[ 3 / a / adv / an / asp / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / g / gd / int / jp / k / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / o / out / p / po / sci / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wsg / x]

/p/ - Photography - Gear General - Sigma 18-35mm FINALLY Released for Pentax edition

<< back to board
[Delete this thread]

Gear General - Sigma 18-35mm FINALLY Released for Pentax edition Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)02:10 UTC+1 No.2356717 Report

as the title suggests, this is the new Gear General, and the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 is in stock and ready to ship.

old general >>2351644
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)02:24 UTC+1 No.2356732 Report

>>2356717
So will Pentax finally be tolerable?
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)02:27 UTC+1 No.2356737 Report

>>2356717
I guess sigma's designer had a stroke? :^)
Still can't wait to get mine. Ugly but supposedly it does immaculately at f/6.3. We'll see.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)03:50 UTC+1 No.2356781 Report

>>2356717
>27mm-52mm
What would be the purpose of this zoom range? Is it just for the narrow depth of field? How is optical quality - chromabs, starburts, etc?
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)04:01 UTC+1 No.2356789 Report

>>2356781
It's a constant f/1.8 aperture zoom. Find me another one of those... anywhere. Yes, it's a narrow focal length range, but 18-35mm happens to be the perfect range for a "walkaround" lens. Everything I've read indicates that this lens is sharp across the whole frame wide open at all focal lengths. Closest focus is about 1 ft at .23x (1:4), so it's not totally useless for semi-macro shots either.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)11:32 UTC+1 No.2356905 Report

You guys know any good backpack that would let me pack my dslr + 2 pretty big lenses and 17 inch laptop?
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)11:39 UTC+1 No.2356908 Report

How's the

''70-300MM F4.0-5.6 DG MACRO CANON' lens?

it's about 100 bucks where i live and i've had good experiences with another sigma lens i once used.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)11:52 UTC+1 No.2356911 Report

>>2356908
70-300mm DG is kinda shit.
70-300mm DG APO is okay for a budget telephoto.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)12:05 UTC+1 No.2356914 Report

>>2356781
>>2356781
it's a wide angle to normal/ narrow wide to sort tele ( depending on crop factor)...either way a damn useful range, and I am jelly of the constant aperture.
>>2356905
most of Swiss gear's larger stuff
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)14:34 UTC+1 No.2357003 Report

>>2356717
I'm planning out my next purchase (probably around 6 months down the road). I'm looking at the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Tilt-Shift Lens because I do a lot of landscape and architectural shooting.

The distant second choice would be a 70-200mm of some flavor (likely the L f/4 IS), but I probably won't have near as much for it as the tilt-shift...

Now my question is, how difficult is it to get used to the movements/know the proper movement for a given situation?
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)15:40 UTC+1 No.2357038 Report

>http://microsites.lomography.com/petzval-lens/

I hate the brass body of it, but I kind of want one of these.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)15:49 UTC+1 No.2357042 Report

The other day a guy was asking about getting a Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8, this is for you.
Mine arrived two days ago, so far the verdict is:
>Sharp across the range
>Fucking heavy - seems really well made
>autofocus motor is slow, and hunts a lot for a new lens - I know this was a complaint about the older version, but the new one doesn't seem to have improved it that much
>The biggest plus, for me, is the super close minimum focus distance. It's advertised as 20cm, but I've had it right up against a subject and it's focussed perfectly after a few seconds
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)15:54 UTC+1 No.2357046 Report

>>2356717
>>2356781


Don't think of it as a zoom with a small range, think of it as four f/1.8 primes (18mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm) all crammed into one lens.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 40D
Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.6.11
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:07:06 10:53:17
Exposure Time1/8 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashFlash, Compulsory
Focal Length18.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)15:54 UTC+1 No.2357047 Report

>not /gg/ - Anime Edition

Pentax is cool though.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)16:05 UTC+1 No.2357049 Report

X-pro1 users!

Are there any cheaper batteries for this thing? The official ones seem to go for 80-100 euros around here; a bit much, I could still sort of justify 40-50 for the X100s ones. The bigger retailers here have some other brands but ask lots of money for them (60-100).

Requirements: cheap + not totally shitty. Main requirement is that they're "safe", built reasonably well, etc. Worse battery life is ok as long as its still usable, since I'm assuming these will be cheap enough to just buy several of em.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)16:59 UTC+1 No.2357080 Report

Anyone have personal experience with this:
http://smile.amazon.com/Satechi-WTR-A-Wireless-EOS-D2000-Compatible/dp/B003Y35VJA

I see it's mostly good reviews, but I'm a little leery of spending $60 on a brand I've never heard of.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:01 UTC+1 No.2357082 Report

>>2357080
>http://smile.amazon.com/Satechi-WTR-A-Wireless-EOS-D2000-Compatible/dp/B003Y35VJA
Whoops, that's the wrong link:
http://smile.amazon.com/Satechi-WTR-A-Wireless-EOS-D2000-Compatible/dp/B004QDN2ZC/
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:10 UTC+1 No.2357085 Report

>>2357046
B-but I would only own one of those four focal lengths anyways. I find that one 35mm makes owning a 28, 40, or 50 pointless.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:13 UTC+1 No.2357088 Report

WHAT IF

SOMEONE MADE A FILM MFT CAMERA

LIKE ONE WITH THE MFT MOUNT THAT WORKS WITH ALL LENSES?

Wouldn't that be cool?
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:16 UTC+1 No.2357090 Report

>>2357088
Why
That wouldn't have AF or any MF assist
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:18 UTC+1 No.2357094 Report

>>2357090
Oh. I just realized that the distance is too short for a mirror. But why would af not work?
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:20 UTC+1 No.2357096 Report

>>2357094
Because the mft cameras use the image sensor as the focusing sensor. Mft lenses are not designed to be used with phase detect sensors, so any external phase af unit would be buggy, slow, and inaccurate. Enjoy finding film that fits as well.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:34 UTC+1 No.2357101 Report

>>2356717
Picked a Nikon version up + speedbooster for my E - M 1.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:38 UTC+1 No.2357107 Report

>>2357085
I use an x100s and I can confirm this. I do slap on the 50mm screw on sometimes for portraits
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:41 UTC+1 No.2357109 Report

>>2357088
>WHAT IF
>SOMEONE MADE A FILM MFT CAMERA

But someone already did
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:43 UTC+1 No.2357110 Report

>>2357085
>>2357107
you're not everyone though.

the difference between 27 and 52 equivalent is pretty big, I find, when actually shooting somewhere. if I set up every shot slow - yeah, its basically slight wide angle effect vs no wide angle effect, no big deal except for some things (portraits, where you'd want longer anyway if you're doing even nearly head shots)
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:47 UTC+1 No.2357111 Report

>>2357110
While some people like to see the 18-35 as a cheap alternative to four primes, I see it as a needlessly expensive alternative to one middle prime. You can probably get a 35mm and a 90mm for less than the sigma
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:49 UTC+1 No.2357112 Report

>>2357111
we know, you just said this.
read this:
>>2357110
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)17:50 UTC+1 No.2357113 Report

>>2357112
U wot
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)18:07 UTC+1 No.2357120 Report

>>2357042
because it's 20cm starting from the sensor.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)18:46 UTC+1 No.2357129 Report

>>2357111
>You can probably get a 35mm and a 90mm for less than the sigma

But not an 18mm and 35mm.

The wide end is really what makes it interesting.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)21:45 UTC+1 No.2357194 Report

>>2357042
That was me. Thanks for the follow-up.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)21:48 UTC+1 No.2357197 Report

>>2357111
The thing is... for a Pentax-mount lens, we don't have many fast f/1.8 at all, even, and the ones that they do have are pretty expensive. This lens is a major windfall for any Pentax user.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)21:56 UTC+1 No.2357201 Report

>>2357197
Also, on Pentax and Sony you can now combine f/1.8 with IS.
>>
S75 07/06/14(Sun)23:04 UTC+1 No.2357231 Report

>>2356911
I have the APO version for pentax and it is rather shitty as well. But then again I'm used to shooting with primes so you might be happy with it. Anyway I'd rather buy the canon 55-250(?) Smaller and better IQ in my experience.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)23:14 UTC+1 No.2357237 Report

>>2357111
not for pentax, at least not in the 1.8 range.

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 - $450
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 - $900
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 - $200
Pentax 31mm f/1.8 - $1200

>>2357197
this is accurate. there are only a handful of <50mm lenses for pentax that are faster than 2.8; most are sigma primes (see list >>2357046)

>>2357201
QFT
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)23:21 UTC+1 No.2357239 Report

>>2356717
...so what's the most expensive piece of photographic gear you've taken a picture of your penis with (lens+body)?

And I'm not talking about doing a nude self-portrait, I'm talking about taking a dick pic.
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)23:55 UTC+1 No.2357263 Report

>>2356781
I don't think it's 27mm-52mm, I think it's different because the lens itself is designed for APS-C cameras, which means the stated focal length is the true focal length. However, I've no idea the crop factor of Pentax DSLR's and I'm not just gonna assume it's a standard 1.6x
>>
Anonymous 07/06/14(Sun)23:56 UTC+1 No.2357264 Report

>>2357263
2/10
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)00:18 UTC+1 No.2357273 Report

>>2357263
1.6x is not the standard, 1.5x is the standard for APS-C. The 1.6x crop factor is only in Canon cameras and is in fact slightly smaller than APS-C.

