are you using?
If you don't know what you're talking about, you don't ALSO get to be condescending about it. Just letting you know.
>>2716362
>>2716376
Sounds like you just suck at focusing, nothing's really gonna help you.
>Tell it to sigma with AF problems.
What you should expect when you cheap out.
>overpriced sony a7
Confirmed for retard. Best bang for the buck FF camera out there (and cheapest new), solves your inability to focus 100% (and would even AF with your lens).
hey everyone, ultraultraultra cheap mirrorless? i'm getting interested in something lighter than my 60D, and i'm now seeing some shots i took with a borrowed x100s a few months ago, i liked the feel
>>2716359
As well, I still stand by that they could have made the Otus lenses smaller and still retain the same kind of quality, otherwise it seems like Zeiss is compensating for something, if you catch my drift. Though there's one lens that could be put into the Otus line that is much needed
>yfw we get an Otus 200mm f/2.0 APO
>>2716400
samefag here, nex3 are less than 100€ now, interesting for an apsc sensor in a small body, essential
>>2716401
>As well, I still stand by that they could have made the Otus lenses smaller and still retain the same kind of quality,
...
>>2715508
anyone have any info on these cameras ?
The guy selling them doesent know a thing and i might get a deal but havent a clue what cameras they are
>>2716370
You don't know much about cameras, do you?
>>2716400
EOS M first gen at cheap as hell
also can get an EF-M to EF/EF-S adapter to use your current lenses, but this will obviously make the camera bigger and heavier than just using the EF-M lenses
I have a Sony A6000 and I have a SEL20F28 and a SEL50F18 and I love them both. Do you have any recommendations for a telephoto lens on the camera, currently I own the SEL55210 and it leaves something to be desired, thanks!
>>2716458
Get an adapter (which supports AF, aperture) and a Canon 70-200 f4 L. You are going to love it.
>>2716447
Thanks for the advice but I checked it and it's not that cheap.
Also, I have an old canon 20D that currently is my second body, should I sell it for a mirrorless? I checked, it's around 150€.
Also, what about Olympus? I love their style
6D or 5D Mk II ?
both are used, and in very good shape. (less than 20k act. on either)
>>2716198
cool, had a quick look on ebay, those lenses are cheap as chips!
>>2716400
samyang.
just look that brand up.
>>2716510
6D. Hands down has the (much) better dynamic range and better features.
>>2716417
The left one is a modified 2x2 passport studio instant camera with 4 separate lenses taking 4 separate portrait-size exposures on one sheet of instant film. With photo studios going digital these surface quite often and are either a gimmick toy to use or are entirely useless. That's up to you.
The right one is either a 126 cartridge cam or a kodak disc one. Both formats are obsolete and shit. It's a mint set though I doubt you'll find anyone innerested in it.
>>2716541
thanks, would either one be worthwhile for the lenses to bodge into a digital camera ?
>>2716338
dude buy a split ring focusing screen they are like 20 quid, and not that bad to change.
I've been wanting to make the jump to medium format for a while, and someone is offering me the following:
- RB67 (this has been the camera I've been eyeing for a while) with prism
- 120 back, 220 back, 2 Polaroid backs
- 50, 90, 127, and 180mm lenses
- trigger release cable, case, other accessories
All in excellent condition, for $800 USD. Is it a good deal?
Could someone explain to me what exactly crop factor is? What considerations does it bring up when buying a lens?
I own a sony a5000 and was looking into buying a prime lens.
What's the best camera I can get for under 500 dollars?
What is a good monitor that is colour calibrated in factory and is under $250 AUD?
>>2716654
Check out this wonderful explanation of crop factor;
http://bfy. tw/39Wi
>>2716654
Since for years the industry standard has been the 135 film the concept of wide angle, standard and tele lenses is tied with it. So a lens with a focal of 50mm is considered a standard lens, a 35mm is a wide angle and a 85 is a tele BUT only when used on a 24x36 sensor which now is called full frame. When you're using different sized sensors you need different focals to achieve the same angle. For example your a5000 has an APSC sensor, significantly smaller than a full frame sensor and it has a crop factor of 1.5. This means that if you want a standard lens you don't want to use 50mm like on the full frame, but 50mm/1.5 so a 35mm. A 50mm on your camera will be the same as a 50mm*1.5 on full frame, it will be like a 75mm, a tele lens.
