|
IceLicker posted:What would be the best way to protect all of this gear from ever-present playa dust that seems to find its way into everything? Don't go to burning man
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
If you wanted to just diy some cheapo weathersealing how effective would hot-gluing a UV to a clear plastic zip bag be? I've thought about trying it when its raining and I want to go out shooting and it seems like an on-topic question at the moment.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Yeah, I was thinking of not bringing my real camera gear at all. I have a few older point and shoots that I'm willing to let be potentially destroyed so I'll just do that instead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
I ordered a Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC from B&H on February 27th - I just read in their newsletter that there is now a $100 mail in rebate for this lens from March 1rst-31st. Goddamnit! Is it worth writing them or something and see if I could get a new receipt, or writing Tamron or something? I am guessing that it is just really bad luck on my part and nothing can be done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
Nikonos V vs. "Waterproof" P&S There's a Nikonos V for sale near me for $180, and I just got $200 dropped into my Paypal account as a birthday present. Seems like a good match. But, I lost my waterproof P&S back in November and I've been meaning to replace it. That was a Pentax Optio WG-1 GPS, and the WG-4 has just been announced, meaning there's a camera store locally that has the WG-3 for about $230. I'll get to play with said WG-3 (with my SD card and my spare-batteries-from-the-WG1-that-should-work) tomorrow when I pick up some film from that shop. Oh, and that film came from my "weathersealed" $4 Olympus Infinity / AF-1. So maybe I'm just experiencing shiny-thing lust. It's a film-vs-digital question on top of a "is this a good camera?" question, so I don't know if anyone has any solid advice here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
rio posted:I ordered a Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC from B&H on February 27th - I just read in their newsletter that there is now a $100 mail in rebate for this lens from March 1rst-31st. Goddamnit! Is it worth writing them or something and see if I could get a new receipt, or writing Tamron or something? I am guessing that it is just really bad luck on my part and nothing can be done. I would imagine they would work something out with you so long as the lens is within the return period.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Nikonos V vs. "Waterproof" P&S If you really want it now, go for it, but $200 is pretty high for a Nikonos-V. I just paid $150 for a green body (more expensive) with the 35mm lens from KEH (i.e. has a warranty). I think the orange bodies are more like $100 for an outfit. The electronics are kinda temperamental and you should really really think about buying from someone who'll stand behind it. Particularly since this is a camera that goes in the water and stuff, flood damage pretty much writes the camera off. The Nikonos is a great camera for what it is. It's a dive/all weather scale focus viewfinder camera with a selection of three above-water lenses. The 28mm LW is non-submersible, based on the Series E lens, and rare. The 35mm f/2.5 is diveable and the best all around lens for above-water. The 80mm is also usable above-water but have fun scale focusing a long lens (and you'll probably want the finder to frame properly). The 28mm amphibious lens is also supposed to be OK above-water too. The range of shutter speeds is limited - something like 1/15 to 1/500. The electronics are kinda temperamental. The flat ports on the lenses can flare if they're scratched (I think only black lenses are multi-coated, silver is single?). There's no rangefinder and only one set of non-parallax-correcting framelines. But if you want a "real camera" to take to the jungle or canoeing or something, they're the best game in town. The earlier models were very popular with war photojournalists in south-east Asia for this reason. On the other hand something like a Stylus Epic has weathersealing, is smaller, less of a theft target, has autofocus, etc, but lacks the potential for manual control the Nikonos offers. The Stylus Epic (specifically) does have a spot focus/spot meter mode that can give you some control back, and the flash exposure is very reliable. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Mar 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