Yes, technically the lens is 18-35 but since it wouldn't cover the entire field of view on a full frame/35mm film camera, it matters not.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)00:38 UTC+1 No.2357283 Report

>>2357263
You think wrong
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)00:48 UTC+1 No.2357289 Report

what's an acceptable price for a used Nikon Nikkor 55-200mm 1:4-5.6G ED DX?
looking at ebay doesn't get me anywhere.. mostly above new price on amazon.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)01:24 UTC+1 No.2357306 Report

>>2357289
If it's in good condition, drop about 10-15% on the new price.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)01:29 UTC+1 No.2357308 Report

>>2357306
claimed to be in mint condition and offered for 80eur.. should I buy it? According to my research it's not a really good lens, but since I just bought into Nikon (from Olympus), I'm looking for some zoom lens (originally planned something up to 300mm).
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)01:37 UTC+1 No.2357314 Report

>>2357308
I assume it doesn't have VR.

I can't really speak for UK prices, but you can get used ones for right about $100 USD (58.31 GBP)...so I might keep looking if I were you.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)01:40 UTC+1 No.2357316 Report

>>2357314
first of all thanks for your support and replies.
Well, $100 is about 80eur I guess, but, no, it doesn't have VR.
What might be a useful addition to my 50mm? Currently only got that one lens.. got the camera and lens about a week ago and haven't touched my olympus since then.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)01:46 UTC+1 No.2357322 Report

>>2357316
What do you tend to shoot? Is your nikon a crop body?

For me, I'd go for a ultrawide to wide zoom, but I love shooting really wide.

If you've a full frame 40mm is a pretty significant difference in focal length to make one worth having (and they're cheap).

If you're more into portraits you'll want to shoot around 80-100mm.

Otherwise pretty much any normal to tele zoom should be pretty useful.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)01:50 UTC+1 No.2357325 Report

>>2357322
I usually shoot supermacro with old reversed manual primes and tubes. Sometimes I'm out in the city shooting some stuff (which I really like the 50mm for). Wanted the zoom for animals and wildlife.. the reversed primes don't do well on that. It's 1.5 crop, D90.. so I could also use some D lenses.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)02:15 UTC+1 No.2357331 Report

Hey, guys, I'm a beginner to photography, but I plan to take photography classes in uni starting September. I wonder what you guys think about the Sony NEX-5? I'm asking cause I can get one with a stock lens for 100GBP.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 550D
Camera SoftwareDigital Photo Professional
Photographerdecltype
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution350 dpi
Vertical Resolution350 dpi
Image Created2011:01:15 12:19:06
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/10.0
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/9.9
Exposure Bias0 EV
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3709
Image Height2782
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)02:19 UTC+1 No.2357333 Report

>>2357331
It's a great camera, especially for a beginner. I felt it had little too much menu diving and generally made for beginners. Lacking OVF/EVF it can feel weirdly P&S-y, but it shoots well otherwise. Tilt screen is godsend for waist-level shooting. Made great clacky noises when I shot with mine (just my model?), so maybe not for discrete shooting. Has Sony hotshoe, so find an adapter for actual hotshoes.

Get and learn.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)02:24 UTC+1 No.2357339 Report

>>2357333
What about Canon 300D? Is it good too?
>>
Sofia 07/07/14(Mon)02:25 UTC+1 No.2357340 Report

>>2357109
That's so disgusting. With frames that size, you could have hundreds of shots in a roll or cartridge.

Kodak... What were you doing?
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)02:31 UTC+1 No.2357343 Report

>>2357339
>Canon 300D
I've not used one before so I can't comment on it. Very old camera though, probably avoid if you can get the NEX5.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)02:33 UTC+1 No.2357344 Report

>>2357343
Alright, thank you!
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)04:10 UTC+1 No.2357389 Report

I guess this might be the thread to ask...

I know you guys probably hate these types of questions, but for ~$90 is a Nikon Coolpix 310 a decent deal?

I'm not trying to be some photographer or anything, but I'd something that takes clearer pictures than my shitty phone.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2012:02:01 10:12:26
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width600
Image Height400
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)05:22 UTC+1 No.2357413 Report

>>2357389
yes
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)07:00 UTC+1 No.2357448 Report

>>2357263
>because the lens itself is designed for APS-C cameras, which means the stated focal length is the true focal length.
The real question is whether the stated f/1.8 max aperture is stated in APS-C terms, or in FF terms.

Your mind is now blown.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)07:06 UTC+1 No.2357455 Report

>>2357448
1.8 is a ratio you goddamned retard. If you stick it on a FF camera, you'll get "proper" f/1.8 depth of field and a shitload of vignette
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)07:19 UTC+1 No.2357460 Report

>>2357455
You're a tard if you think that. I want to know the actual f-stop on my K5.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)07:34 UTC+1 No.2357464 Report

>>2357460
probably 2.4 in terms of DoF
>>
Ayya 07/07/14(Mon)07:38 UTC+1 No.2357466 Report

>>2357464
>>2357460
>>2357455
You fucks better not start the equivalence argument again.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)08:10 UTC+1 No.2357472 Report

>>2356717
Been considering this thing since it was announced. One one hand it could be a very good all-around zoom, otoh, I'll probably just leave it home most of the time, in favor of something smaller.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)08:35 UTC+1 No.2357476 Report

>>2357460
The actual F-stop is 1.8. The apperature's effect on exposure does not change with the used lens or sensor size.

"Equivalent DOF on 35mm" does not translate to "actual f-stop"

/autist
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)08:36 UTC+1 No.2357479 Report

I just bought the MS-Optical 28mm f/4 and it's a very cool lens and all, but it takes ridiculously small 19mm filters. I'm having trouble finding filters in that size other than some useless UV filters and some ancient Leica contrast filters that date back to the dark ages and are really just collector's items. Does anyone know where I can find a 19mm yellow filter?
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)08:41 UTC+1 No.2357481 Report

>>2357476
But for an equivalent 50mm lens, the depth of field will not be as narrow as a equivalent 50mm f/1.8 lens on a FF sensor
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)09:03 UTC+1 No.2357487 Report

>>2357481
but it still doesn't make the "equivalent f-stop" an "actual f-stop"
/autism

anyway I'm sure you can find some calculator via google. it shouldn't matter much though. crop, 35mm and f1.8 will not make for a lot of OoF areas unless you shoot really close - you'll be able to pull some background blur, but not melt them completely, unless you do shoot really close. at 35 and f1.8 you'll have to sorta mind your DoF, as it is possible to fuck it up at that point. of course, this is just my experience when shooting the things I shoot.
-coming from someone who often shoots 18mm f2, 23mm f2 and 35mm f1.4 lenses on 1,5x crop cameras
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)09:05 UTC+1 No.2357488 Report

>>2357448
urgh

if a lens says 18-25 f1.8, that is what it is. I don't think any lenses are sold with their "equivalent" focal lengths/apertures in their specs (as that'd be technically wrong).

now how a lens like that acts depends on your sensor size.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)09:07 UTC+1 No.2357489 Report

>>2357049
here

I think I heard that wasabi power batteries are good. However, it seems they aren't so widely available where I live.

So...
Should I get wasabi batteries from somewhere

or is a brand called Jupio any good?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D800
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.0 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern804
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution220 dpi
Vertical Resolution220 dpi
Image Created2012:04:09 13:31:49
Exposure Time1/3 sec
F-Numberf/13.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/13.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length50.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)09:13 UTC+1 No.2357491 Report

>>2357489
Prices:
4 wasabi batteries + 2 chargers - 40 euros + 20 euro shipping (or so)
Jupio batteries - 40-50 euros for one.

Hmm, unless somebody is going to tell something horrible about wasabi power, I think I'll go with them. Extra chargers are nice and damn they're cheap it seems.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)10:09 UTC+1 No.2357501 Report

>>2357491
I have wasabi batteries for my gopro, and they're almost as good as the originals. Will buy wasabi again.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)13:01 UTC+1 No.2357543 Report

>>2357479
Nigga you're gonna have to get a step up ring
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)13:05 UTC+1 No.2357545 Report

>>2357489
I have a wasabi battery for my x100s and even though they have like 200 mAh less runtime, I'd say they last as long as the originals by Fuji.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)21:09 UTC+1 No.2357811 Report

>want a lens hood for my leica lens
>it costs 120€
>there are no chinese copies

I know it's Leica but goddamit it's just a piece of metal.
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)21:14 UTC+1 No.2357816 Report

>>2357811
what lens

google around, chances are theres a cheaper option somewhere, even if it isn't chinese and $5
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)21:59 UTC+1 No.2357867 Report

Do you boys and girls sell and buy your digital camera bodies as newer versions are released?