This is very important when searching for a new lens. Sorry for my bad English and sorry if I made some mistakes, it's 2.40AM here, I hope I explained this subject
What's a good substitute for the iPhone 6S camera?
>>2716673
I understand that part, but what I don't know is whether when the manufacturer-in this case sony, markets their lenses for their product, do they display the product with its equivalent on their cameras? So if I was to get the 35mm E-not the FE, lens will it display the normal 35mm angle?
>>2716684
Focal length is focal length, no matter the sensor size.
The lenses are always marked with the actual focal length except on some bridge or point and shoots where the equivalent is used sometimes.
>>2716692
Everything else. Get a Nikon D3300.
>>2716684
> do they display the product with its equivalent on their cameras
No. A 35mm lens will be a 35mm lens no matter what. Occasionally on product pages, brands may indicate somewhere the equivalent focal length, but no lens is ever labeled directly as the "crop equivalent".
>So if I was to get the 35mm E-not the LE, lens will it display the normal 35mm angle?
The difference between full frame and crop / APSC lenses is that the crop lenses will only cover the smaller sensor and so if you put them on a FF camera, you'll likely get large amounts of vignetting. But in terms of the lens' field of view, both 35mm's will be the same.
>>2716698
Can't the iPhone 6S shoot in 4k though?
>>2716706
It can, but it's probably shooting it at a max of 24mb/s Which is equivalent to only 6mb/s in 1080p mode. if you want 4k, go with a Panasonic G7 or LX100
>>2716711
Which is better? I like the look of the LX100.
>>2716713
The G7, it's got a dedicated mic jack and an articulating screen
>>2716739
Shit, an articulating screen is nice.
I'm not looking to shoot video though.
Should I get a used Pentax k5 or a new Ks-2? I like doing long exposures, some architecture, landscapes ect.
Canon Powershot N or Panasonic Lumix ZS45?
>>2716718
>buying a prime lens much harder
Not really. Crop factor mostly affects standard and portrait focal lengths (50mm, 85-135mm) where view angle has to be precise due to perspective distortion. To get the standard angle on APS-C you need 35mm, on m4/3 24mm. It's just a simple calculation with the crop factor, [lens focal length]*[crop factor]=[equivalent focal length], with crop factor being 1.5 for APS-C and 2 for m4/3. Depending on your subject you choose the equivalent focal length then divide by the crop factor and you have the actual focal length, you can buy from that range.
Anything longer or wider don't really needs to be converted so precisely, so if your standard is 35mm then getting below you are going wide, going below 18-20mm you are going super-wide.
The telephoto range benefits from the crop factor, giving you longer equivalent focal lengths.
So now you see if you shoot normal or wide (28-35 equivalent) you shouldn't have any problem with crop sensors, but going wider you might want to consider moving to FF.
Most sports and wildlife photographers use crop (Canon 7D line for example) to take advantage of the crop factor so using a much lighter 400mm lens will give them the 600mm equivalent reach.
inb4 "pros only use FF", this is strictly from the hobby/enthusiast viewpoint.
>>2716747
K-5/5II/5IIs is the high-end body with more rugged build, but the K-S2 has the same amount of weather sealing.
I have a K-3 and for most of my shootings I'd rather got a K-5II for the better dynamic range of the sensor. Not that the K-3 is bad, it is most definitely not, but base ISO 80 comes really handy when doing long exposures.
What you should consider is the K-S2 is the beginner body with features tailored towards amateurs who mostly use Auto and scene modes.
If you want to go further or already don't care about beginner features you will be much better with the K-5 or K-5II if your budget allows.
>>2716846
>Crop factor mostly affects standard and portrait focal lengths (50mm, 85-135mm)
And distortion gets *lower* at longer focal length. You'd shoot portraits or technical images or whatever at long focal lengths because you don't want perspective distortion.
But distortion is much *worse* at shorter focal lengths. It is more accurate to say that it "mostly affects" short focal lengths (say, 1mm to 10mm, or 10 to 50, or whatever).
> where view angle has to be precise due to perspective distortion.
No. Crop factor and distortion aren't related.
Only focal length and distortion are related, at least on typical lenses.
