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: >>2822947
Hey guys! Retard here.
My parents generously gifted me a T5i with a macro lens because they know I like movies, but I'd like to take videos from a distance further than just .8 feet.
What do you recommend for a dumbass newbie film maker?
Wide-angle?
Telephoto?
Let me reiterate that I have no idea what I'm doing. (pic related)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Picasa Image-Specific Properties:
>>2825705
Forget the macro "filters", those destroy your image quality.
Also what lens do you have specifically, just see what's written on it, below the front lens cap.
>>2825706
M58?
efs 18-55mm image stabilizer MACRO 0.25/0.8ft
>>2825705
>macro lens because they know I like movies
What?
If you want to film from further away, you want a lens that has a longer reach. That would be telephoto. Your kit lens that you have will probably be okay, depending on what you want to film (Humans will be fine, tiny bugs will not)
You'll also want a tripod, and probably some sort of microphone
>>2825710
That's a basic 18-55mm kit zoom lens with image stabilizer. It will be good for video especially with the image stabilizer. Seriously, get rid of those macro front filter type converters, they are shit.
Also look up Magic Lantern, it will enhance your video capabilities. And practice manual focusing during video, all the pros and the people who know what they're doing are focusing manually.
A book for starting out (not video, only stills but the concept is the same) is Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson and of course the camera manual. Read them then read again. And again.
Have fun.
>>2825712
>>2825713
my kit lens is macro, I think (pic related)
I just looked up Magic lantern, downloading now. Thanks
I just want to be able to start shooting stuff thats more than a foot away. Does this thing unscrew or what?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Picasa Image-Specific Properties:
>>2825716
>Does this thing unscrew or what?
Yes, the thing on the front of the lens that says "macro" in gold letters is threaded onto the front of the lens.
>>2825716
Yes. Unscrew it and toss it out.
>>2825724
Don't. We all started at the bottom.
Read the manual for the camera a couple of times, and watch some youtube videos on film making 101 and shooting video with a DSLR and it will help you out a LOT.
Any suggestions for a good digital mirrorless?
I've been looking at the Lumix Gx7 or the Olympus em10
If you have any other suggestions, that are in that sorta price range, please tell.
I want one for street photography, and other things, and its easier to lug around then a DSLR.
>>2825735
Lumix has the better AF. Maybe a GR II.
>>2825735
The usual suspects
X100s
X-T10
X-E2
a6000
X70
GR
>Street photography and other things
>other things
Oh, well for "other things", you definitely need a D750 and a 400mm prime. If you try "other things" with a compact, you're just going to get frustrated.
Not really GEAR but I guess I can ask here.
I have been having problems with getting my RAWs to look decent. By now I'm only using JPEG. Here's a screenshot to show you what I mean
there is still this tiny prismatic noise all over the place, even after denoise, sharpen, chromatic aberration correction and demosaic
Is there some setting I'm missing or do I just have to fiddle a lot?
>>2825735
Lumix G7 isn't bad but it is supposed to be a mini GH4 and more aimed towards video-making. But you also get a 600€ lens for just 280€ more in the package. Hell, Buy the set, sell the frame in mint new condition, keep the lens.
>>2825744
That is high ISO noise, it's because you are using ISO 3200 on a MFT camera. Dial down the ISO, 1600 tops.
>>2825744
Use Denoise (profiled) and choose wavelet denoise. Non-local means just shits up the image even further.
Also never ever use the chromatic aberrations module, it will shit up your colors and delete whole tones from the palette.
>>2825746
That's Auto, I'd have to switch to longer exposure and thereby probably to another stabilization method than hand. Also, the JPEGs do MUCH better.
>>2825757
Thanks. Tried, looks like this now
Not really "better" just a different kind of bad.
I'll keep on trying.
But I don't see how RAWS are so much better to work with. Unless Photoroom is somehow 100 times better at this than Darktable and RAWtherapee
>>2825744
is that from a porno or something? she is the teacher and is going to fuck the guy or some shit like that? looks kind of familiar.
All other things being equal, which would get me the better quality product, used or refurbished?
>>2825737
>other things
Are we talking about creepshots? :-)
>>2825773
If you have a fucked up RAW there is not much to do to save it. You can't magically pull out detail that isn't in the RAW.
Learn to stay in your system boundaries, you can also improve low light with flash and/or faster glass, mostly primes.
Oh, some systems have in-camera denoise functions that also alter the RAWs, it is better to turn off such things and have the unaltered "raw" RAW to work with in post.
>>2825773
Why do you have denoise 3 times?
>>2825783
>or faster glass, mostly primes.
Ok I am out of my greek here?
What's "Fast glass"? because that sounds like something a skater would say about glassfiber boards.
>>2825773
Also turn on local contrast. It helps with smaller details to "pop". And that even noise pattern will be removed with the JPEG compression so don't worry about that.
>>2825787
Lenses with larger maximum apertures. For primes, that generally means stuff like f/1.2, 1.4, 1.8. For zooms, usually f/2.8 (As opposed to kit lenses that are usually like f/4-5.6
>>2825789
>local contrast
yes it helped
>JPEG removes noise
sort of...maybe
Yeah I'm starting to see why a four thirds sensor might be a bit light dependant.
>>2825791
Ok. Yeah. I have a 3.5 (although most commonly the device will only allow 4.5) on a four thirds system.
I was considering getting something with more aperture, maybe even something wide for better videoshots of larger scenes or closeups of smaller objects with better defocussed backgrounds.
Is there a list of m42 lenses that are basically copies of other more expensive lenses? E.g. the Flektogon copies, Helios 44-2
>>2825815
Try Camerapedia and mflenses.com
>>2825777
It will be the same. One will be used, with no technical faults. The other will be used with no technical faults.
>>2825744
Your raw doesn't look decent because you haven't pointed it at a decent scene. It's bad light in a bad scene with bad colors. There's noise because you're pushing your camera to its limits.
>>2825795
f/3.5 is considered slow, even for a zoom lens.
>>2825744
Micro four thirds sucks for any sort of noise performance.
APS-C or better.
>>2825824
Thanks. Never knew these sites existed.
>>2825824
Camera-wiki.org is a much better site than camerapedia.
http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Camera-wiki.org:Camerapedia
>>2825888
Learn how to modify light. It is the essence of photography. Bounce it off a wall, use a reflector, or shoot it through a sheet of paper. Even get the light off camera and move it closer to the subject. Anything to make your light source bigger.
Learn how to brace your camera against your body. Practice firing the shutter in such a way that it doesn't disturb the body when you press.
Is the Nikon D750 a good buy? Want to do night photography and some video too.
I'm starting on photography, I'm thinking about getting a Nikon D3300, there's a good offer in my town to get the basic bundle: Body with the 18-55mm for about $390 US.
But I also want the bundle with the 55-200mm lens, but there's no offer for that.
Which one should I go for?
Thanks.
>>2825935
Neither of those lenses is particularly exciting, but get the one with the 18-55, since that's much more generally useful (it goes from moderate wide-angle to short telephoto, as opposed to going from telephoto to more telephoto)
You can always buy more lenses afterwards.
I'm trying to decide which camera to get.
Fuji X-100T or Fuji X-E2s.
It would be used for "general" photography purposes. Street, snapshits, landscaping, etc.
If I were to buy the E2s, I would not be purchasing another lens for it for a while because Fuji glass is so expensive. My major concern is that I won't get good low light performance with the E2s until I get a new lens for it.