Or do you buy a body, use it for years until it dies or becomes utterly obsolete, and then buy a new body?
>>
Anonymous 07/07/14(Mon)22:04 UTC+1 No.2357872 Report

>>2357867
I buy bodies and use them until they die. I might add a body after a few to several years if it has a feature I really want and keep the other ones around as backup but I never sell camera bodies, they're too sentimental to me haha
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)02:20 UTC+1 No.2358024 Report

>shopping for lens on ebay/keh (comparing prices)
>see this post for a pentax 50mm 1.7 AF
>seller asking $125+shipping
>can get new 50mm 1.8 for $150

>excellent condition
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)02:23 UTC+1 No.2358025 Report

>>2358024
Here's my problem with "minor cosmetic damage" like a broken or dented fucking body. If you struck the lens with enough force to physically damage it, you have almost certainly decentered the elements. There is almost a 100% guarantee that a lens that has taken that level of damage and hasn't had a CLA AFTER that is soft as microwaved shit.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)03:52 UTC+1 No.2358100 Report

I have $3000, and i want a set for Landscapes, astro, wildlife and weddings; i was thinking on:
D610
Nikon 70-300 VR
Samyang 14mm 2.8
Nikon 50mm 1.8G

But i want another options, maybe APS-C?
I'm open to Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm and m43
>>
Ayya 07/08/14(Tue)04:04 UTC+1 No.2358106 Report

>>2358024
>It's beat to shit but other than that it looks excellent
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)04:25 UTC+1 No.2358119 Report

>>2357046
Anon, the technical quality of that image is HORSESHIT. It literally has no fine details at web size. I know from experience that the Sigma is a nice lens and this is your technical fault, but you're not making a good case for the lens by any stretch of the imagination.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)04:37 UTC+1 No.2358124 Report

>>2358024

The 1.8 is better than the 1.7 anyway.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)04:43 UTC+1 No.2358128 Report

>>2358100
>landscapes
>small format
okay, bud.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)04:47 UTC+1 No.2358133 Report

>>2357479
Post pics from this lense, or it didn't happen.
How many coins did it diminish your value as a human by?
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)04:55 UTC+1 No.2358139 Report

speaking of finally sigma lenses op, take a look what i got to pick up today..
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)05:27 UTC+1 No.2358169 Report

>>2358133
It's a neat lens, I'm really enjoying it. I wanted a 28mm lens (the best focal length) and this was cheaper than all the Leica 28s. It cost me around 65,000 moon-dollars, which worked out to $660, and it didn't take long at all to arrive from Japan. The seller also marked it as a gift so I didn't pay Obama anything.

Shot on an M3, by the way. I can't really say much about its optical quality since I'm shooting it on film and I didn't shoot any test charts or anything, but it's definitely very good and not a toy lens at all.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)05:30 UTC+1 No.2358172 Report

>>2358169
Also it's Fuji Acros pushed to 400 by the way, and I guessed the exposure pretty poorly because I'm a bitchbaby who can't do anything without matrix metering.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)06:50 UTC+1 No.2358210 Report

>>2356717
Fuck yes. Been waiting since last summer.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)07:42 UTC+1 No.2358229 Report

>>2357867
I sold my first 2 bodies

I sold all the lenses etc too, though, and they were 5-7 years old at that point anyway. I moved to different kind of cameras.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)07:42 UTC+1 No.2358230 Report

>>2358169
>>2358172
Cheap and cool, I like it.
Looks reasonably sharp at that res too.
I like Acros too, I don't know why the hell you would push it though...
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)07:44 UTC+1 No.2358232 Report

>>2357479
step up...
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)07:49 UTC+1 No.2358233 Report

>>2358169
Honestly the contrast and snap looks very nice there.

But
$660 for a really slow 28mm? You know you could've gotten a ton of other options - like the superlative 28mm Skopar from Voigtlander for half that. Or the Nikon 28/3.5 LTM, which is a terrific lens (I have one). The Canon 28 LTM lenses are less good I hear.

On the other hand it's smaller than all those, but at the expense obviously of usability...
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)07:50 UTC+1 No.2358234 Report

>>2358233
Though clearly it's a collectors item, which I assume is why he choose it over technically better options.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)07:51 UTC+1 No.2358235 Report

>>2358234
I didn't get that from his post...he just seemed to want a cheaper 28mm (compared to Leitz glass).
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)13:32 UTC+1 No.2358348 Report

Is Uncle Kenny's raging hard on for the SB 400 really that warranted? I'm picking up a D3300 soon, and wanted to know if an external flash (or in this case the SB 400) is really worth it in the long run.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)14:13 UTC+1 No.2358373 Report

>>2358348
No.
It can't turn sideways for portrait orientation bounce flash. That's a no-go for a lot of situations.
You can get an SB-800 for under $300. Best deal in flash IMO.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)17:53 UTC+1 No.2358477 Report

>>2358230
Well I think Acros is a beautiful film but it's a bit too flat for me at box speed.

>>2358233
>>2358234
>>2358235
I wanted something that was good enough without being too expensive. It's something different from my other lenses, I already have a GR and Nikon's 28 f/1.8 if I just want a hella sharp lens. It was a bit of a strange choice I admit. It's perfectly usable, though, it has rangefinder coupling and everything. It's just the filters that suck, I can't even find a 19mm step-up ring.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)21:49 UTC+1 No.2358607 Report

Hey guys, I'm new to photography and am about to buy a minolta maxxum 1.7. It's my first prime lens and I'm wondering if I can manually focus it, as it appears to have no focus ring in the pictures?
>>
softcunt 07/08/14(Tue)21:54 UTC+1 No.2358608 Report

>>2358607
if you're talking about the 50mm, that knurled ring towards the end is for focusing. It can't zoom in or out.

I suggest reading up more on cameras before committing any money to photography.
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)21:57 UTC+1 No.2358609 Report

>>2358608
thanks dude, didn't notice the ring
>>
Anonymous 07/08/14(Tue)23:30 UTC+1 No.2358651 Report

>>2358373
best deal in flash is the yongnuo line, specifically the YN-565EX

$100
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)00:32 UTC+1 No.2358680 Report

>>2358607
Get a Sony 1.8 instead.
The Minolta is nice, but it's showing its age now in terms of chromabs and poor sharpness
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)01:24 UTC+1 No.2358722 Report

So I have the EF-S 10-22 and I'm thinking about selling and getting the EF-S 10-18 and maybe a flash (depending on how much I get).

I love the focal range of my 10-22 and from what I've read I probably won't care as much for the 10-18's build quality/feel compared to it, but from what I can see the IQ is decently better on the 10-18 and the IS likely makes up fairly well for it being a slower lens.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)02:34 UTC+1 No.2358763 Report

>>2358722
Are there any proper tests of the 10-18 yet?
The only thing I dislike about my 10-22 is the cromabbing; if you use small apertures, it's strong enough to see at web resolutions towards the corners. Although IS would be pretty bomb-ass, I'm not interested if it comes at the expense of huge barrel distortion.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)02:41 UTC+1 No.2358764 Report

I just bought a Sony NEX-6 body for lightweight and portability, could I get some good prime lens recommendations? My main concerns are size and quality(obv). Under $100 would be ideal but I'd pay up to $200.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)02:41 UTC+1 No.2358767 Report

>>2358763
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/874-canon_1018_4556is
1.9% barrel at widest compared to 1.21% for the 10-22mm -- imo, close enough it makes no difference
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)05:15 UTC+1 No.2358854 Report

>>2358763
Simple barrel distortion is piss-easy to fix in post. Lateral cromabs can also be fixed to some extent.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)11:09 UTC+1 No.2359032 Report

Ordering my 105 f2 dc soon. I want it now.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)11:32 UTC+1 No.2359046 Report

>>2358764
Buy a used Sigma 30mm f2.8.
Ridiculously cheap and ridiculously good.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)13:29 UTC+1 No.2359089 Report

>>2358763
>>2358767
According to their info, it seems like the only weakness is heavy vignetting at 10mm (I mean when you look at the price point and focal lengths of the lens).

I honestly can't believe I'm tempted by this lens when I already have the 10-22.
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)18:33 UTC+1 No.2359294 Report

I've been using a 350D that was given to me for about two years after I expressed an interest in photography.

I feel as though I have improved allot simply with the kit and some old M42 lenses. I want to have a telephoto lens after all this time but I'm questioning if I should further invest into this camera or instead migrate to another system, while I still can.

I'm starting to notice some of the technical limits and wondered whether I should go for a mirror less set up or perhaps even get a 5Dc and go full frame.

TLDR: Only used a 350D w/ kit for 2 years sink more money into the system or completely migrate?
>>
Anonymous 07/09/14(Wed)19:33 UTC+1 No.2359368 Report

>>2358680
thanks for the tip
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:36 UTC+1 No.2359673 Report

Broke college student here, should I sell my D7000 for a ricoh grd?
I feel that I would use the ricoh a bit more frequently as it's obviously more portable. Thoughts on the switch? Have any of you regretted selling your dslr for a smaller camera?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:45 UTC+1 No.2359680 Report

>>2359673
We know literally nothing about your shooting style. you realize that, right?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:50 UTC+1 No.2359683 Report

When using older lenses on a dslr, specifically Pentax, your shutter speed and ISO are automatically adjusted based on the aperture chosen? Meaning you can't manually change it like with a modern lens?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:52 UTC+1 No.2359684 Report

>>2359683
Only if you shoot in Av mode. Shoot in M and you can pick every setting.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:53 UTC+1 No.2359685 Report

>>2359680
Shoot, sorry I left that out.
I'd like to try shooting street a bit more, that's my main reason for switching. Other than that I like to document things from my trips, and walks.
I got a really good deal on the D7000 when I started, otherwise I would've just started out on a p&s
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:54 UTC+1 No.2359686 Report

>>2359685
If all you shoot is wider stuff, like street and memories, you'll be very happy with a GR.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:55 UTC+1 No.2359687 Report

>>2359684
Thank you!
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)03:56 UTC+1 No.2359688 Report

>>2359684
Ooh sorry one more question. When it asks for focal point when turning on the camera, what do you choose if the camera is, let's say, 18-55m?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)04:01 UTC+1 No.2359691 Report

>>2359688
RTFM
This is not /p/ - babby's first photo questions
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)04:08 UTC+1 No.2359696 Report

>>2359688
I have no idea what you're asking, sorry.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)04:22 UTC+1 No.2359703 Report

>>2359688
the kit lens would communicate that info to the body. If you're using some adapter then you either wouldn't be able to adjust the lens after setting the number, could accept that whatever adjustments the camera makes would be off, or you could turn the camera on again each time you adjust the focal length.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)10:33 UTC+1 No.2359875 Report

What's the probable technical background on Kenro Izu's images? Large format, etc?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:18 UTC+1 No.2359909 Report

So I just got my lens. But even at the biggest aperture I can see the aperture blades. Is that normal? It's pretty much like in the f/2 picture.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:19 UTC+1 No.2359910 Report

>>2359909
Yeah that's normal.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:20 UTC+1 No.2359911 Report

>>2359909
it's fairly normal in anything but the most expensive lenses with seventy thousand aperture blades.

it just means your bokeh balls will be slightly less round.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:21 UTC+1 No.2359912 Report

>>2359911
>>2359910
well it's an f/2.5 50mm lens so I doubt there will be any bokeh balls at all
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:24 UTC+1 No.2359913 Report

>>2359912
then yeah, it doesn't really matter to you... also a >1.8 50mm?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:34 UTC+1 No.2359917 Report

>>2359912
50mm f2.5 on aps-c gets pretty bokeh ish
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:43 UTC+1 No.2359923 Report

>>2359917
I could barely see any bokeh on mine. Which is why I worry that it might not go truly wide open.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:51 UTC+1 No.2359928 Report

>>2359909
>even at the biggest aperture I can see the aperture blades. Is that normal?

