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: >>2870790
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 3657 Image Height 5509 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2012:09:10 13:06:28 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 664 Image Height 1000
Are there any Soviet lenses that are as cheap and good quality as the Helios 44, but with different focal lenghts, like 28mm or 135mm?
I'm currently shooting on my cheapish Pentax K-x and I really love my Helios 44-2, it totally blows my Pentax zoom lenses out of the water in every aspect. I want to get some better gear, but the newer lenses are damn expensive, I'd like to stay with cheapish manual focus ones for now.
Gonna visit the flea market sometime soon, hoping to find something decent.
>>2874279
Pentacon 135/2.8 is an excellent portrait lens, there is a not so cheap version called the "Bokehmonster" with 15 aperture blades.
There are MIR wide lenses that are essentially Flektogon copies and there are numerous Jupiter lenses that are generally have warm color rendering.
Look around the Pentaxforums lens database, there are numerous M42 lenses with example shots.
>>2874279
>Are there any Soviet lenses that are as cheap and good quality as the Helios 44
Choose one here...
>>2874291
>That Tair 3s put on the side
I'm feeling feels right now
So I'm looking to buy an ND filter but unsure of what f. to get.
Going to mainly use it for wide-open portraits in daylight. Was thinking maybe 5stop, but unsure.
>>2874294
Get a 2 stop, 3 stop and 5 stop filter so you can stack them into a 10 stop.
Also get a couple grad filters.
>>2874292
where is it? can't find 3s... ?
>>2874298
Left side. The 3s is the photosniper version of the same 300mm lens. It is godlike sharp and has 3D like images due to different rendering of foreground and background blur/bokeh.
>>2874300
Ah yes I see it now. Im fucking drooling right now. Seems like the only way to obtain them is to "sniper" ebay auctions
>>2874302
how about uploading that entire ebook, dipshit?
???
??
?
Just traded my canon 6d and a few L zooms and Primes for fujifilm x-pro 2 and a set of wr primes. Did I make a good decision?
>>2874305
Nope, you just got cucked faggot
>>2874302
If you are in/around the EU, try Foto Sandor on ebay, it's a german shop and they have a mint condition one for schmeckles.
I was eyeing that one until I got my Bigma.
A good DSLR under 250$?
>>2874315
used Pentax K-30/K-50
>>2874315
D80, D90, spend a little more for a D300 or D7000
Been looking around mainly on ebay for a nice 35mm SLR to get into film photography but there is a huge choice, would be good to hear some views from you guys
Canon AE-1 or Olympus OM-1 or Pentax p30n?
or any other suggestions to look out for?
thanks
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP. Camera Model E-M10 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Macintosh) Photographer Álvaro Serrano Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Color Filter Array Pattern 856 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 90 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 200 dpi Vertical Resolution 200 dpi Image Created 2015:02:19 20:23:24 Exposure Time 1.6 sec F-Number f/5.6 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/5.6 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 45.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2874337
The one you can buy with the least effort
>>2874337
>>2874337
All of them will serve the same function. They have pretty much the same features. Just really depends which camera you like the look and feel of the best and which lens ecosystem you want to invest in. The Olympus is an excellent camera, however finding good lenses for it is somewhat difficult.
The Pentax would be my choice probably. Pentax lenses are pretty good and can be had for pennies on the dollar. The Pentax SMC-A 50mm 1.7 is a great lens and can be had for almost free.
The AE-1 still has a pretty crazy hipster tax on it since it's the quintessential manual film SLR. If you can get one at the right price go for it but don't spend big bucks and expect a camera that's worth the money you paid.
Wheres the best way to sell gear? I literally bought
>D810
>Sigma Art 50mm
>Sigma Art 24-35mm
>Nikon 85mm 1.4
and literally took <200 shots with it; I bought a x100t as a compact camera and been using it more actively.
Is Canon going to release any more STM lenses?
>>2874351
Ebay, DSLR Forums or Craigslist (watch out for scammers).
I personally have had lots of good experiences selling my gear on forums. The people are nice, they do not want to scam you and they usually know the current prices so they won't be like 'Imma bid threefiddy fo it'.
>>2874276
I just bought a 5d mark ii, should I sell my d3100, kind of hesistant about it. It was my first camera.
>>2874383
You should sell the 5DII, the D3100 is the better camera of those two.
>>2874384
>the better camera of those two
It's not.
Why would you even suggest that.
I got a nikon df and 45mm P cheap used. I like it but I'm missing AF, how's the new tamron 45mm sp?
>>2874302
Could you strap a modern mirrorless to that thing?
>>2874385
Because the 5DII is even more ancient than the D3100.
You wasted that money when you could've bought a much better camera. I bet you fell for the muh fool frame meme and went in without thinking.
>>2874391
Yes. On a Pentax body you can also switch the mount from M42 to K-mount and put it on an AF capable 1.7x TC giving you AF function on the photosniper.
If you are referring to that reflex scope then it is there because the rangefinder body is not capable of aiming and focusing properly with that lens. With a mirrorless you just put it on an M42 adapter and focus with the EVF peaking function.
>>2874393
Oh, it is m42? Combine it with a techart pro and you could get some sketchy autofocus working. It would end up moving the camera body to focus though, probaly lots of issues that way.
Can you make the trigger work on a modern digital body?
>>2874392
The 5d mark ii compares very well with the new mark iii, even in its age, the image quality is just as good.
The d3100 just wasn't performing well enough for me in lowlight and I also now need to be able to do video at 30 fps; the d3100 does 1080p at 24 fps. The full frame gives better lowlight performance and it's nice to be able to do large prints should the occasion arise, which wasn't an option before. It was a good choice I still believe. I got a 28-70mmL lens with it too, 3 CF cards, 3 Canon batteries and the charger. I paid a very good price for it, $1100. The 5d mark ii camera body goes for 1k+ in the condition I bought it in, in poor shape they go for 800-1000, that's without the CF cards, lens, and batteries.
It was an upgrade even in the sense of performance, it has a better sensor than the d3100 regardless of being full frame camera.
