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
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.
No pointless (brand) arguments and dickwaving allowed! You have been warned!
I repeat, ANYTHING GEAR RELATED goes in here!
And don't forget, be polite!
Previous thread: >>2802061
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 20D Lens Size 17.00 - 85.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 2.0.3 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 1621016270 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2007:06:05 11:26:31 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/10.0 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/10.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 28.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3504 Image Height 2336 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Program Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness High Saturation High Contrast High Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Image Number 132-3286 Color Matrix 0
>>2805200
How are the Pana Lumix prime lenses on Olympus MFT cameras? Which would be more versatile as first lens, the 20mm or 25mm?
>>2805205
>How are [open source standard] prime lenses on [open source standard] cameras?
One is a 40mm equivalent, the other is 50mm equivalent. Get the one you are comfortable with and/or like the image qualities better. Check Flickr for the lenses.
>>2805208
>>2805205
iirc, some of the panasonic lenses has a really slow autofocus. at least their pancake has in low light.
so watch out for that..
their leica 25mm collab is great iq wise, but i dont know about the autofocus on that one. but all this is basic research you would've found out by basic googling so gtfo.
>>2805205
>asking dead system lenses in a 6x7 medium format thread
im trying to get into shooting skateboarding
should i rock a Nikon D3200 or Pentax K-50
and should i consider getting a mirrorless
>>2805220
If you don't know what you need (and the fact you're considering those two bags of shit), then you don't need it.
>>2805220
>should i consider getting a mirrorless
You say that as if DSLR is the defacto choice.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 520 Image Height 298 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 2010:07:11 13:31:30 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 425 Image Height 208
>>2805220
Nikon and Pentax both has good and affordable lenses.
MFT is expensive if you want at least decent IQ. Sony E-mount has no lenses to speak of, the cheap ones are ass, kit lenses have power zoom and better quality is only on FE mount over $2000.
I'm looking for a point and shoot at about £500 that is decent in low light.
Thinking of the Ricoh GR II or the RX100 Mk3, any suggestions for gems I am totally ignorant of?
>>2805238
The GR is designed for photographers, RX100 line is designed for plebs with options of more control than the average point and shoot.
The Fuji X100 stands between somewhere.
If you know what you're doing with a camera I'd recommend the GR II, otherwise get either the X100 (maybe X30-X70) or the RX100.
>>2805241
Interesting, I can find the X100 cheaper than the GR II. I know my way around a camera but I'd probably just be shooting full auto. Is it that inaccessible?
>>2805246
If you shoot full auto then probably your phone is the best choice.
>>2805249
You're probably sarcastic but I've actually considered it. Even my 6S' dynamic range isn't great and I'd rather have something dedicated to taking photos.
Is it a good choice to upgrade from D90 to fuji x-e1/pro1?
>>2805251
I am not sarcastic. Using full auto you don't need a dedicated camera. If you want the features and functionality of a dedicated camera you have to learn and use them.
To me it looks like you browsed through the board to see what are the hot topics in the segment you understand and asked us to decide between the two names you found.
Do your own fucking research and learn to use the camera. If you have a problem with at least one of them, just use your phone.
>>2805251
Sort of off topic
Anyone used LG phones for snapshits? (Mainly when im dicking around and dont have my "real" camera)
I want muh sony but the LG uses the same sensor but with laserAF and OIS
And can shoot raw unlike the sony
Might as well be an infant a**** series.
(Looking at the old cheaper v10 not the new one)
>>2805260
Yeah but I probably will use the manual features too, I just prefer shooting in auto. Anyway, thanks for the suggestion, the X100s is looking like a strong contender. The GR II is pretty aesthetic looking though...
>>2805265
I have heard good shit about the G4. Probably a lot cheaper now the G5 is out too
>>2805258
For what? They're slow cameras with low quality EVFs, but great image quality.
>>2805200
where to cop wooden tripod?
>>2805284
I wooden know
>>2805284
really dude
>>2805284
www.berlebach.de
Worth the buck?
Why does my sensor get so fucking filthy? I barely change lenses, cleaning them once a week, storing them with body caps and shit all the time, point the camera down whenever possible and go at the sensor with a rocket blower fairly regularly, but it always seems to pick up shitloads of dust anyway. It's a 5D1 so no sensor vibrator.
>>2805290
This is what you get when you use non-sealed lenses on a non-sealed body.
>>2805290
It's an old body, so it could be that the crap is already in the body itself, and the act of taking photos kicks it up and gets it stuck to the sensor.
>>2805205
The 20mm creates some sort of banding at low ISO images using em10 em5 cameras (not sure if em1 too). Lens is slow to focus. Is small and sharp.
>>2805313
*High ISO, sorry.
>>2805313
The LENS makes banding? How does it do that?
Maybe a vignetting correction profile that boosts dark areas, doing a poor job at high ISO?
>>2805290
>cleaning them once a week
>>2805290
Have you considered the blower itself has dust inside and you're blowing all that gunk inside your dinosaur?
There is a rule, never blow on your sensor, not even with a blower. Bring your camera in for a through cleaning and use soft brush (rabbit fur) next time.
>>2805205
The 14mm and 20mm are small and gud. See above comments on the 20mm. The 25mm you might as well buy the Olympus. The 42.5 is gud, but the O45 is mostly as gud but with a lower price. The PL15 is pretty good though. It's not as small as the O17, but it's reportedly sharper.
Was looking for a smaller more mobile camera and found the Fujifilm X-T10 with Fujinon XC 16-50mm and XC50-230mm for 899€. Yay or nay?
>>2805338
>AESTHETICS
>>2805222
>(and the fact you're considering those two bags of shit)
what a retard
Never understood why people fall for this meme.
>>2805342
>implying it's not aesthetic
Why are there no nikon pancake lenses?
I would like the smallest lens possible, but all nikon glass is huge.
>>2805354
Because Nikon hates us.
