|
Thoren posted:Is there any real advantage in spending more for TTL over manual? I plan on using it for street photography 99% of the time. Size. I have the Nissin i40 for Fuji, it could fit underneath a full-sized flash with the head tilted forward.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:40 |
|
|
VelociBacon posted:If you're asking if it's worth it for street photography or even just learning flash the answer is no. Get a yungnuo and use it on manual mode. Yeah gently caress it I'll just buy a cheap manual flash. edit: Is there something smaller than the YN 560 IV? Thoren fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Thoren posted:Yeah gently caress it I'll just buy a cheap manual flash. I'd check in the dorkroom buy/sell thread to see if anyone has a speedlight they'd sell at a good price before you buy something. I don't really know the lineup enough to recommend a model sorry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
spog posted:I imagine that the LR team at Adobe Headquarters all have little pointed beards and/or sashes Of course, it turns out that the Lightroom team let the Acrobat team write the 'move folders' part of LR - so it doesn't work and give 'unknown error'......
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
So this is a weird question but does anyone know if there was ever an attempt to make a 'metric' camera. I.e. One that used millimetres and milliseconds for aperture and shutter speed respectively (would it be lumens for ISO?)?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:So this is a weird question but does anyone know if there was ever an attempt to make a 'metric' camera. I.e. One that used millimetres and milliseconds for aperture and shutter speed respectively (would it be lumens for ISO?)? No because aperture is already metric, it's expressed as a denominator of focal length which is already in millimetres and shutter speed is written as fractions of a second minus the numerator (the 1/) part for reasons of space. When you have to fit a lot of numbers onto a relatively small dial, you use the shortest numbers that you can. Seconds are already a SI unit. As for ISO, it doesn't refer to any units as such. ISO for film is a measure of a film's sensitivity but this doesn't reference units directly (i.e. 100 ISO film is not something like 100 candlepower/furlong squared).
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
There would have to be some units or scale for iso. Otherwise it wouldn't be a standard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:No because aperture is already metric, it's expressed as a denominator of focal length which is already in millimetres and shutter speed is written as fractions of a second minus the numerator (the 1/) part for reasons of space. When you have to fit a lot of numbers onto a relatively small dial, you use the shortest numbers that you can. Seconds are already a SI unit. As for ISO, it doesn't refer to any units as such. ISO for film is a measure of a film's sensitivity but this doesn't reference units directly (i.e. 100 ISO film is not something like 100 candlepower/furlong squared). I guess metric is the wrong term then, but wouldn't it be possible to express f/n as a diameter in millimetres? And fractions of a second in decimals? Would it really take up that much room on a dial?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Its not important to know. The f stop is what is important in the calculation of exposure. You cant even rework it to be in mm because f stop has no units because its a ratio. The diameter of the aperture is only partly relevent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:I guess metric is the wrong term then, but wouldn't it be possible to express f/n as a diameter in millimetres? And fractions of a second in decimals? Would it really take up that much room on a dial? The f in the numerator is the focal length of the lens (n=f/d). So, yes, you could have users input the diameter of the opening in millimeters, but then you're doing the calculation in your head for what lens you have, when all you really want to know is the ratio between the focal length and diameter of the opening. I suppose you could express shutter speed in decimal instead of fractions, but I also don't see a particularly compelling reason to try. tk fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
underage at the vape shop posted:There would have to be some units or scale for iso. Otherwise it wouldn't be a standard. As for aperture, expressing it as millimetres squared instead of as a fraction of the focal length would be useless. You wouldn't be able to directly compare lenses of different focal lengths and you'd need to calculate exposure values for each lens that you owned at each stop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
underage at the vape shop posted:There would have to be some units or scale for iso. Otherwise it wouldn't be a standard. What you mean is "dimension," and no, that's not true - there are plenty of dimensionless units.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
What's the view here on the 5D Mk4? I own a 7D and was thinking to upgrade, but so far the reviews make it sound like I might be better just going for the Mk3. I mostly do concert photography and portraiture, and it doesn't sound like the MK4 would represent a leap big enough to justify the price difference. I've used the Mk3 in the past, so I know it fits my needs; the only problem will be the faster depreciation as a result of the new models that are out. I've heard great things about the mirrorless Sony full frame, but I'm not sure the available adapters would make my Canon lenses work too well if I was to migrate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Do you have full frame glass already or are you starting over with the 5D4? 5D4 definitely brings Canon's dynamic range into the same ballpark as its competitors, which is an area where the previous Canon bodies fell behind. The 5D3 suffering in that regard (among other things that irked me about the system) was a contributor to me dumping my Canon setup last year. If you don't already have full frame Canon glass I'd seriously explore other systems, but the 5D4 is by all accounts a great camera if you're already in the system. With respect to 5D4 vs. 5D3 I think it's important to evaluate dynamic range and maybe get your hands on some RAWs. While shooting they're very similar cameras with what I consider minor improvements.