|
TheJeffers posted:Read some books, look at some art, or find whatever muse it is that inspires you. I guarantee it'll cost less than a new camera. That's true, and I'll definitely do that. I've had my 7d since 2009, I don't have a ton of Canon lenses (70-200 f4l and a tamrom 17-50), I use manual primes all the time and I've never shot full frame. It's served me well and I'm going to keep it for action, but I feel like it's time to see what this new technology has to offer. I'm going to buy a cheap c/y adapter and rent the a7 before I commit. Google Butt fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Nov 23, 2014 |
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 08:02 |
|
|
Is there anyway that camera's on cell phones will reach to the quality level of DSLRs? Or is that impossible?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Given that cellphone cameras are dealing with pixel densities over a magnitude higher than DSLRs, I rather doubt so. Any physical magic they can make working on the cellphone cameras would also improve DSLRs. Cellphone pictures look good enough because of heavy digital signal processing, which will be pretty glaringly obvious whenever you take a second look at images that weren't that well lit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Given that cellphone cameras are dealing with pixel densities over a magnitude higher than DSLRs, I rather doubt so. Any physical magic they can make working on the cellphone cameras would also improve DSLRs. Cellphone pictures look good enough because of heavy digital signal processing, which will be pretty glaringly obvious whenever you take a second look at images that weren't that well lit. Will my Canon T1i be better than any cell phone for quite sometime still?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Sony set up the NEX/Alpha cameras well for manual focus lenses. Focus peaking makes for fast focusing and you can zoom in on a patch for precision. Battery life for the A7 series is unfortunately poor, but the batteries are physically small and third party batteries are cheap, so it can be worked around. Shutter lag is excellent as you aren't waiting for a mirror to flap around. If you're shooting the kinds of things where you pre-focus and wait for the shot, you'll love the short shutter lag of a mirrorless camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
There are some odd phones with good cameras, like the Nokia Lumia with the 41mp camera or the samsung galaxy camera which is basically a camera with a phone attached, but they're still not as good as a real camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Will my Canon T1i be better than any cell phone for quite sometime still? Depends what "better" means to you? If it means being able to control depth of field, shoot in RAW, pick your lens, use a flash, shoot sports/kids/indoors etc etc then yes your t1i will better for a long time. But if you're not taking your DSLR places because it's too big, or want to post to Instagram instantly, or even if your even asking the question "can a cellphone replace my DSLR", maybe you should be looking at smaller cameras with more "social" features (like a fuji xe-2). Or maybe just use a cellphone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:There are some odd phones with good cameras, like the Nokia Lumia with the 41mp camera or the samsung galaxy camera which is basically a camera with a phone attached, but they're still not as good as a real camera. It comes down to sensor size. You pay for sensor size when you buy a "real" camera, regardless of megapickle count.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
I have full frame bodies that really never get used socially, my cell phone camera takes the majority of my personal photos. Depending on your phone and expected level of quality, a phone can be good enough, but will never compare to some kind of professional mirror less or DSLR. Pretty soon though I think they'll completely replace cheap point and shoots.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies but I should clarify that I was referring to solely image quality compared to my T1i.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
HPL posted:I thought getting it right the first time was a pretty good excuse for no firmware updates.  Google Butt posted:Hey guys. I've been shooting with a 7d and 6 Carl Zeiss c/y for years and recently I've been kind of losing interest in photography. I want to jump to full frame to change it up, I was going to to get the Nikon d610 but it looks like there's no real way to adapt my c/y glass With the upcoming A7ii you'd be adding in-body stablization to those c/y lenses, which is a pretty sweet proposition coming from a Canon body. I dunno how ergonomics shooting with them would be though, as others have said, the appeal of the mirrorless bodies is the portability, and slapping an SLR lens on there with an adapter kinda kills that for a lot of people. Personally I might pick up a used NEX, m43, or Fuji body (NEX or m43 will probably be cheaper though) and see how I like it. I was not prepared to like my NEX-3 as much as I did, it quickly replaced my 5D and 24-70L for basically everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 03:56
|
|
. I've been looking into the Sony a7, it's right in my price range but I'm still unsure of the trade offs with say, the 5d mk ii. I know people complain about battery life and the shutter lag/black out time. How's the a7 for portraits with off camera strobes?