I've tried them both, and I like both of them in different ways.
I'm torn between which to get. Can you gents help me out?
>>2825946
Depends on the focal lengths you prefer. The weakness of the 18-55 is that it's pretty slow. You might want a 35/1.8 next. 35mm is "normal" on APS-C, (i.e., neither wide-angle nor telephoto) and a lot of people like that for street. Though some people like more wide-angle. For portraits maybe a 50/1.8 or 85/1.8. Each of these lenses costs something like $2-300.
Shoot with the kit lens for a while and see which focal lengths you like best.
I'm looking for my first camera, have little experience with photography but know what kind of imagery I want to produce.
Looking for camera that creates images with similar values to pic (Decent contrast, vibrant colors, good use of darker values)(I have no idea about photography terminology, either, bare with me)
Possibly even camera being used in pic or one literally held within these images.
As this being my first, kind of a modest price range.
>>2825956
No camera will make your photos look like that. All that kind of stuff is done in post processing.
>>2825957
Makes sense. Recommend me one to take the first step?
>>2825958
Any basic DSLR in the $500 range
Nikon 3200, 5200, Canon Rebel series, 7D, pentax K3, etc
>>2825956
That photographer is Daido Moriyama. He usually uses high quality point and shoots, such as the Ricoh GR1 (film) or GR (digital).
He mentions a lot that the camera is not really important to him in his work. As long as it works and focuses he is happy.
For a first camera I would pick something expandable and adaptable, like a cheap DSLR as >>2825960 says
>>2825956
The good news is, basically any modern interchangeable lens camera can make those images and those kinds of images. Some can do better, some will have ergonomics you prefer over others, and others will offer more features, but you're pretty safe no matter what direction you go. The better values these days are probably Fuji, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax. Canon's behind on sensor tech, but the cameras can still make great images (you'll have more trouble in lower light though) and is generally one of the cheapest systems to buy into if you buy used (don't be afraid of buying used cameras -- speaking of adorama and keh are great to buy from). Pentax isn't super good in lower light, but has a ton of other features. Fuji requires a bit more work post processing/different workflow for good results than other cameras and a more traditional style of handling. The biggest difference between Nikon and Sony is the form factor -- Nikons are DSLRs and Sonys are mirrorless (Nikon has a mirrorless, but you're a retard if you buy one...it's just not what they do well). Nikon has a richer lens ecosystem, but you can also adapt a lot of different lenses to Sony.
If you have a camera store...like a proper dedicated one...near you, go there and actually handle the cameras. Get one you'll be comfortable carrying often and feels right in your hands. Trust me, you'll far prefer one that feels good over almost any specs you can name.
Thoughts on th gx85? I need a small camera and shoot as much video as pics. Im considering either the om-d m5ii and m10ii as well. The gx85 and m5ii both have 5 axis stabilization. 4k would be cool but im more concerned with image quality.
GragsfhgsfgsffyunvVwka
Why the fuck don't all cameras spot meter on the autofocus point? It's such a basic thing and makes any camera that doesn't have it feel like shit.
Sup, /p
I had a canon's 70-200mm f2.8 L IS ii lens, but somehow i didn't like the portraits i get from it.%%the lens was good, but in comparisson with prime lenses it was kind of boring%% So i sold the 70-200 and bought 85mm 1.2, l absolutely inlove with this lens, but want to try legendary 135mm from canon now. %%sometimes i shoot dances so better af speed and more focal length will be useful, at least i think so.%% Does it make sense, to have both 85mm and 135mm? Also i have some doubts about the difference in picture with 70-200mm i had.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Model Canon EOS 6D Photographer SDN Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Windows) Equipment Make Canon Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:04:12 21:33:40 Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Color Space Information sRGB F-Number f/1.2 Focal Length 85.00 mm Lens Aperture f/1.2 Exposure Mode Auto Rendering Normal Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Program Aperture Priority White Balance Auto Metering Mode Spot Flash No Flash, Compulsory Exposure Bias 0.7 EV ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Time 1/1250 sec
>>2825976
Rent it and try it for yourself. If you have 2k to drop on a prime, then spending $100 to make sure you don't regret it is no problem.
So has anyone else tried the new sony app tweak that bypasses the totally bullshit EU 29:59 time limit?
Playing around with my rx100ii and I'm currently at 40mins!
If this shit works properly on the a7sii then it makes that camera an order of magnitude more interesting than it was before.
Sony's prolly gonna come down hard on this shit soon and patch the shit out of it when enough if people figure out that sony's dedicated handycams aren't the only option anymore.
>>2825987
>Playing around with my rx1003
ftfm
>>2825966
You want the Panasonics for outright video quality. The GX85 with an IS lens can do some pretty good stabilization. Otherwise, the M5II and M10II both have pretty good IBIS. The M5II has better video features (mic jack, codecs, profiles), but still doesn't hold a candle to Panasonic's stuff.
>>2825973
because you bought a canon
>>2825976
>those chromeabs
>that busy as fuck background
>shot at f1.2
b-b-b-b-but muh bokeh
grow the fuck up
>>2825976
Get the 200mm f2 or f1.8.
>>2825976
It's not really a great difference between a ~90mm and a ~135mm, as far as I'm concerned.
IMO, only bother if the lenses are very different otherwise, or you often shoot in a studio with a cabled tethered setup where moving your tripod around is a pain in the ass.
>>2825976
Bokehwhoring is literally the only reason the 85mm 1.2 exists. Unless you plan on being a massive bokehwhore, just get the 85mm 1.8 and the 135...
>>2826012
I bought a fujifilm actually. Is Nikon the only company that does this? My nikon prosumer models could handle anything I threw at them: spot meter on the af point? No problem. -2/3 comp on Aperture priority with auto iso? Np. Use af-s for focus trap? Gladly.
How do I know if a particular SD card is a good card? Or do I only need to concern myself with how many gigs and the bit rate?
>>2826041
As far as purchasing it goes, it's just the latter.
When you receive it, just test it for bad blocks, either by reformatting it with a bad block test (which you might have to do anyhow in case it's exFAT and your camera only does FAT32 or whatever), or by just running something like h2testw (or badblocks on Linux).
>>2826041
Bu the big names, I only buy Sandisk cards and never had any problems with them.
Also I set the camera to record to both cards for the important shots so I have backup from the get go.
How safe is it buying a used camera blind on eBay?
I'm thinking about picking up a used t2i body, and it looks significantly cheaper there. Any tips for not getting a lemon?
>>2826048
I got my K-3 used from ebay without problems, most of my (all in fact) lenses too. Photographers usually take good care of their equipment, pros and hobbyists alike. It is very rare to have a shitbucket sold as excellent condition, mostly because some will buy the damaged stuff for parts. There are the "as-is" deals where you can clearly see the damages or the description clearly says what to expect. So if it looks good it is probably good. You can also check the sellers feedbacks and if you see something you don't like you can choose another deal. But that's ebay 101 for everything.
>>2826050
alright sounds good senpai, thanks
>>2826047
> Bu the big names, I only buy Sandisk cards and never had any problems with them.
I've bought many minor names too and as long as the capacity isn't faked (you'll find out with the bad blocks test) it's basically going to be fine. And if they're fake, get a refund.
> Also I set the camera to record to both cards for the important shots so I have backup from the get go.
Redundancy is a good idea if your camera has two SD slots.