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Do you have full frame glass already or are you starting over with the 5D4? 5D4 definitely brings Canon's dynamic range into the same ballpark as its competitors, which is an area where the previous Canon bodies fell behind. The 5D3 suffering in that regard (among other things that irked me about the system) was a contributor to me dumping my Canon setup last year. All of my lenses, with the exception of a lovely kit lens that I use for traveling, are for full frame cameras. I only own one L lens though, the 70-200 ISM 2.8 (which I absolutely love. It's built like a tank, and as sharp as they get) What system did you jump to, and what has been your experience so far?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:What system did you jump to, and what has been your experience so far? Star War Sex Parrot posted:I switched from Canon full-frame DSLRs and can't say that I miss much, especially now with the X-T2. The X-T1's autofocus performance was a downgrade from the 5DIII, but the X-T2 corrects that completely in my experience so far. Dynamic range on Fuji is significantly better (not sure how it stacks up to the 5DIV now), and I find myself shooting a lot more because it's such a compact setup compared to my old 5DIII and full-frame glass. Even being mindful of things like confirmation bias, I can confidently say that I don't regret the switch at all. Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
For some of my photos, I'd like them to be an accurate representation of how the scene really looked (i.e. having colors and contrast that most accurately match what I saw with my eyes). How should I go about doing this? Should I try something like this: http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?id=1257? Or is there a lower-tech method I should use?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
DorianGravy posted:For some of my photos, I'd like them to be an accurate representation of how the scene really looked (i.e. having colors and contrast that most accurately match what I saw with my eyes). How should I go about doing this? Should I try something like this: http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?id=1257? Or is there a lower-tech method I should use? Edit them with Lightroom/Photoshop?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:What's the view here on the 5D Mk4? The 5D4 is a straight up upgrade on virtually every feature and spec of the 5D3. If you don't currently have the 5D3 and are thinking of upgrading to full frame from crop then a 5D4 is a good (and expensive) choice. If you already had the 5D3 then the upgrade is a harder sell, unless you are a full time professional or need specific things the 5D3 doesn't offer*. A new 5D3 is still fairly expensive, not THAT much cheaper than the 5D4, so if you are going for a new camera you might as well go for the 5D4 in my opinion. Keep in mind there are tons of used 5D3's on the market now with plenty of people upgrading to the 5D4 so now is a great time to get a used 5D3. *I recently bought a 5D4 because i want better autofocus and ISO capabilities, and also the ability to autofocus with F/8 glass on all autofocus points. Non Serviam posted:I've heard great things about the mirrorless Sony full frame, but I'm not sure the available adapters would make my Canon lenses work too well if I was to migrate. Unless you are doing photography that requires the very best AF performance the Sony cameras with a metabones (Mk4) adapter for Canon lenses provide very good results.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Conversely there is no more irritating a photography problem than missed or slow focus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
DorianGravy posted:For some of my photos, I'd like them to be an accurate representation of how the scene really looked (i.e. having colors and contrast that most accurately match what I saw with my eyes). How should I go about doing this? Should I try something like this: http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?id=1257? Or is there a lower-tech method I should use? try https://www.hdrsoft.com/index.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
I used the Photomatix plugin for Aperture back when that was still a thing. I prefer the way it presents pre-rendering options to the way that Ps/Lr do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Family is asking what I want for Christmas, and some landscape photography books would be rad. I have a ton of Ansel Adams and Michael Kenna - is there anything else I might be interested in? Bonus points if medium/large format film.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Family is asking what I want for Christmas, and some landscape photography books would be rad. I have a ton of Ansel Adams and Michael Kenna - is there anything else I might be interested in? Bonus points if medium/large format film. Beyond just "landscape" is there anything in particular you're searching for?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Beyond just "landscape" is there anything in particular you're searching for? Inspiration, primarily, so it doesn't have to be too specific. Beyond maybe Adams, Kenna, Brandt, Rowell , I haven't been exposed to much. I really enjoyed Adams's "Examples" - I thought it was fantastic insight into the creative and technical process behind the pictures. Landscapes that tell a story with traditionally banal subject matter? We don't all have easy access to Half-Dome. luchadornado fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Dec 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Inspiration, primarily, so it doesn't have to be too specific. Beyond maybe Adams, Kenna, Brandt, Rowell , I haven't been exposed to much. I really enjoyed Adams's "Examples" - I thought it was fantastic insight into the creative and technical process behind the pictures. This http://a.co/cgbUEIu book is inspiration central.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Soviet Bus Stops is great if you want banal subjects in gorgeous photos. I have it and it's wonderful. This Brutal World is also really nice if you like architecture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
I just picked up Terry Falke's "Observations in an Occupied Wilderness" and it's good. I'd also recommend Eirik Johnson's "Sawdust Mountain".