> Most sports and wildlife photographers use crop (Canon 7D line for example) to take advantage of the crop factor so using a much lighter 400mm lens will give them the 600mm equivalent reach.
Because APS-C sensors are cheaper as an option for a high resolution sensor area that records the center of a lens' projection, yes.
If they however had an inexpensive FF camera with the same resolution per area (=~twice the overall resolution) to choose from, they could just crop as needed (and in this case, not necessarily *only* center crop like APS-C forces) while also better record some animals closer nearby at larger resolution. It'd be the preferable option.
>>2716858
I knew it would take little time for the resident gearfags to chime in. Have a lesson or two in English language and read again.
I formulated (?) vaguely because it is easier for a beginner to comprehend what is crop factor about and what it affects. When he gets more into it he will come to his own conclusions.
>>2716806
Sony RX100 III or IV
Can someone name a couple budget full frame DSLR? Canon/Nikon either or even Pentax etc.
Are there any small and more importantly thin camera bags? I've been looking for a while now for a bag to fit a mirrorless camera and a lens but everything I've seen so far is pretty bulky. I just want a small-ish slim bag that can be worn under a jacket.
Lowepro and thinktank have a couple of small bags that look nice but have non-removable padding which makes them bulky for taking pretty much everywhere
A few of the medium sized bags are an okay size once you take the inserts out but have silly or fiddly locking mechanisms (clips and clasps).
Am I going to be relegated to looking everywhere for a small non-camera messenger bag and looking round charity shops?
What small bags do you have /p/?
>>2716893
Digital FF is never budget, lenses always cost more and older sensors are worse than new crop sensors.
If you want budget FF, look into film cameras. In fact, don't stop there, try a 6x7 Medium Format, scanning negatives is much easier.
>>2715508
would anyone recommend a Fed 4 rangefinder ?
I might get a deal on a camera and take a few film photos then buy and adapter for the lens.
anyone have any experience or tips and tricks ?
>>2716904
Sure. They're not too bad as long as you have one that works. The max shutter speed may be a bit slow depending on what film you're using and the conditions you're shooting in but can easily be solved by using an ND filter.
>>2716906
i never used a rangefinder are they easy enough to focus with ?
>>2716907
Fairly easy to use. I mostly use zone focusing every day unless it's a portrait. Occasionally I get flare which can make focusing a bit harder but this can be solved by just moving my eye.
>>2716902
Hmm what's the cheaper range of Nikon DSLR (in USD or NZD)? Lenses aren't too costly, D lenses are good quality and cost less. And now that you mention film, are there more "portable" versions of medium format cameras?
I currently have sony alpha 330
it's very shitty
I want to change my camera after 6 years of use and wonder what would be a better buy, some nikon or pentax? are pentax equally ok? because they are a lot cheaper and I have read here they are ok even with higher iso settings
or maybe there is some sony as good as those? since I already have some sony lenses
>>2716914
>are there more "portable" versions of medium format cameras?
Mamiya 6 and 7 and other folding MF rangefinders.
Cheaper but still good Nikon FF is the D750, look it up on ebay.
>>2716915
Pentax K-3 is great, if you can find a K-5II/5IIs for good price it is also a good choice. I get consistent images at ISO 6400 with easy to remove even texture noise.
For lenses look at http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/ and http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/
Also O-GPS1
For Nikon D7100 and D7200 are also good but offer less for higher price.
>>2716918
thank you anon!!!
>>2716918
I looked up Mamiya 6 and 7, they're going for around $1200, then I also searched through and found D610. Opinions on the D610? It's almost the same price.
>>2716918
BUT on the other hand the D7xxx cameras give you far more options when buying second-hand lenses
>>2716922
It is the D3300 of the FF line. Designed for an entry level use, not really tailored for experienced users. Around its price you can find used D750 which is still a great body today.
>>2716925
Pentax has the same options for second hand glass. And older glass. And M42 glass. Also better focus assist for manual focus glass.
Better built body with steel chassis in monocoque magnesium alloy frame, built like a tank. Not to mention it can withstand torrential rain with WR lenses. Speaking from experience.
Same sensor as Nikon though.
>>2716915
> or maybe there is some sony as good as those? since I already have some sony lenses
Yes. Sony did quite awesome with their cameras recently.
The A6000, A7 II, A7R II, A7S [II] are some of the very best cameras you can get.
