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: >>2855399
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 20D Lens Size 17.00 - 85.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 2.0.3 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 1621016270 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2007:06:05 11:26:31 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/10.0 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/10.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 28.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3504 Image Height 2336 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Program Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness High Saturation High Contrast High Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Image Number 132-3286 Color Matrix 0
>>2859220
Thank you come again
why are pentax fags always the biggest gear fags yet are the ones that give people shit for being a gear fag? Is it the underdog mentality?
>>2859225
I don't know where your delusions come from but the Pentax guys are nothing compared to the Sony fags
guys did I fuck up buying a T6i for my first DSLR?
What could I have bought that would have been better?
>>2859264
Go outside and take photos.
Any tips on cleaning a DSLR sensor? I've read a couple tutorials and it doesn't seem too terrible, but if anyone has any advice I'd love some.
On a similar note, any tips for keeping my camera as dust free as possible while changing lenses? I do a lot of backpacking so I'm never really changing lenses in ideal conditions. (Canon 70D)
>>2859268
>Any tips on cleaning a DSLR sensor? I've read a couple tutorials and it doesn't seem too terrible, but if anyone has any advice I'd love some.
Just buy the cheapest cleaning kit on amazon.
>On a similar note, any tips for keeping my camera as dust free as possible while changing lenses? I do a lot of backpacking so I'm never really changing lenses in ideal conditions. (Canon 70D)
Don't worry about it.
Just bought pic related. Did I fuck up /p/?
>>2859309
It says "PRO" three times on it, it must be good!
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2746194559/ricoh-introduces-weather-resistant-pentax-k-70-with-hybrid-af-and-pixel-shift
>$649
canon on suicide watch
>>2859218
Happen to have any programs to recommend to secure a SD Card and get rid of the white space/ensure no recoverable data?
>>2859342
I'm a canonfag and think this looks mint for the price. In body stabilisation and proper weather sealing at that price point seems very impressive.
>>2859348
and the pixel shift.
that's like getting a sigma foveon without the cripple.
>>2859351
Lel I also have a foveon. How does the pixel shift work?
>>2859353
for pentax, they move by 1 pixel, 4 times.
so you get full colour info instead of bayer interpolation.
for olympus, they move it half a pixel, 8 times.
then composite it as a high res file.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=pentax_k1&attr13_1=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_2=oly_em5ii&attr13_3=nikon_d810&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=64&attr126_0=highres&attr126_2=highres&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.2187616560984707&y=-0.6261545940690323
>>2859309
I have one and I think it's decent enough. I'd rather have the carbon one with the twist locks, but it's a good tripod.
You're going to want to replace the cork pad with something more grippy since your camera will droop downward in portrait orientation if you're using anything larger than a 50mm.
>>2859351
It's not the same at all you retard.
What are my options in terms of 70 to around 120mm, sharp, preferably fast Canon lenses for less than 299 USD?
Can I get IS at that price point?
There are too many to pick from and too much info to sort through to figure out if they're shit.
Canon 35mm L vs sigma art 35mm? Anyone have both? Will be used on 6D.
>>2859382
Look at the 80-200mm 2.8 L on ebay. Negative on the IS.
>>2859406
35mm f2 IS > Art > 35mm L > 35mm f2
>>2859411
Hitting up Disney and looking for a one lens walk around solution and thinking 35mm will fit the bill. Thanks!
Planning on getting fujifilm x-pro 2 with 16mm, 35mm and 90mm all the weather sealed versions. Any reason I should not?
>>2859265
>>2859276
Already have been doing this. I'm a car guy and I'm supposed to be going to a drag race tomorrow so hopefully some good shots there but I'll be limited on angles because dragstrip shots are pretty much taken from one angle and that's it.
good though, glad to hear I didn't totally make a mistake.
>>2859418
It's fuji.
500usd budget but I want a mirrorless to take around for street photography and shitty concert shoots.
Should I get a 2nd hand sony a5100 or fuji x100s/xm1? I've heard good things about the sony but I'm worried about lens, since there's not much options for the former plus kitlens cannot be manually focused.
>>2859421
Is fuji not fag enough for you?
I have a budget of 350 shekels to spend on my next gear purchase. The thing is that I'm between a Tamron 70-300 VC USD and a Fuji XQ2.
I currently have:
-D3300 body
-AFS 35mm f1.8 G prime
-AFS 50mm f1.8 G prime
-AFS 18-55mm kit lens that I treat as a 18mm f3.5 prime
Long story short, I work six days in a row and rest two, leaving home at 16:15 and coming back at 3:15 am. My job implies lots of walks from one place to another in the centre of a really touristic city.
If I buy the glass it'll be to explore new kinds of photography (mainly outdoor sports and nature in general, including birds) in my free time.
If I buy the Fuji I'll take it as an everyday carry in my work's messenger bag, shooting street and cityscape; mostly in low light conditions (night in a big city).
I know I'll eventually end up buying both, but that will take months. So what would you get first /p/?
>>2859418
If you wear glasses, or big viewfinders are a huge plus for you, or you think you might want a battery grip, waiting for the X-T2 might be good for you, but other than that, it's great. I don't have the 90mm but only hear good things.
any shoulder strap recommendations?
tired of using the neck strap my camera came with
>>2859446
Put your strap around your should instead of your neck.
Bam, instant shoulder strap.
>>2859353
it's basically a multi exposure stack
>>2859382
second hand 85 1.8
>>2859426
I would buy the compact camera. teles are not very useful.
Is the manfrotto compact advanced a good tripod? Or are there better alternatives in the same price range? Mainly going to use it for when i take landscapes or long exposure city shots and for when I go traveling.
>>2859448
that's the first thing I did, the strap only reaches center chest
don't want/like the camera in my armpit
>>2859218
>>2859188
>I would say the Minolta 40mm f/2, but you already have a 40.
>Affordable and Leica don't mix.
Oh man, I wish I would have see nthat before.
I have a few MD and A mount Minolta lenses and love them.