>tfw no 24 2.8 DX pancake
Your only options are 50 1.8 Series E, 45 GN, and the Voigtlanders. All of the above are manual focus.
Also
>nikon
>making the lenses you want
u want dx lens? fuck you, here another 18-xxx superzoom
>>2805360
More like here's a random fucking 58mm. Who asked for 8mm? Wot.
Does anyone have experiences with something called an, "Auto Telo Converter"? One came with my old film camera when I bought it. It's like, a 2x magnification, or at least that's what it says. I have never found a practical use for it, other than coupling it onto my 135mm lens and making it even tighter crop.
I've never seen them for digital. It's just a weird little metal ring with some glass in the middle. Nothing else. You guys ever use anything like that? Is it useful? I just keep it in my bag in case I feel like taking my 50mm up to 100mm or whatever without lugging around my actual 135mm lens, because it's a hell of a lot bigger.
>>2805369
You mean a teleconverter? I used to use one when i started doing wildlife and only had an old Nikon 300mm. Used a 1.3x tc with that for a bit more range. They will soften your images somewhat, higher the magnification of your tc the softer it gets. I don't see any point to using a tc other than to squeeze some extra focal length from a telephoto lens when it means getting the shot or not getting it at all. For shorter lenses there is no need. Zoom with your feet.
>>2805381
Pardon, 1.4x tc.
Teleconverters also decrease the amount of light making it to your sensor/film.
>>2805360
Honestly that's why for DSLRs everyone suggests going full frame. It's not that Nikon crop cameras aren't capable of amazingly good results, its that the lens lineup available to DX is garbage.
Are there any gear heads that don't cost like 500 bucks? I'm doing a job as a real estate photographer in Orange County, and it feels like my ball head is not really going to cut it.
>>2805406
Manfrotto has a kinda cheap-ish one but it's not exactly cheap. But it works and less than $500.
>>2805369
>You guys ever use anything like that? Is it useful?
It's only useful with very sharp lenses.
Specifically: if the center of your lens out-resolves your sensor you can capture extra detail in distant subjects.
But If the image is already soft you can get the same result by cropping in post.
I sometimes use a 1.4X TC with my 300mm f/2.8 - turning it into a 420mm f/4.
But I never use it with my 70-300 f/5.6 since it's already quite soft at 300mm.
Just try it, but also compare it to cropping in post.
>>2805394
This is the only reason I kept investing on Canon APS-C.
Up until last yet I had a 40D, nifty fifty, Tamron 17-50 and 70-200 f4.
I wanted a small lens and an ultra wide for my upcoming Norway trip. I knew that Canon sensor stopped being really competitive a 4 years ago but I still decided for a Canon 100D because of two great crop lenses: 24mm pancake and 10-18.
It's not ideal, but has been a nice kit so far.
I spent my photography budget (850 bucks) on:
-A D3300 with a 18-55 VR II
-An AFS 50mm 1.8G
-A55-200 VR II
-A Velbon ex630 (best bang for the buck tripod, seriously. Supports 5kg, sturdy as many >100€ manfrottos, bubble level included)
-A set of cheap ND, macro and CPL filters
-A medium sized, discrete, black messenger camerabag for everything
Everything brand new.
How much did I fuck up /p/?
>>2805425
Well there was no need to get it all brand new, but you'll be fine. Go take photos.
>>2805406
So the Manfrottos are about the bottom? That will probably work I suppose.
>>2805406
> real estate photographer
Seriously, why again do you think you need a geared head...?
Seems completely unnecessary to me.
>>2805200
Got a lens turbo 2 today for my MD lenses. When mounting lenses on it the pin would hit causing it to stay wide open and my wide angle lenses would have very dark corners (Not present on my film cameras). I'm sending it back but just wanted to know if anyone else here has had a similar issue with Lens Turbos?
>>2805455
Not him, but with ultra-wide lenses you do have to get perfectly level to avoid distortion.
I too think a gear head would be easier for that. - but I never tried one because too expensive.
>>2805425
You did fine. The d3300 has pretty good sensor for an entry level dslr. Enjoy.
>>2805466
You can easily do this with a tripod / ball head that has a spirit level for the few shots where you actually might prefer ultra wide.
>>2805471
It's a hell of a lot easier with a geared head, though. Much more precise.
Should I save up for a Mamiya 7II or an RB67? I already have a hasselblad. I just want something more portable.
>>2805527
If you want something more portable go with 35mm, not medium format.
>>2805527
>RB67
>portable
You mean more portable than a brick wall? Get a Pentax 645N.
I bought my 1D about a year ago now as a B camera and feel it's just a bit too heavy to lug around. I got it for around €200 from a store and thought it was a bargain.
I wanted to replace it with something that had similar AF and FPS so though a 7D would be a good improvement.. Not really feeling that now, would I have to fork out a serious amount of money to get something better than a 12 year old body?
>>2805553
The 7D is around $500-600 used. The 7DMkII is around $1000. That's not a serious amount when you consider it will ace over that 1Dinosaur lolAPS-H in any situation.
>>2805477
It will be faster to use with the required precision, yes, but IDK, it doesn't sound like rushing through shots 'cause of full books is the reason for this upgrade?
And you can be precise enough with a ball head for the few shots it takes. IMO, there are probably better ways to spend your money right now. But if you have full books and are pressed for time, by all means, get an Arca Swiss cube or something like it.
Otherwise, just pay attention to your levels and image - you'll also have to do this with a geared head.
I have a few questions. First, I'm trying to get a flash for my K-5. Not trying to spend too much, but I need one for a school club event I'll be shooting and for the future. Thinking about getting a YN560 IV. Would this work with the flash off camera? Would I have to use it as an optical slave to trigger it? Or is there some other solution that's just better than this?
Secondly, I'm trying to find a couple wide lens for my camera. Last time, someone recommended a Flektogon copy since I was looking for 24mm. I'm thinking about doing some wider shots, maybe even some astrophotography. Anything good for K mount or m42 in sub 18mm and for 24mm?
Thanks in advance.
