|
For fast targets you really need a focus screen. If you've ever shot a film camera, it's exactly like that - you get a split prism where the image is split in two, and when the halves line up over an object it's in focus. The D200 and up have interchangeable focus screens that let you add a screen with a split prism. If you have that, it's really not as hard as you would think. Especially since Nikon has open-aperture metering for their manual lenses - you focus wide open where there is the shallowest depth of field (the halves move farther apart) to allow easy focus, then when you shoot the camera stops down which widens the depth of field. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Sep 21, 2016 |
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
Yes I've shot film before, that's good to know, for now I'm happy with my camera, I'll find something a bit newer/ better after a bit. Anything is leaps and bounds above my phone, or old sony.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Anyone used the Breakthrough Photography filters? Worth it over the standard players in the market?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:Anyone used the Breakthrough Photography filters? Worth it over the standard players in the market? I have one of their X4 CPL filters. It's nice and feels good to use but I haven't noticed any appreciable difference in quality between it and my Hoya filters in other sizes. Certainly nothing that offsets the considerable markup. Mine picked up some micro scratches from a polishing cloth and the black paint wears off the machined brass quite easily (which may be a design feature).
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
I MIGHT(voting ends next Wed.  ) win a local newspapers photo contest for a Balloon glow we had recently, which should help me afford one of the following: Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 or a Tokina AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 PRO DX I'd be putting one of these on my d7000. Currently I have the 18-55 kit, and a 35mm 1.8/g. Anyone have any thoughts on either of these lenses? I'm leaning towards the Tokina.. I guess I should also say, my goal for this lens would be landscape and some astro. murk fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Sep 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Okay! Just got some free monies! (Insurance money paying for my bike someone drove into). To hell with putting that on my mortgage... So, I currently have cobbled together equipment. Using it for couple years. - Pentax K-60 w/ kit lens 18-55 [airmiles] - 50mm and 28mm manual focus old rear end lens from a pentax me. - a old push pull zoom 70-200mm - man froto kijiji tripod - tamron 200mm zoom, plastic cheapie. - 55mm polarizer I've spent less than $100. So i don't feel super committed to Pentax. But I do really like the k-60. I am struggling taking pictures in low light with the kit lens. Never seemed to be able to go above 800 iso before pictures look like crap, then everything's blurry cause shutter was open too long. Almost all my pictures are at 18mm on the kit lens, feels like i'm too close all the time. I like landscape. But i seem to drag my camera most places and shoot whatever. Want to try star/lowlite stuff. Tried my friends Cannon 5D with a 24mm. Blown away by the difference. Clear picture at high iso. Doesn't seem like i need to be 20 ft away. So now I have $3500 Cad to spend... Thinking about the Pentax K-1 body. More because I'm used to my 60, and I've only had a camera with the in body stabilization. Don't think i'd use many of my old lenses even though they would work in crop mode. My other friend has a Sony Alpha mirrorless setup. Also seems very slick. So the one in that price range seems to be the Alpha 2 (without R or S). He has different adaptors for many different lenses, which is why he thinks it would be a better way to go. The focus highlight feature he was showing me was super cool. So! If you got to 'start over' and commit to something. What would you go with? Are these two odd ball choices?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
I'm surprised the K60 is that bad above 800—always seemed like Pentax did well on their sensors. You could also just get a 15mm wide lens if you prefer something 24mm equivalent-ish. The K60's successor, the K70, just came out as well and it looks to be a pretty excellent camera for the money. The K1 looks like a great camera too, but that's dropping a lot of money on a body and not leaving a ton leftover for lenses. Also I don't know why you wouldn't want to use your old MF lenses on it. They're probably pretty good. Mirrorless vs DSLR is a different conversation. I like DSLRs myself, but it definitely seems like more people are into mirrorless these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Keep the K-60, spend some money on lenses. It's weird, the K-60 doesn't show up in the PentaxForum database, but I'm just going to assume it's a notch above the K-50. That means, "pretty good camera". I'm also surprised by your noise issues above ISO 800, my K-5 is several years older than your camera and it does OK up to about 3200. It's a gradual change as you increase ISO so it's hard to draw a line between 'good" and "not good" but 3200 is about where I'd put it for mine. Anyway, your kit zoom - the 18-55 - is the single biggest