Let's note at this point that they migrated from the A-mount to E-mount, though. And that the native glass on the E-mount is mostly high-end, which isn't cheap... Basically, it's not expensive *for* high-end glass, but expensive *as* high-end glass. I very much like shooting those primes, though.
>>2715508
1200d with a crappy 18-55mm kit lens, Tamron 70-300mm and a canon 50mm 1.8 ii.
Eventually i might upgrade to a 760d in the next year.
>>2716914
The cheaper range is D7x00. 'cause you need the AF motor if you want to use "D" glass, right?
The D3x00 and D5x00 didn't have it, if I remember correctly, they can only use "G" glass.
What's the best point and shoot camera for £200-£300?
>>2716973
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=the+best+point+and+shoot+camera+for+%C2%A3200-%C2%A3300%3F
>>2716975
What's the point in this thread if you can just google every question?
>>2716976
There are many questions that can not be googled.
"Hey guys, I'm looking to shoot portraits, and I know that the standard advice is to have a lens between 85mm and 135mm, but I'm not really sure why that is. Also, I'm not so interested in fine detail so much as I am a unique rendering. Could someone please explain a good way for me to get photos that resemble older more unique lenses on my current camera?"
or "All I'm seeing is marketing, telling me that I really need to get a Rebel T11i, but when I look at the specifications, it really doesn't seem much better than even the older T3i. I've done a lot of research, and I'm ready to just buy the T3i, but I wanted to check here first in case there's something I'm missing"
Asking "what camera should I buy" is the equivalent of turning on your phone, going directly past your calculator app to your messages, and texting your friend Dave "What's 11*17?"
You could literally have googled it, gotten a ton of pre-loaded answers.
>>2716977
But now I'll get 50 different sources with 50 different cameras that are good.
>>2716978
Will you?
>>2716979
Yes
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundup/camera-roundups/best-digital-camera-under-300-2650
http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/digital-cameras/1403360/best-camera-2015-compact-csc-slr-picks-and-buying-guide
http://www.cameras.co.uk/details/digital-cameras-under-300.cfm
>>2716980
So what's the problem then? Look, you have "50" great cameras to choose from. Now look at them, and pick the one that best suits your needs, and you've not bothered anyone. Ta-Da, welcome to self sufficient adulthood.
>>2716982
But I'm lazy and don't want to get a camera and then be told I made a massive mistake or w/e.
How's the Canon PowerShot S110, that seems to have good reviews.
>>2716983
> But I'm lazy and don't want to get a camera and then be told I made a massive mistake or w/e.
Good luck with that if you buy a cheap fixed lens camera.
>>2716987
Maybe I won't come here then :^) I'm not spending a grand on a DSLR.
>>2716983
>But I'm lazy
Yes, I know. That doesn't mean we're obligated to cater to you.
> don't want to get a camera and then be told I made a massive mistake or w/e.
If it were a mistake to buy a camera, why would it be reviewed well?
>>2716989
Fair point.
Just bought one of these now anyway don't need the Canon.
>>2716988
> I'm not spending a grand on a DSLR.
$1.5k plus again about as much on a lens would be better anyways, if you have a western middle class job and photography is your hobby.
But actually, useful DSLR kits -like, a Nikon D3200/D3300 or Pentax K-50- with their kit lens start at around $350-400.
>>2716993
Seems like a huge moneysink. I know all hobbies are but photography seems more so than others. You could buy a decent bicycle, or a great guitar for the price of a lens etc.
>>2716997
It got really cheap, actually. Film photography was quite a bit more expensive to most.
Also, nothing stops you from getting the other stuff ~3-6 months later (pretty normal salary, could be quicker), but the camera will produce great pictures in your limited free time for the next 4+ years, and the lens might easily be useful for 10-20 years.
Arguably, if you prefer a guitar and don't really care about photos, get whatever camera.
>>2717001
Ngl don't really care about photography as a hobby, would just like a camera to take some nice pictures, but more for the content rather being an artistic thing if you know what I mean.
Then again I may get into it you never know.
>>2717004
Use your cell phone.
>>2717004
Hrm. I guess a cheap P&S it is, then, though you should consider if you wouldn't rather upgrade your smartphone.
Most casual photographers shoot with smartphones 'cause they're nearly as good and unlike with their camera, they have it with them.