Are there any other mounts that require just a super short adapter to be used on E-mount?
>>2859523
M39 screw mount lenses, Contax G.
>>2859523
rangefinder lenses can be shorter. but the short distance makes image quality terrible on the corner of an image sensor depending on lens design.
>>2859497
Oh, not you again.
If you enjoy going out into the world telephotos are great. Even if you're not shooting super small objects you can do all kinds of cool stuff with the DoF and compression effects, and the Tamron 70-300VC is a killer lens for the price.
>>2859542
>If you enjoy going out into the world telephotos are great.
except they aren't.
>Even if you're not shooting super small objects you can do all kinds of cool stuff with the DoF and compression effects
while getting raped with composition because of distance
Show me your awesome long photos.
>>2859544
Ok.
Dude wants to:
>explore new kinds of photography (mainly outdoor sports and nature in general, including birds)
You can't do that WITHOUT a tele, man.
>>2859547
>>2859548
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D300 Camera Software Capture NX-D 1.4.1 W Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 1000 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 450 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:06:06 17:52:10 Exposure Time 1/1000 sec F-Number f/9.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 500 Exposure Bias 1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 300.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 664 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control Low Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2859549
>>2859547
>he works 6 days a week
>can carry the compact every time
>might occasionally go bird shooting
>then he can use his tele
which do you think will result in more photos?
>>2859550
>>2859551
Uh, gee, I dunno. He already has a tiny, extremely light and portable DSLR. Which will allow him to take more types of photos?
The compact can't do anything the 3300 can't, and it sure as shit can't take wildlife or sports photos.
I'd invite you to the birding thread to argue with us about how useless teles are but I'd rather not have you shitting up the thread.
>>2859547
>{number}_{number}_b.jpg
these are clearly ripped from 500px
>>2859553
How about you stop stealing photos?
>>2859554
>>2859555
No, they're from my Flickr which I don't care to share with you. I'm not digging through old hard drives, finding, and resizing originals to satisfy you when I can do it so much more quickly and easily.
How about you blow me?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D2Hs Camera Software Capture NX 2.1.1 W Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 878 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 450 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2011:02:17 11:37:36 Exposure Time 111111/20000000 sec F-Number f/7.6 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 400 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 300.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2324 Image Height 1462 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown ISO Speed Used 400 Image Quality RAW White Balance AUTO Image Sharpening HIGH Focus Mode MANUAL ISO Speed Requested 400 AE Bracket Compensation 0.0 EV Tone Compensation NORMAL Lens Type Unknown Shooting/Bracketing Mode Single Frame/Off Color Mode MODE3 Lighting Type NATURAL Noise Reduction OFF Camera Actuations 22227 Saturation 2 NORMAL
>>2859426
I'd recommend buying a compact if you're carrying it with you all the time. Having a compact with you at all times will allow you to take photos of whatever you want whenever you want.
If you've got a compact tripod you should be able to do quite well.
>>2859553
Not everyone can carry a DSLR, but it's incredibly easy to carry a compact that small around.
Also bird pics are probably the 2nd worst type of photography just behind pictures of bridges and skylines.
>>2859557
>le download and rename
lel
>>2859557
>bird photography
literal point and shit
>>2859537
>DSPTCH
those look pretty good, thank you very much
>>2859553
not as compact as canon eos sl1.
i suggest panasonic fz1000.
>>2859342
Holy shit nice, the store I got my K-50 on offer a pretty good trade in service toward newer models of the same camera so I'll almost certainly get this on release.
>>2859426
>xq2
peanut sensor.
get rx100, g7x or nikon dl 18-50
>>2859564
>carrying your dslr to work
Sounds like you never worked a day in your life.
>>2859565
>newer models of the same camera
If it's a newer model how can it be the same camera?
Hey guys I am going to buy a film camera but it is kinda tie between Nikon F3 and Nikon FM2
Please anons give your opinions which camera to buy?
>>2859570
Dude, it's a fucking D3300 with a prime. It weighs like nothing. It comes in at less than 800 grams with the 35mm 1.8, that's less than a damn bottle of water weighs.
I sure as hell have lugged DSLRs to work when I wanted to go shooting before or afterwards, and usually commuting by bike. If you're not willing to put any effort into a hobby then what's the point?
>>2859577
>comparing 800g monster to a compact
Not everybody is a barista.
Looking to get a camera strap.
Would i look like a fag with a skinny black leather thing? I just want something minimalist but don't want it to look like a handbag strap.
>>2859582
No, I'm a teacher. What's your excuse for being such a pantywaist?
>>2859589
That's completely different from the OP then.
>>2859419
For motorsports you better invest in the EF-S 50-250 IS if you haven't already. Later on a used 100-400L will be even better.
I managed to buy a Canon G11 for 50bucks.
Now I see others selling it for 190-250bucks.
I only remember the camera being one that I wanted ages ago, but it still can't be worth this amount of money right, the 200usd range?
>>2859595
sell it for a profit.
>>2859605
Obviously.
But I can't tell if these guys manage to get them sold at that price. But I'll try.
Anyway, the camera was way more plastic than I thought. Just further hyped me up for getting an A6300 though.
>>2859572
Brain fart, I meant newer models from the same RANGE of camera.
Hi /p/
I just bought a Lumix GH4 body today,
What is your opinion on the GH series? Was this a good decision for film making?
Thanks.
>>2859615
Yes.
>>2859257
this is right, sonyfags are the fedoras of the photography community.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-6000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Macintosh) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 24 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2014:12:31 11:36:57 Exposure Time 1/100 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 2000 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Brightness -2.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 16.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2859576
>FM2
>lighter
>center weighted meter
>1/4000 shutter
>no batteries needed
>standard hot shoe
>F3
>brick shithouse of a camera
>based fat spot meter
>aperture priority mode
>electronic shutter
>mirror lockup
>>2859736
Not that guy but I just snagged an F3HP and an AI 50 1.4 off eBay for 200 dollars, fucking psyched.