>>2874397
5DII is fine. I went with the mkIII for dem autofocus points and I still only use groups of them at a time and mostly still focus and recompose.
>tfw I could have saves $1k and got the mkII
>>2874399
That's my biggest gripe with the camera if I were to look for one. I find the autofocus slow and tedious. But I suppose I need to get better at manual.
>>2874346
good advice, thanks man
So I was planning on buying a Ricoh GR but the price just shot up 100 bucks everywhere for some reason.
If I go used, am I going to run into trouble if I get dust in my sensor without any warranty?
>>2874305
LOL
no that sounds like an absolutely terrible decision
>>2874409
just use the center point in the 5DII and recompose. same with the 6D.
>>2874436
Agreed. Not only did he drop a fantastic full frame body for a mirrorless.
He did it for an APS-C mirrorless. And a shitty one at that.
>>2874433
yeah dont buy the gr used
you'd only save what like $200? and run a lot of risk of getting one with dust. just buy it new.
>>2874440
The issue was they were 620 yesterday, and now they're up closer to 700 now.
Hopefully the price goes back down.
>>2874442
>calls people posting in the gear thread gearfaggots like it's some sort of insult
No fucking shit, moron
Please settle an argument for me /gear/, how acceptable is it to call yourself a "photog" in current year?
>>2874470
Unacceptable, just like it was before and forever will be.
Hey everyone, I'm looking for some help concerning buying a camera as a gift. So I'll get right to it.
>gf is a professional photographer
>Vivian Maier is one of her favourites
>Would kill to have a Rolleiflex
Any suggestions on a good twin-lens reflex camera that won't involve me getting a used Rolleiflex and getting skinned for it? Thank you so much in advance.
>>2874478
Yashica Mat 124G. They're a lot cheaper but still well constructed, basically the bronica to rollei's hasselblad. Avoid the earlier ones unless they've been refurbished, they built these well into the 80s.
>>2874496
Thank you very much for your help, I'll look out for that particular model.
>>2874500
terrible, it's a plastic toy camera
>>2874441
I just got a gr2 used for 450
>>2874527
I just sold my dusty GR2 for 450 because the focusing stopped working from time to time.
>>2874534
yeah... case and point. just pay the extra $200 for the camera to not have dust issues.
>>2874276
Has anyone ever DIY adapted a fixed focus p&s lens on a digicam?
Cant find much info on anybody doing this before
>>2874616
because it's a stupid idea. get a cheap russian lens and play with that.
Just bought the Panasonic G7, what should I expect from it?
(Video only)
>>2874634
It takes videos
>>2874639
thank you, wasn't expecting that :)
(Y)
>>2874649
I wanted t know about users experience with it.
I do know more about what i'm talking than perhaps you ever will.
>>2874667
why not just google (name of item + reviews) and scroll down for different opinions?
>>2874671
Because everyone says the same thing and doesn't give it any faults, I want some real, not biased opinion about it.
How does /p/ feel about physical vignetting?
I have a 6D and a 17-40mm f4, shooting at 17 with my usual filter stack makes quite the vignette.
I use:
Hoya Multicoat CPL
B+W 10stop filter
Cokin graduated filters (the rectangle things)
The Cokin filter holder is what makes it vignette the hardest for sure.
>>2874684
>real, not biased opinion about it
I'm sure you'll get that here
>>2874315
I got myself a d300 and moved up to an a6000
the d300 got the job done but the dynamic range on it was pretty bad and nikon glass isnt the cheapest
I'd suggest just saving up money a little longer for a nicer digicam because you'll likely find yourself limited very quickly
>>2874337
Coming from someone who had a canon ae-1 p, i highly advocate against it
You should go for the pentax, you'll have a much better time and have more lens selection
>>2874478
Either a kodak duaflex or a yashica tlr
I have a yashica A and it is p nice
Kodak duaflex is about 20-40$
>>2874337
ftb
I have an S5 pro that has the shutter count as 44 with two smaller zeroes. Does this mean 44, or 4,400?
>>2874305
I did exactly the same thing but came from Nikon instead of Canon, and couldn't be happier.
>>2874337
Get the Olympus. They're super small, and the lenses are great.
>>2874762
Oh, I am. The files are gorgeous, the UX is nice, and I'm loving having a full kit that's less than half the size and weight of my FF Nikon setup.
Honestly I really didn't go Fuji for the retro thing, though. I went with them because I wanted the size and weight advantages of APS-C mirrorless and they're the only company that has a pro-quality body and lens ecosystem for that format. I would've been happy with the less-retro XT instead of the X-Pro, but didn't want to wait for the XT2 to come out or buy 2014 tech.
>>2874337
Might also be worth keeping an eye out for deals on electronic shutter Nikons. Pro bodies and FMs are probably too expensive, but the FE, FA, etc can be found for pretty good deals sometimes and they're actually more usable than the full mechanicals. (Since electronic shutter means not having to deal with fucked up mechanical timing and immediately sending the camera for a CLA.)
I'm looking to get the Olympus E-M10 MkII but I was wondering if there were any other mirrorless cameras around the same range that I should look into?
Also should I even change from my Rebel T3?
>>2874684
>A m43s camera
>No negatives
Is this a joke?
You didn't find a single comment about the terrible sensor?
>>2874696
Last two times I bought from Keh I got screwed (thoughthey fixed it after complaints). I have had better luck and cheaper prices with ebay.
>>2874769
But doesn't Fuji have a very small lwns selection for x-mount? Something like 20 or so lenses.
>>2874790
Yes, but unlike most brands they've "top-loaded" their lineup and instead of a shitload of consumer-grade glass, they have a pretty full set of pro glass and only a couple of entry-level lenses. I think the only things they're lacking in terms of high-end glass right now are a long macro lens and tele primes. There are a lot more gaps in their low-end and midrange lineups, (no 35 f/2 equivalent, for example), but those aren't really relevant to me.
As it stands they've almost got as much lens selection as Nikon or Canon, it's just that they don't have 4 variants of every single focal length like the more established manufacturers do.