Also, I actually don't do much "artistic" photography either. It's more bland product photos, family events, portraits... "reality" as-is. Still a hobby.
>>2717005
My mobile is pic related and has no camera. Not buying a smartphone just for the camera either.
>>2717006
I don't use my phone enough to warrant getting an X amount a month contract though, so I'd end up need to spend 300 quid on a smartphone that's pay as you go, and for that price I might as well buy a camera.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand
>>2717007
>I don't use my phone enough to warrant getting an X amount a month contract though, so I'd end up need to spend 300 quid on a smartphone that's pay as you go
A Redmi Note 2 is around $170 without contract and it has a PDAF camera. There also are the OnePlus X, OnePlus Two, and many more options.
But I guess if you prefer a standalone camera, get the S120 or something. Your choices aren't mine.
>>2717008
>A Redmi Note 2 is around $170 without contract and it has a PDAF camera. There also are the OnePlus X, OnePlus Two, and many more options.
Aren't those the Chinese ones and you need someone to refer you before you buy one? I can't be arsed with that. I really don't want or need a smartphone.
>Your choices aren't mine.
No but I appreciate the advice.
camera id please whats that thing on the left, looks like a medium format rangefinder
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 500 Image Height 500
>>2717011
Why does it matter
>>2717008
>>2717009
Would like to add I have my dad's SLR, think the model is pic related, with some lenses, can't remember where it is though. Only really used it once and all the pictures came out terrible so I was shit at that lel.
>>2716935
they can use it, will even meter, just no AF with D
why the fuck are cameras so fucking expensive? i cant afford shit.
>>2717045
buy older used models. profit!
>>2717049
still expensive as fuck. a used k-5 iis costs more than a new k-s2. and if im gonna spend a few hundred dollars id rather have a month of living indoors than a camera.
>tfw broke student on scholarships
>tfw dad getting knee surgery 3 days after Christmas so a new camera for Christmas isnt gonna happen
>tfw phone camera is old as fuck and has white spots and shit now
fuck life
>>2717045
watch and learn
https://youtu.be/T4ZvAFCt5Sk
https://youtu.be/ujAwXVF_X-E
>>2717051
Stop whining. The world doesn't owe you anything.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-Alpha-NEX-5N-16-1-MP-Digital-Camera-Silver-Kit-w-18-55mm-Lens-/131664717861?hash=item1ea7d42825:g:~FwAAOSwp5JWXJsd
>>2717054
>The world doesn't owe you anything.
lel i never said it did, i just wish the shit was cheaper.
and i dont just want a camera to have one, im not stupid with my money, i make sure i get what i want/need when i can afford it, not a lesser version of something just because i can afford it at the time.
also
>mirrorless
>>2717057
Buy a Holga. Get a job. Stop whining.
>>2717069
>doesnt understand that film photography costs more than digital
>doesnt understand that a one time purchase of a quality item is cheaper than constantly upgrading and fixing shitty gear
are you even out of hs?
>>2717071
I am out of high school and while I'm working on my so far successful career I am attending college for extra training.
I still find the time to work, make money, advance my career and do my training, while spending my extra time on shooting photos. Do you see me whine about my life? No, because I make the money that I am spending on my hobby.
You make it happen or you give up on photography until you can afford it. Now go and be a crybaby somewhere else.
>>2717077
>Do you see me whine about my life?
you spend much of your time whining about other people's lives here. stfu, you cunt.
>>2717081
No. You are the one still depending on your daddy buying you stuff.
Go get a job, loser. It is Christmas season, plenty of opportunities, lots of part time jobs for people without experience.
Seriously, get a job, get the money, buy your own stuff.
>>2715732
if you Dont know what mirrorless means, why are you getting one? I highly suggest you spend a good amount of time learning what cameras are out there.
The image stabilizer in my olympus e-p2 broke, I'm planning to stay micro 4/3, which camera should I save for?
>>2717077
i have a job you faggot but rent is more important than buying a camera. and i cant afford a second job because shit like this is time consuming
>>2717101
>what is financing
>>2716886
I can't afford either of those.
>>2717109
a trap that people fall into
the only things you should finance are a house and a car
>>2717101
If you can't afford it, why do you want to buy it?