I want to replace the kit lens on my EOS 700D.
Is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 worth getting?
What other glass can you recommand for a crop camera?
>>2859785
get the tamron one it's cheaper
>>2859309
I have that and it's fine.
>>2859647
Don't forget this guy.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-Leitz-KE-7A-Set-Sealed-Unopened-Extremely-Rare/152122440807?_trksid=p2047675.c100011.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20140602152332%26meid%3D6eb52e80a53241e0b369408d8d098083%26pid%3D100011%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D10%26sd%3D131687543047
>>2859808
Holy fuck, that anon was right.
pic related- What he was responding to.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:09:16 22:34:13 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 480 Image Height 320
>>2859882
I don't know, that Leica dot only breaks the lines of purity, I bet it would go for double without the dot, packaged and have a certificate from the factory that it is genuine and has no internal parts, so it is pointless to open the package.
>>2859915
There you go.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:09:16 22:29:52 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 480 Image Height 320
>>2859921
>no package and certification
Are you trying to scam me?
>>2859921
How will people know if it's a Leica though?
"The great thing about Leicas isn't taking photos, it's showing everyone online that I did"
How do I into medium format? Unfortunately my scanner does 35mm only, but my enlarger will cover up to 6x9 and I already have all the appropriate enlarging lenses and holders and stuff so I'm considering just going for it and doing only prints with no digital scans like it's 1990.
As far as formats, I think I want 6x6 because square format seems like a fun thing to try and it'll be a very different experience from shooting 3:2. Some 645 and 6x7 cameras seem very nice, but I'm less interested in those formats. 6x9 is also cool just because it's fuckoff huge (maybe I could even try contact printing it) and there's the cool Fuji rangefinders, but it's 3:2 just like 35mm and only 8 shots per roll sounds like a pain in the ass.
My only previous experience with MF is a Yashica-mat which I thought was a piece of shit camera and I know I definitely do not want a TLR. I do like the waistlevel finder though, and I'm not a fan of rangefinder focusing, so I think that I want a waistlevel SLR like a Hasselblad or Bronica SQ or RB67/RZ67.
What should I pick? Hasselblads are sexy and classic and supposedly the Zeiss lenses are great, but they're also pretty expensive for probably little benefit and they seem to be pretty delicate and high-maintenance. The Mamiya cameras seem too damn big and heavy to be portable and I don't want 6x7. The Bronica SQ cameras I guess are just budget Hasselblads, but a lot of people seem to like them and say they are very good.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2859965
If you really want to *shoot* medium format, as opposed to just brag about owning it on fourchannel, listen carefully.
>GET A FUJI 645
I bought one in japan, and shot nearly as much 120 film in 2 weeks as I have in almost a year of owning a GSW690.
That's because it's small, and light, and has a meter. It means it's actually practical to take with you when you're not "doing photography".
It's easier to take with you than most 35mm SLR's.
You won't get meme-tier bokeh, but you will get that subtle MF depth, and the ability to make non-lomo 8x10's from 400ISO colour negs; consider it a similar step in IQ from 35mm as 16mp to 36mp.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2859969
Ha, and I upped the image with the hole in the bellows pointed out.
But srsly, it was so much fun to shoot.
If I was to recommend something specifically, I would say one of the later motorised ones, a GA645zi most likely.
Having the built in flash would be killer.
>>2859969
>That's because it's small, and light, and has a meter
But what about the people who don't care about ease of use and have upper body strength? and what kind of photography are you recommending that camera for?
>>2859969
I've been thinking about getting a Fuji 645 lately too, even if I love my GW690 to bits. Both for the reasons you stated, and I also think I might prefer a 4:3 aspect, I've noticed lately that 2:3 is often too wide for what I want to shoot. Of course with the huge negatives I can just crop, but it does often feel like a slight waste of film to shoot 6x9.
I think what I'd like best would be a Fuji 6x7 or a Makina 6x7, but those are fucking expensive, while the 6x4.5s are p cheap still.
Is there a huge difference in the look of the prime versions to the "zoom" lens, and do you really get the medium format look?
I've shot a bit of 6x4.5 on a Mamiya lately as seen in my recent thread, and I'm a bit underwhelmed, and that's with the 80mm f/1.9 that's known for being really nice. While I did get a lot of bokeh, I feel it's lacking in comparison to the MF I'm used to shooting.
>>2859969
That looks neat, but it's rangefinder focusing and 645. For some reason I can't explain I just cannot stand cameras with bellows either, I guess I just don't want to deal with hunting down light leaks and shit. Also I would prefer interchangeable lenses because I want a normal lens and a wide (~28mm equivalent, probably).
I could see that being a very nice second MF camera though, if I ever want one. Something I can fold up and toss in my bag when I'm not out specifically to shoot, like you said.
>>2859984
Fuji gx680, Pentax 67, Mamiya RB/RZ 67
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Photographer James Worrell Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Image Width 1000 Image Height 667
>>2859984
>what about the people who don't care about ease of use and have upper body strength?
You mean gym monkey morons?
Get yourself a 6x9 Linhof then, have fun. You can make your photography as difficult as you like, why stop there, go shoot cinema projection lenses on window sized collodion plates for all I care.
>>2859985
For me, bigger formats are more about resolution and tonality than bokeh whoring.
You'll notice all of your memeya shots were out of focus too, which i'd say puts them in the trash; having a sharp subject is the essential element of making them stand out in the image, as opposed to having a defocused background.
My main concern with the zoom versions would be the loss of light from the small apertures, not the depth of field.
>>2859218
Alright /p/, i'm a newfag when it comes to actual photography, (i don't count highschool much), and i'm picking up a D3300 since i can get one, new, for under $400.
It reads that it has an F mount, and I have some of my dad's old sigma lenses and i was trying to figure out what adapter to buy for it.
It's been a while and i can't remember this stuff off the top of my head.
Could you guys help me find an adapter for this thing if at all possible?