That's the actual way to get some data safety, unlike buying muh super awesome expensive brand name storage in an pricey Apple device, which does not work because they *don't* actually guarantee or have more data safety.
Also have that on your final bulk storage when you take the shots off the camera on your SSD or HDD (maybe in a faster NAS).
>>2826048
If it's a REALLY good deal then maybe, but I'd much rather buy used off of KEH.
>>2826055
easy money goy
>>2826056
KEH is run by the Digital Jew too?
I thought that was just Adorama and B&H.
>>2825340
asking from previous thread
>>2826076
Generally primes always have better IQ. If you use wide angle more then it is better to get a prime instead of a zoom. Especially such a long zoom as the 16-55 compared to say a 12-24mm or something like that.
Also primes have bigger maximum aperture than zooms most of the time.
>>2826080
Hmm.. alright. Thanks for answering my question. This gives me something to think about.
I wish there was like an XF 10-24 with weather sealing. Or even just a 10mm WR.
>>2826083
Do you need WR or just like it as an extra?
I have a WR set but my most used lens are not sealed. I still keep the WR lens with me if I ever need it, but not really an issue.
Sealing is a much bigger issue on the body, having a few droplets bricking it is infuriating, even more so when customer support tells you it is not covered under warranty and cheaper to buy a new one.
I'm talking to you Nikon! You too Canon!
Come to think of it the only big company doing repairs is also a Canon dealership and only took up other brands to escape EU monopoly regulations and assume the same bullshit conditions to everyone.
>sir, it's an entry level body, it has no sealing
It's a Pentax K-50 you shit eating assgoblin!
>>2826092
Yeah, I intend to travel to places where the weather's a bit of a gamble/humid & rainy Asian countries; to pair with XT1 weather sealed body.
Here's hoping Fuji releases a super ultra wide WR.
>>2826040
Canon should be the one dying, not Nikon.
>>2826096
Then I suggest getting the WR zoom, the difference in IQ is huge if you pixel peep but getting the framing right it will be no different in A4 size prints.
Why are Nikon and Canon more popular than Pentax? I compared the D3200 with the K-50 yesterday and the viewfinder is miles bigger and better on the Pentax.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 640 Image Height 640
>>2826103
More marketing, more well known, more relationships with the consumer-electronics places where a lot of people buy entry-level DSLRs.
Also the fact that most consumers who buy a DSLR don't know their aperture from a hole in the ground. They buy cameras based on megapixels, not on dynamic range or type of viewfinder or control wheels or legacy lens compatibility.
>>2826103
Not to mention the rugged design and sealing, including the kit lens.
It's totally bananas, but soccermoms only recognize Nikon and Canon as a camera brand.
>>2826105
Hopefully the K1 will sell well.
Shame there's not a cheap 35mm equiv prime lens on Pentax otherwise I'd buy one.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model FinePix S5500 Camera Software Digital Camera FinePix S5500 Ver1.00 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Maker Note Version 0130 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2008:08:03 11:13:05 Exposure Time 1/420 sec F-Number f/5.6 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 64 Lens Aperture f/5.7 Brightness 9.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 40.50 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2272 Image Height 1704 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown Sharpness Normal White Balance Auto Chroma Saturation Normal Flash Mode Off Macro Mode Off Focus Mode Auto Slow Synchro Mode Off Picture Mode Auto Continuous/Bracketing Mode Off Blur Status OK Focus Status OK Auto Exposure Status OK
Any anons recommend a decent hand strap for my mirrorless? Fancy a change from neck strap as it should be easier to remove/replace the camera to its bag.
>>2826112
Peak Design
>>2826109
Yeah, there's the 21mm Limited which is also a very compact pancake design but $400
I just use the 35/2.4 and take a step or two back if possible, if not then the 16-45/4 zoom does the job.
Actually I spotted a few DA* 16-50/2.8 zooms used for $300 and some not long ago on e-bay.
>>2826129
The clutch? Seems legit
>>2826137
There's also a more regular wriststrap with a single anchor lug.
guys please need your help, found someone in my city selling a D750 for 1300$ with 6k photos taken. Is it a good deal?
>>2826158
Yes.
>>2826158
Definitely. Just wipe the blood off of it and you're good to go.
I asked a few weeks ago for your opinion on a Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 and how it would fit my collection of lenses. Today, I'm back just to say thank you to the people who helped me make up my mind.
I bought it, and while I'm still getting used to it and learning to put it to good use, I'm really liking it.
Thanks guys!
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3200 Camera Software RawTherapee Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 127 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 2048 Image Height 1365 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:20 19:21:52 Exposure Time 1/640 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 85.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown ISO Speed Used 100 Image Quality RAW White Balance AUTO Focus Mode AF-A Flash Compensation 0.0 EV ISO Speed Requested 100 Flash Bracket Compensation 0.0 EV AE Bracket Compensation 0.0 EV Lens Type Nikon D Series Lens Range 85.0 mm; f/1.8 Shooting/Bracketing Mode Single Frame/Off Noise Reduction OFF Camera Actuations 16885
>>2825847
All things being equal yes the lower the f/number the better. But for someone starting out just get out and shoot/film and get the skills down.
I still use the 100-400 mark 1 for sports and it doesn't matter that the lens doesn't got to f1. 8 if I don't get the thing I'm shooting in focus, framed and from a good angle.
When I start making fat money I can drop 2k on a faster lense and shitpost on here about my superior gear all day but right now I'm focused and actually getting good shots rather than my glass
I need a video lens for sony a6000
>>2826174
>All things being equal yes the higher* the f/number the better.
The point was not to insult people with slow lenses, merely to explain that f/3.5 lenses are not fast. For someone struggling with low light results, it's good to know that there is a lot of room to improve if necessary.
>>2826109
Vancouver spotted.
Pentax is king
>>2826180
For what.
>>2826180
>need lens for a system that has no lens
fixed that for you
>>2826181
Oh I know, your advice is on point! And I think in his application decent glass is really needed.
I've just seen friends think it's all in the camera they have whilst then sticking those photos in black and white or annihilating them in post. It depends on the subject as with most photography issues
Does anyone know of a good review of the X-pro1 with the most recent firmware update?
>>2825949
bros, plz help?
>>2826213
Not really. What do you want to know?
>>2826215
low light performance with fujis is very good. The differences between the cameras are very obvious, but what isn't obvious to us is your usage, priorities, or personal preferences. If you will never need a lens longer than 50mm equivalent, then you can feel fine getting the X100t. If you will, get the X-E2. The kit lens is fantastic, and won't make you feel limited unless you're literally in the dark, or the focal range isn't broad enough.
>>2826217
I haven't had a chance to use the kit lens in a low light setting yet. But even not at 2.8 it performs well, you say?
I won't be purchasing a new lens for the E2s for quite some time if I get the E2s, but I like having the option if I ever want or need to. Plus the kit lens lets me get a little closer than the X100T.
I love the image quality of both cameras. And I really like the hybrid viewfinder that the X100T has.
In regard to what my usage is, like I said, general photography. I have found MY niche.
So I'll be taking it with me everywhere, doing street stuff, "portraits", "landscapes", "abstract", etc. That sort of thing, you know?
>>2826221
>I have found MY niche
HAVEN'T** found MY niche*
>>2826221
Get the X-E2. If you don't know what you're goign to be using it for, the one that has a zoom lens will be a benefit to you. If after a while, you find that you only use wide focal lengths and wish it were smaller, sell it and buy an X100t.