>>2715508
so it's my first year in photography, I'm currently looking to buy a lens and possibly some filters
does camera gear usually go on sale after christmas like most other stuff, or should I just buy now?
>>2717118
is that a serious question? lel
>if you cant afford college, a house, a car, a tv, a fireplace, a new couch, etc, why do you want one
I want to buy used Canon 50D in a few days, will there be a big difference or a shock even after years of using Canon 350D?
Btw. should I gather a bit more money and decide on 60D instead? Or 50D and a better lens would be enough?
>>2716202
Never heard of it, but it looks like cheap shit.
>>2717139
Same sensor in a better body. I'd suggest saving up a bit more for a 60D or even a 70D.
lastly, where can I get some good cheap film?
opshops rarely have em, I'm in NZ.
ebay seems to have costly prices. Anyone got links? I wouldn't mind black and white or colour. 35mm
Alright. So I sold my pentacks k1000 and spent 100 on this. I'm liking it so far. Anyways; is there any way to rid of this almost like oily smudges on the front lens? It's been sitting for awhile. They're hard to get a photo of aswell.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 640 Image Height 1136
>>2717164
>go to thrift store
>find film camera section
>buy camera with film in them for 1$
>use film
That's what I've done. Not sure how thrift is in NZ.
>>2717164
In the UK you can get AGFA 200 C41 for £1, Take it to your local Asda or kodak for processing around £3 or be poor and process it yourself in Rodinal.
>>2717165
Try one of those microfiber lens cloths. I bought a used lens that had smudges and it was affecting parts of the image. I gave it a pass with the cloth and it looks great now.
>>2717183
Hm. Alright. If that doesn't do, what about a 90% isopropyl alcohol solution?
>>2717165
Why did you sell the K1000? It is a great camera. Only needs a few rolls of film.
>>2717191
Use glasses cleaning paper. You can buy packets of it.
>>2717197
I've got these ;
Mamiya 1000dtl
Yashica electro 35
AE-1
Agfa Karat IV
and Nikon FG20
I've got enough film babbies
>>2717205
>not getting rid of the AE-1 instead
Absolutely disgusting
>>2717210
>getting rid of a camera that's a dime a dozen
Absolutely haram m8.
So after long time of thinking, I currently own a 5d classic and want to buy a 6d, i was between the 6d vs the a7ii.
I enjoy shooting video and while the a7ii has a more perfect video the 6d has way better battery life and i am a weekend hiker and wedding dweller so basically:
canon 6d pros:
-way better battery life 1000 shots/per battery
-better autofocus
-mediocre video
a7ii pros:
-great shadow recovery
-great video
-electronic viewfinder is awesome for manualfocus
So which camera would you guys buy?
>>2717210
It's broken and nobody will buy it. Going to try to fix it for my girlfriend.
>>2717008
They are Chinese, which makes them cheap despite having good Sony / Samsung / ... cameras, and actually decent specs overall (even for smartphones, they're quite respectable).
I think all of them don't have referral systems in place anymore, at least not currently. (Well, Xiaomi -like most sellers- never had, you always just pay your $10-20 or so to the reseller for his margin and shipping ... the referrals are an OnePlus marketing tactic).
>>2717013
Depending on the lenses, they might actually perform interestingly well if you have a good digital body to try them on. /p/ often has threads with photos shot through "vintage" lenses like that.
Well, just something to remember if you ever get an IL camera - getting one where you can use a $5-15 adapter and use dad's lenses is probably worth doing.
>>2717227
I just spent months researching the exact same thing, plus the D750 was in the mix too.
A7ii won out. I'm a serious hiker and nature photographer, and I decided the battery thing was less important than other parameters. It's a fucking GLORIOUS camera.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7M2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpcm Vertical Resolution 240 dpcm Image Created 2015:11:29 14:11:41 Exposure Time 1/1250 sec F-Number f/2.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 80 Lens Aperture f/2.0 Brightness 8.0 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 28.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2717165
Fine microfiber cleaning cloth.
And just window cleaner (preferably applied to the cloth, not the lens, just to avoid any chance of it slipping inside the lens with grease or something and fogging and dirtying it).
>>2717231
awesome, where can i see more of your photos?
>>2717227
> -way better battery life 1000 shots/per battery
Yes, but actually only ~50% more shots per battery weight. It's not nothing, but I think you can carry more batteries...