>pic related, it's the lens in question
I would ask the stupid question thread, but it's really inactive/dead
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Motorola Camera Model XT1095 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.2 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:06:09 18:19:59 Exposure Time 833/50000 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 64 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Brightness Unknown Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Average Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.24 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3120 Image Height 4160 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Soft Geodetic Survey Data WGS-84
>>2860005
I believe you can mount it without an adapter, but it won't meter.
>>2860005
There are no adapters for Nikon lenses on Nikon bodies. If it is AI ("auto-indexing" it will mount without an adaptor. If it is non-AI it will need to be converted. Google it.
you might be stuck with manual focus and manual mode with no meter, but it will work
>>2859989
You forgot about the 6x9 Optika Rittreck and the 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Graflex cameras
>>2859944
It's not about taking or even posting photos. It's about having a Leica. That is the Essence.
>>2859965
If you're going down the 6x6 SLR route, I'd recommend the Bronica S line for sure. Sure, getting a hasselblad is nice and owning some nice zeiss glass is what everyone wants. It has legendary lenses too! Though, I'd add that it's only worth it if you are really going to use them a lot and have the extra money to purchase one.
I use my SQ-Ai a lot, sure it has it's downsides (x sync port/metz flashes only) Grip required for mounting a hotshoe flash, no self timer and a tedious as fuck mirror lock up, multiple exposure and back removal system that take a while to get used to. It also weighs a metric tonne compared to a camera like the Mamiya 645.
It also has lenses and backs that are mostly affordable and shoots pano 135 film. It has both good points and bad points.
If you're looking for a rangefinder then I'd try and find a Mamiya 6.
Let your budget and needs decide what you need. Also consider if it's really, really worth the extra money for a hasselblad. I did when I bought my Bronica, and I ended up buying the 135 back and another lens with the money saved.
looking to get a lens for landscapes and to start street photog. I have a nikon d3300 and was looking at the 35mm 1.8 dx. Is there a better lens for my purpose that isn't very expensive?
>>2860046
The 18-55 3.5 is even cheaper if you don't care about shooting wide open.
>>2860052
I think i'd prefer a prime that I can shoot wide open with. There is a lot of 35's and 50's which is why I'm unsure of what would be the best choice.
>>2860046
>Landscapes with a ~50mm equivalent lens
Get something like a Rokinon 14mm.
>>2860057
you're right, a wider lens would probably be more appropriate, thanks
selling my a7ii tomorrow (hopefully), gonna buy an x-pro2 with the money, I'm excited
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-T1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 83 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:06:01 08:28:31 Exposure Time 1/180 sec F-Number f/6.4 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/6.4 Brightness -3/100 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 55.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1400 Image Height 734 Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2860087
Goy with an X-Pro 2 here. Why are you selling your A7II? I've been looking to buy an A7II as a 2nd for a while now.
>>2860087
Glad to see you are excited about the downgrade.
Itis a lot easier to find a good lens for APS-C anyway. Easier to cover the small sensor.
>>2860087
Fujii cucks can't be this retarded, can they?
>>2860087
Is the a7 actually that big compared to the x-pro?
Could the older Contax rangefinders be considered the anti-Leicas?
>Made in Germany
>amazing build quality
>gorgeous lenses
>Cost 1/10 to 1/5 the price of a Leica
>>2860133
Contax G2 is an amazing camera. Can't tell about "anti-leica", because Leicas are the name, the classic, the image of a Camera.
Contax is a camera that get the job done perfectly.
>>2860136
I wasn't talking about the G2, I was talking about the old Zeiss Contax IIa and IIIa series of cameras
Anyone here have this steadicam? Wondering if I should bite on this deal. $149 after rebate.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/980426-REG/steadicam_stedicam_solo_stabilizer.html
>>2860133
what do you mean by 'anti-leica'?
>>2860133
The fact that it has AF and auto exposure instantly makes it "anti-Leica".
>>2860150
maybe you should stop being retarded?
>>2860150
Oh. Well their older RFs are in no way more of an "anti-Leica" than any other non Leica RF like a Canon 7 or Bessa.
>>2860090
I don't like the ergo's. My main cam is an M4-P and I'm just wanting a digital companion at less than Leica prices. The a7's feel a lot like a computer in use, just don't feel as good to use for me.
>>2860110
Eh, I don't consider it a downgrade at all. APS-C and FF are so close in IQ and both formats have had high ISO that's good enough for me for years.
>>2860128
They're close, a7's a lot thicker because of the grip.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Sean Image-Specific Properties:
Fujifilm XT10 or Sony a5100/6000 for streetphotog, lowlight and general use?
>>2860160
>I don't like the ergo's. My main cam is an M4-P and I'm just wanting a digital companion at less than Leica prices. The a7's feel a lot like a computer in use, just don't feel as good to use for me.
Damn. I use a Leica M6 for my film RF. Used Fuji for a while now and been satisfied.
Wanting to use an A7II for muh film glass with IBIS.
Hopefully you like the XP2. My only real problem with it is the expanded weight and the terrible ISO dial compared to the X-T10. But you should enjoy it coming from 24MP -> 24MP
>>2860163
X-T10.
I say this as a biased as fuck fujifag.
It's small, light and has a completely electronic silent shutter. Unlike the sony, it has sensible menus and ergonomics.
The X-T10 is so good that I'm having trouble moving past it.
>>2860203
The a7's (I've used all the models a fair amount) are all great cameras, good specs, but just never felt "right" when I was using them.
I'd probably be fine with an X-Pro1 honestly, but there's just too many QoL changes they made I just have to get the XP2 (dual card slot, joystick, weather seals,
>>2860205
Yeah I've been losing sleep thinking about it. My problem now would be lenses, since I've no idea what would be best to get first.
Prime, pancake or just the normal kit lens?
I like to travel and attend music gigs but I might need zoom lens for design work but then again I could always borrow dslrs. Goddamn cant make up my mind
>>2860163
XT-10 for looks and controls; A6000 for video, some cheaper lenses (Mainly the Sigma ART primes), and size.