I have experience building miniature setpieces and want to try my hand at stopmotion. Unfortunately, my only digital camera is from 2005 and can't even take photos in widescreen. Anything specific I'm looking for in an under $100 camera for this purpose? For example, I've read that some digital camera have an overlay feature that automatically lets you have the previous picture you took overlapping the viewfinder, but I'm not sure if this is a standard feature or something I have to look for specifically. Is there something I should look for specifically for 1:10-1:20 scale? (do cheap digital cameras even have significantly differing lens sizes?)
>>2874801
Just realized I worded that last sentence badly - they obviously have far less lens selection, but they've got all the focal lengths covered, if that makes sense.
>>2874438
Thanks. That's what I've been trying. I guess in a weird way I have this ultimate expectation to have a camera that focuses instantly but, that'll never happen.
>>2874478
Mamiya C330s are another option, good cameras and have the cool-factor of being an interchangeable lens TLR, but they're fucking cinderblocks.
>>2874801
But doesn't something like Sony have all the pro-level lenses (including the long macro and tele prime) along with low-end aps-c only lenses? A quick look at dyxum shows 34 full frame lenses alone.
>>2874828
Most of that Sony glass is FF, though, and that's exactly what I'm avoiding. I want my system to be small and light, and FF lenses are neither.
I won't even begin to try and say that Fuji is the right option for everybody. An A7RII is going to blow it away for landscape or architectural photography, and a D5 or 1DX will destroy it for sports or "hard" journalism. However, my particular niche requires that I be relatively discreet, that I can flow with action well, and that I can publish striking images at web or small print sizes with minimal lead times. The Fuji is perfectly suited for all of those things.
(If you're wondering, I'm a "documentary-style" PR photographer. I work mostly for engineering, aerospace, and automotive firms, and my job is to go to their workspaces or to events they're at and capture their people in action so that the images can be used in company blogs, marketing material, etc. I also do a lot of environmental portraits and a little bit of action shooting, but nothing hardcore. What really matters is that I can get in and out quickly and without being a big distraction, and Fuji's perfect for that.)
Have Olympus TG-4 and hitting the beach next weekend. Anyone have experience with the fisheye converter? Wondering if iq is decent and if the converter lens let's water in.
>>2874684
>real unbiased opinion
the fact no one owns the camera here to appeal to an opinion should suffice
Shooting with a 50-100 1.8 sigma when ever i shoot wide open on Aperture priority my exposure goes -5 stops.
even indoors causing it to under expose
outside shutter speed is 1[8000
indoors its 1/100-1/250
on a 70d
what am i doing wrong?
>>2875018
Exposure isn't manually set with aperture priority?
That is weird as hell.
>>2875038
there should be a way to manually set it in AP..going +/-, at least mine does anyway
I've got a Fuji X70 on the way, wavered between it and the GR, but decided using the tilting screen as a kind of waist level finder would give some nice flexibility on the street.
People have said it can be tough to use the LCD in bright light though, and I'm used to the OVF on my other cameras. Is parallax really that much of an issue to worry over when it comes to buying a standalone hotshoe viewfinder? How close does your subject have to be before your framing is fucked?
>>2875046
can't you get filters for the screen? like a uv/shaded plastic cover?
>>2875047
I'm sure there are options out there, but depending on how wowed I am by composing with the screen I'd probably be thinking of an OVF anyway
>>2875049
Just learn hyperfocal distance and shoot from the hip. Just like with the GR.
>>2874305
this is bait
pls convince me 12 megapixels is enough
pls
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:07:03 05:31:48
I'm going to new Zealand tomorrow. I have a Canon 700d, kit 18-55mm, nifty 50, and an 8mm Rokinon fisheye. I'll be backpacking so I can't take my photography back pack with me. What would be the best way to transport this? Should I take all my lenses? Only one? Not really for anything artistic, just higher quality holiday happy snaps with my friends. Anyone gone backpacking with a dslr before? Advice/tips?
>>2875090
I'd bring the kit and the Rokinon, I don't think a vacation will be about artsy-fartsy nifty 50 shots.
It would be different if you had a 35 or 28mm instead of the 50mm because it is much more useful on APS-C, in that case you should take the two primes.
In any case see if you can find a decent padded insert or a padded case for the camera and two lenses and put it in the top compartment of your backpack. Easy reach, in case you don't keep it on your shoulder/neck.
>>2875090
>>2875103
You can also make paddings from poly-foam, cut up one of those things you bring on beaches/camping, put it on the wall of a smaller case, put a linen bag or a simple cut out rug from one of your older shirts and BAM, you have a padded case for your photography stuff.
DIY goodness, only takes about 10 minutes tops.
>>2875113
>I'm going to new Zealand tomorrow
>get a fuji xe2 + 18-55 2.8
How retarded do you have to be if you can't comprehend the first few words of that post?
>>2875090
Take the kit lens and the 8mm, all you'll need. I live in NZ, go around the islands heaps, if you don't have a photography bag, just keep the stuff cushioned between clothes when you go out for hikes. Worked for me pretty well on my trips previously. Obviously just take where you leave your bag, not to forget it or sit on it or anything. But 3 day hike, my camera was well off between clothes and a sleeping bag.
take care*
>>2875119
Honestly you kit lens will be more than enough, take the 10-22 instead if you want to, but also consider the 50 prime alongside so you have something for the reach, 10-22 is really wide, even on crop so a 50 on crop would be nice to have handy.
>>2875119
That could be the most useful, but I guess you will miss the kit lens longer zoom.
You know what you shoot most of the time, if you mostly go wide then take the 10-22.
>>2875126
Sounds good, also try not to take your camera to the beaches, it's winter down here and it gets really fucking windy, especially on the west coast by Muriwai and Piha.
>>2875127
My friend took his DSLR down to a beach one.
Sand still comes out of the thing years later.
>>2875127
or maybe just dont change lenses on the beach you retard
>>2875138
that won't prevent sand from fucking up the front element and getting in the focus ring; yes that's happened to a mate, his focus ring is still scratchy.
