|
Geektox posted:yeah the sensor is called film
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:19 |
|
|
I just bought my first circular polarizing filter http://www.amazon.com/Kaesemann-Cir...larizing+filter off of Amazon, and although it is very pricey, I hope to be able to take some good landscape shots with my Tamron 17-50. I understand they can make the sky more blue and increase color saturation, but still am not entirely sure about when to use them and when to leave them off. I understand they are great for landscapes, so should I just leave the filter on when shooting landscapes outdoors, unless I want to preserve reflections for whatever reason or if I need faster shutter speeds?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
There is no golden rule. This is a pretty good explanation how they work and when to use them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8HZCdieSAo&t=845s Skip to 14:05 if it doesn't automatically.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:There is no golden rule. This is a pretty good explanation how they work and when to use them. Awesome video. It has convinced me to always bring out a UV filter on my landscape shoots, because there are so many opportunities to use it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
lollybo posted:Awesome video. It has convinced me to always bring out a UV filter on my landscape shoots, because there are so many opportunities to use it. UV filter doesn't do anything except degrade image quality. You mean your circular polarizer?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
I used to buy UV filters once upon a time but I stopped years ago. Speaking of CPL's, I'm been meaning to buy one for my Canon 24mm TS-E but is that too wide for one? I know ultra wide angles have issues, is 24mm in that range or will it cover the whole frame?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 08:57
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:There is no golden rule. This is a pretty good explanation how they work and when to use them. Hey, thanks for posting this. Was a good watch in bed last night, I like being able to stick something like this on even if he reiterates stuff I've read/heard lots of times, it's good to have that stuff drummed in and the length of the talk meant he was able to give lots of examples and a bit further detail than a lot of other people. Definitely going to check over the other stuff B&H have like this, looks like lots of 1hr+ videos, seventh heaven.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:Speaking of CPL's, I'm been meaning to buy one for my Canon 24mm TS-E but is that too wide for one? I know ultra wide angles have issues, is 24mm in that range or will it cover the whole frame? Nope, I used a Lee 4x4 circular polarizer just fine with my TS-E 24. Then I dropped it somewhere in Iceland, maybe you could go find it.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 13:06
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Definitely going to check over the other stuff B&H have like this, looks like lots of 1hr+ videos, seventh heaven. Some of them are really bad, haha. All depends on who is speaking.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
HPL posted:Use the Bessa with Leica glass. Rumour has it that Leica and Voigtlander use exactly the same sensors. gently caress leica glass, get the voigtlander 15mm and go hog wild
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Nope, I used a Lee 4x4 circular polarizer just fine with my TS-E 24. Then I dropped it somewhere in Iceland, maybe you could go find it. Do you think a 4x4 would work better on a wide angle then a screw on filter like a B+W? Does it matter? I'm just curious if there's any difference.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:Do you think a 4x4 would work better on a wide angle then a screw on filter like a B+W? Does it matter? I'm just curious if there's any difference. 24mm should not be wide enough to see vignetting from all but the thickest of ring filters. Plate filters are generally better when you're either going super wide (<20mm), you want to stack filters or you're using grad NDs. That being said it's always prudent to check if the filter you're buying will vingette on your lens, there are some might thick circ pols out there.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
The other issue that comes up with ultra-wide lenses and polarizers stems from the wide field of view, not the filter mount. The effect a polarizing filter has on the sky depends on the angle of light relative to the sun. For a normal or narrow view, this doesn't normally make much difference, because the angle to the sun at one side of the photo is only a few degrees away from the angle to the sun at the other side of the photo. With a huge field of view, you can have more than 90 degrees between left and right, which means one side of your sky will be much darker than the other side.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
Is there are dorkroom consensus on the best CPL for the money? It was the Marumi Super DHG but that felt like it was a while ago, I didn't know if there was anything new that had come to market since then? I was looking at the B+W filters but I couldn't figure out which features were critical and which barely mattered at all. This shouldn't be confusing me so much, probably what I get for researching this at 4:30pm on a Friday.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
Krelas posted:Marumi Super DHG
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 08:47
|
|
|
Is tristatecamera dot com a reputable place? I'm seeing much lower prices on a D750 and Tamron 24-70mm lens than i would otherwise be expecting. Is it all greymarket stuff?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Don't do it. 100% of really low price listings or stores are rip offs, grey market, or stolen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
There's nothing technically wrong with greymarket gear. You just can't get it serviced and FedEx might hassle you to pay customs after the fact but you can just ignore them. Depends on what you're willing to put up with. For $50-100 it's probably not worth it, but if you can save $250 it might be an option for you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
If you're bargain-hunting, Nikon factory refurbished gear is a better, safer way to get stuff cheap than grey-market items. You might have to wait a while for a D750 to come around, though. Adorama and B&H sometimes get factory refurbs, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Man, looks like tristatecamera are the kings of outdated lovely P&S cameras. Literally hundreds of varieties. There are a few decent things offered for a little cheaper than you might see elsewhere, but that selection does seem kind of shady.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Man, looks like tristatecamera are the kings of outdated lovely P&S cameras. Literally hundreds of varieties. There are a few decent things offered for a little cheaper than you might see elsewhere, but that selection does seem kind of shady. I'm sure it's just grey market camera stuff. the pricing for the two items I want [D750 and Tamron 24-70 2.8] make me think it is imports from Japan. The only reason not to buy these is the warranty issues, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
