|
FYI yall Blackrapid is doing 20% off your order with code BRRFCM through tomorrow.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:04 |
|
|
Has anyone got experience with the Langly Alpha Pro or the Lowepro Flipside Trek 450? I'm going on a 3 week trip around Taiwan next year and need a bag that'll fit a 10-20, 17-50 on body, 70-300 and ideally a 150-600 because god drat it I bought it and I want to use it. In addition, having space for 2 days worth of clothes/a coat/a lunch to get me between laundromats/hostels would be great too. External tripod straps obv.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
ijyt posted:Has anyone got experience with the Langly Alpha Pro or the Lowepro Flipside Trek 450? I'm going on a 3 week trip around Taiwan next year and need a bag that'll fit a 10-20, 17-50 on body, 70-300 and ideally a 150-600 because god drat it I bought it and I want to use it. In addition, having space for 2 days worth of clothes/a coat/a lunch to get me between laundromats/hostels would be great too. External tripod straps obv. Something that holds that much all at once have to be enormous. The Alpha Pro seems a bit larger and I'd lean that way but I don't know anything about Langly's stuff. I'm also not noticing any hip support straps for the Langly bag, which would be a big help if you're hauling all that stuff along with a tripod.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Yeah, as compact as it is compared to a prime 600 the 150-600 might have to travel someway else, but by the looks of it the Alpha Pro is pretty much perfect - someone even used it for a 3 week trip to Asia as their only luggage so if that isn't a seal of approval I'm not sure what is 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
You might be different but I really wouldn't want to do a lot of walking with all that crap and no hip straps. It also looks small for all the stuff you've listed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
powderific posted:You might be different but I really wouldn't want to do a lot of walking with all that crap and no hip straps. It also looks small for all the stuff you've listed. I'll admit I considered just going with a normal hiking pack and throwing in a case, but the camera gear itself is only about 14lb, and everything else shouldn't put it past anything else. A reviewer comfortably fit the 150-600 in there but that was just with a body, so I might have to do some wrangling. Worst comes to worst I'll have a nice backpack to replace my day-to-day one for work. It needs to fit on carry-on so unfortunately it couldn't really be much bigger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
I will never use a backpack, even a small one, without a good hip strap.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Is this like a backpacking trip or more like drive somewhere and hike a half-mile from the car? If you definitely want to bring the 150-600, maybe keep the pack small and get a holster or other small padded case you can throw over your shoulder. It will make it a lot easier to swap that lens, and also makes more sense if you go on hikes where you want to leave that lens behind. Or go with a 80/100-400 and save your back.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
Oh yeah we’ll definitely be using transport more, so the actual hiking time won’t be for 3 days straight or whatever - we’re far too millennial for that. You reminded me that the 150-600 came with a case and strap so that’s actually a really good idea, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
I use a dakine photo bag for my full load hauls, it fits a body, 10-22, 18-55, 55-250, 150-600 plus my old body as a spare. I also strap manfrotto 055xprob legs to it. I've done 15-20 mile day hikes with that load and it's not miserable, but you do feel it dragging you down at the end of the day. But when I use it, I always have a car waiting at the end of my hike and I can throw the bag in the trunk when I'm done and have a second bag with all my clothes there. Trying to get 3 weeks of living into it is completely unrealistic (though if you have a hotel as a central hub, the dakine bag has a cool insert for the camera gear, so in theory you could put your clothes in the main bag and carry your camera gear in the insert. then once you have a hotel room, dump all your clothes in a drawer and pop the camera bag into place). That said, after a few days you'll still be making judgment calls. Leaving the 150-600 behind saves a ton of weight and you will notice it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
it really depends on what you're planning to shoot as well. In a lot of my travels so far I've largely found myself shooting wider rather than longer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
ijyt posted:70-300 and ideally a 150-600 Do you really need to bring both of these? If you are adamant about bringing that whole focal range, have you considered selling both and getting the 100-400 II instead? The 100-400 with a 1,4 extender is as sharp at 600 than the 150-600, lighter and more versatile, and easily fills whatever need the 70-300 fills (while being a lot sharper) Ineptitude fucked around with this message at 10:10 on Nov 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 10:07