>>2875144
>the front element
has nothing to do with image quality and can be deeply fucked up without harming the image
>>2875145
When did this become an argument about image quality?
ok, ive looking for a new computer setup, because my laptop has a bad monitor for pp and It never looks the same on other devices.
I thought about getting a decent computer which is good for PS and Lightroom (friend of mine is into IT and is going to pick one), a calibration tool and a nice monitor
I've looked around a bit and found this wideass LG Monitor. Price (~430€) is allright for my budged and Ive read a lot of reviews.
Is there another good one I should consider?
Do you have a personal favorite you can recommend?
>>2875149
Name of this one is btw: LG 34UB67-B.AEU 86,4 cm (34 Zoll)
>>2875149
Go on ebay and you'll find cheaper 27" 1440p IPS monitors from Korea which use the same panels as the high end Dell monitors, or the previous best Apple monitor.
That aspect ratio is pretty pointless, and it's probably only TFT. You can do better for less.
>>2875152
>probably only TF
It says its TFT-LCD...
which kind of monitor should be better for PP? LED,TFT,LCD,....?
>>2875087
D700 is still a preferred camera to many.
>>2875149
It depends on what level of work you do. If it's hobby only then a used Dell Pro display is nice and cheap, it's what I used in the last few years. Angle is high enough that it doesn't fuck with brightness and tones when you shift in your seat or move around your desk, calibration can be done but I found it is good enough right away for the simple prints I do. For the web your laptop screen is good enough to be honest.
If you do pro work then getting a good photography optimized display is inevitable, until then the one I said above might do the job.
>>2875158
yeah I get paid for most of my work (events, sometimes shootings) and got booked for two weddings.
I'm at the point where I can say I should build myself a good setup for pp. Which monitor do you use now?
>>2874276
What's your insight concerning an EDC camera for less than 350$ (new or used) , knowing that i'd like to have an viewfinder (EVF okay).
I was thinking about the OM-D EM10.
thanks guys !
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP. Camera Model E-M1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Color Filter Array Pattern 824 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 120 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2014:01:29 06:06:50 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/11.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/11.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Cloudy Weather Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 60.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2875087
Sensor/body age matters more than megapixels.
>>2875159
I still use my trusty Dell pro whatever display, no calibration. Mind you I'm only doing hobby. (P2412H, I had to take thing off to look at the back)
Thing is most offices buy the computers in bulk with displays so when they do a purge (every 2-3 years usually) they "throw out" those perfectly usable displays.
If you can't buy a good photography oriented display then look around for sales on these displays, there is actually a few shops in my larger area that buy these bulks and sell them for cheap. My display cost like $130 something in my local europesos.
>>2875160
m43 is better than a point and shoot, but it is certainly no APS-C sensor. If you are going to shoot low-light shots quite often it will come up short, but for EDC it is a great combination of size and quality.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2875166
>the pro compacts
Both have miniscule sensors. Would be better off with m4/3s.
Sony and Fuji make some with compacts with APS-C and even Full Frame sensors.
I'd take a look at the Sony a5100/a6000 too and Fujifilm XT-10. They can be had for just a little more and have a considerable quality increase.
>>2875168
I guess I'll stay with m43 because reflex-like quality doesnt worth the equippement.
I'm looking for a cheap camera because for me an EDC should be "breakable or losable" without too much of a loss , and I'm still learning , that's why I want an EDC mostly for takings pictures everyday and train my eye , I'm not looking for extreme sharpness.
But thanks for your advice anyway !
>>2875171
Only reason I mention the APS-C mirrorless is because I saw the a5000 for $400 the other day and almost bought it myself.
You should be able to find a great used m43 for dirt cheap though.
>>2875173
I'll check it out , what's your advice about m43 bodys (as I said not looking for high-end recent cameras , almost bought a 5d classic as a second body) ?
>>2875176
To be honest, I haven't done much research into new m43 bodies.
I hear very good things about the OM-D though, and the few short times I have used it, it felt VERY good in my hands. Not sure how cheap you could find one though. New here is comparable to or considerably more than an e or x mount camera.
>>2875179
Are EVF good nowadays ? I remember I had one on my DMC-FZ8 (old panasonic Bridge) and it was awful , and I dont think I can shoot correctly without a viewfinder , or is it comfortable to shoot with an LCD screen after a little time ?
What are peoples views on the Nikon f601 / n6006
seems to be a good enough camera, i would like a more basic 35mm SLR but this is for sale cheap near me and if you ignore all the auto features and just use it manually it should be a good camera to learn on?
>>2875184
Modern ones are pretty nice.
Except for some of the earlier add-on ones for m43(which I don't think are even produced anymore) thay are all crystal clear and quite smooth.
I have been using the a7ii lately and am absolutely in love with it.
>>2875188
That's strange, I use cameras and their viewfinders, electronic and optical but never ever felt emotionally towards them. They are just work tools, something to get the job done. Definitely not love interests.
>>2874634
I have the G/ and I took some decent videos with it. Official works only these so far.
https://vimeo.com/user53455283
Advice:
get a decent camera mic, get a video tripod (fluid-dampened pan+tilt) and get an audio recorder
And for fucks sake learn to work with Video- and Adio-programms. I use Audacity and Blender.
I have the 14-140 kitlens that comes with the most expensive version. it's a good allrounder for video and you get a 600€ glass for just 250€ extra.
And last but not least: get used to lowlight conditions or buy good lights, because the MFT sensor is weak as shit. but the 4k video modus is really good and in video, the new Panasonic sensor actually has some pretty decent noise performance
>>2875187
If you get it get lots of rechargeable AA batteries
Okay so the cnet article in the wiki is down so I guess I'll ask here
I want to get into photography and to learn what types of photos, or maybe even videos, I enjoy taking the most so I think I want a cheapish point and shoot camera, is it still worth getting one since film cameras are so cheap? if so which ones are recommended?
>>2875195
I can't tell if this is a serious comment by a non-native English speaker or a smart-ass one.
>>2875204
>>2874634
Meant to type G7
Also, another one: Yes it's not that great for photography, but for videography it's good.