Not normal, no.
I have never seen a lens where the blades don't fold away completely at the largest aperture.

What model is it?
Can you post a picture of the aperture blades at the widest setting?
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)12:53 UTC+1 No.2359930 Report

>>2359913
>no bokeh no matter

It should matter because less light comes through.
Especially since the lens isn't that fast to begin with.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)14:12 UTC+1 No.2359984 Report

>>2359928
This is how it looks like. Note that it looks like the aperture blades stick out a bit less on the top but it's just a shadow.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width742
Image Height800
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2014:07:10 15:08:07
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width557
Image Height600
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)14:31 UTC+1 No.2359998 Report

>>2359984
It's kinda hard to see, but from the shape of the aperture blades it doesn't appear like they could open up any further.

If they were partly closed you would expect the inner edges to form the typical spiral pattern.
But those inner sides seem to already lay in a circle.

So I think this is normal and the aperture is fully opened.
>>
Anonymous 07/10/14(Thu)17:37 UTC+1 No.2360145 Report

>>2359984
This lens is the Canon 50mm f/2.5, right?
Because weird things like this are totally normal for macro lenses and cine lenses.
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)16:05 UTC+1 No.2361099 Report

How can I test a rangefinder lens for focus shift if I only have a film camera? I got a nex and an adapter but there one focuses with life view. Would it work if I focused the lens on a specific legnth and then took a picture and looked if the area in that distance is in focus?
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)16:21 UTC+1 No.2361106 Report

>>2361099
If you are testing for focus shift, you can put the lens on your nex and live view. focus all the way zoomed in wide-open, and then watch the screen as you stop down. if the lens exhibits FS you will see it.

If you just mean proper focus with your rangefinder, just shoot a roll and see.
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)18:23 UTC+1 No.2361217 Report

I'm thinking of dumping all my Canon crap (600D, kit lens, 50/1.8, and YN565EX) and switching to Nikon (a D90 most likely, with a 50/1.8D and a 80-200/2.8 down the line)

I'll have to get used to Nikon's controls, but dem cheap D lenses.

Am I doing the right thing?
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)18:38 UTC+1 No.2361226 Report

>>2361217
I'm willing to bet the answer here is no. Not because of any differences between canon and nikon, but because the way you're focused on gear at this point at the beginning of your journey as a photographer tells me that you'll take shit pictures no matter what system you use.
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)18:46 UTC+1 No.2361238 Report

>>2361226
That's you making assumptions.

I shoot for fun, but every now and then I get asked a favor and shoot events for a small newspaper. The main selling point for Nikon (for me) is the fact that I can get a fast telezoom for cheap.

I actually HAVE begun to brush against the limitations of what gear I do have, and now I have to decide if I'm going to invest further into Canon, or jump to Nikon.
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)22:37 UTC+1 No.2361359 Report

That feel when you accidentally scratched your $3000 black Leica lens and it now has an ugly silver scratch
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)22:39 UTC+1 No.2361360 Report

>>2361359
I painted over the chipped paint on my $1000 Leica lens with a black permanent marker, idgaf.
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)22:41 UTC+1 No.2361361 Report

>>2361359
Is the feeling anything like scratching a pro DSLR making it look battle worn and thus more cool?

...it's not, isn't it?
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)23:06 UTC+1 No.2361380 Report

>>2361360
Is it visible that you painted over it? Does the paint stick on metal? Doesn't one need a special marker for that?

>>2361361
Not when the camera body is spotless and if it's just one scratch that sticks out like a sore thumb.

The only camera one can scratch is a black paint MP.
>>
Anonymous 07/11/14(Fri)23:46 UTC+1 No.2361405 Report

>>2361380
Just go to the model car section of a hobby store get one of those tiny bottles of Testors enamel paint, you enormous vagina. I've entirely repainted the engraved text on cameras before and it looks like new.

You should see my M3, the top plate looks like the previous owner used to throw it upside down onto the roughest concrete available every time he loaded it.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)05:28 UTC+1 No.2361499 Report

>>2361380
Why do rectangular hoods get my dick so hard?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)06:13 UTC+1 No.2361509 Report

>>2361499
you're a gearfag
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)06:31 UTC+1 No.2361512 Report

In your opinoin, what is the best mirrorless I can buy with this priority:
1) Autofocus speed
2)IQ
3)Available lenses
4)Battery/Ergonomics
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)06:51 UTC+1 No.2361517 Report

>>2361512
X-T1 or E-M1 (the former has better IQ, the latter has slightly better AF and more lenses)

do note that AF speed depends heavily on the lens used.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)09:25 UTC+1 No.2361552 Report

>>2361512
>1) Autofocus speed
Tossup between
EM1 (only with olympus MSC lenses)
GH4 (only with Lumix G lenses)
>2)IQ
Sony A7R, zero competition.
>3)Available lenses
Sony A7 (not R) for adapting legacy glass
Olympus EM1 or Lumix GH4 for native glass
>4)Battery/Ergonomics
Em1, GH4, A7 (any variant) with an added battery grip. This is subjective, but the GH3/4 feels the best in my hands.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)11:36 UTC+1 No.2361579 Report

What are great small tripod for mirrorlees (alpha 6000)?

What's needed?
>-Small volume
>-Solid and stable
>-With a great head (I don't want to start searching for good heads separately)
>-Fast to setup (I like the idea of being able to deply the whole thing in 3 movements)

For the moment I found the SIRUI T-005X and the MeFoto BackPacker.

Picture related, it's the SIRUI T-005X and it shows the size of the thing I want.

What do you have? What do you want? What do you recommend?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)11:40 UTC+1 No.2361582 Report

>>2361579
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)11:41 UTC+1 No.2361583 Report

>>2361512
eh...good iq doesn't really matter if you don't have good glass ( or is even possible).
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)12:51 UTC+1 No.2361617 Report

>>2356717
Good telezoom for Pentax? Been feeling the limits of my 18-55 kit lately.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)13:07 UTC+1 No.2361624 Report

>>2361617
Your default option, and the most common second lens after the kit 18-55, is the 55-300 f/4-5.8. Decent and inexpensive. The current weather-resistant one is $450ish. If you don't need the weather sealing you can buy a used older version with the same optics inside it for $300-$350. If you want something faster and sharper, you're going to need to open your wallet for one of the DA* lenses, you're looking at $1,000+. If you're thinking "300mm? Got anything longer?", there's always the Bigma. Which is big, heavy, slow, and also over a grand, but it's also a 150-500mm zoom. Not the very highest image quality, but it's acceptable and not all that expensive for something that long. If you're looking to pinch pennies you could always hunt around for old glass, I have a 200mm SMC-M f/4 that I got for $50. Manual-focus only, stop-down metering, but it's a quite sharp 200mm lens for 50 bucks.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)13:43 UTC+1 No.2361643 Report

>>2361579
>(I don't want to start searching for good heads separately)
>(I want the world to be my spoonfeeding mother)
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)13:46 UTC+1 No.2361646 Report

>>2361579
>(I like the idea of being able to deply the whole thing in 3 movements)
I like the idea of my wife blowing me whenever and where ever I want it to happen.
Guess what though?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)13:57 UTC+1 No.2361653 Report

>>2361579
>What do you have?
Generic metal tripod from 70's
>What do you want?
People to take photographs
>What do you recommend?
Taking photographs.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)14:24 UTC+1 No.2361669 Report

Has anyone used one of those Katz Eye focusing screens in a modern DSLR? I'm considering getting one since I have some manual-focus lenses. How do you like it? Does it really not black out at smaller apertures?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)14:31 UTC+1 No.2361673 Report

Alright about to pull the trigger on a 105mm f2 DC. Anyone used one before?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)14:47 UTC+1 No.2361687 Report

>>2361673
On what body? I think 105 is great on a ff, but I'm not a fan of the 150mm FoV on a crop body, it's just awkwardly narrow without enough magnification to me.

