>/p/ tries to street
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icE9hKCGjos
>>2719862
When I go out to shoot street photos
>Gonna snap some real interesting people
>shoot photos of anything but people due to social anxieties
One day.
>>2719862
>Using a DSLR's OVF to manually focus
>Not replacing the focusing screen with one that uses a microprism and a rangefinder
>>2719882
>street
>DSLR
getta load of this peasant.
>>2719884
>gear
>mattering
Get a load of this commoner.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows) Photographer unknown Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:10:21 21:11:56 Exposure Time 1/180 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias -1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 20.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2719884
>not using your ass crack as a distraction so nobody notices your camera.
>>2719887
It's almost as if some cameras are better suited for different things.
>>2719949
If you think a DSLR is a hindrance for street, you don't understand street, or humans, and therefore you're a lost cause anyways.
>>2719951
If you don't think other styles of cameras have benefits over DSLRs for street
>you don't understand street, or humans, and therefore you're a lost cause anyways.
>>2719955
Good street needs: Speed, accuracy, and flexibility. Everything else is placebo.
>>2719956
>Speed
Not every moment in life is decisive and whimsical, it sounds like you don't think of what the shot you want to get looks like in your head before trying to take it
>>2719956
I mean, if you wanna make the "you can take any picture with any camera" approach, feel free. I totally agree that any photographer worth his salt should be able to take great images regardless of the camera.
It's ignorant to say that all cameras are created equal when it comes to certain styles of shooting though. You certainly wouldn't say all cars are more-or-less the same for certain styles of driving.
Even if all cameras were identical performance wise, even just the look of a camera can have large effects on people's perception of you (and thus you can get very different pictures). There kind of is a reason nearly every contemporary street photographer tends to gravitate away from SLRs (most using rangefinders / mirrorless).
You're basically gearfagging, just in the opposite direction.
I saw Eggy irl about 3 minutes ago shooting street with a big ass DSLR like nobody's business. It's only a hindrance if you let it be, it's an issue of attitude.
>tfw I've shot street with a 4x5 Linhof
kek
>>2719966
I can't see how rangefinders are physically any good at street photography. Everyone knows they have parallax issues and their lenses generally can't focus as close as an SLR lens.
I like using a 35mm lens, but shit I gotta get in close! What kind of street photography is /p/ even talking about?
>>2719975
>Everyone knows they have parallax issues and their lenses generally can't focus as close as an SLR lens.
not relevant for street. literally talking out of your ass about things you ignore. keep shooting macros of your cats and figurines.
>>2719975
>What kind of street photography is /p/ even talking about?
photos of streets
>>2719975
>parallax
is it 1944? no? then shut up fuckwit
>>2719976
seriously? You're talking about yourself there buddy. I actually like to frame my shots and get close to people on my SLR and be able to focus. Sorry. I literally cannot see how good street photography can be done with a rangefinder. Most shots are just too far away and lousy, man.
And please reply with some meat in your post rather than just typing something up to act tough. Grow up.
>I literally cannot see how good street photography can be done with a rangefinder
Well just because you're an idiot doesn't mean other people are
>>2719981
>I literally cannot see how good street photography can be done with a rangefinder.
>thinking gear matters
Get a load of this commoner.
>>2719981
please show me just one photo taken on the street with a 35mm lens focused under 0.7 meters.
>>2719976
>can't focus as close
>Nikon's 50mm f/1.4 for m39 mount could focus down to 0.4 meters
>They even made a Micro-Nikkor for their rangefinders
>>2719983
Physical limitations actually do matter, do you not know basic differences between a rangefinder and SLR ??
Yeah guys, call me names, but nobody has posted anything to disprove what I'm saying. You guys are probably too socially scared to even do street photography.
>>2719981
>I literally cannot see how good street photography can be done with a rangefinder.
>look im a huge retard hurrr guyse grow up k
wew pal.
>>2719986
Here, let me help, faggot.
Google Henri Cartier Bresson. Because clearly you are a high school student in Photo 101 and took an image of your parents on the street with your mom's old Nikon FM, and now are an expert. If you actually knew Bresson previously, you wouldn't have posted such an asinine statement, so we all know you're full of shit.
Also, yes please post just one photo of your street photography. Give yourself some cred.
>>2719975
>I can't see how rangefinders are physically any good at street photography
The OVF. A larger FOV than the image will be (frame lines) is a huge, huge thing, no frame blackout either. There's a reason teh x100 series and X-Pro 1 have been so wildly successful. 1:1 viewfinders allow you to keep your other eye open as well with some practice.
> they have parallax issues
Extremely minimal in real world use.
>can't focus as close as an SLR lens
>I like using a 35mm lens, but shit I gotta get in close!
>Most shots are just too far away
I mean, I don't think many good street shots are done with focus closer than 2.5 feet. For a lot of lenses, the comparable rangefinder is in fact closer focus (35 1,4L @ 1m, 35 1,4 lux @ .7m, for example), so I'm not sure why you keep bringing this up.
When nearly every top street photographer uses them, you should probably take a long look at yourself as to why you disagree.
>>2719997
I wasn't the one saying they can't focus that close you prick, I was against that argument as well by bringing up examples of close-focusing RF lenses
>>2720004
Yeah, which is why the
>see
and using your comment as an example as a post that disproved what the DSLR guy is saying.
>>2719995
>other eye open with rangefinder
>tfw left eye dominant so I can't take advantage of it
I tried rangefinders but due to using my left eye for focusing I sticked with using an slr for street. Rangefinders do look nice I believe but as a poorfag as well my OM-1 and ME Super feels fine. They are also small and lightweight. :)
I can focus my 50mm f/1.1 on my M way faster and more accurately than my 50mm f/1.2 on my Nikon SLRs.
>>2720015
Accuracy tends to come from focusing aids, like said before, modern DSLRs aren't designed for manual focus, so their focusing screens lack any of the focusing aids that would help with focusing manually
>>2720039
why is that? i remember my ae-1 had like a prismatic effect that made it very easy to focus. now that my eyes are older i can't even manual focus on my new dslr at all because the focus screen offers no help at all. why did they get rid of that?
>>2720047
because they significantly darken the view finder and aren't necessary.
It's kind of like how BMW finally said "fuck you, I don't care if you like to shift, you suck compared to this computer" with their M5 and started making them automatic transmission only.
>>2719862
pretty accurate
>>2720047
You can just buy a focusing screen and put in your dslr. The meter might be effected though.
>>2720039
>>2720140
Nikon doesn't make them anymore, 3rd party ones suck, and the newer Canon cameras don't even allow changing the FS. So yes, you're right, but only on older cameras.
Also, yes I've changed all my Nikon F cameras to microprism spot screens but that doesn't work for some lenses and focus accuracy is still easier, faster, and better with an RF.
>>2720196
No one even cares, you'd think the df would have just come with a good screen but it didn't. I'm hoping Pentax' FF has factory screen options since Pentax but I'm not expecting it.
>>2720208
Nikon wants consumers to buy new lenses. I'm still surprised the DF has the pre-AI flip-up feeler thing installed. I think it was a small concession, but the shitty focus screen was just a "fuck you" to the MF guys.
>>2719975
Being able to see outside the frame help a bit, and RF lenses have really smooth and short focus throw.
>>2719862
Beat me to it.
Though there are probably some people here that would try the whole camo bit on the street in a desperate attempt to get creep shots.
>>2719862
Oh no! That was the 'Family Jewels' flash!
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 278 Image Height 299 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:10:12 23:23:04 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 186 Image Height 200