ANd you will get A LOT of hate by gearfags for not using their preferred system.
Wait a little longer before byuing a new lens, and when you do, try to get one with a wider angle of view than 14mm and a bigger aperture. make it count. Look into the used market.
What's a good place to get filters cheap and what does +1 +2 +4 filter mean?
is there a pro apsc pentax? ive loved the pentax shots on the recent pt.
>>2875215
stops of nd
>>2875216
That's because most people who buy Pentax are not bumblies like most people buying Canon, Nikon or recently Fuji, it's not because Pentax makes images look better than them.
>>2875216
There is the K-3 and K-3II as flag ship APS-C, but from Pentax the only Pro-level body is the K-1 apart from the medium format bodies.
The K-3/II is nearly there, apart from the accuracy of the tracking AF. Outside of action/sports it is definitely pro material with the right lenses.
also this >>2875241
A pro photographer knows what he's doing and can make breathtaking shots with simple lenses on a beginner body.
>>2874689
Pls response
>>2875246
I assume you use wide angle. Wide angle always vignettes from filters because the effective thickness increases towards the edges making it higher stop ND.
Two options you can choose, you can buy those very expensive very thin filters or get an extra high stop filter so you don't have to stack them. Or both.
Otherwise it can be easily addressed in post.
>>2875239
They look perfectly clear, is that supposed to be? because I thought simple ND filters were like sunglasses
>>2875253
I know all that. I was asking how you feel about physical vignetting from actual gear.
>>2875268
What do you mean "feel"?
It's not an emotional thing, it is there, you address it or leave it. There is no reason about being sad, happy or whatever lovey-dovey about it.
>>2875208
Should I just get a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W800 and quit bumping?
Is the pentax k-1 worth it over the k-3II? Mostly shooting the night sky, scenery and wildlife.
Currently have sony a5000 and thinking of upgrading
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-5000 Camera Software Capture One 8 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 500 dpcm Vertical Resolution 500 dpcm Image Created 2016:04:11 01:28:57 Image Created 2016:04:11 01:28:57 Exposure Time 50 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 6400 Brightness -9.5 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Image Width 1000 Image Height 666 Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2875295
No. Your phone makes the same photos and the zoom lens is horrible.
>>2875297
The full frame sensor will handle noise far better than apsc which is ideal for nightscapes
>>2875297
Both have integrated GPS with Astrotracer, so long exposure should not be a problem. Not very good on UWA though.
K-1 has 5-axis sensor shift IS, K-3II has 3-axis.
Crop factor helps with more reach on wildlife and the burst rate can be more helpful. Both very much capable of scenery/landscape and night sky but the K-3II is better for wildlife so that would be my choice with the DA* 300mm lens.
>>2875155
He probably means TN.
>>2875087
Don't think, just shoot.
>>2875160
Any of the small M43 bodies and the pancakes are a sex combination.
>>2875187
Why bother? Unless you want an AF body for like $50, you might as well find a F90X or F100.
>>2875297
Motion correction on the K1 is surprisingly effective. It makes pixel shift for landscapes surprisingly easy, if there's not too much wind. You can hand hold it, with care, even.
I think I am going to get the Pentax p30n with 50mm lens
Any views on this camera? Or anyone had experience with it?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 800 Image Height 547
>>2875382
It has program mode much like on DSLRs, so it will be easy to use. Look up some nice A-series lenses on ebay, they are (usually) cheap and sharp as nails.
you can see some here: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-A-Lenses-c28.html
thinking of grabbing my first dslr to test the waters with. found a well used canon rebel XTi/400d for around $80 body only. as of now i'm hard pressed to find any reason not to pull the trigger, anything I should consider before buying?
>>2875384
Thanks man
>>2875397
extremely outdated sensor but it's only 80. might not be in top condition. I'd get it if I had canon lenses
>>2875420
also found a nikon d70 at the same price point, and some d200's for $20 more. would either of those be better options? i would still need to grab a kit lens
>>2875424
not sure about those. I just bought a nikon d80 and it's a great camera
>>2875424
D200s are dated, but they used to be the semipro body of the day. If it's in good nick, give it a shot. D70 and D90 were the prosumer bodies at the time.
>>2875397
Perfect cheap dslr to learn with. Got all the manual controls you need to know. I used a 350D for several years before upgrading. Stick with that for a while and you can learn for sure.
>>2875397
I still only have a 450D and it's fine (pic related). Camera is only half the story.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 450D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Elements 8.0 Macintosh Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 1882 Image Height 2824 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:06:21 21:29:11 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/6.3 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/6.3 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Partial Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 90.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 666 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2875434
I purchased mine for around $300 w/a 18-105mm. So that sounds about right
>>2875207
he's gonna need a bandolier filled with AAs
I asked a while back on getting my first camera and was told an A6000 was a good choice. Can anyone offer any advice or tips as well as recommendations on what to buy with it?
Also where would I go about getting one for a decent/cheaper price.
>tfw student trying to manage his poorfag money
>>2875528
A lens. Too bad the system has none other than the crazy expensive ones over $2k.
Should've got a Pentax or Nikon instead or even a Canon. You got cucked by the sony shills, mate.
>>2875534
I haven't bought it yet. I should have clarified. I'm not a professional I just want a good one for taking pics occasionally
Should I be starting off with a DSLR to explore multiple focal lengths, or could I manage with something with a fixed focal length?
I've heard the latter will be more limiting, but will also help with composition (which seems like the hardest aspect of photography to learn) considering you'll be forced to play around with your single focal length in order to capture shots.
>>2875528
Kit lens is fine to start with. It wont win any awards for sharpness, but it is a good, compact all aroubd lens.
I'd get a prime with it too, the 50mm (SEL50F18) is $200 or so. The Sigma 30mm f 2.8 is even cheaper if you are short cash. Reviews for it are pretty awesome too.
>>2875534
Sony APS-C has lots of varied, affordable lenses.
Every lens for the full frame version of e-mount starts at $1,000 except the shitty FE 50mm.
>>2875559
the advantages of primes are that they're faster, and that even quite basic ones are often on a high-level, sharpness and image-quality wise.