I got my Zenit EM today. I won it at an auction. This is what I see when it look through the viewfinder. It's not the lens, so I'm guessing it's the mirror. What else could it be? And how much would it cost me to get it fixed?
Because of this I can't properly focus because the image on the viewfinder isn't sharp.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Exposure Time 1/11 sec F-Number f/2.0 ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/2.0 Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 3.79 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 4208 Image Height 3120 Rendering Normal Time (UTC) 22:04:37 Date (UTC) 2016:03:31
>>2805607
It could be the mirror or the focusing screen or maybe the prism, Take a look at the mirror when you remove the lens and see if you see anything wrong with it. If not then I'm not sure how hard it is to access the focusing screen in that camera but I would check that next.
>>2805607
Hey, didn't I tell you they're fucking trash?
That's normal, mine is the same.
You can still focus, don't be a retard.
Don't you wish you'd bought a Japanese camera?
Street. 50mm/1.8 or 35mm/1.8?
>>2805658
Depends entirely on your shooting style (and equipment)
>>2805658
do you attach them on a full frame or apsc camera ?
if its apsc you dont want the 50mm lens because it will turn into a portrait lens like 75mm
on full frame i'd say 35mm ( which is 23mm on apsc for example )
Just a Question... is it possible to get face detection mode with updates on the fuji x-pro1 just like they did for the x-pro2 ?
iam just curious
>>2805714
Stop being a dickbag who thinks that a focal length equals a field of view. A 50mm lens is 50mm no matter how big the image circle or sensor is.
>>2805717
The XPro1 does not have face detection.
>>2805726
Great. However, completely useless to the conversation at hand.
anyone here shoot jpeg? if so any recommendations for such a camera? i shoot film casually from time to time and looking for digital counterpart. i'm not planning to edit just shoot for fun with full manual control.
>>2805758
Fuji jpegs stand alone. So much control over the final result, from simulation, to control over highlight and shadow, to color toning, there's nothing else like it.
Also, toy camera mode.......
>>2805764
thanks ill look into fuji, any other comparable suggestions?
Is it worth shelling out for a Prismatic Halo ring light (18") or should I just go with the Neewer one+wax paper diffuser?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 1000 Scene Capture Type Standard
I just got a sony a6000. Ive been looking at the sigma 60mm and sony 50mm which one should I get?
>>2805818
If you have to ask, it doesn't.
>>2805851
For what purpose?
>>2805656
Actually, nah. The lenses are still in great shape. Got 2 lenses with it, so I'm not mad.
And I can't focus. Because of that scratch the viewfinder doesn't give a clear image. Everything looks out of focus. Even if it's in focus.
>>2805630
There are some scratches on the mirror. But they're quite small and the scratches are horizontal. I guess I would be better off getting another camera with an M42 mount. There should be plenty out there.
>>2805857
Get a Spotmatic then, there are a lot in good condition and the black ones look awesome.
>>2805857
Actually... I found out. Everything looks vague on closer distances. Like a meter away. This is within the focusing range of the lenses, so I'm not exactly sure why that happens. It should still be usable thought it seems.
>>2805858
What do those cost nowadays? And which one do you recommend?
I have a 40mm and 5dm2
I'm looking for a new lens. Mostly shoot landscape, may get into portraits.
I don't mind prime or zoom, just something as sharp as the 40 and versatile. Tbh I'm lacking widened and the telephoto but I can compensate one or the other with the 40 depending on the next lens.
> inb4 sell the 40
Not gonna happen. It's worth it's money it's hella sharp.
thanks
I'm renting a Tamron 150-600mm, using it at motorsport events. I've been using a Canon 300mm f4 the past few years.
Feel with the Tamron the autofucus is slightly too slow for what I'm doing. Is this the case with any telephoto with varying focal lengths (as my 300mm is a set length does it focus much faster)?
Bit disappointed as I was hoping this would be a more cost effective lens that a Canon 100-400mm...
>>2805868
Ebay, search spotmatic, buy one with good condition. It's not rocketscience.
>>2805894
The 100-400 is fast with tracking. Cost effective is the Canon 400 prime
>>2805934
I know that much, but is there any model you recommend. One I should look out for? I know it's as easy as looking for one in good condition.
>>2805942
The Spotmatic is the model you dumbass! Pentax Spotmatic! Did you do the research on it? I sure won't.
Whats with all this name shit recently?
>>2806043
Why am i fucking sonja?
>>2806043
It's 4chan's new format. m00t got fed up with all the tripfags going against the design of the board (anonymous image sharing) that they're forcing everyone to have random names.
>>2806046
So no more trips? Wow thats great.
>>2806043
This is the future of 4chan, Sonja. Moot^2 sold the website to Google.
>>2806059
Thanks for your answer Tabitha. Many well wishes too you.
Are there any reasonable 50mm lenses for M42 in the price of canon's 50/1.8 STM?
I don't actually need AF so I wonder if I can get better IQ in that price range
Does anybody know of a smaller Nikon-compatible digital cable release than the MC-30? Do digital releases similar in size to traditional releases even exist? I'm talking with just a button, not a tv remote.
If im a casual do i need anything but a d5100 kit and the 35mm?
>>2806075
Probably not.
>>2806062
Helios 44M, 44M-4 and upwards
Helios 77
Pentacon 50
and these: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-M42-Screwmount-Normal-Primes-c23.html
>>2806096
I already own 44M-4 but the coating has wore off
77 is much more expensive but there is 77M-4 - is it much different?
I've stumbled upon super takumar before but I've read that there are several version of them, are there versions that are not worth considering or is the IQ in all versions alike?
>>2806153
>I'm so lazy please spoonfeed me!
No.
You got your link, do your own research.
>>2806157
>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
Why are you in a gear questions thread if you're just going to be a dick to people that ask questions about gear?
I cannot find any info about this lens online, apart from a forum post from 1997 where the author got bitched out for asking if it was good or not.