mr. stefan posted:If you wanted to just diy some cheapo weathersealing how effective would hot-gluing a UV to a clear plastic zip bag be? I've thought about trying it when its raining and I want to go out shooting and it seems like an on-topic question at the moment. They make plastic bags for dslrs that cost only a couple bucks. Just check on Amazon or B&H. You shouldn't need to hot glue anything to your camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Haggins posted:They make plastic bags for dslrs that cost only a couple bucks. Just check on Amazon or B&H. You shouldn't need to hot glue anything to your camera. Yeah those OP-Tech Rain Sleeves are fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Speaking of shooting in extreme conditions, my best purchase this past season was a pair of gloves made by Freehands. They make full-fingered gloves that have little convertible thumb and forefinger tips for easy operation of camera (and smartphone) controls in cold, windy weather. I typically just use fingerless wool gloves but this winter was cold as hell and I appreciated having my entire hand sheltered except for the small fingertip region needed for the manipulation of fiddly little dials and buttons. I find a pair of fine leather gloves is suitable for using most camera controls but I still lose the ability to also use my touchscreen phone or pick my nose without having to remove them altogether. I went with the dark grey wool variant because they're the least dorky-looking but they make various styles out of other materials as well. I've seen similar concepts from a few other companies but I liked that these double as normal non-dork wool gloves since I'm usually shooting in urban areas and not Antarctica. edit: The above pic looks like velcro but my pair has hidden magnets to keep the fingertip latches held open so I guess they've refined the design at some point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Or free Materials needed: Garbage bag UV Filter Rubber Band 1. Cut a small hole in the center of the bottom of the trash bag. The incision doesn't have to be much larger than an inch. 2. Screw the UV filter onto your camera lens about halfway. 3. Stretch the cut you just made over the UV filter into the gap created between the filter and the lens. The bag should not tear at the cut. 4. Screw the UV filter on all the way. 5. Stick the rubber band over the interface you just made with the lens, bag, and UV filter. 6. Go out and take photos with a new sense of invulnerability. I've done this for both hurricane Irene and Sandy. It holds up really well in high winds, believe it or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 04:38
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:Or free This is basically what I do in foul weather.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Any recommendations on where to buy a UHS-II card? I see B&H have them lists but unsure if they're the best option. Need international postage too 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
feigning interest posted:They make full-fingered gloves that have little convertible thumb and forefinger tips for easy operation of camera (and smartphone) controls in cold, windy weather. I've seen similar gloves marketed to hunters, so you can have your trigger finger out. Might want to check Cabela's or Bass Pro or the like if you think you might get them wet. Also, wear a pair of nitrile exam gloves under them. Those things add a surprising amount of warmth under regular gloves. And would protect your exposed fingertip from the wind, at least. As for the camera, with somewhat-sealed pro bodies I drape a small folded towel over it (the ones football players have on the sidelines are almost perfect size). If you're out for 8 hours in a hurricane it won't be enough, but it'll do for a football game. I keep meaning to get some waterproof fabric to sew to the top side of the towel. The towel is pretty handy to have even if you do have a waterproof cover for the camera, for wiping the rain off your face/ersatz scarf/hood, etc. I've also done the trash bag and rubber band thing, I just never seem to be able to find a rubber band when it's raining. Another handy thing to have in the camera bag: one of those orange safety vests like construction workers wear. Lightweight, packs small (I keep mine in the bag under my short lens), gets you into places you wouldn't otherwise be allowed (and not even in the sneaky way -- the cops run us off if we stand in the road to take pictures of a wreck without 'em, but let us in if they don't have the safety excuse).