>>2826216
I was attempting to decide between it, an X-e2 or e1. Would probably use adapters to canon fd lenses or maybe that f/2.8-4 standard zoom. I traded sold all my medium format and 35mm stuff awhile ago and have just been getting by with an x20 but things have changed and I want more camera/lens now. How's manual focusing? Is it ok through an EVF? Does digital split image work? I like the weatherproofing of the x-pro but the X-e2 has a newer sensor and processor. I'm not sure whether or not I'll care for the ovf, the ovf on the x20 is weird to focus sometimes and I often miss the focus and just end up using the screen, I want a camera where I can stay looking through the viewfinder and manual focus well.
>>2826228
Digital split image works very well. However, the EVF on the gen-1 Fujis wasn't great. If the X-E2 is in your budget, that's where I'd push you. If you're using manual focus, you'll want to be on EVF.
>>2826232
That's what I thought. I'm going t have to go to b and h to play with one. My other choice was an om-d e-m5 but I can get a used x-e2/standard zoom for a similar price to the olympus and the 13-50f/3.5-6.3 or whatever it is, and the x-e2 isn't micro 4/3rds.
>>2826233
I can't speak to the E-M5 at all, as I've never held or used one, but I've used quite a few of the Fuji cameras, and after the most recent firmware update, the X-E2 is an excellent camera with very very few compromises.
>>2826223
I was leaning towards the E2s already. Thanks for helping me out.
I would like to have the X100T, but then I have this worry in the back of my head like "What if I can't get X shot because of the fixed focal length?"
>>2826237
Chances are good you won't regret it. The X100 series is very sexy, but you shouldn't sacrifice photos for camera styling. After a while, you can always save up and stick the pancake on the X-E2 and have a nice little compact prime camera. The only thing you would have lost is the OVF, which, for most cases, isn't a problem.
The X100 is a much more niche camera than people try to make it be.
>>2826040
I think so. It just makes sense, right?
>AF-S focus trap
>tfw you will never be able to focus trap on D7000 and newer bodies
Literally trying to decide between the older software and algorithms, and pro ergonomics on a D700, or the D7200 for all the new software and gizmos. ISO performance is the same, so it's all down to ergonomics vs software.
>>2826040
Pentax
/out/ here
It's nice to see some anons actually fairly appreciating Pentax ITT. For what I can afford Pentax is the only camera I can trust for /out/. It's insane to consider other options for outdoor use, without an entirely different set of priorities (if you have lots of money for a more expensive camera, or if you need 20 lenses, etc).
https://youtu.be/sXv2HTQCK6k
>>2825949
I own an XT1 and a x100s.
Both offer things the other does not, the leaf shutter of the x100 is fantastic being able to use any flash at any speed is great and I like the ergonomics more on the x100 plus the silent shutter has come in handy for so many shoots including one in a Church. But X mount has some great lenses like the 16mm and the 56mm. Saying that you can get screw on for the x100 for 28mm and 50mm without any IQ or light loss. If you can live with 28/35/50 get the x100 if not the Xt10, XE2, XT1 are fine choices.
>>2826365
Not that accurate, most manufacturers have rugged and sealed bodies and lenses, what Pentax does is offering it from entry level (except the lowest ones, K-500, K-S1, K-01) including the kit lens.
It means with buying a K-50 or K-S2 you get a rugged weather sealed system from the get go and you can go on a week long trip into the forest and hills with it right away.
On Nikon and Canon you have to buy at least a mid-level body and a pro level lens with sealing to have a comparable setup.
>>2826367
The X-T1 has a silent electronic shutter quieter than the X100, just tossing that out there.
>>2826368
>Not that accurate
>proceeds to say exactly what I said
I said for the price point Pentax is the only one with the rugged/weather seal. I know the others have them but you gotta pay a lot more, especially if you consider the lens. So maybe $1000+ instead of ~$400
>>2826368
Also, "Weather sealing" is a very vague and untested term. In nearly every case, Pentax's sealing is overkill, and totall "unsealed" bodies are actually quite resistant to weather.
Pentax's sealing is undeniably more comprehensive, but just as 14fps vs 12fps doesn't make a difference when you're taking photos of your lunch, Totally weather sealed vs Mostly weather sealed doesn't make much of a difference when you're only really taking it out in the rain a couple of times in your life.
>>2826373
Well I do 98% of my 'tography outdoors, including in rain and snow. But even in nice weather camping is dirty and mucky. I've had my camera slung on my side in pouring rain multiple times, so for me it was totes the right choice
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make PENTAX Camera Model PENTAX K-50 Camera Software Aperture 3.4.5 Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 39 mm Image-Specific Properties: Pixel Composition Unknown Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:04:03 22:40:26 Exposure Time 1/25 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Creative ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash Flash Focal Length 26.25 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1230 Image Height 814 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Macro
>>2826375
For nearly all intents and purposes, the X-E2 is a mini X-T1. Same image quality, same AF performance, etc. Unless you need the burst shooting, or the weather sealing, or the viewfinder, you won't be disappointed by the end results.
>>2826376
It's great to be confident and not have to worry, but the point is, chances are very good you'd be just fine with a T5i and kit lens.
>>2826380
My friends Canon died because he was drunk and left the camera out at night and the dew bricked it. My K-3 and WR kit lens combo went through torrential downpour shooting an event, the K-30/50/S2 is the same with polycarbonate body instead of the Mg alloy of the K-3. It's not just confidence, it is a solid insurance from not getting buttfucked by customer service.
>>2826380
Eh, that's still just an unsubstantiated opinion. I wouldn't risk my investment based on an anonymous opion posted on a Pakistani Dental Forum. Also Pentax warranty covers its weather sealing under normal use. The act of taking a Canon out in the rain will void your warranty.
Sauce: I owned a Canon Powershot that got water damage and although I had bought the $200 superwarranty they said "sorry, our warranties and replacement plans do not cover liquid damage"
>>2826365
WR is a gimmick sell.
Non-"WR" bodies can often shoot perfectly fine in rain for an hour or more without issue.
Also, a few 50 cent plastic bags that any outfag should have in a pocket or bag turns any canon or nikon into a weatherproof camera that can shoot in a full monsoon.
Though 99.9999% of photography isn't actually done standing out in extremely severe weather with buckets of water spraying your front lens and ruining your images anyway, so your priorities are quite dumb.
>>2826388
It's not good for FAST MOVING subjects Someone walking will be perfectly fine. And you only need to use it when you can't make any noise at all. For all other times, there's the normal shutter. I have never noticed banding in any of my photos taken in ES mode.
>>2826392
>your priorities are quite dumb
why u mad tho?
what's so threatening exactly?
>>2826378
I really do like the viewfinder on the X100T. I'm just leaning towards the E2s because I like the option to be able to buy more glass if I want/need to in the future.
With the X100T, I can't shake the feeling that I might regret it with missing shots later because of the fixed focal length.
I know why you bought your Pentax and why you're trying to justify your bad buy with always the same lame arguments, namely: arguing about kit lenses, some gimmick that is more a time waster than something useful (like the astro-crap), weather sealing on lower end bodies, crappy as way overpriced for their optical qualities weird focal lengths primes, of which the only quality is the size. Yep, on a DSLR mind you...