issue here. Nothing stands out as awful about that lens, I've got one, but with a decent budget you've got some great options. Pentax has a couple of product lines that are a step (or ten) above their baseline "consumer" grade lenses. They stick words like "Limited" or a star (typically written on the internet as * ) on their good stuff. SMC Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM, about $800, is the obvious choice to replace your walkaround zoom. The * designation means it's weatherproof, the ED and AL are for some characteristics of the glass (Pentax's designations for glass are pretty impenetrable until your realize that they only have like 2: ED is the good stuff), IF means "internal focussing" and SDM indicates the sonic drive AF system, which replaces the older screw-drive. SDM is supposed to be faster and quieter. You've got lots and lots of choices for very-wide, PentaxForums did a 3-way in-depth review of some of the zooms a few years ago, and a 4-way comparison in June of this year. You could also replace your longer glass. A note about terminology: a zoom lens is one that changes focal length (e.g. 18-55mm, or 70-200mm), not one with a long focal length. Your 200mm plastic cheapie seems to be a "prime" lens, 200mm. Primes are easier to build to a high standard, and consequently lighter and cheaper for a given combination of focal length and maximum aperture than a comparable zoom. I really want a DA*-300mm F/4 (about $1200 new, not much less used), but I like to shoot birds and wildlife where longer glass is a necessity and you haven't mentioned that. The 60-250 is similar in many ways (narrower aperture by one stop, non-overlapping FL range but it's close) and sells for about the same price. So, my advice is to get a couple of top-shelf lenses for your K-60 and re-discover your camera. Get a new tripod while you're at it unless your current Manfroto is flawless. The key to low-light photography is TRIPOD. Start using it. For less than $20 you can get a remote shutter release, named an intervalometer, from Amazon or eBay or wherever and that's a requirement for astrophotography. If you're still struggling with low-light (and there's lots more to discuss there before you spend a dime!) then maybe you'll want to consider the K-1. Your K-60 appears to be the current model of Pentax's midrange so I don't know what to suggest for non-K-1 options. Maybe look at a K-3? Bigger sensor than APS-C but smaller than "full frame", for about half the price of a K-1.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I have this RØDE mic. It's fine and falls between the two that Red19Fire listed as it has a high-pass filter and its own batteries as a power source. Just wanted to say i finished my first video using the mic and i love it already. It was quick and easy and i could tell a huge difference in sound quality versus the lovely ones they rent out at my school. The professor even said it had the best audio of the class. Now i just gotta stop sucking at the video part.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
@ Powderific Well I haven't gotten anything I'm happy with by hand above 800 anyways. Maybe that's partly my technique though. On a tripod I've taken some shots at 1600 iso that look clean. https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrmundo/18303364136/ At my uncles wedding I had to throw out 90% of my shots of the reception because I couldn't keep anything from being a blurry mess without the flash. Then you get that nuclear bomb effect using the little flash that is built in. Course my friend with the full frame seems to take a pile of clear photos in the same light, and he didn't even bring a drat flash. Again, maybe I'm too liquored up to hold still. @ ExecuDrok Wow, truth be told, never thought of putting money into more crop sensor lenses. Also i'm a dork, it is a k-50, not 60. Honestly, I didn't really compare much of the different bodies when got this guy. This was 1 of 3 cameras i could get for free with Air miles. I just never thought I would like taking pictures as much as I have. This would be the 'cheapie plastic zoom' I have. I just couldn't remember what it was exactly on the train this morning. http://www.photozone.de/pentax/281-tamron-af-70-300mm-f4-56-ld-di-macro-pentax-k-review--lab-test-report?start=1 It was $60 second hand. I like it because its auto-focus, and it can zoom hella far. It seems to get a little fuzzy when you max it out, so I shoot it not quite all the way zoomed in. Then crop stuff in lightroom after. Clearly I'm not really into the research that much If I can't remember the model of the camera I've used the last two years. I'm only now really grasping how the ISO/Shutter Speed/Fstop work quickly. Without consulting my book anyways,. But maybe your right, I can't say i'm totally against continuing to use the body. I just figured I had hit its limitations. Only other thing was I can't do more than 3 bracketing for those HDR shots. I was fooling around with them. The new cameras can take like 9 shots at all the exposures. Honestly not even sure if that would be better not... Wouldn't now be the time to switch to a full frame camera though? I never really thought about it. I just assumed that was the reason my buddies shots always turned out better. It could be entirely due to the lenses and I wouldn't know. Quite right on the discussion though. I'm