If you just want to learn more about composition and how to do interesting things while being limited to single focal length, just tape down your zoom's setting with a piece of masking tape to remind you to not use it.
Saw a Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC USD pre-loved for $750. Also a Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 ATX Pro for $450
Which one should I cop?
Needing an UWA for my Canon EOS 6D.
>>2875559
primes have better quality images. most cameras throw you a kit 18-55mm. Use it to understand distance/framing/focusing etc. You'll begin to learn and understand how you see things and how you enjoy what the photograph looks like. Set the kit to 35mm or 50mm and don't change it and just walk around shooting stuff to see what it looks like before dropping money on a prime
>>2875434
The D200 has a better sensor than the 70 and a far more sexual body than the alternatives. The controls are far superior and it has lovely color rendering. Also it can meter with old manual lenses. I think it's the best option without a doubt.
>>2875608
Scrollan, saw this.
I agree, although the battery life is kinda shite.
>>2875612
True, the battery itself is cheap and plentiful though, I still easily get at least 500 shots out of one, and the camera doesn't discriminate against third party batteries. Also the battery grips are so dirt cheap now it's easy to use 2 at a time.
I have a D300 now but I'd love to convert a D200 to IR or something.
>>2875617
I'd still go for the D200, it has more features and they all share variants of the same sensor as far as I know. My first DSLR was a D60, great IQ but it was too small and the lack of internal AF driver. I upgraded to D80 a year or so later and liked it a lot better, but there's just no comparison to the pro body and ample physical controls on the D200.
>>2875633
I have the d80. what is a comparison to the d200?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D80 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 8.6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/5.1 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 738 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 87 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 999 dpi Vertical Resolution 999 dpi Image Created 2016:07:03 23:29:31 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Not Defined ISO Speed Rating 500 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 58.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Landscape Gain Control Low Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2875638
I haven't handled a D80 in a while, so I apologize if I miss something, but off the top of my head, D200 has:
Features:
Faster shutter (max 1/8000)
5 fps continuous
Mirror lockup
Metering with AI lenses
Writes via 4 channels to the D80's 2
Magnesium body, weather sealing
Uncompressed NEF option
Intervalometer
Controls:
Dedicated Qual, WB, ISO buttons
Focus switch has Continuous, Single, and MF instead of just AF/MF
Focus zone mode selector switch
AF-on button
Metering mode switch
Locking dial for shutter drive mode, S, CL, CH
Probably I missed some stuff but the D200 is definitely a step up.
Anyone know why the Ricoh GR was sub 600 dollars (even 550 at one point) for the past few months and has moved up to 700 dollars over the past month again?
I want one, but I want to spend 550, not 700.
>>2875648
GR isn't produced anymore.
You are probably looking at GR II at 700.
Either that or all the decently priced GR have probably sold out and you are stuck with the companies still listing it at MSRP.
>>2875649
I meant II, sorry.
Thoughts on Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM? Might get it. Will be using on crop sensor. My other lenses are 50mm f/1.8 and a 100-300 USM
>>2875657
If I could I would
>>2875657
if you're not going to be putting a full-frame sensor behind it, why not a Sigma 18-35/1.8? Cheaper, faster, I believe a bit smaller.
>>2875661
will be upgrading to full frame in the future so this is looking into the future as well. Don't wanna buy APS-C only lenses cause I'd have to spend more money once I get the full frame
I've been using an X100S and I think I'm ready for a new lens.
Should I get the wide range adapter or the tele adapter? I'm leaning towards tele, as 35 is somewhat wide already.
Asked in /vid/, might as well ask here too:
>looking at a used A7sii where I live (not US) for about 570USD off the price of a new one (713USD off retail price direct from sony).
>wondering if there's anything in particular I should watch out for in regards to a used specimen of this particular camera? (apart from the obvious that is). I recall that with sony stuff there's always the issue of buggy or faulty first batches etc.
>Seems to be in good nick; grip has some white residue on it (hand cream?), but that's about it for the visual inspection. Sensor's clean etc. Haven't tried a lens on it yet but will when I go back to the shop next.
>The store has a good rep, and they have an active influx of used goods that seem to be bought soon after the come up for sale.
>Just wondering if there's peculiarities with this specific model that someone in the market for a used one should be aware of.
I'm generally leery of used goods like this; always wonder why the original owner got rid of it in the first place.
Still under official warranty of course.
Thanks, /gear/
I found this old Tamron 28-200 lens in my parents' photography stuff and I was wondering if it will work with a Canon 6D? I wanted to double check because I don't want to fuck up my camera
>>2875668
if it's EF mount then it should work fine.
that said it's an old superzoom so you can expect it to be pretty shitty optically even when it is working fine.
>>2874689
What even is your question
>i get really hard vingeting when i mount countless and countless glass planes in front of my zoom lens, what to do?
Buy a prime or
Don't use filters
>>2875669
>that said it's an old superzoom so you can expect it to be pretty shitty optically even when it is working fine.
Some can actually be pretty decent.
I don't think that is one of them though.
>>2874276
>Canon 80D
With this (and I'm assuming others on Nikon side etc) out, is the quality of crop sensors level with full frame now? Comparison pics of the 5d mark III vs the 80d were basically identical. My question is, besides taste and specific things not related to quality (amount of bokeh, speed of shots, ability to use this or that lens), have the 80D and similar crop sensors reached the level of full format in terms of sharpness, color representation, aberration, etc?
And for god's sake whether you say yes or no, say why
>>2875707
>level of full format in terms of sharpness, color representation, aberration, etc?
They've always been on the same level. The sensor technology is identical. None of the above qualities are affected the size of the sensor area.
