|
I would too of I had a loving choice in the matter.
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
Anybody got $166,000 laying around that they aren't using? http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/used-equipment/used-lenses/used-canon-fit-lenses/canon-ef-1200mm-f56-l-usm-1
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
quote:its annual production volume was approximately two lenses.[3] The lens also took more than a year to construct, due to the time required to grow its massive fluorite crystals.[6] Makes me wonder how many of the more expensive super telephotos are sold per year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
"Minimum focusing distance is a hefty 14 metres" Good lens for goons to take 'portraits' with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
grack posted:Anybody got $166,000 laying around that they aren't using? Bitch, please: http://nikonrumors.com/2013/03/12/photographer-waiting-for-the-new-pope-with-a-nikkor-1200-1700mm-f5-6-8p-if-ed-lens.aspx/ I find it hilarious that both of these were designed to take photos at high-school baseball tournaments in one particular stadium where the press box was way up in the nosebleeds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 10:00
|
|
|
grack posted:Anybody got $166,000 laying around that they aren't using? I wonder if it's the same one that came up for sale at B&H a few years back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
A bunch of Manfrotto gear marked off on woot today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Bobx66 posted:Is there any reason to go with the 35MM Sigma over the 24-105MM? I have never owned a zoom lens before and I would be selling my 24MM Canon to get this lens. I have the 24-105MM range pretty well covered by primes but if I bought the 35MM that would be my widest lens (following the sale of the 24). Any recommendations?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
I need advice on light meters. I have a couple of cameras now that doesn't have a meter built in and I don't need anything fancy with TTL or flash metering and all that jazz. This one any good? http://www.sekonic.com/products/l-208/overview.aspx
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 06:42
|
|
|
Geektox posted:I need advice on light meters. I have a couple of cameras now that doesn't have a meter built in and I don't need anything fancy with TTL or flash metering and all that jazz. This one any good? I'm sure that meter is fine, but I'd argue if you're going to be buying a light meter, you might as well get something that can do flash metering even though you do say you don't really need it. I have the Sekonic l-308 which works really well, it's a bit more expensive but still has a small footprint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
What are my options if I'm looking for a digital camera with a classic 35mm(-equivalent) field of view, i.e. a digital rangefinder camera?
Xabi fucked around with this message at 14:08 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
Do you want an actual rangefinder, or just the 35mm FoV on a fixed lens camera?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
Sorry for being a bit unclear: I'm looking for a 35mm FoV on a fixed lens camera. Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but it looked like it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
Fuji x100s might be your best bet? There's Ricoh's with a 28mm-equivalent i think too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Xabi posted:Sorry for being a bit unclear: I'm looking for a 35mm FoV on a fixed lens camera. Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but it looked like it. The Ricoh GR is probably one of the cheaper options (new) but it's 28mm equivalent. A Fuji X100s would be a great option too, or a used X100 as well. The comedy option would be the Leica X2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
What are people's thoughts on the Nikon AF-S 55-200mm VR lens? I can get a used one for a pretty good deal and I'll be able to use it between my DSLR and film SLR. Is it decent as babby's first telephoto or should I save up for something a little better?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:What are people's thoughts on the Nikon AF-S 55-200mm VR lens? I can get a used one for a pretty good deal and I'll be able to use it between my DSLR and film SLR. Is it decent as babby's first telephoto or should I save up for something a little better? It's a great lens if you're not shooting in the dark, but it won't work on your film SLR. It's a DX (APS-C) lens. If you need 35mm coverage, Dorkroomers love the Tamron 70-300 VC, but it's about twice as much money new.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
It will work, it'll just have some vignetting (I use other DX lenses on my F100). I made a custom profile for them in Lightroom to correct it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Has anyone messed around with the Sony A7S much yet? My boss got one (film production company) and we've used it for a few smaller video shoots with the XAVC-S codec. poo poo is pretty unreal in terms of image quality. Not sure I'd use it for stills over a DSLR personally, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:What are people's thoughts on the Nikon AF-S 55-200mm VR lens? I can get a used one for a pretty good deal and I'll be able to use it between my DSLR and film SLR. Is it decent as babby's first telephoto or should I save up for something a little better? It's pretty good, VR works as well as you'd expect it to, quality isn't complete idiot trash, etc. If you're getting a good deal on it then it's probably worth having.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Mest0r posted:The Ricoh GR is probably one of the cheaper options (new) but it's 28mm equivalent. A Fuji X100s would be a great option too, or a used X100 as well. The comedy option would be the Leica X2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
khysanth posted:Has anyone messed around with the Sony A7S much yet? Someone here has been using one for concert photography and seems to really like it. I got one for video production and it's been awesome for that (on the two shoots I've had with it so far.) For stills, I'd rather use my D800 or even the little A6000.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