tijag posted:I'm sure it's just grey market camera stuff. the pricing for the two items I want [D750 and Tamron 24-70 2.8] make me think it is imports from Japan. Yeah, 'shady' probably isn't the right word. (Although I am reminded of the episode of the Wire where Ziggy is diverting shipping containers full of digital cameras and offloading them to Baltimore gangsters who traffic in stolen goods.) I probably wouldn't hesitate to buy grey-market stuff if the discount was deep enough, but I've also learned the value of a good warranty. Anyway, on a completely different subject, what's the deal with the Sigma DP2's? I knew they existed, but I was browsing by camera on Flickr, got a good look at the kind of images they make for the first time and holy poo poo. Those are really some of the most beautifully colored and detailed digital photos I've ever seen. I think it's more than fair to compare them to the stuff produced by a D800/E or, even high-quality medium format film:  015 by Aidan Butler, on FlickrBut I haven't really noticed anyone here that shoots them. I also did notice that the bulk of the photos in the DP2 pool on Flickr are landscapes. I know that even the new APS-C Foveon sensor has abysmal high ISO performance, so I wasn't expecting much low-light stuff, but there also didn't seem to be very many pictures of people. Does the unorthodox approach to color reproduction make for bad skin tones? I know that there are plenty of people who go for the Fuji X100's, so it's not the fixed lens that puts everyone off, and the DP2's on KEH are a few hundred dollars cheaper than the X100S's, too. So are the tradeoffs in flexibility too great to make the DP2 a desirable camera for most serious hobbyists?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Yeah, 'shady' probably isn't the right word. (Although I am reminded of the episode of the Wire where Ziggy is diverting shipping containers full of digital cameras and offloading them to Baltimore gangsters who traffic in stolen goods.) I probably wouldn't hesitate to buy grey-market stuff if the discount was deep enough, but I've also learned the value of a good warranty. I got my tamron 24-70VC gray market for 370$ less than US retail (and with a 7 year third party warranty included) so on that particular item seriously heavy discounts are out there
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:But I haven't really noticed anyone here that shoots them. I also did notice that the bulk of the photos in the DP2 pool on Flickr are landscapes. I know that even the new APS-C Foveon sensor has abysmal high ISO performance, so I wasn't expecting much low-light stuff, but there also didn't seem to be very many pictures of people. Does the unorthodox approach to color reproduction make for bad skin tones? I know that there are plenty of people who go for the Fuji X100's, so it's not the fixed lens that puts everyone off, and the DP2's on KEH are a few hundred dollars cheaper than the X100S's, too. So are the tradeoffs in flexibility too great to make the DP2 a desirable camera for most serious hobbyists? Someone who owned one told me it was like driving a 50 year old Toyota missing the front wheels and the only good thing was that it had the engine of a modern Ferrari. And then he sold it off shortly too. From what I've read online, if you give the sensor 100 marks, you can give the rest of the camera 0 marks. I'd say no one uses it for people because most portrait shooters use longer focal lengths which the DP2 can't do. Most people using the Fuji X100 type of cameras tend to use it for all-purpose shooting which includes people. The DP2 is the furthest thing away from an all-purpose camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
I bought a grey market Canon 6D with 24-105 F4/L kit in Hong Kong in summer 2013 and have had no problems with it. I later sold the lens locally here for almost as much money as the entire kit cost me in HK due to the price difference of grey market HK vs european price. I did inform the guy buying the lens that it was grey market but he had no problems with that and has had no problems with it after he bought it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Someone who owned one told me it was like driving a 50 year old Toyota missing the front wheels and the only good thing was that it had the engine of a modern Ferrari. And then he sold it off shortly too. From what I've read online, if you give the sensor 100 marks, you can give the rest of the camera 0 marks. That's pretty much what I gathered from the reviews I read at the time. It had some real issues with the interface, and some horrible processing times (RAWs took 15 seconds per image to write!) Plus some hilariously high prices (the SD1 was $9,000 at launch) Which was a shame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
How did a SD1 cost as much as a 1Dx 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 07:54
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:How did a SD1 cost as much as a 1Dx Because Sigma said so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Because Sigma said so. But the colors man, the colors!  It probably wasn't a cheap camera to build since there's no way Foveons are manufactured in any significant quantity. I'd hazard a guess that total production probably was in the same ballpark as the 1Dx if not smaller, and I can't imagine the yields were particularly great. So yeah, not a cheap product to build. It's extra retarded when you consider that the Canon has a full 18MP and the SD1 had 3x4.7 MP. Yeah, it probably does produce more a bit more color depth, but you've got less than a third the resolution of your competitors. Some people were totally into that. I'm not exactly the guy who should be chiding people about wasting their money on niche camera equipment, but that's not how I'd spend mine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I'd say no one uses it for people because most portrait shooters use longer focal lengths which the DP2 can't do. Most people using the Fuji X100 type of cameras tend to use it for all-purpose shooting which includes people. The DP2 is the furthest thing away from an all-purpose camera. What's the problem with long focal lengths? quote:Someone who owned one told me it was like driving a 50 year old Toyota missing the front wheels and the only good thing was that it had the engine of a modern Ferrari. And then he sold it off shortly too. From what I've read online, if you give the sensor 100 marks, you can give the rest of the camera 0 marks. Another modern equivalent would probably be the 645D - big sensor, but in most stuff it's become outclassed by garden-variety FF cameras that can be had much cheaper. I tend to like that kind of camera - I traded my 40D for a NEX-5N a couple years ago - but even I think you'd be wasting your money on a Sigma. They're cheap because bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
The 645Z, though, has really upped the ante compared to the 645D. The 50mpx CMOS medium formats can all produce stunning image quality, and Pentax delivers the exact same thing for a third of the price.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
Ethanfr0me posted:Anyone have a Bessa R4? I'm wondering if it is comparable to a Leica M6, or if its worth forking over Leicabucks to use M mount lenses. Not the best example, but here's a low-res lab scan of a shot with my Bessa T with a Leica 35mm 1.4 and Shopper's Drug Mart brand film (which I'm really impressed with, by the way. I know BANME.SH shot a few rolls too. For $2/roll it's p great.) 