On a full frame, you're pretty hard pressed to find a better portrait lens. I'm not saying that there aren't any out there, but just that this is one of the top ones.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)14:58 UTC+1 No.2361695 Report

>>2361687
I'll be using it on crop (D7000), but I'm going to stick to portraits and maybe some nature so I'm not concerned about the fov. My intentions are to upgrade to FF in future though so I feel its a nice investment. Is the borkeh and sharpness as good as the like 5 YouTube videos/reviews say on it say?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)15:03 UTC+1 No.2361700 Report

>>2361695
>I'll be using it on crop (D7000), but I'm going to stick to portraits and maybe some nature so I'm not concerned about the fov.
The question then becomes do you actually have enough room to use it as a portrait lens...remember, you're now talking about basically having to be around 50% further away to get the same framing.
>My intentions are to upgrade to FF in future though so I feel its a nice investment.
...maybe maybe not. Depends on how often you use it. Do you have a zoom that you can set at 105 and play around with? Basically get a feel for if you'd actually use that lens on your crop body. If you find it isn't for you, I'd honestly tell you either to save your money or look in another focal length that would serve both ff and crop.
>Is the borkeh and sharpness as good as the like 5 YouTube videos/reviews say on it say?
Absolutely...and I'm a primarily Canon shooter.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)15:28 UTC+1 No.2361711 Report

>>2361700
Thank you for the advice. I'll hold off a bit and start taking shots at 105mm on my other lenses and see how I go. If I were to want shorter focal lengths what would you recommend that produces similar borkeh and sharpness? And around the same price or cheaper ($1000 AU)
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)15:41 UTC+1 No.2361717 Report

>>2361711
Do you have something like Lightroom/another program that will let you search your photos by focal length? If so, see what focal lengths you gravitate toward and see what primes you can get in that area.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)15:42 UTC+1 No.2361718 Report

>>2361673
>>2361687
>>2361695
>>2361700
>>2361711
I have the 135DC. It's brilliant. BUT I shoot FF.
I suggest you get the 85mm f/1.8D. It can be had for $300, is sharp, and makes a wonderful portrait lens. I got the 135DC simply because I had been enjoying the 85mm on crop before, so it was a logical choice.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)15:47 UTC+1 No.2361722 Report

>>2361717
>Recently bought a 19mm prime
>Thought it was my best focal length but doesn't feel 'right' to use
>Try this lightroom trick
>Majority of shots were at 14mm with my zoom before
I can see clearly now.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)17:30 UTC+1 No.2361751 Report

>>2361722
on the bright side, the 14mm pancake is fairly cheap
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)18:19 UTC+1 No.2361772 Report

Metz 50 AF-1 for $190
or
Yongnuo 560 III for $120
??
Which and why?
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)19:36 UTC+1 No.2361826 Report

>>2361772
You're comparing a $70 all manual flash with built in RF and optical slaves to a $200 TTL flash.

The obvious answer is the Yongnuo, and buy a camera-brand speedlite for your system if you want TTL.

>tfw trawling craigslist for a good deal on a SB-600
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)19:39 UTC+1 No.2361828 Report

>>2361772
>Metz 50 AF-1 for $190
dunno what brand you're looking for, but I got a 580exII for $220 on ebay.
>>
Anonymous 07/12/14(Sat)23:44 UTC+1 No.2361951 Report

>>2361717
Turns out a lot of events I shot were around 105, probably because I was using the 18-105 at the time. But recall it being a good length. Might lean toward getting the DC still as a friend of mine has a band and has asked me to be his photographer for his events. So judging by that it'll be getting a lot of use. Regardless, if I don't end up selling it I can just hold onto it, I can see it being one of those lenses people want in future when they go out of production and I'll become a millionare.

>>2361718
I was looking at that lens as well. It does look awesome. It was my second choice behind the DC, but I must admit I'm a bit of a sucker for borkeh which is why I'm leaning toward the DC.

Thank you guys for the advice. Gave me a lot to think about.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)00:20 UTC+1 No.2361971 Report

Wut combo iz gud?
A7 + 24-70 vs E-M1 + 12-40

for the purposes of this comparison, assume they are the same price and i have no other lenses
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)00:33 UTC+1 No.2361974 Report

>>2361971
For IQ, a7
For focusing speed, em1
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)00:38 UTC+1 No.2361976 Report

>>2361974
really?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014-02-06T20:22+01:00
Image Width950
Image Height1974
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)00:42 UTC+1 No.2361979 Report

>>2361976
Yep.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)00:47 UTC+1 No.2361984 Report

>>2361971
>>2361976
>zooms
>good
pick one fegit
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)00:57 UTC+1 No.2361988 Report

>>2361971
E-M1 for sure. Faster, better button layout, more buttons, faster focus, amazing in body IS, awesome EVF, amazing and mature system.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)01:00 UTC+1 No.2361992 Report

>>2361971
Also the 12-40 2.8 is flat out fucking amazing.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)01:02 UTC+1 No.2361993 Report

>>2361988
>in body IS
>amazing and mature system
comparison of these combos *only*
(likewise a7 is better for adapting old manual focus glass... but i don't really give a shit)
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)01:11 UTC+1 No.2361995 Report

>>2361992
>>2361988
>>2361976
>Still shilling all over /p/
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)01:34 UTC+1 No.2362003 Report

Looking for a really nice manual focus lens to use as a 35mm length on my XPro1. So something near 23mm. Is there anything out there that's relatively cheap, and worth adapting to the X system? The Fuji 23mm is great, but I'd like to have something genuinely manual focus, rather than focus-by-wire, and the world of rangefinder glass is completely strange to me.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)04:11 UTC+1 No.2362052 Report

>>2361976
jesus christ how horrifying.

E-M1, 12-40 2.8, crop from far bottom center.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera ModelE-M1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Color Filter Array Pattern790
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)80 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2014:04:06 20:27:00
Exposure Time15 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length40.00 mm
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)04:14 UTC+1 No.2362053 Report

>>2362052
Another 100% crop. Mid frame.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera ModelE-M1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Color Filter Array Pattern890
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)80 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4608
Image Height3456
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2014:04:19 00:24:11
Exposure Time5 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length40.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1124
Image Height843
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)04:18 UTC+1 No.2362054 Report

>>2362053
>>2362052
And the infamous "bandaid on wall" shot, here in its full size (but compressed) glory.

Bask in the sharpness of this abandoned bandaid, stuck onto an abandoned late 1800s air pump.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera ModelE-M1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Color Filter Array Pattern890
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)64 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4608
Image Height3456
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2014:07:12 22:16:54
Exposure Time1/2 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length32.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width4608
Image Height3456
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)05:02 UTC+1 No.2362072 Report

Is it wise to sell my nikon 18-105mm for a 18-70mm +$100 in my pocket?

I have a bunch of filters and adapters for the filter holders which fit 67mm and they're not cheap to replace so that's why I'm looking at the 18-70. I'd be using it for landscapes, the 18-105 doesn't have infinity focus, unsharp at 18mm and has a plastic mount which is why I'm wanting to change. Good idea or nah?
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)05:09 UTC+1 No.2362075 Report

>>2362072
>18-105 doesn't focus to infinity

What the fuck? I've had this lens for over 2 years and am just now learning of this.

Jesus Christ, I'm glad I'll be replacing it soon anyways.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)05:10 UTC+1 No.2362076 Report

>>2362075
I should reword and say it does, but it's not marked so it's a pain.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)05:12 UTC+1 No.2362077 Report

>>2362076
Yeah was just reading about it not having hard infinity stop, which is different.

The lack of focus markings is what gets me. Honestly, when I saw the 18-70 in your pic, the first thing I thought was "it has focus distance markings, that already makes it a better lens".

I agree that it's rather soft/shitty at 18mm.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)05:20 UTC+1 No.2362078 Report

My uncle just dumped off his old gear on to me consisting of a nikon D200, nikon 35-70 f/2.8 a tokina 28-70 f/2.8 and a nikon 80-200 f/2.8.

Damn these old lenses are built like tanks man.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)06:15 UTC+1 No.2362086 Report

>>2362078
>dem 80-200/2.8s
Push-pull, two-ring, or AF-S?

The manual focus lenses are even more solid. I'm not even afraid to beat somebody over the head with my 70-210/4 and FM2.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)06:45 UTC+1 No.2362089 Report

>>2362086

Push-pull. I never used one of these before but I'm going to put this thing to work when I travel to a convention next month.
>>
Ayya 07/13/14(Sun)10:23 UTC+1 No.2362149 Report

I'm going to get a digital camera to use along with my film gear.

The current plan is:

NEX 6 ($280 used)
Yongnuo smart adapter EF to E mount ($90)
Canon 100mm macro USM ($400 used)
Canon 50mm 1.8 ($70 used)
Minoilta MD to E mount adapter for old film lenses ($20)
Whatever canon EF film SLR takes normal batteries ($10-70 used)
$860 total.

-Using both film and crop would allow for wider range of focal lengths.
-Using a smart adapter means I'm not stuck with one manufacturer or sensor size.
-100mm macro removes need for dedicated film scanner.

Am I trying too hard to do everything?
What would you get instead?
>>
Ayya 07/13/14(Sun)14:56 UTC+1 No.2362235 Report

>>2362149
whoops, $870-930 total after the canon film body
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:19 UTC+1 No.2362241 Report

>>2362149
>-Using both film and crop would allow for wider range of focal lengths.
If and only if you can use the lens on each camera.
>-Using a smart adapter means I'm not stuck with one manufacturer or sensor size.
See above. Unless you're also going to adapt MD to EF, you're still not really going to have the advantage of the crop versus ff FoV differences without doubling up on lenses.
>-100mm macro removes need for dedicated film scanner.
Eh, that's enough of a royal pain in the ass that I think I would prefer just scanning, especially for 35mm where the bulk of the market it is, so you can find the most stuff for it on the used market.
>>
Ayya 07/13/14(Sun)15:23 UTC+1 No.2362243 Report

>>2362241
I'm going to use MD lenses on minolta cameras.