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Anything wrong with using bulb for longer night exposure shots? My yashica 124 has a max shutter speed of 1 second, which means night shots still have to be shot at an aperture around 4~, maybe 5.6 if I'm lucky. I'd prefer to shoot at 22 or 32 at much longer shutter speeds. I assume I'll just have to get a stop watch out and time it correctly? At these length exposures, I guess being off by a half second or so won't matter that much?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:Anything wrong with using bulb for longer night exposure shots? My yashica 124 has a max shutter speed of 1 second, which means night shots still have to be shot at an aperture around 4~, maybe 5.6 if I'm lucky. I'd prefer to shoot at 22 or 32 at much longer shutter speeds. Ya, you'll be fine. Make sure you're compensating for reciprocity failure as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
You have a remote shutter release cable for your Yashica, right? Y'know, one of those snakey cable things with a button and a set-screw on the end. Holding the shutter release down with your finger for 20 seconds is going to result in lots of blur.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Thanks ansel, I'll do some reading on reciprocity failure. And yeah execudork, I have a cable for my FE that I think fits, but I'll have to double check. If not I found one on amazon for $15.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
They are much less on ebay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
reciprocity timer for ios is a great app to have looks like the equivalent for android is exposure assistant you set your film stock, and your measured exposure time, and it tells you what your shutter speed should be factoring in reciprocity failure
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
That exposure assistant app is perfect, I wasn't keen on figuring out those values myself. And it has portra, ektar, and tri-x which are the only films I really shoot. You guys are really helpful, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:I just picked up Terry Falke's "Observations in an Occupied Wilderness" and it's good. I'm either going to buy or visit the library for all those suggestions, but I definitely need to buy this one. Extremely my type of poo poo - thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
So I'm down into the rabbit hole of Japanese camera listings on eBay. Generally, stuff rated [Exc ++]! is not going to be poo poo, and the more plusses and exclamation marks, the closer to mint something is going to be. As far as I can tell, [MINT] itself doesn't really mean that something is any better than [Exc+++](!) functionality-wise, although there might be some very slight cosmetic edge for [MINT]. I stay away from [Very Good]. All that said, there are two Fuji GA645Zi's that I'm looking at right now, each a little less than $500. They're both rated [Exc++] but one is about $30 more expensive and the rear of the lens looks like this:  While the cheaper one looks like  Is there anything to be inferred from the reflections on the glass in those photos? Both are listed functioning perfectly and have 'no dust/fungus/balsam separation' in the descriptions of the optics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
I'm fairly sure those are ghost orbs which are usually the spirits of people tethered to this world against their will. Could also be the angle the pics were shot at - it's the same lens right? I wouldn't expect one to be multicoated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
The second one is clearly haunted. Is is a friendly ghost? Only buying it will let you know for sure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:40 |
|
|
Welp, I just made sure there was a generous return policy for the one I bought. I always wondered what camera reviewers meant when they said a lens has issues with ghosting. So it's the actual souls of the dead? Huh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 05:13
|
|