>>2860219
>Yeah I've been losing sleep thinking about it. My problem now would be lenses, since I've no idea what would be best to get first.
It's a hard decision if it's your fist time. Your best way is to find out the focal length you use the most and compare it against any MF/SLR lenses you have that can be adapted. Find the length you use the most and pick from there.
If you shoot portraits a lot, go for the 56 1.2 first. If you shoot street a lot, consider the 23 1.4. Want a nice in between length but don't shoot in low light? 27mm 2.8,. It can be tough deciding but one you get there you'll be at home, especially if you're used to shooting manual/film cameras.
When I first got my X-E1, I used adapted prime lenses and adapted FD/C/Y tele's.
>>2859615
>M43
>good
Holy shit lol. It's the worst system ever created. Talk about planned obsolescence. Even now the system can't compete in any market, even filming (thank you based A6300). All M43 cameras are garbage and noise creeps in at 200 ISO. What's the point of M43 even their lens line up is garbage.
Hey,
A friend lend me a 5DIII, with two batteries. I've put them to charge (only one charger) and they seem to take a long to time to charge up. I've tried to power the camera to see if they had charged even a bit and it doesn't turn on.
I've read about a known issue and a fast blinking light, this might be my case (I don't know how fast is fast). Is there anything I can do?
>>2860219
I'd say start with lenses then find a body.
Read reviews for the Sony and Fuji lenses, maybe go try renting some. When you find one that clicks, buy that.
>>2860160
>APS-C and FF are so close in IQ and both formats have had high ISO that's good enough for me for years
There really isn't much difference anymore.
I personally went for FF because I find the crop factor the APS-C has, made a lot of the old lenses I had really awkward.
That combined with the A7's IBIS and better handling had me sold.
It is a shame there is no A7 equivalent Fuji, They look so damn awesome. I wish Sony would more rangefinder styled A7 series.
>>2860330
>They look so damn awesome.
there will be soon.
they are not gonna come out with FF first cuz then people who buy the early models would have no reasons to buy more bodies when the aps bodies show up.
so they release crop bodies, people buy those, then they release ff bodies then people upgrade and they get to sell twice.
also get to sell the lenses twice too
$$$
>AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II
is this shit or would I be overspending?
is there something better at a comparable or lower pricepoint?
Hey guys, weird question:
I have pic related to always have in my bag so I have a minimal tripod for opportunity shots. I now also had an idea for when I do filming:
I have a Camera-Mic that goes on the hot shoe and also has a 3/8 threading. I want to do the following:
1. Mount the 3/8 threading on that tripod, but I cant find out what threading it is. It has a 6mm diameter but the threading-coarseness doesnt fit the 6M-standard. Is there some kind of adapter for that?
2. later, i might want to put both my Mic AND my Audio-Recorder (Which i dont have yet, but they all have standard 3/8 audio threading) on there, so is there like a T-Shaped adapter I can buy somewhere?
Since I live in Germany, even bigger hardware stores don't have the right stuff for it (I looked and asked) and Audio stores take 2-4 times as the hardware store for an equivalent thing
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2013:07:11 13:03:45 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 600 Image Height 540
>>2860228
Fullframefag detected.
Try lumping around three to four times the weight in gear for an artsy cinematic effect that you dont even want in a documentary.
If you don't know how to work with light, don't go into filming/photography
>noise creeps in at 200 ISO
Big suprise. Smaller Sensor, more noise. But let me show you an example.
1000 ISO
If you can't handle this much noise in PP, you plain out suck.
Worst case, just slap a film-effect on it and call it "artistic"
M43 is designed towards filming and compactness. For people that are often on the move or need to take lots of shots from different angles or even chase their objects, smaller cameras are better.
>>2860336
>superzoom
Why?
>>2860339
>dat noise
holy shit my eyeballs
>>2860336
Why do you need that big expensive useless superzoom garbage? Get a couple of wide/normal/tele primes or maybe even a wide and a tele zoom if you insist on having zooms, but don't get a superzoom they try to do everything and are shit at all of it.
What do you even want to shoot? Why do you need every focal length from 18mm to 200mm?
>>2860342
I see the European Championship has already begun!
>>2860341
I don't know, I'm a complete newfag looking for something I could use to take sports shots.
>>2860347
get the 55-200 then
>>2860031
The SQ is looking appealing, I was seeing what KEH has in stock for the system and I think I could build a complete kit from there for the same price as a Hasselblad lens or two. Holy shit the film backs seem way too expensive though, and I've heard they're the weak point in these cameras.
I'm thinking an SQ-A with a waist finder, one or two 120 backs, and the 50mm PS and 80mm PS lenses. Any thoughts on those two lenses or which lenses are good? Is there any way to use the 220 backs with 120 film since those backs are so much cheaper? Any other accessories worth getting, maybe a grip or something?
>>2860364
I just got done selling through my SQ-A kit. I had:
a speed grip (Very strongly suggest getting one)
a WLF (that I never used)
a 45 degree finder (That I loved and never went back from)
A 50mm
An 80mm
A 110mm (for up close portraits)
A 150mm
I used an old LunaSix meter with it.
I didn't have any complaints about the system at all, I loved it. Took me a little while to get used to though.
>>2860374
>le bokeh meme
try stopping down, friend
>>2860382
It was dark as fuck, and I had no monopod, with Portra 160. It was wide open, or no photo.
The benefits of shooting film!
>>2859218
I'm wanting to buy my first DSLR and am on a bit of a budget. How risky is buying second hand cameras on ebay? I've found some older, but good looking cameras on there for fairly decent prices.
If that turns out to be a busy, I'm thinking of buying a D3300 (found somewhere that sells it new for $390-$400 w/ lens).
For that price, how does that camera sound?
Also, how does the D3300 compare to the D3200 in low light in real world usage and image clarity? The D3200 is much cheaper than the D3300, but I've heard that the d3200's anti-aliasing makes the D33's pictures more crisp and croppable.