>>2875707
It has been since the Pentax K-5 and the Nikon D7100
They are the best crop prosumer bodies. Canon is coming up nicely but still behind in a few aspects, not that it would hinder your work. (for example DR on the 5Ds /R is somewhat the same as on the K-3 and D7200)
>>2875565
Thanks, so kit lens with the a6000? I take it the a6000 is a great beginner camera then. How much £ would this generally cost (so i dont get ripped off) also would I be better off buying refurb or brand new? Sorry for all the spoonfeeding
What are some good manual focus lenses for Nikon? Preferably cheap because I'm a poorfag
>>2875723
28mm f3.5
So I was thinking about the K-1 crop mode. It makes a thin bracket in the viewfinder, right? It doesn't black out the rest of the frame? If yes then wouldn't it be good to buy a 28mm lens and use the crop mode for street stuff so I can see the surroundings around the frame?
Then with the flick of that knob-switch thing I can switch back to full frame and shoot wider scenes, this way I can use a single prime for two focal lengths.
>>2875721
a6000 is a great value. A good design with a great sensor and good native lenses. Every button is customizable and you have some customizable control wheels too. It really blows the older NEX designs like the NEX-3 out of the water.
Kit lens is a good start, but you will want more. Again, I'd recommend the 50mm prime. It is a little long on a crop sensor, but it is great for portraits and gives that cool blurry background (bokeh) that everyone likes.
As for new or used, I'd go new, it is pretty cheap to start with. If it is a refurb, make sure it has some kind of discount.
>>2875736
>sony
>good native lenses
>kit lens is a good start
>recommends 50mm on crop
>cool blurry background (bokeh) that everyone likes
>I'd go new
This post is full of cancer
>>2875732
pantecks doesn't even 28mm.
>>2875743
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-FA-Lenses-c30.html
>>2875743
>http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-A-28mm-F2.8-Lens.html
>>2875747
And don't forget
>http://www.pentaxforums.com/lenssearch/?minfl=28&maxfl=28&type=Prime&inproduction=0
>>2875749
Ooh I didn't know the database has that neat search feature
Convention season is here
Should I roll with the 18-135 Pentax kit lens I have for it?
Or should I move to a sigma 18-35 and use my 50 for any close up shots I want to take?
>>2875752
The 18-135 while still one of the decent travel/superzoom lenses from all the manufacturers is horrible on both ends and only mildly usable in the middle.
I'd go for the 18-35+50 and ditch the 18-135. Even the normal 18-55/50 kit lens is sharper with much much less CA than the 18-135.
>>2875754
Thanks anon. I noticed I break my camera out much more for conventions than anything else so I thought it might be time to move to something more specialized in the short range.
>>2875750
The 50mm is way less useful on a crop, but many still like it. You can get a 35mm and it will be pretty similar fov as a 50mm on a full frame body.
Some of my favorite shots are with an old Nikon F-mount 50mm on a crop body.
>>2875768
;_; idk the difference between these or what they mean.
>>2875795
Then you should research more on photography in general before you buy a camera, not to mention for the body only.
You should look up the available lenses and then select a body for it.
Don't forget the mirrorless bodies are only small without lenses, once you put a lens on they are just as big as a DSLR.
I'd suggest you look around the Nikon and Pentax lenses and what they are capable of and how much they cost. I can tell for babby primes Nikon and Pentax are the best choice, both offer dirt cheap 35mm and 50mm lenses that are very sharp without much aberrations.
>>2875795
what you need is a sony a6000 and kit lens.
>>2875795
I'd be really suspicious if someone would be going out of his way to get you to buy a Sony gadget.
>>2874276
>No pointless (brand) arguments and dickwaving allowed!
granted I haven't been on /p/ in a while but who the fuck is OP and where did he get the authority to tell us what we can argue about in /gear/?
FUCK CANON
FUCK PENTAX
FUCK SONY
>>2875823
*waves dick*
>>2875795
You really should look more into how digital cameras work, specifically lenses.
There is a common saying, "Marry the lens, date the body." Unlike old film cameras, a digital camera body quickly goes out of date. 5 or so years later you will be wanting a new body, but a lens can last forever if properly stored and taken care of. I have a few lenses I use quite often that are older than I am.
So you should first decide what kind of photos you want to take and what lenses you will want to do so. Are you going to just take casual pictures of family? A kit lens or a few cheap primes will do. Shots of small things like flowers or bees? Gonna want a macro. Pictures of the next H-IIB launch? Gonna want a telephoto.
When you know what lens you want, pick a body. A mirrorless body IS smaller and lighter, but a lot of people imagine them to be pocketable like a cellphone and that just isn't true.
One of the main reasons mirrorless cameras are so popular is they can adapt almost any other lens from other cameras including those from the film era.
A DSLR also focuses faster, though with each generation this becomes smaller and smaller. I don't think it is an issue anymore for most types of photography.
As for what brand to buy? Up to you. The Sony a6000 is a nice camera capable of taking nice pictures, but Sony lenses can be a little pricier than others. Newer Sony bodies are considerably more capable than the a6000 too.
Another mirrorless worth looking into is the Fuji X-mount mirrorless cameras. They use a slightly different pixel pattern on their sensors that some people think produces a better looking image. They lack lenses now, but are constantly adding new ones.
Pentax (K-S1, K50, K-70 etc) is worth looking at if you are interested in a DSLR (outside of Canon/Nikon I mean). They have some affordable bodies and lenses, and for awhile were one of the few companies that had DSLR bodies in colors other than black.
>>2875841
>Pentax (K-S1, K50, K-70 etc) is worth looking at if you are interested in a DSLR (outside of Canon/Nikon I mean). They have some affordable bodies and lenses, and for awhile were one of the few companies that had DSLR bodies in colors other than black.
Not to mention in-body sensor shift stabilization, something that the A6X00 and Canon/Nikon lacks and some special utilization of said stabilization system.
And pro-level features in their entry level bodies.
Is there a better option than the QPIX 35mm negative scanner for similar money?
How do you guys digitize your film?
>>2875866
They any good?
My grandmaw bought one for slides, I tried to set it up, but never got it working.
I figure it would just be easier to send it somewhere to get digitized. Would most likely be done with a higher DPI scanner too.
>>2875880
i am looking to get one so cant tell you if its good
apparently it can scan at 4800 DPI which i think is pretty good?
i would rather do it myself than send the photos away every time i finish a film
>>2875803
You obviously know nothing about what you're talking about. Have you ever even held a micro 4/3 camera?