I know you because 5 years ago or so I was about to become one of you thanks to the WR advertising, especially because for me putting myself in rain and snow while shooting isn't something I do by accident, but then I investigated the matter and came to the obvious conclusions, since:
1. The widest WR lens is the crappy as overpriced 16-50mm, with the sdm motor prone on dying on you, so the cheap WR system is in your dreams only
2. Crappy as overpriced lens lineup, even crappier used market (going on the cheap here is way easier with Canikon for example)
3. Limited support from 3rd party manufacturers - harder to justify a line of products for a brand that has the 2% of the market (Tokina has even given up making lenses for Pentax mount, and there's no alternative to their cheap, luminous and crisp ultrawides)
So I choose lenses over gimmicks and overpriced crap and I'm happily shooting under snow and rain since 5 years straight instead of waiting for a lens that will never come up from Pentax nor 3rd party manufacturers, and the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 I'm using isn't advertized as weather resistant and doesn't even have the gasket at the lens mount. It also took a couple of hard beats, I really thought it was over for it those times.
Also, one of the things that always made me wonder is the electric contacts of the Pentax lens mount: they are right there on the plate rather than inside of the camera body, like in the other mounts, I guess I just wouldn't change lenses with Pentax in rainy conditions, thing I regularly did with my mid range body.
>>2826430
That's a hefty butthurt you are nursing there mate. I presume you are the same sad little troll all alone in mommys house, you had your luck with the Sony and Fuji fanboys but this time you are out of luck.
Pentax is not a hot brand. Pentax buyers choose the system after solid research and budget calculations. Pentax buyers will never jump to a brandfag bait because they don't fill their shelves with guff and expensive glass just to brag on a 3rd rate anonymous internet forum and never actually take any photos.
Pentax users don't feel the need to justify their purchase. You are barking up the wrong tree here mate.
>>2826430
oof someone kiss that sore tushy better
>>2826180
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ENZRQH8/ref=gl_it_dp_o_pd_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=3UY1BNHCYGLB4&coliid=I1WERPXDZQSTS5
>>2826430
But you just summed up Sony cameras.
t. A7 user
>>2826485
>power zoom
>focus by wire
Top kek, well played mate
I don't have any AF FE lenses for my A7 yet since i bought the body like a stupid poorfag. Should I get the standard 28-70mm, or preorder the 50mm?
>>2826512
Why do you stick to such a fucked up system? The way I see it would be more beneficial to move to a different system, you would be able to get lenses in your budget range and take shots you could not before. It would only inspire your photography.
>>2826512
Those are very very different lenses. Which is better suited to your shooting style?
>>2826512
>standard 28-70
>it doesn't go down to 24
All my keks!
>>2826515
I bought into it because I have a lot of old Olympus and Canon lenses and wanted a system where I could have the ability to adapt tons of lenses without having to worry about flange distance or crop factors. Turns out I could probably have done that anyways if I got something like a D700/800, but I paid like $880 for this fucking body and I don't know if it's worth taking a price hit to get out of the Sony cuck shed.
>>2826517
Honestly, something versatile at the moment. I have all the vintage lenses, but I find times where I wish I didn't have to swap lenses to get a shot, or times where I wish I had image stabilization. The 50mm f/1.8 doesn't have IS, does it?
I also just realized I could probably get an LA-EA4 and just get some cheap Minolta Alpha glass too, but I don't think most of the older Minolta AF lenses have IS.
Hello, I hope you can help me out here.
I want to buy an entry-level dslr and km going for the D3300.
I saw two bundles on the BEST BUY website (Mexican)
1. D3300, 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8D for $466 US
2. D3300, 18-55mm, 70-300, 16 GB SD SanDisk for $611 US
Which one should I get?
Thank you.
Planing to sell my
Canon 60D
17-55 2.8 IS USM
50mm 1.8
55-250 IS STM
and buy a a6300 for the better video output and continous focusing while filming.
Also need fast enough AF to track racingcars for my Formular student racingteam.
Q: does it make sense to buy an adapter to make my canon lenses work on the a6300?
How bad will the AF be with the adapted cannon lenses
which Sony lenses are recommended to match the canon lenses above?
Any advice on getting a lens with a wide angle for a crop body? Mainly for low light situations .
Preferably under $300 if possible
>>2826581
Forgot to mention that it's a canon body
>>2826559
>1. D3300, 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8D for $466 US
Get this one, it has a better secondary lens than the second one and it costs less.
>>2826541
>Honestly, something versatile at the moment. I have all the vintage lenses, but I find times where I wish I didn't have to swap lenses to get a shot, or times where I wish I had image stabilization. The 50mm f/1.8 doesn't have IS, does it?
So you want a versatile lens, so you don't have to swap... and you're comparing a prime (in a focal length that's not good for portraits, or street/landscape/architecture) to a zoom, and you're still having enough trouble that you have to ask /p/. Interesting.
>>2826581
Rokinon 16mm
>>2826587
>There are very, very few cases in which it's better to replicate a focal length you already have instead of getting a different focal range.
If he goes with the second set he can forget using his gear as soon as the light fades. The 50mm is a fast prime so he can shoot longer and it enables a lot of creative options he wouldn't have otherwise.
>>2826590
If he goes with the first he can't shoot anything longer than a 55mm. The 70-300mm is a shot to long telephoto so he can shoot a variety of other focal lengths and it enables a lot of creative options he wouldn't have otherwise.
Wow, it's like maybe someone with priorities that are different from yours might choose something different!
>>2826590
Nothing says versatile like shooting a 75mm equivalent lens in the dark with no tripod.
>>2826593
>Wow, it's like maybe someone with priorities that are different from yours might choose something different!
Not really, if he's a beginning photographer there is no doubt he would benefit more from a fast prime.
Considering the money he saves he can get a cheap tripod + ND filter and do some long exposures and so much more.
>>2826598
It's not 2006 anymore. high ISO on these cameras is great. Fast primes aren't vital anymore. If he wants bokeh portraits, yeah, get a fast 50, but claiming that you can get good shots in the dark with a fast prime is pretty much bullshit. Getting good photos in bad light requires a lot more than a wide aperture.
If you're going to suggest him a fast prime for his crop camera, it needs to be something wider than 35mm anyways, so he can actually use it for things.
>>2826600
Nah, MUST HAVE 50mm 1.8! No one can possibly find any use out of any other focal length on crop, especially new people!
Sorry if this has been asked all the time but I'm looking to buy a camera that fits these requirements
>light
>not bulky
>can be smuggled into events
>will mostly be used during travel or taking pics in concerts
>>2826609
>what is every compact camera
>>2826609
GoPro
SJCAM
Xiaomi Yi
If you need flash and fantsy pance modes (M, Av, Tv, etc) you have to delve into the endless abominable sea of point-n-shoot camera but I can't follow you through the mirror anon. You'll be on your own anon.
Is the 5Dmkiii too old now?
>>2826629
this is 4chan bro it's not too old until it reaches its 13th year >:D
>>2826638
Sweet that's all I needed, thanks anon- just bought one :3
>>2826641
noice! congrats
>>2826585
You can use that on a canon?
I thought it said Nikon
>>2826702
Rokinon makes them for pretty much all the major mounts.
>>2826180
Minolta MD Zoom 35-70 3.5 VERSIONS
TWO OR THREE
One is not as good.
Two and three optically identical but three has closer minimum focusing distance of 0.4m vs 1.0m.
>>2826641
FYI there are rumors of a 5DIV soon. Prices should fall in a couple of months.
