Archived threads in /p/ - Photography - 208. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
I picked this up for 75$. How'd I do?
Nikon FG20
Nikon 50mm E
Nikkor 43-86mm
Nikkor 105mm
Albinar 80-200mm
Nikon speed light sb-22
5 Lens filters.
6 Rolls of film.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3264 Image Height 2448
You did nicely.
Now go use it. This place doesn't need more snapshots of gear.
That 105 is nice.
And the strap.
Does the meter work?
Realistically.. How much smaller could a 70-200 f/2.8 lens be for mirrorless?
The Sony 70-200 f/4 for the a7 camera seems to be on par size wise to the Canon 70-200 f/4...
I am really interested by this so if anyone has one or has tried one can you let me know? I am just not sure why people want such small camera bodies (a7 series) if the lenses are still so fucking huge.. Who would want an a7 with Canon/Nikon size 70-200 on the front???
>Who would want an a7 with Canon/Nikon size 70-200 on the front?
People who fell like they must have the latest and greatest of everything no matter how menial the advantage. Besides some guy on a camera blog said Sony was a game changer and another guy on Reddit agreed so it MUST be true.
Optically theoretically no less than 20cm and 7cm thick. And quite bigger than that in real life
Probably within the decade, mirrorless systems will deprecate DSLRs, but it won't actually make a physical difference
The current mirrorless style cameras will then continue to live as the "ultrabooks of cameras". I.e. bad performance and shitty battery life shipped in a small pretty package for normies to eat up raw
Luckily the latter won't completely choke out consumer-level DLSRS, as +300$ cameras will continue to be a market dominated...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>2701498
>mirrorless systems will deprecate DSLRs
And this is where you are wrong. EVFs are not magic, it is a simple substitute for a missing optical system. Also sensor integrated PDAF is nowhere near and cannot be as accurate as a complete optical PDAF system. The mirrorbox is here to stay, no matter how deep are your delusions and your superiority complex. But to see all this you need to be educated in engineering and university level of physics. It simply cannot be expected from an average...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
What's your opinion on the new Sigma lens?
I'm considering getting it as a landscape / astrophotography lens since my 24-70mm f2.8 isn't as wide or as open as I'd like it to be. I was also looking at some of the Samyang / Rokinon primes which were a lot cheaper, but I fear 14mm is too wide, and I don't see much point in getting a 24mm f1.4 since I have that angle already (and I'm going to be doing landscape more than astrophotography so I doubt it's worth it). So, do you think the 20mm f1.4 meets the bill? What do you lenses does /p/...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
they don't even make one for pentacks
Nikon 16-35mm f4 landscape master race
I recently tried my had and perspective photography? Did I do well? Left car is mine, right car is a toy.
any tips would be appreciated. also, perspective photography general
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D7000 Camera Software Photos 1.0.1 Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.1 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 48 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:11:09 17:58:24 Exposure Time 1/30 sec F-Number f/4.2 Exposure Program Not Defined ISO Speed Rating 900 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 32.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 4928 Image Height 3264 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control High Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
It just looks like an out of focus toy car in front of an out of focus real car. What exactly were you trying to do?
>>2701179
more or less make both look like they were side by side, without any real editing or photoshop.
>>2701179
yeah you suck at this.
read a book maybe?
I mostly shoot film, and I also have an OM-D EM-5 with an ok but not great 45mm prime, but I want to get a DSLR to pick up some basic portrait jobs. I was thinking about getting a Canon 5D and a nice 50 1.8 as that seems to be the most affordable way into quality FF. I could also probably swing an 85 1.8.
Is the 5D still a respectable camera or would that just be a waste of money at this point, it being 10 years old and all?
>>2701172
go to the gear thread, you fucking poon, REEEEEEE
>>2701172
It's as good as it was when it was first released.
Unless you're doing long-exposure star trails, it surpasses 35mm in every way except maybe dynamic range. Think of a a 3-FPS motor-drive SLR with AE and a never-ending roll of film.
Read the sticky and use the gear thread next time.
make sure you get one where the mirror's been fixed - Canon won't fix them for free anymore...
Hey /p/, I recently went to San Francisco and decided it would be fun to mess around with my friend's camera. This is my first time ever using a camera other than my phone, so I know i didn't use everything correctly, but I feel I took some alright shots. Any feedback; positive or negative, would be greatly appriciated.
Camera: Nikon D7100
Lens: Nikon DX AF-S NIKKOR
I'm sorry they're so big, I must not have compressed them enough.
Also I was told that centering your object can make the photo boring, I'll try to stay away from that.
All of these photos were unprepared, I just walked up and took the shot.
Shot a second test roll with my Hasselblad. Portra 400.
I'll post the whole roll (minus 3 family portraits).
Please give me constructive criticism.