>>2875888
>m43
>relevant
>ever
You must be joking, famillama.
>>2875697
>doesn't answer question
>primes never vignette
Thanks /p/
Gonna ask in this thread again:
I noticed Vimeo and Flickr had the same layout. Are they in any way connected? Can I bundle them somehow?
>>2875896
They're as relevant as the photographer using them, gearfag
>>2875803
I should research but I don't know where the best sources of information are or reputable and well respected photography based youtube channels. Also I heard DSLRs are big and chunk in general, so atleast a mirrorless will be easy to carry around in general right?
>>2875815
As I've been told many times.
>>2875822
I heard there are many sony shills on here so idk if I'm being persuaded into buying a bad camera or a good one though apparently it is good.
>>2875841
Anywhere I can learn this stuff besides "just google it" I'd rather have a good and easy to understand explanation than countless pages of babble. Also thanks for the help, I want to take casual pictures, I'm not seeking a career or anything but I'd take pictures at concerts occasionally, maybe places around london when I'm exploring and maybe outfits/fashionwise stuff since I'm pretty interested in that. Also mirrorless seems really interesting with the lens adaptation, all these new names of cameras to choose from.
Judging by my description of things I want to photograph, what would you reccommend also I really appreciate all the help man.
>>2875912
digitalrev tv on youtube is pretty good. But it triggers some like RLM so..
a mirrorless compact will be almost as big with a decent attachable lens as a dslr, so you'd either have a dslr with a small bag or a mirrorless in the pocket and maybe the lens in a smaller bag or either around your shoulder/neck
>>2875912
>Also I heard DSLRs are big and chunk in general, so atleast a mirrorless will be easy to carry around in general right?
Depends on the specific camera, there are mirrorless cameras larger than some SLRs, but in general, as far as the body is concerned, you'll always save on size and weight in some way with a mirrorless.
Lenses are a different story, while a mirrorless can have smaller lenses due to the reduced flange distance, the longer the focal length the less you save, since a 200mm lens will need to be equally long on any kind of camera. A 35mm lens however can be very compact since it no longer needs to clear a 30~45mm long mirror box by adding extra lens elements to reproject the image.
That said, I have no problem carrying around a 2.5kg heavy camera, so easy to carry is relative. For my hands something like the A7 series is actually so small that it's hard to use without finger acrobatics.
What are some good entry level sliders (for video)?
>>2875954
A tripod balanced on two legs.
Hey guys, i have 1600 bucks to spend on a camera and a lens for video purposes only, could you help me decide between the G4, the 80d or the Blackmagic pocket cinema camera . if you have any other camera that i should look at, that would be also fucking awesome
>>2875970
i meant the GH4
>>2875955
With a kit lens? Sure. Two months later you will definitely start to feel held back by the lens and when you start to look around for something to move on further you will realize how much the system is limited.
Sony is a gadget seller and makes it's cameras accordingly, most users never go further from the kit lens.
If you feel more in yourself it would be better to research more and getting into Nikon or Pentax on the DSLR line or staying with mirrorless and getting a Fuji something instead.
Also shopping for the body features and then looking for lenses later is all kinds of stupid. You should look at the more prominently used lenses of each system and then getting a body for those you like.
Start by searching for the systems on Flickr, like googling "Nikon Flickr" and the likes, look at the photos, look at what lens was used and investigate further. I myself researched two months before I settled on my choice and never had a single regret. I also quickly learned that the body is only there to hold and drive the lens and acquire the image. The real magic is in the glass and 20cm behind the camera.
>>2875866
I'd been thinking of using my phone with macro attachment to shoot small portions of the film at max res, then stitch them together like a panorama for a final image of decent quality.
I saw a website once where some dude this this, but with a 1" sensor compact camera, and it came out looking better than a v700 flatbed scanner.
>>2875964
You rang?
Considering a budget of 500 to 700€ for a canon zoom lens, would you rather pick a 70-200 L non IS, or a non-L IS ?
So far I've only used < 50mm prime lenses, but I'd like to get into more fast paced action, motorsport mostly, but also air shows and sports events, only in daylight.
So I'm not really familiar with what matters the most when using a zoom lens in these scenarios, which is why I'm asking you. Considering you had to choose, would you rather use a better built lens with no IS, or would you compromise on picture and built quality just for IS ?
I know what IS means it term of stops, I'm more curious about whether things like mechanism and material quality matter to you.
Thanks!
>>2876004
I think all Canon 70-200s are L lenses.
Anyway IS helps you avoid blurring from handholding at low shutter speeds (slower than 1/35mm-eq focal length is the rule of thumb) IS doesn't help you avoid blur from something that is itself moving quickly. So if you intend to shoot action, you'll probably be above the shutter speeds where IS helps you anyway, so I'd go for an f/2.8 non-IS. The extra stop of aperture *will* help, since you can trade it for a one-stop faster shutter speed.
as for build quality, any Canon 70-200 is going to be well-made. Just pick one in good condition if you're buying used and you should have no problems.
>>2876006
Sorry for not explaining any further, I meant if not Canon L, then any zoom lens with the same form factor, and most likely more range, like the 70-300, 55-250, or even other brands like sigma.
Of course used vs new is another concern, as a 70-200 f4 new is basicaly the same price as a f2.8 used...
There's a store nearby that sells a refurbished 70-200 f4 for 475€ with warranty.
Could someone recommend an entry level prime lens and 18-55mm kit lens to use with a nikon d200? Budget would be <$100 for each.
>>2876004
I'd buy either a Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC or a Sigma 70-200/2.8 OS HSM
Much better value for your money.
Is the difference between the X-E1 and X-E2 really significant?
So the GR II price is fluctuating up and down over the past few days.
What price should I wait for it to be at? I'm not even sure what it's been in the past.
>>2875990
Yea I've seen a lot of videos on YouTube of people doing this with their DSLR and a light screen, seems to give good results
I found out my dad has an Epson rx640 flat bed scanner that I am going to try first though
>>2876042
Enjoy your newton rings