>>2825700
Should I get the Panasonic GX 85 or wait and save up for the Panasonic GH5? I mostly want it for video but photos too.
>>2826609
IIRc there was an anon here that had luck with a panasonic 4/3 interchangeable lens model. G5? Can't remember.
Regardless, it's fucking tiny.
He'd stick a lenscap lens on it for show and it really looks about the size of those cheapo compact point&shoot cams that everyone had before good phone cams.
And he'd smuggle in, about his person on on a friend, a better lens: faster prime, telephoto or zoom (nothing too big).
>>2826040
Seems like Nikon and Pentax have their AF games on point.
>>2826740
It will use the same old sensor, Canon doesn't seem to be interested in improving its sensors shows clearly in recent developments of 70D/80D and 7DMkII.
I expect the 5DIV to be a 5DIII with dual pixel AF, the old PDAF and a limited 4K video support. Also firmware lock-in so there will be no Magic Lantern development for it.
>>2826814
Rumors say 24mp sensor so the sensor will probably be similar but not the same. The thing I'm most exited about is the weight reduction. I tried a 6D and with the 50mm f1.8 I thought the weight was amazing. Anything heavier really turns me off.
>>2826740
>>2826816
I doubt the whole thing will be better than a K-1 or D750, or even be near.
I bet there will be huge influx to both Nikon and Pentax of disappointed Canon users being fed up with all the non-improvement of Canon R&D.
Seriously, the last couple of years was like walking in very small circles while everyone made their advancements. And there is no real sign of any progress from Canon apart from a 50MP FF sensor with worse DR of an APS-C.
>>2826818
I think the K-1 is cool but it doesn't have the lenses I want. Also like I said I really liked the 6D. Not everyone cares about having the latest and greatest. Some people just want a camera that is nice to use. The 6D sensor seemed more than enough for me. I wish it had better DR but I could take that or leave it.
>>2826820
I agree it is still a nice camera, but the 6D AF is very very outdated. Even slapping the 5D AF on the 6D the camera would be still (while nice to use) grossly outdated.
Canon has some deep running problems, either they have run into technological limitations in R&D or have an ignorant management problem, or both.
>>2826822
I'm not a fan of AF and the 6D was pretty bad. I set it to a single center spot focus and if I needed another area in focus I would just half press the the shutter, focus, and recompose. It works unless you are shooting action or close up with a wide aperture haha.
Canon cameras keep selling. When their sales start slumping they'll start innovating. It will probably be too late by then. I want to pretend canon is doing slower updates unlike sony which pumps out a camera every couple of months making the previous model outdated.
I think the 5DS is better than what people give it credit for but it's clearly not what most people want.
>>2826109
I have the fa 35 f2, the m 35 f2 and a m42 35 f2.8 by Schacht
24mm f/2.8STM
55-250mm f/4-5.6 STM
Bower 8mm Fisheye
I'm probably getting all 3 in the next 3 months, which should I get first? I'm thinking one of the wider primes.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 700D Camera Software Photos 1.1 Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.4 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 Vertical Resolution 72 Image Created 2016:05:23 01:08:31 Exposure Time 15 sec F-Number f/3.5 Exposure Program Shutter Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/3.5 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2129 Image Height 1490 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2826956
Bower has a lot more quality complaints than Samyang/Rokinon. I'd suggest getting the Samyang variant.
If you want the wider primes more then go for the 24/2.8 STM, then the 55-250 STM for telephoto fun and then the Samyang 8mm for the ultrawide fun.
I assume you want to go for wildlife with the telephoto so it is better to get it sooner because wildlife starts to move out after the springtime nesting.
>>2826959
I don't have any wildlife to see until I head to Africa in July, I'll probably get it just before I head off.
What kind of complaints have the Bower got? The images in the fisheye thread up here look great with it, isn't it exactly the same as the Samyang one just with a different label?
>>2826962
Quality issues as in bad build quality. Focus ring off, focus ring has a binding zone, decentered element etc...
Generally Bower has more of these complaint than Samyang and Rokinon even if the lens are the same/rebrands. Samyang also has these issues from time-to-time but not nearly as much as Bower.
>>2826985
It means the products are categorized by QC into groups, Samyang and Rokinon gets the higher yield, Bower gets more failed products.
Or simply the better ones get the Samyang/Rokinon badge while the rest gets the Bower, Kenko and other brand painting. The chinese QC and production is usually fucked up in this way, having different brand names for inner and Asian markets, another branding for western. Usually western gets a bit more QC (not much more) while the shit is fed to the inner market and various Asian markets.
I for one would not buy any thing from this Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/etc... group... or anything else from china.
>>2826991
Except it's literally not what's going on here at all. I mean good on you for thinking a little about manufacturing processes, but the only difference between the three brands is the name.
>>2826991
Any source besides what you think makes logical sense to you based on what you think might be happening at a lens factory?
>>2826824
It makes Canon hold its value a lot better, 3 5D models in 11 years is great. I paid 1900 for my 5Diii I will be able to sell it for around 1300 and get the iiii when it comes out later in the year. I've got more than my moneys worth, the D800 can be had for 750. They came out around the same time and its worth half. Even fuji waited 4 years to update the XPRO 1.
>>2827002
They also hold their value well because the last generation has the same features and image quality as the current generation, because Canon isn't doing anything interesting or innovative for anybody but full time sports shooters.
>>2827001
Nope. Hell, the guy thinks Samyang is a Chinese company.
>>2827003
>same features and image quality
patently false and you're fucking delusional.
Each time, they update features Or they update image quality, just not enormous increases to both at the same time at consumer level.
Compare the cost of the 5d mk3 to the 5d mk2 or 6d. No one at all would pay an extra $1000+ if it was identical.
They do pay, because it's not identical at all and you have to be a fucktarded anti-canon company fanboy to believe it for a second.
Compared to the 5d2, 5d3 has
41x the number of cross points. If I'm not gonna shoot center of frame (and fuck the rule-of-thirds) every time, that feature is a huge increase for picture quality (nothing plays a larger part than there being an acceptable focus on the subject)
Better picture quality again with sensor noise. 2,293 ISO vs 1,815 ISO ratings.
2nd card slot - a feature (didn't those not exist for canon?)
6 fps vs 3.9 fps - yet another feature
more than 40% less shutter lag - oh hey another feature
22.3 instead of 21 MP. (Oh no, prosumers definitely need 60 MP to shoot good images, how dare canon!)
better battery life, LCD screen, viewfinder, in-camera software (options pages are full of things 5d2 can't do), higher max ISO, and even a lower MSRP when it first came out than the 5d2 had.
Sure, if they really wanted, they could halve their profit margins. That'd leave the industry more unhealthy, as less money means less R&D (Which is what you're constantly bitching for the results of) and less QC+Support (like Sony where your camera breaks and you have to find a shitty third party repair shop, because Sony has none, that wastes months of your time and large chunks of cash.) That's another factor that decreases resale value. Having that IBIS seems nifty but who'd want to buy a years used one where that fancy system breaks and your sensor is stuck hanging at the wrong angle, with no sony repairmen around?
Canon's model is trusted by far more pros with more experience than you.
>>2827034
>spending this much time and effort responding to a troll
Friend...
>>2827040
oh, it wasn't for the troll's behalf. It's so they don't troll a new prospective photographer into wasting all their money on some gimmick shit.
>>2827043
Still, best not to feed them. Anyone with half a brain knows that extremist posts like that are bullshit, and frankly, if they don't, they need to learn that lesson at some point or another.