> better autofocus
With native sharp lenses? I don't think so...
I also heard at one point they made the AF with smart adapters about as good as on the A7R II, but haven't followed up if that is true.
>>2717238
Instagram.com/nateloobz
NateLuebbe.com
Either one :)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7M2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpcm Vertical Resolution 240 dpcm Image Created 2015:11:28 12:26:05 Exposure Time 1/5000 sec F-Number f/2.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 80 Lens Aperture f/2.0 Brightness 10.9 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 28.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
Are kit lenses worth using at all? I got a bundle Nikon D3200 with a 18-55 mm VR kit lens + 55 - 200 VR lens, I'm thinking of buying a 35 mm one
>>2717252
I think most people use them, yes?
I personally prefer primes (and higher-end ones), but of course YMMV, as may your budget.
Most Sigma Art are pretty good deals on the higher end for Nikon, though. At least give them a look.
Right now i have super cheap Canon and basically only piece of gear that's worth anything is my nifty fifty. I'm aiming for used 50d (~250 dollars), is there anything used in this range from other manufacturers that would justify paying extra for new kit lens+maybe new 50mm 1.8? 50d doesn't look too good in sensor benchmarks, although i've heard good thing about low-light performance in video - and i think i'm interested in video recording.
>>2717261
Well, a Nikon D3x00, a Pentax K-50 or even a step up to the A6000 might be worth it - for a better sensor and lots of nice features and stuff.
I think a 50D wasn't too bad for home videos when loaded with magic lantern. Though I don't think you can fool anyone into thinking yours isn't amateur video with this camera.
>>2717261
YOU ARE ME
What do you guys think of this product? Going to order some soon and see how it works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r3SXHwYqkY
So I just picked up a giant softbox for a ridiculously good price. The problem is, it doesn't have any kind of mounting gear. The softbox is huge, 4" x 6", and has four poles.
The problem is, I use only speedlights and I want to use this too, but I don't know what to search for to buy something to mount this thing with. Anybody help me out?
>>2717298
> So I just picked up a giant softbox for a ridiculously good price. The problem is, it doesn't have any kind of mounting gear. The softbox is huge, 4" x 6", and has four poles.
So, basically a Chinese $15 one or something?
What stops you from putting it on a light stand, exactly?
>>2717300
It hasn't got anything to mount it with. It's not chinese, or at least not the "chinese" that I think you're referring to. I got it off craigslist for $80, and apparently the guy got it from a friend of his as a gift. It says "Lifetouch" on the side so I'm thinking it was used by Lifetouch. I don't know.
Anyway, it's just the softbox part and has no way of mounting it. I just need a mount and I don't really know how to search for it since I don't know what that would be called. And no, "softbox mount" didn't work.
>>2717301
A picture might be helpful?
Many amateur softboxes are designed so the light stand goes into them, and then it is fixed or resting in some way against the light.
Pro softboxes may be designed to mount on specific top of larger studio lights or strobes, usually on speed rings (pic related)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D5100 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 804 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2012:03:04 21:02:17 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/6.3 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/6.3 Exposure Bias -1 EV Subject Distance 0.84 m Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Compulsory, Return Not Detected Focal Length 50.00 mm Comment (c)Kris Quiroz Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2717304
PS: If you don't have a studio light, an amateur softbox applies more, I'd say.
Frankly, the speed rings are not insubstantially priced for studio lights, and as far as *speedlight* rings go, I mostly remember seeing $50-250 models.
That's for *just* the speed ring. You'll still need a good stand for it, and of course soft boxes - of which you have currently one, I think?
At ~$35 for a full Chinese light stand + amateur softbox (shipped price, might be cheaper if you pick smaller models or whatever), it is probably simply not economical to get speedlight speed rings for a speedlight-only setup.
>>2717304
Hopefully this is enough to go on... It's huge, 4 feet by 6 feet and it's kind of a bitch to get back into the bag, I needed a second person to help.
Anyway, this is what the "back" looks like. It's also got a pair of holes with velcro at the end of each edge between the poles. If you need me to take the whole thing out and show you the opening I can do it but goddamn is it a bitch
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi
>>2717309
These do look like pro softbox rods that are supposed to go into holes of a speed ring or such a mount.