Why is it so cheap? Is there a camera compatibility list anywhere? If it works on my 5D and the pictures aren't awful then it's a fucking steal.
Totally not sketchy. Nope.
Not at all.
>>2806167
Forgot pic. I would delete but april meme's day.
>>2806170
Still not worth it
>>2806172
>Sigma
>zoom
m8
>>2806177
>£65
If it works, it's basically a free lens while I save up for the 16-35 L
>>2806178
I mean go for it, but remember that it's an older Smegma lens before they actually somewhat tried.
>>2806178
Well in that price scale, sure, but why not get something like the Canon 50mm (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EF-1-8-STM-Lens/dp/B00XKSBMQA/), which you could actually get some good shots with?
>>2806181
I already have that. I want wide.
About to buy an OM-D E-M5, anyone want to try and convince me otherwise?
>>2806199
Version 1 or 2?
Also
>Micro 4/3
>>2806202
Version 1.
Anyone here ever used a Zuiko 35mm f/2.8 shift lens?
Kinda tempted to get one for my A7 since they're fairly cheap.
dis my camera
I usually use a Rodenstock 150mm.
I use Fomapan for less important work but it's unreliable if tonally excellent (huge range of midtones) film. Currently shooting with Ilford Delta and finding it immense fun to use. I also shoot with paper negs a lot.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Panasonic Camera Model DMC-TZ5 Camera Software Ver.1.0 Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.3 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 57 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 180 dpi Vertical Resolution 180 dpi Image Created 2015:08:01 13:58:00 Exposure Time 1/40 sec F-Number f/3.6 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 160 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 5.60 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2048 Image Height 1079 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2806030
Well, there's the Spotmatic SP500, SP1000, SL, ES and a couple of other variants. So that's why I was wondering.
Thinking about buying a sonny a5000, as my first camera and just for fun and try the hobby.
Am I missing something better under 400eu (455usd)?
Also I was interested in making some macro adding a pentax smc 4/100 lens, from my father's old analog camera. Can I put them toghether with some cheap adapter and get away with it? Is it that easy?
>>2806249
Having something with a viewfinder isn't necessarily a must, but it's a nice luxury to have.
Look into the NIkon D3200, D5300, whatever they call Canun Rabals there, the Pantacks K-S2, and the Sony A6000.
>>2806249
A used NEX 5N with an add-on EVF would be a much better value.
If you're interested in a DSLR, a used Pentax K-50 or Nikon D3300 can still fit in your budget, with kit lens.
>>2806261
Considering that the E mount has a very short flange distance, you can more or less put anything on one if there's an adapter for it.
Only thing you might lose is autofocus and electronic lens control if you're using Canon or Nikon lenses.
>>2806262
Thanks!
That's not a problem since the lens is already manual
>>2806263
No problem Yvonne.
What are the cheapest F-mount lenses I can get. Not worried about quality- I want to buy three of them.
Actually, what are the cheapest lenses I can buy -period- that aren't complete shit? Keep in mind I live in Canada which is a frozen shithole that may not have the same boutiques or outlet stores you do in the EWE ESS
>>2806221
How portable is the Chamonix? I have a Cambo monorail myself. Damn thing isn't very portable. All these field cameras look to be out of my price range, though. Can't get much in resale value for the cambo, either.
Just bought a Argus C-four today. It was an absolute steal at the antique store in my town, only $10.
Now, it's a lovely looking old coot, but, I've never used a rangefinder before, and I'm having trouble.
It seems there are two directions you can turn the lens (or wheel), and both will move the two images together. One does it perfectly after some time, and the other sorta clicks and almost gets there but not quite. Is that end the infinity side or..?
I can get it focused, but I have no idea what the readings of the dial at, or how to read them. The wheel just spins and it doesn't have a clear indicator that I can find to denote the actual point it's set to, so I'm not quite sure what I'm looking at, which doesn't help the calibration. Speaking of calibration. How?
Also, how does the shutter and film advance work? Isn't not like my SLRs, it doesn't have a shutter cocking mech, it just has two wheels that you can turn. And the wheel that indicates which shot you are on just spins around as you turn it. It never stops anywhere. You can spin you wheels all you want, it never stops.
Do I have to put film in for the shutter and the wheels to work? I don't want to throw in a roll and waste it, because I don't know the mech well enough.
I looked at the manual, and I didn't quite get what they meant. Maybe I'm just slow or something, but it seems much more complicated than an SLR's loading system, although it is similar. Same with the focus ring, I'm just so unfamiliar with this type of older camera.
Also, how do I clean the viewfinder and the metal of my camera? The viewfinder(s) are dirty and grimy, and the metal on the lens is a little corroded, from human hands, I'm guessing. I'm not sure how to properly get into the glass of the viewfinder, any tips?
Does anyone here have experience with this beauty? Any tips would be much appreciated. I apologize for writing so much, I just can't find a good resource to answer me.
Pic related, it's the actual camera.
>>2805735
that's what iam asking....is it possible fuji makes an update that allows the x-pro1 to have face detection ?
I'm looking for a good lens brush anyone have any suggestions in the 0-25 dollar range?
>>2806333
Nope. It doesn't have the necessary hardware for it. Sensor wise, and power wise.
>>2805288
I have one.. Only for 4x5 and above.
>>2806321
it's incredibly light. Folds up okay. A tad awkward to set up. It has a lot of movements but you won't get the range of a monorail. a Chamonix is around £700 but you can get them from ebay on rare occasion
honestly, a Shen Hao will do wht you need it to. IIRC one of them has vertical back movements as well...
Is there much difference between each versions of Super Takumar 50/1.4 or instead of looking for a particular version of the lens should I just get the one in best condition?
>>2806470
Early versions are a different optical design that has eight elements instead of seven.