>>2827043
>some gimmick shit
Sort of like ultra high ISO, where nobody takes good photos anyways, or sports level AF and burst that aren't useful in your day to day life at all...
>>2827046
If your day-to-day life was actually photographing instead of internet shitposting, you'd sure as hell find effective autofocus to be the most useful thing ever.
But that's not the case.
>>2827047
So you never held or used a 5Dmk2, and then a 5Dmk3 then? Because I used a mk2 for about four years, and then got a Mk3, and for nearly every situation there is, there's no difference. The new tracking is great. I don't use it. all the new points are amazing. They don't work any better than the ones on the Mk2. The accuracy is the same in nearly every lighting condition.
If you're shooting day to day stuff, or street, or landscape, or models, or products, or travel, there's no difference in capabilities.
>>2827051
>I'm talking out of my ass
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/08/01/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras
>>2827056
>I'm talking out of someone else's ass from some room with a test chart somewhere
Have you taken more than 100 photos with EITHER camera?
>>2827059
I have, which is part of the reason I know you're full of shit.
I also know that I can also claim to own a 1200mm L lens on the internet so instead of dicking around with the whole "no you don't" bullshit, I'm pulling in independent, verifiable data.
Autofocus accuracy is universally noted to be MUCH better in all situations on the mkIII than the mkII...hell, I'm assuming you weren't shooting seriously when it came out, else you'd remember the shitshow that happened after people had been using the 5DmII for a year and then they got their hands on the 7D and saw how much better AF they could have had...
>>2827065
So it's about tracking for either sports or very specific part f bird photography. Not exactly everyday use.
I have 27 AF points on my camera and generic day to day use I only use one in AF.S mode.
>>2827074
What fucking part of "all" do you not understand?
Even just using one focus point in fucking AFS, the mkIII is noticeably and significantly better in terms of speed and accuracy.
ALL SITUATIONS.
Also
>implying what you do is generalizable to the population
fuck off retard.
>>2827076
So? I'm already using a better camera than the 5DIII. It is also APS-C.
>>2827076
But it's better than "works just fine"
If the AF performance wasn't good on the Mk2, the hundreds of thousands of pros who bought it wouldn't have. So the mk2 works perfectly fine, and then the Mk3 works better. Great. It doesn't affect most people.
There are areas where Canon SHOULD be making improvements, but isn't, and there are places where Canon has no need for improvement, but is for some reason, focusing on.
>>2827079
>5DmIII isn't better than the mII
>Yes, it is, by decent margin
>nuh-uh, I bet you never shot either
>srsly, you're an idiot faggot
>yea well I don't even shoot it
Are you twelve? Autistic? A raging faggot?
>>2826384
your friend is a retard
>>2827082
Just a different person.
>>2827080
>But it's better than "works just fine"
Not really. Low light AF on a mII might as well not exist.
>If the AF performance wasn't good on the Mk2, the hundreds of thousands of pros who bought it wouldn't have. So the mk2 works perfectly fine, and then the Mk3 works better.
You're pulling the body out of its historical context. Compared to contemporaries, the mII's AF was great. Once the 7D came out, that great turns to headachy.
>Great. It doesn't affect most people.
Except it does, in many ways. It takes a special kind of stupidity or a powerful willful ignorance to assert that it doesn't. Can most people kind of almost work around it? Sometimes.
>There are areas where Canon SHOULD be making improvements, but isn't,
More like can't because of patents, but no one seems to pay attention to that little point.
>and there are places where Canon has no need for improvement, but is for some reason, focusing on.
This statements makes zero sense.
AAAAAAHHHH
Should I buy a nice manual 50 or the RX100 + a regular manual 50
I need a kit for traveling and thought that 3 primes will be enough, but after trying the rx100... damn son, pocketable zoom is a nice thing.
I currently have 15 and 35 on fool frem btw
Why am I even asking this
>>2827003
Ok sure thing.
I hope for your sake you're trolling me, if not your IQ is subpar and you sir are a mouth breathing faggot fuck.
>>2827088
>> More like can't because of patents, but no one seems to pay attention to that little point.
This is a very good point most people don't seem to register. To add to it, would we really want Sony making the sensors for basically every major camera company? I say this as a Canon shooter, I'd rather my dynamic range take a hit than give sony the soul monopoly to the sensor market. Also if you look at the new 80D the DR seems to be just behind the current sony DR so hopefully that will follow through with the full frame line.
>>2827110
*Sole
And source for the 80D thing?
>>2827088
Please post a photo from you last 100 photos where the AF on the 5Dmk2 wouldn't have been sufficient with a good lens on it.
>>2827120
That anon is kinda off...iirc the 80D has slightly worse DR than the 70D because they swapped to a higher MP sensor (making them use smaller photosites)
>>2827120
Ugh I hate it when I make basic spelling mistakes haha.
Top is pushing ISO 100 5 EV 80D VS 70D, bottom is 6EV vs the Sony6300 the latest and greatest from Sony APSC.
I make no claims it's as good but its gotten to the point where it's no longer going to be the main factor in people picking Nikon/Sony over Canon.
I think it's great they are keeping their own sensors and trying to compete rather than just buying from the sony over-lords. Next pic will be 5EV vs the 6300.
>>2827133
Uh, that looks much much worse to me.
>>2827128
What are you talking about the 80D now has better DR than any of the Canon full frame sensors apart from the new 1D that has the same tec. Once we get a look at the 1D's DR it will give us a good idea of what the 5Diiii will be able to do.
>>2827120
Here
>>2827135
Fact is pushing 6EV on the 80D is cleaner than pushing 3 on the 70D, I will take that for what it is.
They seem to be around a 2/3 stop behind, as a Canon shooter I can live with that for the lens ecosystem.
>>2827137
As an astro shooter I like that on a sony sensor (K-3 in my case) you don't need brighter and bigger telescopes to get a good SNR, I can even hike up the ISO to 3200 vs 1600 on Canon to shorten the exposure time.
(Also not having to spend on a huge telescope set because an old telephoto prime lens is enough for most stuff I do and the limited time I have for the whole thing)
I know it's an entirely different area of photography and is actually at the edge of what the technology is capable in the cameras.
Seeing the comparison for everyday or even sports shooting the 80D is not bad at all. Still it is slightly behind two years.
I've been doing some small-time event work with a D700, and I think I'll need an extra body to save time swapping lenses (the idea is one body will be for wider angle shots and the other for close portraits). Local camera store has both a used D700 and D7100 for sale. Should I get the latter or stick with what I already know?
i've a nikon d5000 but i'm feeling like i need to get the next level
i want a new full frame, maybe canon. any sugestions?
>>2827187
>i'm just saying i'm tired of worry about crop. feels bad and don't even can use a 16mm like a 16mm
>>2827189
If you want a 16mm on crop you get a 10mm (16/1.5=10.7) like the nikkor 10-24mm. Lighter and smaller. The end.
APS-C body here with 35 mm, 85 mm macro, and 80-200 mm lenses in my collection.
I enjoy doing nature photography, and I generally go on several nature vacations every year, as well as an upcoming tour of the USS New Jersey this summer. Also enjoy going to museums, aquariums, zoos and the like.
I am thinking my next lens should be a nikkor 10-24 because my current widest is my 35, which isn't really that wide.
The other lens I'm currently considering is the nikkor 16-80 which would still open up possibilities on the wide end, but would also be great as a general walk around lens which I have been looking at for a while.