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 13:30
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Digital Jesus posted:Any recommendations on where to buy a UHS-II card? I see B&H have them lists but unsure if they're the best option. Need international postage too Woah, when did UHS-II become a real thing? Edit: Oh I guess its not that big of a deal. Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Mar 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
I dunno, 250 MB/s write seems nice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:I dunno, 250 MB/s write seems nice. But 250Mb/s doesn't seem to be the UHS-II spec. 250 is like way off the chart. Thats like SSD territory. Link?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
The limiting factor is probably the fact that there aren't many cameras that have a host that can write that quickly. Maybe the Blackmagic Pocket Camera and that's it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
The new Fuji X-T1 supports UHS-II which is why I'm looking, just got mine 2 days ago. That number is from SanDisk's own site so you have to take it with a grain of salt of course. http://www.sandisk.com.au/products/memory-cards/sd/extremepro-sdxc-sdhc-uhs-ii/
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
Guh I hate all this consumer jargon with SD: UHS-II U3 X-men fist Class 11 loving aye how is that -not- going to confuse the poo poo out of my mother. Especially when you put all of that on a card plus the Mb/s ratings too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:10
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:loving aye how is that -not- going to confuse the poo poo out of my mother. Especially when you put all of that on a card plus the Mb/s ratings too. Well your mom is going to be buying a class 4 8gb card from CVS, so that's probably not going to be a problem. But all the product categories are pretty dumb; I recently did an RMA of a Sandisk Extreme Pro 45mb/s card and somehow the customer service guy "Todd" from India hosed up and labeled it the Extreme 45mb/s card instead, so my replacement is coming back days later than expected because all their products share similar names and they couldn't figure it out in a timely fashion. Digital Jesus posted:The new Fuji X-T1 supports UHS-II which is why I'm looking, just got mine 2 days ago. LMAO the expected MSRP of the 64gb card is going to be $300. Sandisk manufactures a 480gb SSD with read/write of 545/500 for less money than this http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extre...sdssdx-480g-g25
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
That would be relevant if I could stick an SSD in my camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
I can  http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagiccinemacamera/
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:The new Fuji X-T1 supports UHS-II which is why I'm looking, just got mine 2 days ago. Supporting the UHS-2 standard and actually being able to write to the card that fast are two entirely different things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Like the most useful thing that thing can do currently is offload photos or video at ridiculous speeds. Assuming you buy their overpriced SD card reader anyways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
A few (utterly unscientific) tests I've seen have shown noteworthy improvements over UHS-I cards. I'm not that interested in discussing the merits of the format though, I really just wanted to know if anyone had seen a better price than B&H.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
A while back my dad ordered a 16 gig USB flash drive from amazon and got a 64gig Lexar 400x Cf card in the mail instead. It was especially strange since that's the exact card I bought for my d800 a couple weeks prior. We thought maybe amazon had mixed up our orders somehow but the package invoice had the USB stick listed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
So if 'they' (Sandisk) can make a SD sized card that can do 280MB/250MB/RW, does that mean the extra real estate of CF is pretty worthless now? Is CF still a few steps ahead of SD? Gap closing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
Anyone here get one of those new Vivitar 85/1.8s? Can't seem to find any good data on them. I guess its pretty new. Edit: I can't tell if its related or not to this chinese 85/2 http://translate.google.com/transla...0,start,15.html Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Mar 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Aren't the Vivitar primes just rebranded Rokinon ones?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Aren't the Vivitar primes just rebranded Rokinon ones? The Vititar used to rebadge the Samyang 85/1.4s but this lens is not a Samyang design and AFAIK no one else is rebadging it (Bower, Rokinon, Opteka, etc) so its exclusive to Vivitar at the moment. Its also tiny and goes for about $125 shipped online. People have said the user manual says there might be heavy vignetting on FF but real world reports otherwise although data is extremely limited.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Digging some more it looks like the maker might be Mitakon (who also make a 35/0.95 APS-C format lens) and they have their own branded lenses which look nicer(physically, compared to the Vivitar) and very Leica like. Although the Mitakon is a 85/2 and not 1.8 although that's splitting hairs and I wouldn't put it past Vivitar to fudge the aperture value.
Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Mar 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
It's also possible that the Mitakon optical design is the same but has a smaller aperture for some reason. For example it might not produce great image quality at f/1.8 (hence "portrait", maybe some excess spherical abberation?). Pentax sold both f/1.8 and f/2 versions of their 55mm lens to target different price points. Or yeah, Vivitar could just be embellishing a touch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
So would there be any market for a medium format(or even LF) speed booster type adapters to mount onto FF cameras? Seems like a good way to put MF glass to use that would otherwise be wasted due to cost of digital MF and/or having to scan film.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:So would there be any market for a medium format(or even LF) speed booster type adapters to mount onto FF cameras? Seems like a good way to put MF glass to use that would otherwise be wasted due to cost of digital MF and/or having to scan film. Probably not. Bear in mind that most medium format glass is designed for larger capture medium and actually worse than 35mm glass. I say this as a guy that bought a Hasselblad to Nikon adapter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:A few (utterly unscientific) tests I've seen have shown noteworthy improvements over UHS-I cards. I'm not that interested in discussing the merits of the format though, I really just wanted to know if anyone had seen a better price than B&H. I've taken to getting stuff like this off eBay here in Australia, but with the newness of the product B&H is still the best bet for wasting money from your lens fund. Shaocaholica posted:So if 'they' (Sandisk) can make a SD sized card that can do 280MB/250MB/RW, does that mean the extra real estate of CF is pretty worthless now? Is CF still a few steps ahead of SD? Gap closing? Smaller solid state media is less reliable. Cards have the ability to recover and flag corrupt sectors so this gets mitigated somewhat but you're still dealing with smaller and smaller amounts of electron storage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 10:32
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:So would there be any market for a medium format(or even LF) speed booster type adapters to mount onto FF cameras? Seems like a good way to put MF glass to use that would otherwise be wasted due to cost of digital MF and/or having to scan film. The Mamiya 80mm f/1.9 is like the only lens even worth trying this for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
HPL posted:The Mamiya 80mm f/1.9 is like the only lens even worth trying this for. I had one and my eyes weren't good enough to focus it wide open.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 10:56
|
|
|
Chernori posted:I'm thinking of surprising my girlfriend and travel partner with a new lens for her Olympus EPL3... Hey, just wanted to say thank you for all the advice: I ended up sneakily getting a Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and surprising her with it when we arrived in Vietnam. She's thrilled the new lens and is very excited to start taking photos with it. Thanks again! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 12:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
8th-snype posted:Probably not. Bear in mind that most medium format glass is designed for larger capture medium and actually worse than 35mm glass. I say this as a guy that bought a Hasselblad to Nikon adapter. For starters, this is straight up not true. If they couldn't deliver the resolution, people wouldn't spend $42,000 on a new medium format digital back. For comparison, the pixel size of a D800 is 4.8 microns, the Phase One IQ180 is 5.2 microns (80 megapixels). They're well within the resolution specs of high-end full frame/crop sensors. Go take a look at Chris Perez' resolution tests, medium format cameras produce as much absolute (not relative) resolution on film as 35mm cameras. Something like a Mamiya 7 will deliver just as much resolution as your Coastal Optics or Leica or whatever you kids are raving about these days. There's no guarantees of course - medium format lenses are just as variable in design and construction as 35mm lenses and there is some garbage out there (Moskva folders and folders in general). Secondly, even if we assume that there's only as much relative resolution (a MF image only has as much resolution as a 35mm image when reduced in resolution to 35mm) there's still reasons to do that. The compressed image will be brighter (same amount of photons in less space equals brighter) and have shallower medium-format depth of field. Of course that could be a downside to you as well. Shaocaholica posted:So would there be any market for a medium format(or even LF) speed booster type adapters to mount onto FF cameras? Seems like a good way to put MF glass to use that would otherwise be wasted due to cost of digital MF and/or having to scan film. I don't know if there would be a market, but I've always wanted one since the original Speed Booster came out. Along with the 6x4.5 80/1.9, I would also be particularly interested in a 6x7-sized adapter. The 6x7 has much bigger coverage than 6x4.5 and you could get a correspondingly higher speed increase out of it. I think 6x7 to 35mm would yield at least 2 stops speed increase, versus about one for 6x.4.5. Both the 80/1.9 and the 105/2.4 would yield roughly a 50mm f/1.2 lens. The P67 55/4 would be roughly a 28/2. The 150/2.8 would be a 75mm f/1.4 and the 300/4 and 400/4 EDIF would be 150/2 and 200/2 equivalents. Or you could keep speed boosting all the way down to crop sensor and get another stop/stop and a half on top of that. Pretty soon you'd be getting down into the f/1.0 range where the only alternatives are somewhat expensive, gimmicky crap from shady CCTV companies that doesn't even perform wide open, or insanely expensive, gimmicky crap from the likes of Leica. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Mar 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 18:37
|
|