You can tell them apart by some details (pic related. 8 is on the left, 7 on the right. Note the aperture ring, diaphragm clutch, and IR focus marker). The 8 is kind of a collector's item in the Pentax community. It's widely said to be better, but even the people who say that admit the difference is slight. For all practical purposes, they're the same lens. Both versions can suffer from the "yellowing" effect, and have to be left in UV light to clear them up. All SMC Takumar 50/1.4s are the seven-element design. Those have better coatings, and *are* optically better as a result (you'll see improved contrast and better flare resistance compared to the same lens in Super-Takumar version)
I'd just get the cleanest lens you can, myself. But if you wanna have some cred in the Pentax world you can hold out (and pay more) for an eight-element. Here's a pile of reviews and sample photos, if you like:
Eight: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Super-Takumar-50mm-F1.4-Early.html
Seven: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-S-M-C-Super-Takumar-50mm-F1.4.html
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make PENTAX Camera Model PENTAX K-5 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Windows) Photographer John_D_Harris_Jr Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 31 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2014:10:31 22:17:38 Exposure Time 1/160 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 80 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Focal Length 21.20 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Hard Saturation Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Macro
I'm thinking about buying a 24-105 f/4 L brand new for around 650 euros
I already own a 16-35 mm f/2.8 L with my Canon 60D
Would it be a compromise for low light situations being a slow lens?
If you have any other good choice of glass for around that price tag ( 500-700 euros), pitch me please :)
>>2806338
Lenspen
I'm thinking of buying a Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 G AF-S for my DX camera. I already have a 35mm f/1.8 and I'm hooked on it's luminosity and bokeh, but would like a bit more reach and background blur. I also have a cheap tamron 18-200 but I never have enough light for it, and image quality is subpar (which I expected already).
Do you think the 85mm would be a good choice? I take mostly portraits in open spaces, and some landscapes.
>>2806338
Why would you brush your lenses?
I just use a rocket blower and a microfiber cloth.
>>2806595
>Why would you brush your lenses?
>herewego.jpg
>>2806591
Sure.
It's an excellent lens and good value for money.
It's also a good addition to a 35mm. - 50mm would be too similar IMO.
Hi there /p/
I'm going to be going to japan in the summer so I wanted to get a compact for the trip there, I don't have much money to splash on some of the higher end gear but I can get a used Fuji X100 or Sony A6000 for under 500 dollars.
Is this a good choice for the price point?
ok guys i want a camera and i don't want it to be good or something, i just want something to shoot and have fun, something small to carry with me in my backpack (i have a 60D for work), something i don't have to worry about.
the budget is sub 50€, i was looking at the nikon e5400 (found at 35€). i know it cause it's the first serious camera i used, my dad owned one until i gave it a bath in vodka (i was going to a party and it was in the same bag with a bottle).
Full manual control, RAW shooting, decent lens, horrible speed and sensor but that's the way i want it.
any better suggestion?
got to see this in person today and it's actually really fat and not very good looking in person.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 450 Image Height 305 Scene Capture Type Standard
Someone is selling a D3200 near me. How much should I offer for it to be fair?
>>2806737
also shitty ergonomics?
hi /p/. what in your opinion is the cheapest way of getting into a full frame camera? should I even be considering a used 5d mark ii or is that outdated by today's standards?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D2X Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 970 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 127 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2009:03:06 15:31:47 White Point Chromaticity 0.3 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/6.3 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 85.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 750 Image Height 498 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Soft Saturation Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2806744
Why do you need a fool-frame camera? What advantages are you seeking over APS-C?
You may get a comparable crop camera for much cheaper depending on your needs.
>>2806717
>sub 50€
2nd hand film camera.
>>2806744
Why? I'm being entirely serious. What advantages will using full frame give you over a more modern APS-C sized sensor?
I'm pretty new, looking for a better camera, and I currently use a Powershot SX120 from like 2009. I was looking at mirrorless options, and an Olympus EPL6 looks like a good choice for me. However I noticed there are some excellent deals on DSLRs available especially if you buy old or used. I could keep the Powershot as my carry-round camera and get a DSLR for more serious shoots, but is it worth buying a $200 DSLR from several years ago? I'd like to shoot portraits, animals, and macro. Ideally whatever I buy is under $400. This is probably a stupid question though.
>>2806744
suck a couple of dicks for $20 until you get to a suny a7
>>2806755
I mainly shoot a D810 friend. Nice try. It's not that full frame is useless, it's just that there's no reason to gimp yourself with an old body if you don't have need for full frame and don't have the budget for it.
I got a new bigger heavier DSLR so I think I should probably get a new strap. The DSPTCH strap I have has been great and it's my favorite camera strap, but I think it's a bit too thin to be comfortable. DSPTCH makes a larger heavy duty strap, but I'm open to other options and I don't really feel like spending $50 on a strap right now anyway.
Any suggestions for other straps to look at? It has to be easily length adjustable, easy to detach, and long enough to comfortably wear with the camera slung diagonally across my body. I don't really like grippy materials or padding and I don't like the blackrapid style tripod attachment stuff, I would rather something that attaches to the lugs.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Sony Camera Model D6503 Camera Software 17.1.2.A.0.314_9_f300 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:02 14:26:33 Exposure Time 1/16 sec F-Number f/2.0 ISO Speed Rating 400 Exposure Bias 0.7 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.90 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 750 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2806744
>falling for outdated "standard" formats
kek
Help, gear!
D3200 new in box for $350. Good deal or should I pass?
I currently have a D5200 with the 18-55 kit lens and I'm thinking of buying a new lens.
I've been looking at the Nikon 55-200mm VR II - any thoughts for or against?
>>2806772
Good deal.
http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/digital-cameras/51975/nikon-d3200-review
>>2806774
It's alright. The vr is decent. You have to stop it down some to get sharp photos. Obviously there are better choices in the focal length for more monies.
Are the Leica bridge cameras any good or literally just rebranded Panasonic?