I got an A7S shortly after it came out. If you shoot in low light, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's good up to ISO 51200 which means you can use your f/2.8 lenses in situations where you couldn't with other cameras. It also makes auto ISO a lot more useful because you have such a useable range as opposed to only a few stops. The AF is not super fast but it is very robust in that it will still focus in conditions where other AF systems would roll over and die. I got the 35mm f/2.8 along with it and it's a great everyday lens because it's small, light and a good mix of sharpness and smooth out of focus areas. I like the lens hood because it's super compact compared to other lens hoods and I hope other manufacturers follow suit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Mest0r posted:if you're going to be buying a light meter, you might as well get something that can do flash metering even though you do say you don't really need it. HPL posted:It's good up to ISO 51200 which means you can use your f/2.8 lenses in situations where you couldn't with other cameras.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 00:02
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
The A7S is one of those cameras where those who get it, get it. It's not a camera for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
Currently using the a7s as A cam on a series, works pretty well. The rear screen is a bit average which means the DP keeps crowding my focus monitor and it inhales batteries, but otherwise I'm pretty impressed. It's a poo poo to rig but every stills camera masquerading as a video camera is without a cage. That plus base ISO 2000 means we shoot everything at t5.6 which makes focus pulling on stills glass nearly tolerable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 07:07
|
|
|
How do you guys light for an A7s? I think it's a great camera and a great piece of technology, but with it's huge dynamic range and ridiculous base ISO I have to imagine stacks of IRND are in play? Can you use any lights hotter than 1k?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
1st AD posted:How do you guys light for an A7s? I think it's a great camera and a great piece of technology, but with it's huge dynamic range and ridiculous base ISO I have to imagine stacks of IRND are in play? Can you use any lights hotter than 1k? Budget isn't huge so we're generally slinging a 4ft 4bank kino through a 60cm x 90cm diffusion panel (key) and a Diva (2ft 4bank) through some lee 251 or 250 (back light). DP likes big soft sources. We lit an entire party (15sqm ish area) with just a Diva through some yellow and diffusion then had Dedos coming in as rim lights from across the room. The big issue is you can no longer light to your eye, you set something up and you get back to the camera and your subtle set up has become this oven of light, in that regard it's pretty loving crazy. Exteriors are loving comical though especially in the Australian sun so the DP just throws a vari-ND on and calls it a day. Haven't had a chance to check in on IR pollution. XTimmy fucked around with this message at 08:51 on Aug 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
So Pentax have confirmed a new DSLR. The main feature seems to be a strip of forward facing green LEDs...
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:So Pentax have confirmed a new DSLR. The main feature seems to be a strip of forward facing green LEDs... Well, there's apparently a user-selectable AA filter, but from the description it sounds like a software solution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
Okay, I'm not sure if I should be asking in this thread or another thread. I'm going to film school right now and I'm taking some photography classes on the side. I'm going to be picking up a Canon 70D. (I choose Canon since our school's equipment checkout has hella Canon lenses making it easier for me). On B&H and Amazon they have a couple different bundle deals. Just wondering which lens bundle will give me the most bang for my buck: Bundle w/ 18-135mm STM + 55-250mm IS II for $1550 Bundle w/ 18-135mm STM + 55-250mm STM for $1650 Bundle w/ 18-55mm + 55-250mm IS II for $1350 Bundle w/ 18-55mm STM + 55-250mm STM for $1450 Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
If you're intending to use them with your film Canon, none of them, since they're all EF-S.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:If you're intending to use them with your film Canon, none of them, since they're all EF-S. As someone who is new to photography, can you explain what this means? This camera will be used 75/25 for photography/film currently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
EF-S is a new lens mount Canon made for their APS-C cameras. You can use the older EF lenses without problems on the 70D, however the EF-S lenses will not physically attach to a full frame camera, be it film or a digital one like the 6D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 07:09
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure this guy is saying "film" when he means "motion" not like actual film.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
EF-S is a Canon lens mount standard for their smaller digital sensor size ("crop sensors" like on the 70D, or the Rebel line). EF is a Canon lens mount standard for 35mm film and full frame sensors (5d, 6d). EF lenses will work on digital cameras with crop sensors, whereas while EF-S lenses will often mount on film/full frame cameras, but because it's designed for a smaller sensor, there will be some vignetting and possibly a mirror strike risk. edit: 8th-snype posted:I'm pretty sure this guy is saying "film" when he means "motion" not like actual film. gently caress, so much for my effort post rawrr fucked around with this message at 07:17 on Aug 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
Ooh, oops. In that case, you would want the 18-55 STM and the 55-250 STM out of that group, since the STM marker means it's faster and quieter focusing during video.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
The autism is coming from within the thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:So Pentax have confirmed a new DSLR. The main feature seems to be a strip of forward facing green LEDs... Well, there is the AA filter gone, but the big thing is that Pentax finally did the right thing and made a full-frame camera. I refuse to believe that it would be anything else, I mean how much can you hate money? Yes, it is a full frame. It is a full frame. Full frame. Full Frame It is a full frame Must be Yes Full frame No way it is otherwise. Full frame. Right? RIGHT? RIGHT? gently caress
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 11:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
No Gravitas posted:Dumb words... Full frame sensors would have been a big deal back before APS-C sensors got good now it really doesn't matter (unless you shoot Canon then whelp).
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 11:42
|
|