Geektox fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Jun 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:The 645Z, though, has really upped the ante compared to the 645D. The 50mpx CMOS medium formats can all produce stunning image quality, and Pentax delivers the exact same thing for a third of the price. I don't disagree, the 645Z is a fantastic camera that's really cheap relative to its weight class. It's just an expensive camera in absolute terms. Although I guess less so than the Sigma was, both in relative and absolute. Even the 645Z is in danger of being eclipsed by 50MP FF sensors - larger is better, but so is cheaper. Over time I do think the trend is towards larger sensors, which is one reason I'm buying some nice P67 glass. Pentax is even hinting at what sounds like 0.9x FF sensors in their mainstream line. Maybe on their next refresh they will launch a FF 645 too. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Jun 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Because Sigma said so. They made a big price adjustment shortly after though, and gave big rebates or credits to the folks that had already bought them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Not the best example, but here's a low-res lab scan of a shot with my Bessa T with a Leica 35mm 1.4 and Shopper's Drug Mart brand film (which I'm really impressed with, by the way. I know BANME.SH shot a few rolls too. For $2/roll it's p great.) Yeah it has the same markings as fuji film near the sprockets so it's likely just rebranded fuji. I bought a shitload of 200 and 400 rolls on clearance last year, and now no stores around me are stocking it anymore. Oh well
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
I have the DP2 Merrill (got it a few months ago at a good price). It definitely has a big learning curve; the camera and post processing. The colors and resolution are pretty awesome. Black and white is also great. Sigma's software is pretty clunky, but I mainly export everything to TIFF and use lightroom (which solves the problem mainly). Fill light and white balance operate pretty differently then any other camera I have used. I bought a franiec grip and occasionally use a lcd viewfinder; both help the overall grip and operating a lot. Its definitely usable up to iso 1000, people just pixel peep since its mainly a niche camera that attracts niche people. The rear LCD is garbage in dim light, it looks like 711 security camera footage. The actual camera interface is pretty nice, and the dial around the shutter makes it quick to operate. It is not perfect by any means, but when I got it I was aware of most of its flaws. I also didn't pay full price and already had all of the software updates (in camera and to Sigma Pro Photo). It wasn't a bad adjustment after previously owning a Fuji X-E1 (Weird RAW processing and faster auto focus than my X-E1 had).
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:What's the problem with long focal lengths? There isn't a problem? HPL posted:They made a big price adjustment shortly after though, and gave big rebates or credits to the folks that had already bought them. Yeah but it was way too late, and the usability was an even bigger issue since most of my friends who actually bought one at the much cheaper prices still sold them off after a few months of self-inflicted torture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
I just got home after buying a canon 135mm f2 at a reputable camera shop in the mall. Opened up the package to find a 100mm macro L. It was a 135mm box with the lens hood and all the stuff you usually get. So tomorrow I'm going back and hope to gently caress they don't give me a hard time in exchanging it for the proper lens. If I have any trouble I swear to god I will badmouth them all over the place
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Just do a chargeback if they gently caress around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:19 |
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:I just got home after buying a canon 135mm f2 at a reputable camera shop in the mall. Opened up the package to find a 100mm macro L. It was a 135mm box with the lens hood and all the stuff you usually get. So tomorrow I'm going back and hope to gently caress they don't give me a hard time in exchanging it for the proper lens. If I have any trouble I swear to god I will badmouth them all over the place Isn't the 100IS retailing for like 300$ more? You might be able to unload it for more than a new 135 would run you and make some profit Edit: nvm I thought the macro retailed for like 1200 timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Jun 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2015 20:58
|
|