Why does a dslr need a screen? Why not just have a switch for off, M, A, S, or P, and dials for iso, shutter, aperture, and ev comp? I'd use that camera.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2013:11:04 21:25:52 Color Space Information Unknown Image Width 960 Image Height 711 Scene Capture Type Standard
Because instant review is one of the greatest revolutions in the history of photography.
Why don't you just turn the screen off?
>>2699696
and a car doesn't need windows, roof, seatbelt, or radio, but that's really hard to find because people still like or need various features.
>>2699698
>one of the greatest revolutions in the history of photography
>le chimping face
resize ur snapshit to 1000px pls
read the sticky before toasting
last bread >>2697257
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. Camera Model GR Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:11:04 20:07:42 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 9000 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Brightness -1.3 EV Exposure Bias -0.3 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.30 mm Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal
I kinda have mixed feelings about this photo.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 500D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:11:08 00:09:41 Exposure Time 1/60 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 3200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Partial Flash No Flash, Compulsory Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2699646
>iso 9000
what the fuck
>>2699646
>bread
*thread
Who else here always shoot on ISO 100 (or respectively the lowest ISO possible)?
Under no circumstances I go higher.
Just wondering how (un)common this attitude is.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Leica Camera AG Camera Model S 007 Digital Camera Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Exposure Time 1/320 sec F-Number f/2.0 ISO Speed Rating 100 Flash No Flash Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Unique Image ID 0000000000000000000000000000000000023516
>>2699503
well its hard for example if your doing low light street witch is what i mainly do to have an ISO lower than 800 with any lens past 2f.
but for landscapes and what have you yes i lower the ISO.
its pretty uncommon as a high shutter speed might capture a moment and result in a nicer pic than a lower ISO slow shutter would.
>>2699503
...WHY?
With early digital cameras I always tried to optimize my ISO usage religiously, as pushing a stop higher usually meant terrible things, but with today's modern sensors it's no problem to shoot at 400-1600 and expect little to no degradation.
post em
>>2699450
My girlfriend wants a camera for Christmas and I'm looking for help/suggestions on what to get her as I'm clueless on the subject.
Right now she uses her Galaxy S5 to take photos on. She's not got a lot of experience at using proper cameras so preferably doesn't want anything too complicated to use.
However, I don't want to get her something that's going to be obsolete a year after buying it. So preferably looking for something that's got potential should she want to pursue photography more seriously.
The budget I have...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>2699375
Nikon D3000
get her a cheap film camera (something full manual. a Pentax K1000 is a great beginner camera and quite cheap) and a variety of different film she can experiment with. then with the leftover money pay for her to attend some brief local course on beginner photography (& darkroom work maybe).
she'd probably really appreciate that and it's a lot more thoughtful and romantic than buying a cheap dslr that will absolutely be obsolete very quickly. you could even attend the course together and make it a date thing.
>>2699391
What a fucking retarded suggestion.
How silly would it be to invest in a new Pentax setup when the K1 gets released?
Currently I shoot Nikon, I have been having some issues with Nikon for the last few months (D810 having to go back for repair 7 times in 2 months) I am seriously contemplating a switch to CANON.. But am also thinking about giving Pentax a shot.. But am worried that giving Pentax a shot is basically throwing money into an already dead system..
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi Image Created 2015:02:05 20:23:27 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1340 Image Height 894
Pentax has been said dead for some years and yet they are making money. I think they are stepping up their game with the 645Z and the K1. There will be better service options too. I heard the full frame is delayed because they have to fix some flaws and really want to deliver a good product. I would only change system if the price was right and it fulfills your needs.
Are you shooting professionally, and make use of NPS/CPS? If so, no.
>an already dead system.
You are retarded and this thread is just bait for other retards to tell you how right you are so you can all be blissfully retarded together.
How does one edit like this? Obviously increase exposure but I cannot understand how the colours are still kept from getting too washed out and the contrast is still there. Inb4 hipster
More examples
>>2699014
It's not the editing. It's the light. You need bright soft white light. That's about it.
>>2699017
its literally the editing baka
OP, just pick the RGB curve upwards at middle/upper point and then pick the top down to prevent clipping, and thats it
I want to make some color photographs with black and white RGB filters like pic related. What's the best/cheapest option for color filters? I was going to try colored cellophane but it looks blurry as shit. Is it really worth spending $20 a peice for screw-on filters or is there a better way?
>>2697748
idunno how this works really but i want to know. also, you can't just scan the B&W pics and do it in software? like i said idunno how it works so i might be missing stuff
>>2697748
TianYa square filters off eBay, make sure its the TianYa ones, the ones that look like them, also from China, but are not are unevenly layered and terrible, TianYa are not bad.
They slot into Cokin P holder (which you can also get cheaply from ebay).
>>2697753
You still need to filter each shot prior to exposure.
>>2697754
not for digital
which this fag is probably using