|
Honestly, on the portability part, adapters aren't that bad. My 35-70 f/4 A mount and my 50mm f/1.7 MD with adapters are still about the same size as the Sony E mount 50mm or 18-55mm, or any of the Sigma set.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
HPL posted:Sony set up the NEX/Alpha cameras well for manual focus lenses. Focus peaking makes for fast focusing and you can zoom in on a patch for precision. Battery life for the A7 series is unfortunately poor, but the batteries are physically small and third party batteries are cheap, so it can be worked around. Shutter lag is excellent as you aren't waiting for a mirror to flap around. If you're shooting the kinds of things where you pre-focus and wait for the shot, you'll love the short shutter lag of a mirrorless camera. The shutter lag thing is true but I gotta say I'm not feeling too limited by the 37 millisecond lag on my D2X 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Thanks for the replies but I should clarify that I was referring to solely image quality compared to my T1i. Eventually, somebody will put a camera in a phone that poops out images better than your T1i wearing its kit lens. But your T1i can wear some amazing glass that no phone can ever take advantage of. Super-teles, ultra-wide-angle, any lens with a max aperture of f/1.8 or better, the possibilities in lenses make the comparison meaningless. The situations in which those two cameras get used are too different, forcing them to take the same pictures in the same circumstances to pixel-peep a comparison is unfair to both. You whip out your phone and snap your friend with beer shooting out of his nose. You take the last picture of Grandma with your Canon and get it printed big for the whole family.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The shutter lag thing is true but I gotta say I'm not feeling too limited by the 37 millisecond lag on my D2X I used to use a 40D which has a shutter lag of about 60ms and going to a NEX 5N which has a shutter lag of about 10ms makes a big difference in twitch-type situations like trying to take a photo of someone jumping unexpectedly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Is there anyway that camera's on cell phones will reach to the quality level of DSLRs? Or is that impossible? That said, they're already close enough for lots of people. Pablo Bluth fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Nov 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Panasonic has shoe-horned that 1" Sony 20mp BSI-CMOS sensor in to a cell phone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
grack posted:Panasonic has shoe-horned that 1" Sony 20mp BSI-CMOS sensor in to a cell phone. Ah yes, the CM1. Wonder if that'll ever reach the US. I think the next biggest is the Sony Z3 with a 20.7MP 1/2.3 sensor, but I could be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Pretty soon though I think they'll completely replace cheap point and shoots. Cellphone is to DSLR as Kodak Instamatic was to Nikon F back in the film days. SLRs will always have better lenses (for Nikons, the same ones ), and with digital, a bigger sensor is always better, even with fewer pixels -- less noise, better low-light performance, etc.; compare 110 film to 35mm, or 35mm to 4x5, quality-wise. It's not the same principles at all, but in both cases bigger is better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 21:32
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Well, I worried myself a bit today. My Sigma 150-600 sport came in on Thursday, but as I live in Canada my daylight hours are a subset of my work hours. So, today was the first day to test the lens outdoors. I waited for it to warm up from -37 degrees Celsius to about -30 and went for a drive. Strangely enough the lens was having huge issues focusing, and when shooting, none of the photos were in focus (as in, it wasn't just missing focus, but rather there was no areas of the photos which were in focus). This was strange because I'd tested the lens inside a dim bus garage and got sharp shots handheld. For anyone unfamiliar with this type of climate, you can't shoot a lens this long from inside or near a warm car because the heat causes enough refraction to blur images. But none of my images were clear and I was certain I had a bad copy or had wrecked it somehow. Of course, due to living in a literal frozen hellscape, my jaunts from the car were kept at a minimum, and this turned out to be the problem. The air inside my car (and thus inside my lens) was about 50 degrees Celsius warmer than the air outside, so the air is going to have a far different refractive index than the outside air. So I stood outside and slowly allowed myself and my lens to freeze, and zooming constantly to allow cold air into the lens. While doing this, I took some shots as the lens progressively cooled: http://imgur.com/a/Powpl (100% crops, f/10, no PP/NR applied) What I learned: 1) My lens is fine 2) I need to remember basic physics more quickly 3) -30 C is too loving cold to go outside Now I didn't let the lens get to -30 before my screaming fingers made me go back into my car, so the test was not comprehensive. Just wanted to let others get a laugh at my foolishness. Fart Amplifier fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Nov 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
You are more dedicated than I. My GF and I had planned to go out and finish up her fieldwork - collecing plant galls at a site near the river - and I was going to shoot some film because hey, interesting weekend activity. Then we saw this morning's weather of -31 and said "gently caress it". I'll have to keep your point about air temperatures inside and outside of long lenses in mind, though, I fully expect to be out shooting with my Takumar 500mm at some point this winter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
I'm looking to get a circular polarizer, has anyone used this Tiffen before? Also, would it be a terrible idea to just get a filter much bigger than I actually need and a set of step up rings? All I've got now are 52, 58, and 62mm lenses, but wouldn't the rings + a 77mm filter future-proof me in case I get a 77mm lens down the line? Is there a downside to putting on a million step up rings? Similarly, anything to look for or avoid in the step up rings?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
junidog posted:Also, would it be a terrible idea to just get a filter much bigger than I actually need and a set of step up rings? No, this is how you should do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Are third party batteries pretty safe to use? There's a package deal on Adorama for the D7100 that includes one but I've never used anything other than official Nikon ones.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Geoff Zahn posted:Are third party batteries pretty safe to use? There's a package deal on Adorama for the D7100 that includes one but I've never used anything other than official Nikon ones. I've used 3rd party batteries from Promaster, Wasabi, and a few other companies and all of them have run fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 12:06
|
|
|