not in any rush to buy anything, what I have is more than capable. Just have that 'money burning hole in pocket' feeling. The camera store here rents out camera bodies/lens. I could try some Cannon/Nikon stuff. They don't rent pentax or sony though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Honestly it sounds like a combination of your technique and lenses. Don't take this the wrong way, but do you know the difference between a bad shot from high ISO noise and a bad shot from blur due to the camera moving? Cause if 1600 looks clean at half a second on a tripod it should look even better at faster speeds. edit: like, if you're shooting at less that 1/30 you're probably asking for trouble with human subjects. A lens with bigger aperture is gonna let more light in to push the shutter speed up. And it really sounds like the issues you're having are not related to ISO noise but motion blur. You can probably get useable shots up to 6400, with 3200 being a better highest number. powderific fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Sep 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
powderific posted:Honestly it sounds like a combination of your technique and lenses. Don't take this the wrong way, but do you know the difference between a bad shot from high ISO noise and a bad shot from blur due to the camera moving? Cause if 1600 looks clean at half a second on a tripod it should look even better at faster speeds. You will not offend me, I'm learning and am seeking honest advise. The iso is the blockey random colour splotches. I notice them on someones completely black t-shirt for instance. The blur is when you shake the camera or someone moves. When its really bad its like someone has two ghost arms. So I'm trying to take a picture at lower light without a flash. I can either go for a longer shutter time, which is more prone to ghost arms. Or I can crank up the Iso so the shutter doesn't have to be open as long. Then the blocks get me. I was struggling with it at Christmas last year trying to do some portraits next to the christmas tree. There just seemed to be no 'right' setting. With a better lens I could go to a lower f number though? I'm thinking a night shot on a tripod with landscape worked fine because the moon didn't get to far in that time. And i didnt care if i over exposed those lights by the pool. Now my buddy with full frame has no blocks way over 3200. That has to be just a better sensor? I just assumed those ultra iso's were put on the box of the camera as a selling feature, and were un-usable for all. Not the case it seems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Yes, you can get a better lens with lower f number and it'll help a lot. If you read up a bit on exposure you'll see that if you're on a lens few stops brighter, you'll be able to use lower ISO and faster shutter speeds. The blocks thing sounds weird—I didn't see anything like that in sample photos from the K50 below 3200 or so. Can you post an example? In case you don't see the edit to my previous post, if you're shooting at longer that 1/30 you're probably asking for trouble with human subjects. The 5D definitely has better high ISO performance, but you may not really need that yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
I'll try and dig up some photos of that exact day I was having the trouble. Hopefully haven't deleted them. Will be back at home by my computer on Monday. Its possible its not what i think. It was in my living room so i should be able to replicate it too. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
What is this about the k-3 having a larger than apsc sensor but smaller than full frame? It's not apsh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
Huh. I could have sworn the K-3 was APS-H with a crop factor of 1.3 compared to FF, but I can't find anything now to back that up. Seems it's actually APS-C, same as every other Pentax DSLR except the K-1. I guess I misremembered a review on PentaxForums, I could have sworn there was a pair of shots of the moon in a lens review that showed a different field of view due to the K-3's larger sensor than the K-5 II they were comparing it against.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Get the Pentax K1. It'll blow your current setup away and you'll still have some $ left over for a lens. If you're getting high ISO noise above 800, you'll be really limited in the types of shots/subjects you can capture even with fast glass.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Rodney Chops posted:
If using a flash is an option you'll get way better results with a speedlite vs using your camera's built-in popup flash.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Even small changes can help if you're in a really low light situation. I've had good luck with simple poo poo like just pointing a desk lamp at the subject. Alternatively, you could get some really dramatic portraits if you lit the Christmas tree on fire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Question, I'm trying to find the sa mart post where someone was basically sending his monitor calibration tool from goon to goon.. wondering if anyone knows of it, I tried searching but can't find it anywhere. Now that I'm doing photos, I kind of would like to get as close to printed as I can, I think I have 1 of my 3 calibrated well but the other 2 are going to need help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