I hope to shoot 6x6 too which means I should get a flatbed if not doing macro lens scans but everyone says flatbeds are shit and expensive.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:27 UTC+1 No.2362244 Report

>>2362054
Damn it bokeh whore, depth of field. Interesting subject ruined with muddy focus obscuring it.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:29 UTC+1 No.2362245 Report

>>2362244
But M4/3 can't bokeh.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:31 UTC+1 No.2362247 Report

>>2362245
I get the feeling that the idea that they have to try harder for bokeh causes a lot of 4/3 fags to over do it, without even realizing it. Apparently detail isn't important to a detail shot anymore.
>>
Hafenmeister 07/13/14(Sun)15:39 UTC+1 No.2362255 Report

>>2362243
Flatbeds are bad for 135 type film as the size of the negatives is too small to get any sharp details. For 135 type film either do ghetto scanning or use a Plustek dedicated 135 scanner.
For 120 film and sheets a fletbed is more than enough. But yes, they can be quite expensive.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:51 UTC+1 No.2362264 Report

>>2357046
This is what happens when you don't have five axes IS.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:53 UTC+1 No.2362265 Report

This is more to do with buying, but has anyone bought used gear internationally?
What sites should I check out or should I just try and search locally?
From Australia btw.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:53 UTC+1 No.2362266 Report

>>2362247
To be fair to me, I shot that one hand held, as I left my tripod on the other side of the row of air pumps, and it was more of a test of the IS than anything. I wanted to see how slow I could shoot at base ISO indoors with no lights on.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)15:55 UTC+1 No.2362267 Report

>>2362266
I sure hope you got that tripod and took it proper afterwards.. It would be laughable to think you passed up an interesting image for a gear test.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)16:01 UTC+1 No.2362271 Report

>>2362267
I wouldn't call the bandaid on wall shot particularly interesting, but next time I go back I can get one at f/8 for you.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)16:11 UTC+1 No.2362275 Report

>>2356717
Will Sigma's 35 1.4 ART work with the Nikon F100?
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)16:12 UTC+1 No.2362276 Report

>>2362275
Totally should, yeah. Call Sigma and ask them if you want 100% verification.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)18:00 UTC+1 No.2362335 Report

>>2362275
it should work with any camera that supports Nikon's own AF-S/AF-I lenses
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)19:24 UTC+1 No.2362397 Report

Does anyone here use the Tamron or Sigma 70-300? I read polarizing opinions about it, but the pictures I saw on flickr looked sharp despite that. I don't have much money to spend on a more expensive lens from the Pentax premium line, but 55mm isn't enough.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)20:01 UTC+1 No.2362421 Report

>>2362397
Sigma 70-300 APO is okay for a slow budget telephoto.
Sigma 70-300 non-APO is kinda shit, and not much cheaper.
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)20:03 UTC+1 No.2362422 Report

>>2362397
I had the 70-300 APO DG and it's a decent starter. AF is atrocious but when I got it a few years back it was the best budget option for a 300 zoom
>>
Anonymous 07/13/14(Sun)22:10 UTC+1 No.2362453 Report

Anyone know a good place to get some lovely camera straps?
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)01:35 UTC+1 No.2362553 Report

sup /p/

I have a 100D with the kit lens 18-55 IS STM.

I have a ceremony of myself coming up and I'd like to film it.
I just did a test video in my room (I have my light on, it's night atm)
It seems that the auto focus is really slow on the kit lens when doing videos.

I'm soon gonna trade my kit lens with the 50mm 1.8, is the auto focus there better with videos?
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)04:42 UTC+1 No.2362638 Report

Hey /p/, need a new telezoom since my Sigma 50-150 2.8 isn't compatible with my new D600. Trying to keep it as budget friendly as possible. Out of the Sigma, Tamron, and Nikon VRI 70-200's, which is the best bang for the buck?
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)07:15 UTC+1 No.2362717 Report

How much time will a new D7000/D7100 before I need to upgrade?
>>
Ayya 07/14/14(Mon)07:24 UTC+1 No.2362720 Report

>>2362453
Seen some cool ones at pawn shops near me.
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)07:31 UTC+1 No.2362724 Report

How is the Fujifilm XC 50-230mm?

I want to get one for my X-E1 and need some hype.
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)07:47 UTC+1 No.2362734 Report

>>2362717
it always will
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)07:51 UTC+1 No.2362736 Report

>>2362724
That's the reason why I bought an xt1 in the first place.
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)08:28 UTC+1 No.2362748 Report

Is this finally worth as a second back up?
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)08:30 UTC+1 No.2362750 Report

>>2362734
That means I can go and get like 3-4 years?
>>
Muhmegapickels 07/14/14(Mon)08:30 UTC+1 No.2362751 Report

>>2362748
Yes.
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)08:35 UTC+1 No.2362754 Report

>>2362638
The sigma 70-200 is the shittest, I wouldn't consider it over the tamron
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)08:41 UTC+1 No.2362759 Report

>>2362638
Tamron. Cheapest of the lot with comparable performance to the Nikon/Canon variant.
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)10:33 UTC+1 No.2362839 Report

>>2362736
You got an X-T1 just for a zoom lens?
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)23:13 UTC+1 No.2363286 Report

What is some good website with gear and general photography related news?
>>
Anonymous 07/14/14(Mon)23:25 UTC+1 No.2363291 Report

>>2362748
Backup to what? A Canon DSLR? You going to buy an adapter for your lenses?
No?
Then it's not a backup.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)00:46 UTC+1 No.2363353 Report

I have the opportunity to buy a Canon 5Dc for $200. Currently I have a 40D with the 18-55 kit lens, 50mm prime, and 85mm prime. I shoot mostly landscapes, portraits, and the occasional indoor events my faculty throws. My question is, will the 5D be an upgrade for me? Or should I just put that money towards a better wide angle lens?
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)00:53 UTC+1 No.2363363 Report

>>2363353

Forgot to mention, it's in pretty mediocre condition. 65k actuations, a few scratches on the LCD screen, but fine otherwise.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)01:22 UTC+1 No.2363400 Report

>>2363286

http://www.fredmiranda.com/
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)03:11 UTC+1 No.2363460 Report

Okay, I need an upgrade or something. Looking for something around the $1,000 range. Current camera is a T2i. My gripes with it are the shit noise in mostly every photo above 200 iso, the lack of burst shooting raws past 6, and that it isn't weatherproof.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)03:57 UTC+1 No.2363480 Report

How is the Pentecks Q10?

Should I instead go for a PEN?

Looking for a cheap mirrorless to get a friend.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)14:23 UTC+1 No.2363748 Report

>>2357489
I use Wasabi Power batteries with my D7000 and it seems to make no difference.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)14:24 UTC+1 No.2363749 Report

A decent buy on some 4TB hdds for backups.
http://computers.woot.com/offers/hitachi-gst-deskstar-4tb-internal-sata-hd
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)14:29 UTC+1 No.2363755 Report

>>2363460
If you want to stay with Canon, check out the 70D, but you might want to wait a few months and see what's going on with the possible 7D Mk II...that camera will be out of your price range, but it coming out would likely drop the price of the 7D if you find it's features more to your liking.
Older 5Ds will get you to full frame and full on weather sealing, but might not be enough of an improvement in burst speed for you.

I'm sure others will pop up with other brand recommendations.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)14:55 UTC+1 No.2363783 Report

>>2363480
Update: Looking at Nexs too and the EOS M.

Any suggestions? She doesn't need much, just looking for decent-ish image quality and ISO for a low price at most.

I'm thinking a EOS M, but I forget what was so problematic with them that no one liked.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)14:59 UTC+1 No.2363788 Report

>>2363783
maybe a used NEX 3N or something. Very nice sensor.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)15:01 UTC+1 No.2363790 Report

>>2363788
Not bad, not bad at all.

Will put on the list of certain possibilities.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)15:25 UTC+1 No.2363811 Report

>>2363783

The AF was utter crap in the EOS-M. If was faster even in outdoor light just to manual focus. Get a sony mirrorless from keh, Goes all the way down too $99 for BGN nex-3.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)15:30 UTC+1 No.2363816 Report

>>2363811
>>2363788

Alright, Sony it is.

She's a Sony girl anyways.

Thanks for the heads up you two.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)16:04 UTC+1 No.2363829 Report

>>2363811
The AF was made more manageable in a firmware update. Still nowhere near the level of "proper" mirrorless cameras though.
>>
Anonymous 07/15/14(Tue)21:46 UTC+1 No.2364074 Report

>>2363460
OM-D E-M5 or E-M10. Or even the E-M1 if you can spring for $1100, and want a pro level body.
The 70D isn't mutch better than the T2i in the ISO department...
To get something on par with the E-M10 and E-M5, you'd have to get the 70D or 7D, which are actually inferior to the E-M5 and E-M10. If small isn't your thing, get a panteks. DSLR.

>>2363480
>>2363783
Here is a list of dirt cheap M4/3 cameras : http://www.43rumors.com/list-of-brand-new-mft-cameras-you-can-get-for-less-than-300/
Without knowing your budget, I can't make a recommendation. Here is a used E-M5 though.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)16:45 UTC+1 No.2364524 Report

I'm trying to look for some ND filters, preferably those square ones to use for my landscapes. Which should I get?
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:14 UTC+1 No.2364712 Report

Had some questions about the fujinon 60mm macro.