I know they're both overpriced, but I value sharpness over a few hundred in savings. That being said, I'm not rich enough to buy any FX series lenses.
Any opinions?
>>2827229
Tokina AT-X PRO 11-16mm
>>2827231
How about Sigma 10-20 constant f/3.5?
Half the price of the nikon with comparable sharpness. I am assuming the increased CA isn't a problem considering I shoot in raw and LR should be able to easily remove it, regardless of the lens?
LR will also be able to get rid of barrel distortions regardless of intensity as well, right?
>>2827234
Tokina AT-X PRO 11-16mm. It's a stop faster and a better lens.
>>2827196
Looks soft
>>2827240
Because I used a lower aperture and focused on the horizon, where your eyes are led to. It doesn't show well at this small size, but my print is great.
The sides of an ultrawide image are never the focal point either, they are to add perspective... that's kind of the point. A lower aperture benefits wide angles greatly, unless you're doing something like real estate where it's just about capturing as much detail as possible. People not realizing this is why you see so many disappointing snapshits.
It's a sharp ultrawide, especially in tight spaces. Google some high res sample images.
>>2827248
*Although I have used the Tokina, and like it as well.
Anybody own the nikon 24-70 2.8?
Worth it to buy (maybe on ebay for $1200) for an aps-c body? Some day far in the future I may want to upgrade to full frame.
>>2827267
Go through Lightroom/whatever program and figure out how often you shoot 18-23mm (assuming you're using a kit lens now).
In my case only 15% of my shots were taken in that range. I further went and looked and realized a lot of the 18-23mm shots I either cropped or would have cropped. To be honest if I thought all or even a large majority of the 15% were all critical to do at 18-23 I would have balked.
I'm comparing the Canon 24-105mm but something like 70% of my shots were in that range and a lot so I decided losing the 18-23 was OK until I went to full frame where 24mm would be wider than 18mm on crop on Canon.
That being said, there are times where 24mm is tight on crop and you can't always just back up and get the same shot, and not always in the way you might think (run out of space or something). For example, I was taking a picture of an fighter jet at an air show that was on static/ground display and if I backed up (which I had plenty of room) people were everywhere in the shot. I ended up just doing a panorama which worked seamlessly in Lightroom though.
I just found an old Canon Canonet 28 in my grandparents house and they let me keep it. The only film camera I've ever worked with is a Rebel X SLR, so obviously REAL film photography is very foreign to me.
What kind of batteries should i get for it and are there any good tutorials or guides for this camera or cameras like it? I can't seem to find any.
>>2826991
Anything with a brand name on it will be fine, These exact lenses can be bought new from china for $100 cheaper unbranded. These are the rejects that could damage a brand.
I'll get the Bower simply because I like that name over Samyang or Rokinon
what is the difference between this 2?
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-Focus-Cameras/dp/B004Y1AYAC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1461899111&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+50mm
http://www.amazon.com/NIKKOR-33rd-Street-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00U7Y0Y0K/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1461899111&sr=8-7&keywords=nikon+50mm
Both lenses are the same I think, but one comes with more things, and is cheaper, I dont care about the other things, but is cheaper anyway? why is the bundle cheaper than just the lens?
>>2827179
Sensor performance wise, you'll see little difference. The D7100 will have room to crop though. The D7100 will have newer software and algorithms as well.
The D700 wins out on ergonomics and robustness though.
>>2827311
One is sold by Nikon and one is sold by a third party.
>>2827311
The cheaper one is probably gray market.
Eurofag here, small newbie doubt about buying an EOS M from Japan off Ebay.
I noticed Japanese battery chargers seem to differ from European and American ones. They don't have a regular 2.5a 250v cable that's attached between the charger and the power socket, instead they seem to have two small socket pins on the back, likely to be directly attached to the socket.
Does this mean that, if I get an EOS M from Japan, I'll have to buy the battery charger separately? Also, will the battery be chargeable on a non-Canon charger? I have one for a Sony CyberShot that seems to work in the same way and was wondering if they are interchangeable. Sorry for the n00b question, but I'm still a novice in this whole thing.
I want a lens recomendation. I have a Canon eos 700D with a 18-55 mm.
I'd like to make some macro shots and also have a good zoom level.
Tomorrow i'll have the opportunity to acquire one of these two lenses:
Full Frame FE 28mm f/2.0 (SEL28F20) or the Crop Sensor Sony E 50mm f/1.8 OSS (SEL50F18)
I have an a6000 and i would like to know which one do you guys prefer and why?
What can you tell me about image quality and best focal range for most situations?
Would you use the 28mm for portrait, would it produce the same boke (both at f/2.2-2.8) ?
Is there any diference besides the focal range and the f aperture?
A lot of questions, i hope you guys can advice me for a better purchase
PD. Please avoid "buy another camera" or "sony sucks" i have an 60D, and some canon lenses for school. The a6000 is for my daily walks and spare time, much more easy and comfy to bring with me.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop 7.0 Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4926 Image Height 3400 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition Unknown Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2011:08:22 17:09:02 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 567 Image Height 380
>>2827339
>I have an a6000 and i would like to know which one do you guys prefer and why?
28mm, cuz it's based on FF and chill af on apsc
>What can you tell me about image quality and best focal range for most situations?
28mm has a lot of distortion and chromeabs. 50mm is pretty good. 28mm is a normal lens on crop, perfect for most situations. 50mm becomes a short tele, good for portraits but can get too tight for general use.
>Would you use the 28mm for portrait, would it produce the same boke (both at f/2.2-2.8) ?
bokeh is not dof. dof is how much is in focus. bokeh is how the area out of focus looks. 50mm will have more things out of focus using the same aperture. To see the bokeh you have to look at sample pictures and decide which one looks better. I'd guess 50mm would have better bokeh.
>Is there any diference besides the focal range and the f aperture?
Yeah the 28mm is a FF lens that is wasted on crop. If you have the kit lens stick with that.
Are there any good sub $200 used mirrorless cameras? I'm thinking of grabbing one as a secondary camera to try use some vintage lenses. Maybe a NEX 5?
I'm pretty new to photography. I'm looking for a good quality camera for $500 - $700. It's main purpose will be to take photos while travelling and video as well, but mainly photos. I'm considering Olympus, Sony, Canon etc the 'good' brands. I'd love for it to be durable and not to complicated to handle
>>2827422
is the d3300 what most newbs get?
Looking to get into photography. I don't have enough to buy a new DSLR so I was looking 2nd hand.
Would $300 AUD be good for a D5100 body?
My Dad said I can borrow a few lenses, because he has a Nikon camera too.
>>2827432
I forgot to add too, the camera is only 2 years old, and apparently in good condition. the photos of it were taken with a phone camera, so I think they've bought it and gotten bored of it.
>>2827432
Bumping for a reply
So, how waterproof is d3300? I'm going to buy it, but I live in rainy area and it kinda bothers me. Will light rain fuck it up?
>>2827432
Bumping for a reply
>>2827425
It's what most people who don't know what to get should get. Noobs that don't know what to get but want what everyone else has get the latest Rebel. Noobs that think they are clever because they can use google and only care about numbers on a spec sheet get the latest mirrorless camera (right now A6300).
>>2827470
The A6300 is an excellent camera if you have a mid-sized budget, nothing wrong with choosing it.
But he's on a smaller budget ($500-700 was mentioned)?