>>2860478
>How risky is buying second hand cameras on ebay?
Generally not risky at all. Just check your description thoroughly, and be sure your seller offers a refund/return policy.
The D3300 is fine. You can find many comparisons against the D3200 online with a google search, but it's not a major upgrade for most people.
>>2860478
>How risky is buying second hand cameras on ebay?
if you buy from somebody with high feedback scores then not risky at all. ebay is very buyer friendly with disputes.
>Also, how does the D3300 compare to the D3200 in low light in real world usage and image clarity?
same same
>>2860478
Buy used camera gear from KEH, their customer service and warranty blows the fuck out of any shifty anonymous asshole on ebay and their prices are usually pretty similar too.
I'm having a difficult time deciding on buying the 5D mark iii used, or buying the 7D mark ii new for around the same price.
My original plan was going with the 5Div when it comes out later this year, mainly for 4K video, but I'm really not sure I can justify the price (at least $3500, undoubtedly) when that's really the only feature I could see being worth the price jump compared to the 5Diii.
I basically want a camera that is above average for both stills and video, and these two cameras seem to be the closest in that regard. I've also considered the a7sii, but can't justify the price after having to buy a metabones adapter, combined with sony having awful ergonomics in general.
>>2860228
>noise at base ISO
>shitty lens lineup that is vastly superior to sony's microscopic selection
>trolling this hard
It's not our fault if you're shooting with a E-PL1. Daily reminder that current M43 is 1 stop behind APS-C, which itself is 1 stop behind FF, M43 has a complete lens lineup, M43 is the only mirrorless system that succeeds in portability, and M43 lenses resolve as well as any equivalent lens on the larger systems. Also bokeh is a meme, everybody knows you'd shoot that headshot at F4 anyways.
>>2860228
>cant compete in filming
But anon, M43 can shoot 4K /with/ IBIS /and/ not overheat. A6300 cant even manage that without IBIS and its fancy copper wiring.
Could someone tell me if disabled Sony A7 mk1 phase detection autofocus with non-sony lenses is just a software limitation. I mean, it works with sony lenses, right?
They obviously did it to make it more appealing to buy the current mark 2 a7 bodies.
Do you think there could be a "Magic lantern" sort of firmware that would allow us to use phase af with other lenses?
>>2860547
On the A7, the system relies on the lens to provide a lot of the phase detect information. Adapted lenses aren't capable of providing this information.
>>2860337
Noone? Come on!
>>2860551
Thanx for the explanation.
>>2860552
1) 1/4-20
2) duct tape
>>2860382
>le everything is a meme meme
try killing yourself, friend
I want to show everyone I suck cock. What body do I purchase and why?
>>2860785
>>2860787
Purple frame and cyan looks lovely for my needs.
>>2860787
This is disgusting.
>>2860787
this bothers me. They have it sorted by body color, but why couldnt they have stayed in order with the grip color? Fail at life. kill self.
>>2860813
To make the variations look more numerous, complex and personal. If they made a two-set organization, it would ruin the magic.
I'm buying a Canon 70D from ebay for $850, good or no? Comes with everything, brand new etc etc. What are some thing I should also buy?
[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 1242 Image Height 1192
>>2860787
I can see why the grips all have sad faces on top
>>2860817
holy shit
Hi /p/
I am going it buy a Nikon FM2. I am a noob in film so which things should I check before buying that camera?
>>2860856
Shutter curtains should look absolutely pristine, there are two sets of curtains and both should be good. Open the back and flip up the mirror to see the front and back, cock the shutter to see the first set and then release the shutter to see the second set. If there's and creasing or it looks like someone tried to shove a finger through the shutter then just walk away immediately.
Check the black foam light seals which go all the way around the film door. Over time the foam gets old and crumbly and falls out, which causes light leaks. It's a pretty easy DIY fix to replace the seals with new foam, but it would of course be preferable if it was in good shape to begin with. There should also be a foam cushion at the top of the mirror box where the mirror flips up. If it's rotten you'll probably see lots of black chunks in the viewfinder, it has no effect on the photos but it's annoying and you have to clean it.
Check the battery port for any corrosion from leaking batteries. Then put a fresh battery in and see if the metering lights in the finder light up and if the meter seems to work correctly.
Fire the shutter several times, going through all the speeds. Nothing should sound weird, look through the curtains as the shutter is firing. See if the mirror flips up and down properly and put a lens on the camera and see if the aperture stops down when you shoot. Listen to the slow shutter speeds, each one should sound twice as slow.
Check the serial number to see if it's an FM2 or an FM2n. They're identical externally and are functionally pretty much the same, but it's good to know. The serial number of an FM2n will start with N.
The FM2 is an excellent and legendarily reliable camera from back in the day when Nikon made the toughest cameras. This was the model that most pros kept in their bags as a backup. If the one you're looking at hasn't been obviously mistreated, then it probably won't ever let you down or give you up or run around and desert you.
>>2860551
That's a stupid system. Lens should only tell the body the focal length. aperture, lens code and maybe some sort of focal distance. Last one is not really needed for AF.
>>2860795
Most of that is Asian and Pacific market only. The more cultured part of the world gets the white/black, red, and maybe the camo in some places along with the traditional black.
>>2860506
The 5d mkiii is awesome but I worry about its lifespan. It's already getting long in the tooth.
I've held and shot and quite enjoyed both Pentax K-1 and Nokomis D810. Both excellent but Nikon should do better video (it's also a huge camera but I love it).
>>2860339
That photo is awful, the noise is awful.
Kill yourself.
There's a reason Fujiifags are the most hated posters on /p/.
>>2860506
I have a hard time recommending either camera at the $1,500 price point. They both have shit dynamic range (even compared to Canon's latest two APS-C sensors).
Unless you are heavily invested in the Canon lens ecosystem, I would suggest moving up to the $2,000 price point and getting a Nikon D500 to get what is looking like an absolutely awesome camera.