>>2806749
Advantages of full frame
>better low light performance at high iso
>somewhat better detail in resulting photos
>shallower depth of field (if you want this)
>brighter viewfinder
Advantages of apsc
>crop factor of 1.5 (1.6 for Canon) gives you longer effective focal length. This can be a slight disadvantage if you're looking to do very wide angle stuff
>hell of a lot cheaper for not that much lesser image quality
>compatible with both apsc and full frame lenses
>>2806788
>>better low light performance at high iso
Not necessarily. Sensor advancements in newer crop bodies can make them better in low light than older full frames.
>>somewhat better detail in resulting photos
Depends on pixel pitch.
>>shallower depth of field (if you want this)
This
>>brighter viewfinder
This
Not trying to be a contrarian dick, but we're talking about a 5DmII, not a mIII.
>>2805338
>XC
Just get the XF 18mm and be done with it. Or get the 35/27 if you're too much of a babby for wide angle.
>>2806808
the xc16-50 is a better lens than the xf18.
many bought it just for the 16mm.
>>2806788
I think for DSLRs it's really better to get full frame because canikon have lens lineups that are really more suited to full frame and their lineups for crop are much more inconvenient. Also with an optical viewfinder the size of the sensor affects the size and brightness of the finder.
With mirrorless it's not nearly as big a deal, the image quality difference is honestly pretty small and with a lens mount and lens lineup designed around a crop sized sensor or an m43 size or whatever size then the lenses available will obviously be well suited to the sensor size. Electronic finders can be made whatever size and brightness no matter what size the sensor is, too.
>>2806783
Literally rebranded panasonics with a better ui
>>2806841
>their lineups for crop are much more inconvenient
For anything other than extreeeeme wide angle that is very bullshit, APS-C has more choices than FF for canon.
You can use every FF lens but then you also get a selection of less expensive, lighter weight, great image quality EFS lenses as needed.
And sigma and tamron and others fulfilled the demand for razor sharp, fast, wide (but not crazy distort-everything-wide) lenses.
I already use the 35mm (56mm FF equiv) end of my sigma 18-35mm (28.8-56mm) F1.8 more than I use the 18.
I've also got a 24mm pancake that I find much more useable after crop factor brings to 38.4mm, by essentially treating as a wider lens than a 40mm or 50mm prime on FF.
If you really want some 12mm extreme fish eye shot, where the distortion and perspective are so terrible that everything looks like it was squeezed through someone's butthole then your only real choice is FF.
But those shots aren't even 1 in 500 for me, making the extra EF-S lenses quite satisfying. And also the extra bit of telephoto reach (thanks to higher pixel density, 20.2 mp on a crop versus 20.2 mp spread very widely on a FF, the crop can pull off a closer image of an animal and in higher detail with more affordable lenses.)
>>2805200
are there adapters that allows to use other lenses (nikon, canon, leica..) on c/y mount cameras?
>>2806563
The 24-105 has IS, which allows you to use about the same shutter speed as you would at 2.8 without IS.
So I like to photograph shows and concerts and I'm currently looking to purchase my first DSLR but I am on a budget
I have a friend that is offering to sell me his canon t2i and is going to include everything it came with:
the kit lens
a 64 gig card
and he's going to add his fisheye
He's asking for $250
Since I'll be saving a bit of money I'm also going to buy a 50mm 1.4 lens
Knowing what I like to shoot, is this a good purchase plan?
Ill obviously be getting a second lens somewhere down the road but for starting off would this be a good idea?
Is it worth buying a Nikon D200 nowadays?They're pretty cheap where I am.
>>2806867
No. Get a D7100 if you want a Nikon that's more "Pro" than something like the D3X00 and D5X00.
you guys think a 21-28mm focal length is worth buying if i already own a 35? i've been shooting landscape occasionally with the 35mm prime, but at times found it inadequate. i just wanted your personal opinions and preferences. does it make a worthy difference?
>>2806875
on fool frame yes, 20 or 24 is quite noticeably wider than 35, and it makes perfect sense to have both.
on crop not all that much, look for something wider if you want a wide angle. 16mm is 24 equivalent, aim for that.
>>2806861
What's the fisheye? $250 seems OK - but not like jump for it.
Also, is that 2/3 extra stop worth the 1.4's downsides (shitty AF, less sharp, less contrast) vs the cheaper 1.8mm STM?
>>2806884
>What the fisheye?
I'm not entirely sure
I haven't gotten a look at the camera but he's still giving me more information
The lens was recommended to me by some other music photographers so I was just assuming its a good idea
Im open to suggestions from anyone though
>>2806886
Also, used Pentax K-30 with WR kit lens. Take a look at it.
i'll travel do nyc next winter and planning to make a video there showing the city something like casey neistat style, open shots.
so my question is: what lenses to take (pref just 1)
i do have already:
- nikon D5000
- 18 - 55 mm
- bunch of old lenses for my analogics but I want a automatic focus so they are useless
>>2806889
Yeah it probably will be shitty but it seems like it really isn't effecting the price and he's just adding it because he's my friend and he wont be needing it without the camera
He skates so he probably used it for some videos
>>2806563
What are you going to shoot with it? It's a good general travel, walkaround lens for the price (I think mine was $500 refurbished from Canon), although 24mm isn't wide enough in some cases on crop.
If you plan to shoot low light it's still just F/4 so you're gonna struggle with things moving.
>>2806893
anyone please?
short cut: i need a nice wide and light lens REALLY affordable
>>2806944
>wide-angle on crop
>small and light
>REALLY cheap
>must have autofocus
yeah that ain't happening. Spend more money or compromise on your requirements.
also this is a slow board, so since you're bumping after only an hour and a half I'm more inclined to tell you to just fuck off
>>2806944
Why don't you just listen to Casey himself, "The gear doesn't matter," ya dumb fuck.
>>2806944
20mm f/2.8 D maybe?
But autofocus with a nikon on video?
m8...
Hello /p/, Does anyone have any opinions on the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC lens for Nikons? I'm considering replacing my Nikon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 with one, since it's a lot cheaper than Nikon's 24-70.
My main concern is I hear this lens has an issue with onion ring bokeh, but most of the examples I find of this are cropped/altered to focus on that instead of actual sample images where the bokeh is just visible. Is this something that would actually be a noticeable problem?