My younger sister is moving abroad for 6 months. She has always been interested in photography and has had her own DSLR for several years. She has also studied media production and photography in high school and has an eye for composition. (She photographed my wedding using my Canon 5D3 and 24-70 F2.8 and did just as good a job of it as the professionals that were there) Lately she has been disillusioned with taking photos as she feels her crappy entry level DSLR with kit lens doesn't take good enough pictures nor offers her enough creative options. Sh wants to buy better gear in preparation for her stay abroad (and to use on said stay) and has turned to me for recommendations. Her interests lie mostly within artsy photos, candid photos of people and other interesting scenes in urban environments, as well as studio portraits. My thought immediately went to her getting a 5D3 ( i am selling mine so i'd sell it to her with a family discount) and the Sigma 24-105mm ART. Her buying into Canon also means that she has all my L-glass available for borrowing later. She also has no problem handling the rather big 5D3, at least she had no problems using it for 6 hours in a row during my wedding. Other advantages of going for Canon is that the used market here is a lot bigger for Canon than anything else. Is the above combo (5D3 with 24-105) the obvious choice or are there better options for the type of photography she is interested in? I know very little about compact cameras or mirrorless cameras except that they are smaller and doesn't have as snappy autofocus as the high end Canikon DSLR's Ineptitude fucked around with this message at 12:11 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Put a 35/2 on that APS-C DLSR and go to town. You do *not* want to be lugging a FX body with fast zoomy glass on a trip abroad, believe you me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You do *not* want to be lugging a FX body with fast zoomy glass on a trip abroad, believe you me. Why not? Given the phrase "stay abroad" I'm guessing this isn't backpacking across Europe or something. In any case I've taken my 5D2 on many of my travels in addition to my 4x5 kit and the results were worth it. I just sold the 5D2, but when I go to Japan next month I'll be taking my Pentax 6x7 (basically an oversize SLR) kit and X100T. If photography is important to you (as it sounds like it is to Ineptitude's sister) it's easy to justify taking as much camera as you'll actually use.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Put a 35/2 on that APS-C DLSR and go to town. You do *not* want to be lugging a FX body with fast zoomy glass on a trip abroad, believe you me. It sounds like that is exactly what she wants though, and I think she knows it too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
tater_salad posted:Question, I'm trying to find the sa mart post where someone was basically sending his monitor calibration tool from goon to goon.. wondering if anyone knows of it, I tried searching but can't find it anywhere. It's for Huey Pro by X-Rite & Pantone. I have one, and was trying to pawn it off trying to reboot the probably-archived thread. It's probably $5 for shipping if you want it, PM me. Just be forewarned that this is the bottom rung of monitor calibration, they have a reputation for skewing green with age. Mine does every 3rd try. Also I don't know where the box is, but you should be able to find the software on Pantone's site somewhere, if it still works on your computer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Sorry yeah i should have been more clear. My sister will be living abroad for 6 months, in the same location. The photography she will be doing will be done around the area she lives, and occasionally some shorter sightseeing excursions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
red19fire posted:It's for Huey Pro by X-Rite & Pantone. I have one, and was trying to pawn it off trying to reboot the probably-archived thread. It's probably $5 for shipping if you want it, PM me. Just be forewarned that this is the bottom rung of monitor calibration, they have a reputation for skewing green with age. Mine does every 3rd try. Also I don't know where the box is, but you should be able to find the software on Pantone's site somewhere, if it still works on your computer. I'll dig around for some software, bottom rung is better than trying by eye especially for my Monitors. I want to 2x check AOCs "sRGB" mode and then get my other 2 kinda close so when working I can use all my monitors. I'm going to dump the 6 pics I am sending to npl and shipping to the recipiant to my nearby Walgreens just to make sure it's not way off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Ineptitude posted:Sorry yeah i should have been more clear. My sister will be living abroad for 6 months, in the same location. The photography she will be doing will be done around the area she lives, and occasionally some shorter sightseeing excursions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Have there been any new developments in the "kickass fixed lens compact" sector lately? I have a Ricoh GR which I still quite like (especially the 28mm focal length, though I guess I'd be happy with 35 too), but the lack of weather-sealing and the weird banding when pushing shadows gets on my nerves. Thinking about getting rid of it and a bunch of other gear and maybe investing in an Olympus 7-14 pro lens, but the size is off-putting. So what's out there that's better than the GR? Something cool must have come out in the past three years, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