Or if you want to stick with Canon, just wait until the new generation of on-pixel ADC sensors hits.
>>2860988
>There's a reason Sonyfags are the most hated posters on /p/.
I fixed your typo there
>>2860988
This is why M43 should be red flagged by the Better Business Bureau along with Fujifilm. Disgusting market practices and an overall terrible value to the consumer.
>>2860894
Hey, Thank you so much anon for your response.
I didn't bought that camera because
>If there's and creasing or it looks like someone tried to shove a finger through the shutter then just walk away immediately.
Yes I did :D
I'm thinking about buying a camera in the UK in the 200-300 £ price range.
I like the convenience of carrying something in my pocket so right now I've narrowed my choices down to Sony RX100, Nikon Coolpix A and Ricoh GR (hard to find in the UK).
Would this be a good deal:
https://www.ama_zon.co.uk/Nikon-COOLPIX-Compact-Digital-Camera/dp/B00BPMIJOG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1465606618&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+coolpix+a
>>2861000
Right after Sony
I made my best landscape shot on my iPhone in a "taking a snap" moment.
Am I going to hell?
how good is the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 MF series E?
Just got pic related, did I fucked up?
I'll soon be shooting food and I have no light equipment at all: I'm on a tight budget, any advice for cheap lighting solutions? I can get some reflectors, I'll be shooting with my Pana G7 btw.
>>2861052
It's good.
>>2861062
my question was "how good", not "is it good?" bruh help me out
>>2861063
The AF is kinda lacking.
>>2861064
>>2860988
>Lumix
>"FUCKING FUJIFAGS"
You're dumb as fuck bro.
Go drink some chlorox. it can only increase your IQ
>>2861054
>Ballhead for a Lumix G7
>a camera whose strongpoint is video and lightweightness
COME ON! Get some tilt/pan with fluid dampening.
Try getting one of those workbench LED lights and reflect it off a white surface onto your subject
I use a friend's construction light and point it a white shirt I hang over a chair.
>>2861052
anyone?
>>2861000
>"There is no advantage to M43"
meanwhile, professional networks and producers use M43 for their documentaries rather than fullframe
Okay, very qualified person on the internet!
>>2861071
And some professionals are using Sony.
Just because it is being used doesn't mean it is any good.
>>2861074
EXACTLY!
>>2861074
Just because a b8unch of brand-obsessed fags on 4chan think it in memetic fashion, doesn't make it true.
>>2860339
Looks like my D610 at ISO 25600.
>>2861077
>massively huge camera having 2 times the mass for 2.4 times the price takes better picture than video-focussed camera for minimalists
WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT?!
What you gonna do next? say that your Ferrari goes faster than my Jeep?
>>2861068
Thanks for your answers, I was planning on using the tripod for time-lapses and steady videos, I don't know if I could get anything better for 100€ (I'm going to do some hiking soon, so portability is important for me).
>>2861079
>he has a jeep
are you a girl?
>>2860537
>Also bokeh is a meme, everybody knows you'd shoot that headshot at F4 anyways.
>not getting a 42.5mm f0.95
>>2860547
>didn't get sigma mc11 and get all the function
haha cuck
>>2861087
>the most important gear for a Sony is a third party lens adapter
>calling others "cuck"
>>2861081
>he doesn'tget analogies
Are you a /b/tard?
>>2860816
get an 80d instead.
or you know,
a sony a6000 or fuji xe2.
>>2861052
it's ok.
my minolta is better.
:^)
>>2860816
It's a good camera. Don't worry much about the body, the most important part of the camera is good lens.
>>2861080
There are good pantilt heads for 30-50€ but I wouldn't carry my tripod around for long hikes. Mine is mainly for video so it needs to go to eyelevel.
My next investment will probably be lighting or a recorder.
Hey /p. Need help. Just bought this 52mm lens hood for my 18-55mm nikon kit lens. However whenever I reach a focal length, vignette starts to appear. Any way to troubleshoot this or is my hood not compatible with the lens? Thx. Pic related
>>2861113
yeah you bought a generic one. Just buy the one actually made for that lens.
>>2861120
Tnx m8
>>2861113
>using lens hood
what's the point? flare makes your photo better anyway
>>2859218
Should i pick up a second hand Ricoh GR Digital III? The price is pretty good.
>>2861164
do you have a camera right now?
>>2861164
No. GRD III is a phone size sensor version, doesn't worth any money.
>>2861168
I have an olympus XA2 but i don't shoot much with it because i need to buy film.
>>2860990
>on-pixel ADC sensors
can you elaborate on this? the more i think about it the more im leaning towards the 7Dii still for a couple of factors:
1. I do have quite a bit invested in canon lenses (probably around $1500, maybe more at this point), and I like the lenses a lot.
2. Nikon video looks horrible, as does Sony for different reasons. I've used my same shitty t2i for video for the past 6 years and I still prefer it over post-graded sony or nikon results.
3. When Canon does finally get their shit together with their sensors, I can jump to full frame and keep my 7Dii without feeling guilty, as it seems to be a much more capable photography camera than the 5Diii sans the full frame. and if the 5Div really is revolutionary for Canon I can buy one a year after release and price jumps down without feeling like I've missed all too much.
>>2861173
at what price can you get it?
>>2861183
150$ but that's almost doubled where i live
>>2860506
5Div is vaporware.
>>2861176
CMOS sensors read out the sensor by applying a voltage to shift the charge collected by each pixel down the column or row of pixels until the charge packets reach a wire for transport to the image processor. As a pixel's charge shifts onto the next pixel down the line as it is being trafficked out, it picks up some residual charge from the new host pixel, resulting in read noise.
If you have analogue-to-digital converters on every pixel or every sensor column (such as Sony Exmor technology), the signal is degraded less every time it gets shifted down a pixel, resulting in less read noise.