Is it a good macro lens? Can it be used for both portraits and Muh closeups?

Kinda hoping its a jack of all trades kind of lens.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:17 UTC+1 No.2364714 Report

>>2364524
Alex recommended hitech filters in another thread the other day, stating that there were color casts with the cokin filters.
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)22:19 UTC+1 No.2364715 Report

>>2364712
The XF 60? It was the most commonly used portrait lens on fuji before the 56mm came out.

It's fine for anything you need that length for, though slowing for a portrait lens. Not a big deal unless you're still in all bokeh everything stage.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:27 UTC+1 No.2364718 Report

>>2364715
Eh, apparently its not so good as a macro so I'd only be buying it for portraits now.

I did want a zoom for portraits and Wildlife, but I guess muh background bokeh wouldn't be a thing then.

Decisions decisions.
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)22:37 UTC+1 No.2364721 Report

>>2364718
Look at the 55-200. Bokeh is still a thing at tele lengths with narrow apertures, so long as the background is far enough away for good compression.

Example of the 55-200 bokeh in case you're curious
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:51 UTC+1 No.2364724 Report

>>2364721
Interesting. However that particular zoom is a bit out of my price range.

I know its a bit absurd to rely on good performance on the cheap but I gotta try.

My budget is like 300 at most, which..The 60mm and the other fuji zoom (I forget its focal length) are in that budget on ebay.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:54 UTC+1 No.2364725 Report

Hey guys, whats happening?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera ModelE-M5
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4608
Image Height3456
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution350 dpi
Vertical Resolution350 dpi
Image Created2013:11:09 21:40:20
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/6.3
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating800
Lens Aperturef/6.3
Exposure Bias0.3 EV
Subject Distance1.41 m
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashFlash, Compulsory
Focal Length75.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2304
Image Height1728
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlHigh Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationHigh
SharpnessSoft
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:56 UTC+1 No.2364726 Report

>>2364725
28-70/4 IS
Fuck yeah
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)22:59 UTC+1 No.2364729 Report

>>2364725
all of that effort for a sensor smaller than the shutter release button.
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)23:00 UTC+1 No.2364730 Report

>>2364724
I assume you mean the 18-55 since the 10-14 is stupid expensive :P
Great lens too and easily the most all purpose lens Fuji has ( ignoring the super zoom because I have no experience with it)

The slightly lower end XC line of lenses has a 16-50 and 50-230 for cheaper than their XF counterparts, though they're slower and lack IS or on - lens aperture rings. You adjust XC with the back dial.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:00 UTC+1 No.2364731 Report

>>2364726
Superior depth of field of f/4, with the superior shutter speed of f/2.

Win Win.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera ModelE-PM2
Camera SoftwareAperture 3.4.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2013:10:04 18:02:41
Exposure Time1/25 sec
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating400
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length14.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:02 UTC+1 No.2364734 Report

>>2364731
That's all subjective.

I'm not going to tell you that one is better than the other, but it's subjective and the cameras have different purposes.

Equivalency is depreciated.
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)23:04 UTC+1 No.2364735 Report

>>2364731
M43 is so unnecessarily fuckhueg...
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:04 UTC+1 No.2364736 Report

>>2364734
For many years, photographers strived and struggled to get more in focus.

Today, they struggle, argue, and spend as much money as possible to get as little as possible in focus.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:06 UTC+1 No.2364738 Report

>>2364736
Yep, it's hilarious too.

Actually, it's pretty depressing.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:07 UTC+1 No.2364739 Report

>>2364735
Says the Fuji person.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-M1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2014:01:29 12:56:40
Exposure Time1/75 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating640
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Brightness4.5 EV
Exposure Bias2 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length35.00 mm
Image Width3921
Image Height2206
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)23:12 UTC+1 No.2364741 Report

>>2364739
I don't think you made the point you thought you did.
We can pretend though :~)
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)23:25 UTC+1 No.2364744 Report

>>2364741
Also since we're posting side-by-sides
(Let's take a moment to appreciate the ugliest Bessa in the world, it's awaiting new paint)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSAMSUNG
Camera ModelSAMSUNG-SM-N900A
Camera SoftwareN900AUCUCNC2
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.2
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3264
Image Height1836
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:07:16 17:20:01
Exposure Time1/17 sec
F-Numberf/2.2
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating160
Lens Aperturef/2.2
Brightness0.5 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.13 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3264
Image Height1836
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image IDC13QSGJ02SB
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:28 UTC+1 No.2364745 Report

>>2364741
A camera with a slightly smaller sensor that is considerably smaller than the one next to it with a slightly larger sensor? Yep, I made it.
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)23:29 UTC+1 No.2364746 Report

>>2364744
Although this is more what I was referring to with "unnecessarily large"

M43 is fatty-supreme.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSAMSUNG
Camera ModelSAMSUNG-SM-N900A
Camera SoftwareN900AUCUCNC2
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.2
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3264
Image Height1836
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:07:16 17:15:39
Exposure Time1/17 sec
F-Numberf/2.2
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating160
Lens Aperturef/2.2
Brightness0.7 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.13 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3264
Image Height1836
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image IDC13QSGJ02SB
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:33 UTC+1 No.2364749 Report

>>2364745
>considerably smaller
Are you kidding? It's practically the same size, with a much smaller sensor proportionately speaking.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:50 UTC+1 No.2364755 Report

>>2364746
We can compare small m4/3 bodies to small Fuji bodies all day long.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width923
Image Height610
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:51 UTC+1 No.2364756 Report

>>2364755

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width1280
Image Height960
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution96 dpi
Vertical Resolution96 dpi
Image Created2013:10:19 16:09:55
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1024
Image Height369
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:53 UTC+1 No.2364757 Report

>>2364755
>>2364756
Too bad the Fuji still has a real sensor, unlike any of those cameras.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:55 UTC+1 No.2364759 Report

>>2364756


>>2364757
Good M4/3 sensors are on par with good Fuji X sensors, outperforming in some areas, actually. Fuji X-Trans has a tendency to blow highlights very easily compared to M4/3.
Noise on Fuji X-Trans is no better than M4/3. M4/3 retains more detail.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:56 UTC+1 No.2364760 Report

What's the point of this never ending comparison of camera size and light gathering equivalence? What does it prove? What does it show? How much of an insecure faggot you are for buying m43 or NikonFX?
Its time to move past numbers and learn to take photographs.
>>
isi 07/16/14(Wed)23:57 UTC+1 No.2364761 Report

>>2364755
and you'll still fail to make any point. I'm not sure why you're even arguing with me, the upper-tier M43 cameras are without a doubt larger than they actually *need* to be. Not a bad thing if you have big hands, but they are in fact exceedingly huge relative to their sensor size (as your own examples of miniscule M43 cameras show)

I mean yeah, I get it, its so they could fit more buttons on, so they could up the weathersealing and all, but my point stands- upper-tier M43 cameras are unnecessarily fat little chunks.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:57 UTC+1 No.2364762 Report

>>2364757
Here you go, noise and detail comparison. Note that Fuji X has NO "noise reduction off" setting. Instead, it has baked-into-RAW noise reduction, particularly on the color noise channel, to make their ISO performance look much higher than it really is.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4896
Image Height3264
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:03:04 18:40:32
Exposure Time1/400 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness0.4 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length35.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width524
Image Height646
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessHard
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:59 UTC+1 No.2364764 Report

>>2364761
>upper-tier M43 cameras are without a doubt larger than they actually *need* to be.
Thats because they are aimed at the enthusiast market, who prefers manual controls, buttons, and ergonomics over teeny weeny body size.

>(as your own examples of miniscule M43 cameras show)
So being the same size as a Canon S110, and smaller then a Pentax Q is "exceedingly huge" huh? I'll write that one down. News at 10.
>>
Anonymous 07/16/14(Wed)23:59 UTC+1 No.2364765 Report

>>2364759
>are on par with good Fuji X sensors
Good Fuji X sensors? What are the bad ones? I'm curious since it's pretty much the exact same sensor in every x-trans camera. Do you even know what you're talking about?
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:10 UTC+1 No.2364769 Report

>>2364765
They have some 12 pickle ones in their smaller compact line.
>>
isi 07/17/14(Thu)00:12 UTC+1 No.2364771 Report

>>2364764
I'm aware of why they are the way they are. Do you always get this buttflustered when people observe the obvious?

>so being the same size as a Canon S110, and smaller then a Pentax Q is "exceedingly huge" huh?
I believe I called those particular cameras "miniscule" not "exceedingly huge." Comprehension is a doll.

>>2364762
I can assume by this example that you do not do post-production to your work, yeah?
Because otherwise there's no point to be made here.

>Fuji X-Trans has a tendency to blow highlights very easily compared to M4/3

Oh M43fag, darling, cameras don't blow highlights. Photographers blow highlights. Here's an example of X-Trans shitting the bed on highlights.

Anyway, I'm not really looking to debate with you, m43fag. I know you're extremely defensive about your system for whatever reason. For clarity, I like M43, I just find the idea of a larger full-featured one silly because you are, at that point, eschewing the primary benefit of going M43 over APS-C, which is potential size reduction. I'm not here to argue with you about theoreticals derived from charts, or to compare 100% crops of my parents spice cabinet, because I don't think that accomplishes anything at all. I'm just here to say "Man, that OMD is a little fatass"

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)128 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4896
Image Height3264
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2014:07:16 18:04:33
F-Numberf/1.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness0.4 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length85.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1000
Image Height665
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto Bracket
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SaturationLow
SharpnessHard
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:14 UTC+1 No.2364775 Report

>>2364771
Nope.