>>2806956
sorry about that
my priority is just cheap really (less than $500)
>>2806964
his kit lens goes wider than that anyway (18 vs 20)
>>2806972
Wider, but it's not as sharp, nor as fast.
>>2806969
It won't stand out in normal shots.
Not the most beautiful bokeh, but not a terrible mess either.
>>2806977
i've looked and get to this:
Tokina 11 16mm F2.8 DX
seens ok
I've got about $350 available, have an x-a1 with kit lense atm (been using K-mount lenses with an adaptor). I'd like to move to a DSLR system, preferably Pentax, but I have no idea where to find reasonably priced (for me) bodies in Canada, and with the exchange rate as it is, buying from the USA isn't an option. Please give me some suggestions.
What should I get, Sony a7 or a6000? What are the pros and cons between each I'm stuck deciding on which one to get because they both seem similar to me but can't decide because I've never owned a mirrorless only dlsr.
>canon 50D
>>2806999
$350 Maplebux, or USD? They cost 500+ on Amazon.ca, but I bet you could find them cheaper. If not then you're SOL because these are some of the cheaper and newer Pentaxes.
http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-K-50-Digital-Camera-3-Inch/dp/B00DBPKBQO/ref=sr_1_6?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1459655865&sr=1-6&keywords=Pentax+K-50
http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-K-01-Mirrorless-Body-Black/dp/B0076396OA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1459656576&sr=8-1&keywords=pentax+k01
I would just say save up.
>>2807019
>A7
>PROS: Small, light, muh full frame resolution, good colors, full frame so good sensitivity in low light, really nice EVF.
>CONS: Abysmal battery life (high 200s to mid 300s), poor first and third party lens support, only two of the lenses in the FE lineup are sub $500 so beware if you're looking for AF lenses on a budget, LA-EA4 adapter is sluggish and fucks with image quality, ergonomics might not be for everyone, no IBIS if you want to use legacy glass, not actually weather sealed (contrary to what Sony said when it launched. They backpedaled and now call them "Moisture resistant" which pretty much means condensation shouldn't form, but they don't guarantee anything anymore.) and neither are the FE lenses, cheap feeling body for the price.
>A6000
>PROS: Cheaper than the A7, still takes nice photos, 11 fps burst, better battery life than the A7 by about 100, more lenses available
>CONS: Like the A7 it has no IBIS, battery life is still poor compared to any DSLR, no mic or headphone jack and you have to buy the ECM-XYST1M mic to have a mic out jack, ergonomics are more or less the same as the A7 so that could be a pro or con, not weather sealed at all
t. A7 user
>>2807035
Thank you for the a7 pros and cons. Which would you recommend.
>>2807035
I keep hearing people mention "IBIS" when it comes to Sony cameras. May I ask what that is?
>>2807046
'In-Body Image Stabilization'.
>>2807046
In body image stabilization. Most DSLRs (except Pentax and I think a couple Sony Alpha cameras) have IS built into the lenses, and Sony did this with the first line of A7s too. It pretty much meant that you got no IS when using older lenses, and new lenses with IS cost more.
When the A7II rolled around, they changed to in body IS for whatever reason. I would like to think because they found that people were getting the A7 to use old lenses or to save money on lens production, but I could be wrong.
>>2807044
That's a tough one.
One one hand you get more detail and can crop more with the A7 but suffer in terms of things like lenses and the painfully slow startup time of around 2 second (When you first turn the camera on. It goes down to more manageable startup times if you turn it back on after recently turning it off); or you could get the A6000 and still get good large shots, but you won't be able to resolve as much detail as the A7 nor will you get the low light sensitivity. Either way you get shafted by poor battery life and lenses.
I paid high $800s (Like $870 or something) for my A7 used from KEH. I only found out that high $800s/low $900s is used D600/D610 territory and if I got one of those I wouldn't have to deal with the cons of the A7.
If you're looking for a small but powerful camera as a companion to your FF DSLR for everyday photos, or want a camera that can use tons of old lenses then get the A7; but it's not going to replace your DSLR for the more "pro" stuff by any means.
Can't really vouch for the A6000 since I don't have one nor have I ever shot with one outside of a Best Buy, but a friend of mine recently got one as a companion to his aging D3200 and he seems to like it.
>>2807046
the bird
>>2807122
>painfully slow startup time of around 2 second
kek
>>2806316
Is there ebay in canada?
>>2806324
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9d_wsj3i_dM
Do some research bro. Shouldn't be that hard to figure out. If you shoot film you should have one roll to waste. Find the cheapest roll you can find. Better waste one roll than screw up five.
first time buyer i hvae no experience with cams what would be the best cam to buy for thr lowest price
>>2806662
Yes
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 762 dpi Vertical Resolution 762 dpi Color Space Information sRGB
>>2806739
250$
>>2806751
>is it worth buying a $200 DSLR from several years ago?
Yes.
>>2807139
You already have it. It's on your phone.
>>2806203
It's a good cheap camera. Buy a used one
>>2806751
Buy a used E-m5, best bang for buck right now, and stabiliser is great for macro
Slingpacks or backpacks?
I'm a backpack guy but I've been considering getting a single strap one. The thing is I'm worreid for my back I usually carry a lot of stuff with me and the "speed" those slingpacks offer is kinda attractive.
>>2807166
I want to break that guys both wrists
Using a Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 DX on a D5000 (crop body) will work as a 11-16mm or i need to x1.5?
>>2807166
I'm a backpack kind of person. Using a sling or shoulder bag fucks up your shoulder after long days.
>>2807398
It will behave as an 11-16mm but with the crop factor it will give you the view angles across your frame equivalent to a 17-20mm on 35mm FF.
>>2807401
so its not so different from a 18-55mm kit, right? there's any cheap wide angle like Tokina but that will work as a wide angle?