Geoff Zahn posted:Are third party batteries pretty safe to use? There's a package deal on Adorama for the D7100 that includes one but I've never used anything other than official Nikon ones. Wasabi at least is good. No experience with the others.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
Just bought a new body and got all excited when the Amazon guy delivered. Only then did I realise that I had forgotten to order a memory card for it. Joy of joy to find a 16GB Class 10 SD card, lying unused on a shelf. I still find it somewhat amazing how cheap/large these are - I still have some 4Mb cards lying around that cost a pretty penny when I bought them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
I remember my brother spending like €100 on an 8gb card back in the day 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 13:54
|
|
|
In 2001 I bought a 128MB CF card on Amazon for $105.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
My first digital camera didn't even have a memory card slot. It was a Casio QV-10.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
What's a decent entry level light meter I can get used? I am sick of using my iphone and it is crap for nighttime photography anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:What's a decent entry level light meter I can get used? I am sick of using my iphone and it is crap for nighttime photography anyway. Gossen Digiflash that I got off of KEH seems to do the job for a reasonable price.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:What's a decent entry level light meter I can get used? I am sick of using my iphone and it is crap for nighttime photography anyway. This isn't really entry level, but if you monitor keh, you can get a Pentax Spotmeter V (don't get a lower one because you can't get the batteries for them. Also, don't get a Zone VI modified one -- too much) for about $200. I would stick to keh, because you don't know if an ebay one is still accurate. A digital is more expensive, but the display is a little easier to use at night -- I have a V, though and it is fine. This will not work for flash, but for night photography a spotmeter is really useful. An ambient light meter won't really let you meter correctly when it is really dark, because it is the opposite of a neutral gray. Lots of black and a small amount of (sometimes bright) light.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Barking up the tree of swapping, I currently have a borrowed D7000 and my 40D, and I'd like to do some tests to see if I can actually pull some noticeable (to me) differences out of the sensors. Is there anything I should do aside from just shooting the Nikon all week and seeing if I like what I get better?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Barking up the tree of swapping, I currently have a borrowed D7000 and my 40D, and I'd like to do some tests to see if I can actually pull some noticeable (to me) differences out of the sensors. Is there anything I should do aside from just shooting the Nikon all week and seeing if I like what I get better? The 40D should have crappier high ISO performance and AF speed, so shoot people running around in the dark.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
nm posted:This isn't really entry level, but if you monitor keh, you can get a Pentax Spotmeter V (don't get a lower one because you can't get the batteries for them. Also, don't get a Zone VI modified one -- too much) for about $200. I would stick to keh, because you don't know if an ebay one is still accurate. A digital is more expensive, but the display is a little easier to use at night -- I have a V, though and it is fine. If anyone was considering this, KEH is doing 40% off of accessories right now using code STOCKING. Didn't work for film unfortunately but lightmeters are game. edit: gotta spend $200 overall to get the deal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Barking up the tree of swapping, I currently have a borrowed D7000 and my 40D, and I'd like to do some tests to see if I can actually pull some noticeable (to me) differences out of the sensors. Is there anything I should do aside from just shooting the Nikon all week and seeing if I like what I get better? Shoot a scene with a bright sky but a shaded foreground (like a sunset). Make sure to underexpose just enough as to not blow the highlights in the sky(or just spot meter for the sky). Then, in LR, pull up the shadows.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
If anyone is thinking about buying a Triggertrap, they're offering free shipping (even to the  frozen northern wastes) for the holiday season.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Can I be bad and ask a boring 'what should my first camera be' question? I'm an Art History student looking for a bit of creative respite (taking a few months off due to total academic burnout). Photography would be a really nice skill to have professionally, I find the idea of having a visual record of my life/travels very appealing and once I've cracked still photography I want to move on to making some video. I've used DSLRs for work photographing events and taking pictures of pieces for condition reports, so I have a completely working functional limited knowledge of using a DSLR as a tool. I want to take it with me while travelling, take cool photos of public sculpture, take cool photos of cool buildings, take photos of my friends in bars, cool things I see. I won't be shooting any sports, any wildlife, or any video. I think I'm looking for the same kind of experience as an old school 35mm rangefinder but digital. Budget is £400. £450 at a super stretch. It kind of has to be new because it'll be a Christmas gift and family will want it to have a warranty and a receipt and stuff. Used is off the table unless there's a super super compelling reason. Currently I'm hot for the Fuji XM-1 which is totally in my price sweet spot but it kinda got dissed here for not having a viewfinder and I'm hoping someone can tell me if I should go for it anyway or if there's a better choice I'm not aware of. Or if I should stop being a baby and get a DSLR.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 08:02 |
|
|
number one pta fan posted:Or if I should stop being a baby and get a DSLR. Nowadays you don't really have a lot of advantages in a DSLR vs. a mirrorless body like the XM-1. Sensors by and wide are as good (if not better) than their DSLR counterparts, unless you're getting into the super high-end full frame DSLRs. About the 2 places mirrorless cameras can lag behind is in burst speeds and high ISO noise, although they don't lag behind with the latter nearly as much these days. What's great about mirrorless cameras is their size, especially for travel. It's really easy to pack a mirrorless body and 1 or 2 lenses with almost negligible weight. I took a 2 week trip a couple years ago with my DSLR and some big lenses, and later a mirrorless body with a few lenses for a week on another trip. Comparing it, I'll take the mirrorless 10 times out of 10. DJExile fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Dec 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 16:46
|
|