If you take an E-M1 and set it to the same exposure settings as an X-T1 right next to it, the X-T1 will have noticably less detail in the highlights, and will begin clipping sooner.
>>
isi 07/17/14(Thu)00:15 UTC+1 No.2364777 Report

>>2364775
If you do that, you don't understand exposure.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:16 UTC+1 No.2364778 Report

>>2364775
People usually shoot the Fuji cameras exposed to the left slightly. Your methodology is poor.
1/10, would not do labs with.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:17 UTC+1 No.2364780 Report

>>2364775
Here is an example. Note the properly exposed scene with blown shirt and background walkway.

Check EXIF for exposure comp setting.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:18 UTC+1 No.2364781 Report

>>2364771
>128mm, f/1.0
what in the fuck
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:18 UTC+1 No.2364782 Report

>>2364778
>People usually shoot the Fuji cameras exposed to the left slightly.
You just proved my point.

>>2364777
Dynamic range is dynamic range, deal with it.

>>2364780
Here is the picture that 4chan refused to post.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T1
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)83 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4896
Image Height3264
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:03:09 15:27:51
Exposure Time1/350 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Brightness7.8 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length55.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1800
Image Height1200
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessHard
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:34 UTC+1 No.2364792 Report

>>2364782
>You just proved my point
No, you just proved that isi was right and you don't understand exposure.

>dynamic range is dynamic range
You forget that Fujis have 200% and 400% DR modes. Care to cite your claim that your camera has more dynamic range though? Comparing cameras on the same settings at different sizes doesn't work.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:41 UTC+1 No.2364796 Report

>>2364782
>what is different metering systems
>>
isi 07/17/14(Thu)00:45 UTC+1 No.2364799 Report

>>2364781
Your guess is as good as mine. That's a Rokinon 8mm at f/8.

I think the setting for manual lenses in the camera probably got changed somehow. Only possible way I could have ended up with f/1.0, I don't own anything that fast for exif to get swapped with.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:48 UTC+1 No.2364803 Report

>>2364796
A metering system where you have to consistently expose at -0.7 or -1.0 EV is a bad one. Or its the sign of a sensor with poor highlight range.
>>
isi 07/17/14(Thu)00:50 UTC+1 No.2364806 Report

>>2364803
You really don't use your camera much outside of theory, do you? :/
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:53 UTC+1 No.2364809 Report

>>2364806
I use my E-M1 very often. I am one of the people in the shutter count thread with a "ridiculously high" shutter count.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)00:56 UTC+1 No.2364811 Report

>>2364809
And how many of those are photos of McCormick spice racks and the other nonsensical comparisons you post day-in day-out?

Thinking you need to always line the needles up (i.e. 0 EV) or the meter/sensor is bad is really misinformed.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)01:07 UTC+1 No.2364817 Report

>>2364811
>Thinking you need to always line the needles up (i.e. 0 EV) is bad is really misinformed.
Indeed. Thats why we have EV comp, which I use often on my E-M1.
But a camera where you are consistently at -1EV comp has something wrong. Most of the time the camera should be able to nail exposure, especially in 2014. Exposure comp should only be needed when you want to expose for a specific part of the frame, at which point you have the option to use spot metering.
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)12:43 UTC+1 No.2365247 Report

What backpack do you guys have? I'm looking at some lowepros, seems a bit overpriced maybe...
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)13:54 UTC+1 No.2365277 Report

What're the good/essential OM-system lenses?
>>
Anonymous 07/17/14(Thu)15:31 UTC+1 No.2365339 Report

>>2365277
50mm 1.8 or 1.4 MC
35mm f/2 MC
85mm f/2 MC
24mm f/f2.8

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 60D
Camera SoftwareDigital Photo Professional
Lens Size15.00 - 85.00 mm
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 1.1.0
Serial Number1971116181
Lens NameEF-S15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution350 dpi
Vertical Resolution350 dpi
Image Created2013:12:11 16:30:46
Exposure Time0.6 sec
F-Numberf/8.0
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/8.0
Exposure Bias1 EV
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length44.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1000
Image Height667
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ModeAv-Priority
Focus TypeAuto
Metering ModeEvaluative
SharpnessUnknown
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Digital ZoomUnknown
Shooting ModeManual
Image SizeLarge
Focus ModeOne-Shot
Drive ModeTimed
Flash ModeOff
Compression SettingFine
Self-Timer Length2 sec
Macro ModeNormal
White BalanceAuto
Exposure Compensation6
Sensor ISO Speed65408
Color Matrix129
>>
Anonymous 07/18/14(Fri)12:57 UTC+1 No.2366080 Report

>>2362078
>tokina 28-70 f/2.8

I see this lens on sale for about $250 from time to time.

How is it on a DX body? I have a D300 and was looking to get this lens.
>>
Anonymous 07/18/14(Fri)13:21 UTC+1 No.2366088 Report

>>2365339
that 85mm looks juicy
>>
Anonymous 07/18/14(Fri)13:48 UTC+1 No.2366093 Report

>>2365247
I'm using a Lowepro Flipside 400 AW. It's pretty comfortable to wear, even for longer trips. Storage wise it packs quite a lot. Normally I fill it with filters, a Canon EOS 5D with attached 24-70mm, a Pentax 6x7 with attached 45mm, a Canon EF 200mm, remote shutter release, a 430 ex ii flash and 2 yongnuo ttl flash trigger transceivers. In the front I have room for cleaning items like a rocket blower and some cloth as well as a tripod mount.
They are not cheap, but I have found this backpack to be pretty solid. Had it for 2 and a half years now and it's been with me through some rough environments (beach, caves, abandoned buildings, woods, wetlands) and is still going strong.
>>
Anonymous 07/18/14(Fri)14:26 UTC+1 No.2366104 Report

>>2366088
Oh, it is.
>>
Anonymous 07/18/14(Fri)16:33 UTC+1 No.2366171 Report

So I'm renting a TS-E 17mm to be able to do some architectural shots and landscapes.

I'm not super familiar with camera movements (this is mainly to evaluate if I want to invest in getting one), but I do know enough to be able to get the shots that I want (if weather is permitting, which I hope to high heaven it is).

My question is, beyond those, what are some other things I should try out? I'm not sure if I care enough about macro to try, but any other ideas of things to try?
>>
Anonymous 07/19/14(Sat)03:34 UTC+1 No.2366538 Report

Is it a good time to acquire a Ricoh GR? The hasidim jews have a nice bundle including the viewfinder... or should I expect larger price drops?
>>
Anonymous 07/19/14(Sat)22:24 UTC+1 No.2367075 Report

Hey guys,

My camera and lenses just got stolen and I'm looking to buy a new one. My budget is around $ 3000. I'm looking for a camera to travel with that has good JPG quality because I'm travelling without a laptop. What do you guys recommend? I was thinking about a camera such as the Canon 6D but according to reviews the JPG quality of this camera is not that amazing.
>>
Anonymous 07/19/14(Sat)22:44 UTC+1 No.2367081 Report

>>2366093
Ended up with a flipside 300. Bit a cheaper, but sufficient for my needs. Thank you.
>>
Anonymous 07/19/14(Sat)23:17 UTC+1 No.2367094 Report

Would a pentax q10 be worth picking up for 140$ or is there a better pocket cam in that price range?
>>
Anonymous 07/19/14(Sat)23:53 UTC+1 No.2367101 Report

I'm not sure if this is a big thing here, but I'm not sure where else to go. My wife and I picked this Bolsey model C up at an antique store today. It came with its bag, filters, external flash, light exposure tool, and all the original paperwork (including warranty and original inspector's stamp). We're not looking to sell it, we're basically just curious as to how much it's worth.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSAMSUNG
Camera ModelSGH-M919
Camera SoftwareM919UVUEMK2
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.2
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4128
Image Height2322
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:07:19 17:44:57
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/2.2
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating250
Lens Aperturef/2.2
Brightness0.9 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.20 mm
CommentMETADATA-START
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4128
Image Height2322
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image IDS13F0SAGI01
>>
Anonymous 07/20/14(Sun)02:09 UTC+1 No.2367183 Report

I read the sticky so I looked for this containment thread.

I want to get my first DSLR for macro photography. Is there any reason not to just get something used from 6 years ago on eBay?

Intuitively if I go with a Nikon, I want to avoid the cameras that require a lens with an integrated motor?
>>
Anonymous 07/20/14(Sun)02:11 UTC+1 No.2367185 Report

>>2367094
anyone?
>>
Anonymous 07/20/14(Sun)14:15 UTC+1 No.2367518 Report

>>2367185
>>2367094

The Q cameras are curiosities. They're not bad for what they aspire to be, but they're not really pocketable.
>>
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)03:29 UTC+1 No.2369544 Report

>>2356789
What's the virtue of constant f/ number? (I seriously don't know how to phrase that).

I have an old SRT-101 and am in the process of looking for more lenses; I had one in the cross hairs (a 100-500mm, f/8). I lost and didn't know if I should be greatful (f/8 is kinda slow for 100mm).
>>
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)17:48 UTC+1 No.2369941 Report

Gear Question:
I currently have d3200 + 35mm 1.8

I need a zoom for traveling. I'm looking at the 18-105mm for convenience/general daytime shooting. What else should I consider?
All the content on this website comes from 4chan.org. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster. 4chanArchive is not affiliated with 4chan.