RX1r 2?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Wengy posted:Have there been any new developments in the "kickass fixed lens compact" sector lately? I have a Ricoh GR which I still quite like (especially the 28mm focal length, though I guess I'd be happy with 35 too), but the lack of weather-sealing and the weird banding when pushing shadows gets on my nerves. Thinking about getting rid of it and a bunch of other gear and maybe investing in an Olympus 7-14 pro lens, but the size is off-putting. So what's out there that's better than the GR? Something cool must have come out in the past three years, right? fuji x70 is probably the closest, but you can't fit in your pocket. Same with the nikon coolpix a. The GR is pretty unique in that aspect. There's always Leica 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
THanks! Dang, so nothing too groundbreaking then... RX2R is cool, but too expensive. Weird that no one makes a serious GR competitor. The X70 looks cool, but loses out in terms of pocketability, and my preferred image processing software can't do X-Trans files 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Yeah, I love my GR but wish they'd have updated it with something more than just wifi. None of the competitors quite hit it for me. RX1 and Leica Q are actually a lot less pocketable, and the X70 doesn't feel like all that much of an upgrade. I've also really come to love the GR's control scheme.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
powderific posted:Yeah, I love my GR but wish they'd have updated it with something more than just wifi. None of the competitors quite hit it for me. RX1 and Leica Q are actually a lot less pocketable, and the X70 doesn't feel like all that much of an upgrade. I've also really come to love the GR's control scheme. I would pay any amount of money in the world for a GR with the 24mp sensor in the d7200.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
nerdrum posted:I would pay any amount of money in the world for a GR with the 24mp sensor in the d7200. gently caress yes. Also weather-sealing (the GR is a notorious dust magnet) and perhaps, if possible through some weird magical fuckery, a slightly faster lens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Are there any sort of replacement or addon eyepiece cup that includes an integrated cover for Nikons that don't already have that feature? I know you can get away with covering the eyepiece with your hand or some gaffers tape, but I was curious if there was some sort of addon that adds this feature. I get Nikon has eyepiece caps already, but I'd prefer to not have to constantly remove the default eyecup and replace it with the cover when it's needed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
Ineptitude posted:Sorry yeah i should have been more clear. My sister will be living abroad for 6 months, in the same location. The photography she will be doing will be done around the area she lives, and occasionally some shorter sightseeing excursions. Sell the 5D3 to her, with a steep family discount, if she insists on paying more either go with it or counter with something along the lines of an in-advance christmas / birthday / whatever present. Throw in a spare battery or extra memory card or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
I want to be able to preview photos on an iPad for my self and some friends i'm doing an engagement shoot for. I'm using a Nikon d7000 so it looks like my options are either the Nikon wireless unit WU-a1 or an eye-fi mobi card. I know the eye-fi will copy the raw files over but the WU-a1 will copy over jpegs. Any one of these a better option or do they both suck equally? do either of these drain the battery faster on the camera?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:I want to be able to preview photos on an iPad for my self and some friends i'm doing an engagement shoot for. I'm using a Nikon d7000 so it looks like my options are either the Nikon wireless unit WU-a1 or an eye-fi mobi card. I know the eye-fi will copy the raw files over but the WU-a1 will copy over jpegs. Any one of these a better option or do they both suck equally? do either of these drain the battery faster on the camera? Dunno about battery drain, but I think it'd be a lot easier to just have JPG previews on the iPad and not have to dick around with RAW. Looks like the WU-A1 is cheaper, too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
dakana posted:Dunno about battery drain, but I think it'd be a lot easier to just have JPG previews on the iPad and not have to dick around with RAW. Looks like the WU-A1 is cheaper, too. I am going to second this. I have a camera that effectively only shoots raws and when I want to use a mobile device with it, Lightroom Mobile is literally the worst loving piece of software ever invented for usability. Sure you can do all the things... eventually, if you have good network access, and don't mind running out of battery in a few seconds of use.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 01:02
|
|