>>2807408
It is an 11-16mm, the kit lens is 18-55mm. The kit lens is also much slower, the Tokina with f/2.8 is considered as a fast lens, especially at that wide focal length.
I have:
- Fuji x-t1
-18-55mm
-35mm
-56mm
-X100t
What do I get rid of? I'm considering trading the 35mm for a 55-200mm also. Thoughts? I do lots of environmental portraiture and travel.
>>2807413
got it. but right now i need a travel/architectural/landscape wide lens, then when it comes to focal length i kinda feel i lost w/ the Tokina so simalar to the kit (desconsidering quality)
If i find the kit lens good enough in most cases does that make me a casual?
>>2807419
Yeah
>>2807420
Beats being a gearfag
>>2807419
Kit lenses exist for a reason. They're "good enough" all purpose lenses for photos and they'll do for average stuff.
If you want things like a wider aperture, longer or shorter focal lengths, or better optical quality then you upgrade.
I'm looking for an entry level Zoom for my Pentax K50, any suggestions?
Are manual lens zooms a good idea? I own a Pentax A 50mm 1.7 and works great for stills, still practicing the manual focus thingy.
If not what's a good budget for a arround 300mm zoom lens?
What's the best version of the helios 58mm f2? I realize they vary wildly in build quality but is the 44-2 better than the 44m or vice versa?
does anybody have any past experience with the Voigtlander VSL 1 and Color Ultron f/1.8 50mm? Wondering if its worth it for $150
>>2807460
It's a soviet lens and the build quality varies from lemon to excellent optics. While they are a bit soft wide open, stopping down to f/2.8 greatly improves the sharpness. Lenses of this era also have a bit desaturated and lower contrast image which can be either corrected in post or used for special portraiture effects.
I have the 44M, which is I believe a 44M-4 or 44M-6 without series number, maybe for export. Generally the 44M, 44M-4 and upwards are of better quality with better coatings as well. If the lens is good, it is very good. Mine is sharp and only exceeded by the professional level lenses in sharpness.
If you get a good one it will be the best money spent on your gear.
See if oddphoto has any on ebay, they usually test the lenses.
>>2807482
Thanks for the info. I'll have to try to see if I can get a nice one. I'd love to use it for video on an a7s I've got some neat ideas and softness isn't really that huge of a problem but I'd probably not be shooting wide open all that much anyways
>>2807460
Try 44-3, it was made by Belarus, usually it has better quality. Mine is very sharp in center wide open.
44-M are often blurry, even 44M-7, tried 2 versions.
Or you can also try 77M-4:
-better optics, more swirly bokeh.
>>2807487
>77M-4
I might definitely have to shell out a bit more for that then. Thanks again
>>2807484
In addition, see if you can get a Jupiter 11 135mm, it is usually flaring heavily, but with the tendency to produce golden flares getting the lighting right can produce very interesting effects. Direct Zeiss copy and is a very-very nice lens to have. Alternative with less nice flares is the Pentacon 135mm but it is difficult to de-click the aperture.
>>2807492
I'd love one of those pentacon 135mm. Right now I'm using a 135mm super takumar that works well enough for now
I'd prefer it be somewhere closer to 50mm in length considering I'm usually pretty close to stuff
>>2807494
which one
>>2807496
All of them are KMZ logo from different years.
I have the Pentacon 135mm but the cheap 6-blade aperture version. Sharp as hell from f/4 and wide open has a dreamy glow, excellent portrait lens. The 15 blade version (bokehmonster) is a dream of many, including me.
>>2807419
Yes but don't buy another lens until you feel the kit lens is limiting you in some respect (need more focal length, wider angle, bigger aperture for low light etc.)
Looking for help with a film camera issue!
I just shot my first roll of film (Kentmre 400 I'm a poorfag) on my new film Camera (Pentax MX b/c who needs fancy features). The problem I encountered was that my 36 exposure roll of film only lasted 24 exposures. I was pretty generous when loading and shot 4 black frames to make sure I wasn't shooting on pre-exposed film but I didn't shoot anywhere near 12 blanks. My cameras shot counter was at 24 when the lever refused to pull any more film from the canister. In the dark I went to investigate and discovered there was no more film in the canister. I haven't developed yet so I'm not sure what exactly happened to the film but I will reply when I do. In the meantime does anyone have any idea why 36exp film would only last 24 exp?
>>2807606
Did the canister actually say 36 shots, or did your dysplexia kick in like when I used to call Portra "Portrita"?
If you developed the film already, check and see if there is enough space for 36 frames on the developed roll. If not, call up wherever you bought the film from and see if you could get a refund.
>>2807606
You probably got scammed, but you'll know for sure once you develop it
>>2807610
>Did the canister actually say 36 shots, or did your dysplexia kick in like when I used to call Portra "Portrita"?
Weird thing is I've used this kind of kentmere a lot and all the other rolls lasted 36exps (this was in my other camera however). I double checked and the canister says 36 on it. I'll go to develop this film tomorrow.
>>2807611
So you think I'll either see a short roll or some giant gaps? I have no idea what to expect xD
>>2805200
I'm looking for a all in one lens for my Nikon D3200. Can anyone talk me out of a Sigma 18-250?
Seems like a good lens for a beginner with good reviews. Will be used for travel and taking pics of my dog. Dog slobber toasted the lens of the original lens that came with the Nikon.
cop? beginner tryna get into photography http://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/pho/5512428193.html
>>2807630
Seems pretty decent if it wasn't lifted off some tourist that wandered too far.
>>2807630
That's pretty good. It's near where I live. Just meet the guy at a police station if you are concerned.
>>2807414
Don't get rid of anything. You might regret it later on. Only get rid of stuff once you have a substitute for it and no longer use it. Why would you consider a 55-200mm?
>>2807458
>entry level Zoom
The kit lens.
is $100 a fair price for a pentax k1000? posted it in the film thread a while ago
>>2807721
NO.
I've found DOZENS of them for <$30. Most of them around $15. And I'm in Canada, so it should be a few bucks cheaper for you.