Not experienced enough to tell you the brand, though.
>>2717312
Thanks. You've given me a lot to go on. I see Paul C Buff has a speed ring mount (http://www.paulcbuff.com/sba.php) , but I don't know if it's sturdy enough to hold this monstrosity. Are there any special considerations I should make in this regard?
>>2717313
Most speed rings are fairly sturdy, but I can't tell you if this one can hold your light box. Or if it is even compatible with this kind of rod. Might very well not be, they state they have limited compatibility on the description, after all.
Can't tell you if your light stand (with or without boom arm and counter-weight or whatever) can take it and not tip over easily either.
Maybe the first order of business is to find out what rods these are, or if you can/need to replace them for the speed ring of your choice...
Canon Powershot N or Panasonic Lumix ZS45?
>>2716848
Thanks man that helps a lot. Im gonna keep an eye out for a used k5 or k3. If I get the K-S2 with the 18-50mm I know im going to end up upgrading both the body and the kit lens in a short time. Having the screen on the top is important to me for doing long exposures too.
>>2717248
dat dynamic range doe
>>2716848
i'll take your K-3 if you dont want it :^)
general question: is there a way to deactivate or remove an AA filter?
>>2717329
>is there a way to deactivate or remove an AA filter
On the K-3 and K-3II you can switch it on and off in the menu.
The K-5 and K-5II has one, the K-5IIs does not have an AA filter
>tfw cant really afford it but have a crushing urge to just buy it and hope I dont regret it
>>2717337
Do it man, that deal is sweet!
>>2717328
Yeah dawg. buy my pictures and help support my terrible hobby.
What else would make Me take better photos. I shoot mostly outdoor landscapes. I have a tripod canon rebel t5 and Photoshop cs6.
Should I be looking into filters/flashes
>>2717337
That seems dirt cheap.
Go for it.
>>2716934
Also is the 760d something yall would recommend as an upgrade? Im not looking to fork out a huge amount of cash, just something a little better.
>>2717011
Red Epic with Zeiss 21mm lens. Much more expensive than a medium format cam.
>>2717191
Alcohol is fine, just make sure to have a secondary dry cloth handy to wipe up the alcohol as the wipe with the alcohol won't dry as quickly as alcohol by itself.
>>2717491
It's an upgrade I guess.
On the other hand, an a6000 is mostly better for the same price, as are other cameras.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-760D-vs-Sony-Alpha-A6000/detailed
>>2717519
I suppose I only have three lenses. And there are adapters, right?
>>2717524
There are very cheap adapters for manual focus, and you can use the focus peaking feature to easily determine what is in focus. Works near perfect as far as MF goes.
There also are smart AF ones, but these aren't as reliable on the A6000 as on an A7R II with some lenses. I think the 50mm is fine on these, though.
I'd probably just get the two lens kit a6000 (or pick my own high-end lenses) and essentially replace the two zoom lenses. Still doesn't really cost more than a 760D.
>>2717089
OM-D E-M 10 Mark II or Pana G7 (which boasts a new 20mp sensor with better DR)
CANON REBEL BODY MINT FOR 250$
COP OR DROP
guna be my first dlsr
>>2717539
Which one?
>>2717539
Probably drop. Not a fan of Canon Rebels overall.
Almost everyone had better sensors on the entry level for like 4 years now, too.
>>2717539
Look for Pentax K-30 or K-50 with kit lens, probably goes around that price, has in body stabilization, a weather sealing fit for pro FF DSLRs and better sensor.
>>2715508
Alright, what about backpacks? I've had my eye on the National Geographic bag, are there others out there in the same vein that are also affordable?
>>2717553
When I was looking for a bag I found the NatGeo Walkaround backpack and just stopped looking further and ordered it.
Looks bland, utilitarian and can accommodate a large number of gear safely. It is also very comfy.
>>2717542
It doesn't matter they're all the same.
I'm considering getting a fujifilm X-T1 as well as a zeiss 50mm F2.8 Macro lens for the X-Mount.
Opinions?
>>2717571
It is a camera, and it is a lens. What Opinion do you want? We don't know your experience, your planned usage, your level of interest, your personal preferences, your priorities...?
>>2717571
Not a camera I would or did buy. Did that help?
As the other anon said, perhaps you should be more specific about what you want to do...