What this looks like in practice is "iso-less" behavior (more so at low ISOs). That is, regardless of whether you increase the ISO, or increase the exposure in post, you get the same amount of noise. This allows you to expose for the highlights and then pull up the shadows in post without much noise.
>>2861189
if you can strech out an extra 50 euros you can get a nikon D3100 with minimal use. would recmend that much more
>>2859344
dban
So i just finished my first nightclub photo shoot and I found 24-70 is probably not wide enough for me even at full frame.
Looking for a fast UWA zoom for my Canon EOS 6D currently leaning towards a Tamrin 15-30mm f/2.8 VC USD for about $1,200 brand new locally. Any other suggestion?
>>2861309
>Tamrin 15-30mm f/2.8 VC USD for about $1,200 brand new locally
Canon 16-35mm is only another ~250 and is also brand new. It's probly be worth waiting to save up the extra money to get an actual Canon L series for your Canon body.
http://www.adorama.com/ca16352u.html
>>2861316
15mm though... I would go for the 11-24mm L but dayum niqqa... Isn't the Tamron optically a decent performer as well?
is this worth saving?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Apple Camera Model iPhone 6s Plus Camera Software 9.3.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 29 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:06:11 15:45:37 Exposure Time 1/10 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 80 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Brightness 1.3 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.15 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 4032 Image Height 3024 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
I'm looking to buy some polarising and ND filters, what are my cheaper options?
>>2861327
that's adorable
Bought a Nikon F3 and when I look through the view finder the aperture and shutter speed reading is blurry. I've gone to the eye doctor and do not need glasses. Is it the viewfinder itself?
>>2861327
It might even still be useful to backup camera settings.
>>2861327
You can't even fit an 1/8th of a high quality Sony RAW file. Throw it away unless you get a shitty Fuji those RAF files are less than an MB and you might fit a couple of Fuji jaypegs.
>>2861351
is it the diopter?
https://www.google.com/search?q=nikon+f3+diopter&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjIiNPz7qDNAhUL6WMKHXRWBmkQ7AkIVw&biw=2064&bih=1105&dpr=0.9
>>2861318
>Isn't the Tamron optically a decent performer as well?
Yes.
Also build like a tank.
And I think the Canon he mentioned is an older model.
>>2861356
Also Tamron has better warranty.
And on top of it all: instead of a red ring it has a gun metal ring. gun fucking metal.
I honestly see no reason to downgrade to Canon.
>>2861354
I think that is exactly what it is. Not sure which one I would need though. There's +2 -, -4 and others. How do these work?
>>2860339
>lumping around three to four times the weight in gear
3-4 times is an exaggeration if you're making direct comparisons. Even then, what's the big deal? You're talking about 1 lb vs 4 lbs, not 20 vs 80.
>for an artsy cinematic effect that you dont even want in a documentary
Or for superior quality, which you do want for a documentary. No need to be artsy if you don't want to.
>If you don't know how to work with light
Using a faster lens and better sensor sure seem like things someone would do if they knew how to work with light, Anon.
>For people that are often on the move or need to take lots of shots from different angles or even chase their objects
I chase wildlife with a 600 f/4 with a 15lb pack on. I'm carrying it all day, most times. If I wanted to though, I could easily carry a D3200 and 300 f/4E PF. Or, for that matter, any shit lens.
>>2861079
I'm trying to be polite, but you're freaking out. Seems to me your only legit argument is cost; the weight argument only makes you look like a sickling.
You're playing the comparison game as much as anyone else. Just relax, and enjoy what you do.
>>2861359
They are basically just glasses.
If you need, say, -2 glasses you can use a -2 diopter so you can photograph without them.
That doesn't seem it though.
The image is still sharp for you, right? - just the indicators?
>>2861367
Yea the image is still sharp but the indicators are really blurry. Maybe I do need glasses. Gonna go try on random glasses and look through the camera to see which diopter i should buy. Thanks!
>>2861370
If the image is sharp you don't need glasses or a diopter.
Seems like the indicators aren't aligned properly somehow.
>>2861371
Should I just buy a new viewfinder since its easily replaceable?
Thinking about selling my A7II and 55 Zeiss to get an OM-D EM5II and a more extensive lens setup. Will I regret this /p/?
>>2861410
I liked the lens lineup I had for m43, but although the E-M1 was a great camera I never really liked it as much as I liked Nikon SLRs so I ended up getting rid of my m43 kit.
What exactly do you hope to accomplish? Having done a system switch and then a switch back, I can tell you it's a huge pain in the ass and you'll lose a lot of money selling your shit. It's probably not worth it unless you really don't like your Sony for some reason that isn't just blind gearfaggotry.
>>2861410
YES. M43 is garbage. So much noise you'd think it was a Ricoh GR at 12800 iso but noise like this starts to creep in at iso 100.
>>2861410
I've noticed that m43 users take the worse photos on here. Technically and aesthetically. No amount of post processing can get rid of that shitty point and shoot dynamic range, lomo softness, and nokia cell phone noise. It's almost as bad as fujifilm.
>>2861410
Big mistake. Sony RX100 beats the shit out of any M43 set up. You'd be doing a big down grade, worse then going all film imo.
>>2861415
If I look at my entire portfolio (albeit shit), my favorite shots are from long focal lengths. I can't afford (or dont want to) a telephoto lens for my A7. Apart from the absurd costs of lenses, I don't dislike anything about it.
>>2861421
Interesting. I've seen quite a few excellent shots from m43 users on other sites but never really paid attention here.
>>2861410
yes.
do it.
best idea ever.
i'll buy your sony.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7_ii&attr13_1=oly_em5ii&attr13_2=fujifilm_xpro2&attr13_3=pentax_645z&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr126_1=normal&attr171_2=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.214314251469665&y=-0.6047305951669368
>>2861443
just get a vivitar 200mm f3.5
>>2861467
OMG there is so much noise on the EM5 it's practically static!!!!! SONY FOR THE WIN.
>>2861467
I get the full-frame Sony is going to outperform in low-light but how often is that even a problem?