|
|
|
Well I didn’t buy them to leave them at home  Less snarky respone: I didn't get the 100-400 simply because it's too expensive. The 70-300 and 150-600 were £200 less than the 100-400, and that's not factoring in the £360 for the 1.4x III. That there is the cost of the flight alone, so I think I'll take the £560 over a 1kg saving. ijyt fucked around with this message at 14:49 on Nov 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
Why did you buy the 150-600mm? If the answer isn't something you plan on spending most of your vacation doing then leave it at home. Carrying a giant tele around a foreign country because you "might" need it is dumb as hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Taiwan has some cool birds so I'd at least think about bringing mine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Every time I'm out without my big stupid 500mm I see something that makes me wish I had it. Every time I'm out with it, I don't walk far enough to see the really cool stuff. But that's OK, I like to practice my technique on forgiving, tolerant birds that will let me bang away through my howitzer at minimum-focus distance, like house sparrows and mallards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Speaking of Taiwan, what's a decent price for a used Canon 70-200 f/4? I'll be in Taiwan and Hong Kong soon and heard that they have some good places for camera gear but all I've been able to find online is barely cheaper than new. I'd sell/trade in the cheesy 55-250 to make it hurt a bit less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
What I've heard from my friend there is that most tech stuff isn't at all much cheaper than in the UK, so it'll probably be more expensive than the US. I did find this rental place that seems pretty fairly priced, so might be a good option while in Taipei. Hong Kong on the other hand I have no idea about. With Canon lenses I've noticed the cheaper ones seem to not go much cheaper used second hand if they're in good condition, maybe 20% off whatever the current lowest retail price is. I have occasionally seen the 70-200 F4 with IS used for about the price of the non-IS new though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Hello, goons. Here's the latest "idiot doesn't know what they need" post that I apologize for in advance. So here's my (incredibly nerdy) deal. The main thing I do with my* current camera** is take photos of terrible board games so goons can play them vicariously. *my partner's **Canon PowerShot A610 In a perfect world, this is the sort of thing that people keep telling me I can just use a cell phone for, but if you can believe it, my cell phone's photos are even worse than what this 15+ year old digital camera gives me. In short, auto-focus never does (on the phone or the actual camera), macro focus keeps turning itself off (on the camera) and practically requires the Konami Code to turn on again, and the camera eats AA batteries all day. In fact, on said phone, I'll have a nicely set picture on the screen, I'll push the button for it to take the picture, and then it will actively defocus and snap that. Horrendous. Sad as it is, this is the main use for a camera that I would want, but I would also like to get outside and take nice photos of things and people and places (I'm in an urban/suburban area, but occasionally do go out into nature.) So as far as I can tell, my needs are 1. Can focus worth a drat 2. Can focus in tight spots/macro focus 3. Otherwise, mostly a general photography device 4. Actually, while we're here, maybe something that can do some level of timelapse. I imagine that's baked into most cameras nowadays anyway. I've worked with DSLRs on a limited basis before (my theatre director friend shot several independent/zero-budget movies with one, and occasionally I had to run it while he acted) and took a course on SLRs back in school back in the 90s, so I've got some of the basic concepts down and I'm pretty sure that a full-on DSLR kit for me is massive overkill. Awesome overkill, but overkill nonetheless. Along those lines, I've checked the OPs of the DSLR and Mirrorless threads for advice, which are both several years old at this point---which is why I'm here. Here's my basic questions, I guess. 1. Do I just get a modern point-and-shoot and hope that it's slightly better at close-up stuff and focusing at all than the early-2000s one I 2. I know I've skipped the important "what is your budget" phase of this post and that's partly because my in-laws (who exist at least one tax bracket above me, if not more) have often lamented how they never know what to get me as a Christmas gift, and if I have a basic idea of what I might walk into a store looking for, there's a better chance of me walking out with one, regardless of how much money is actually in my pocket. That said, my job sucks and I don't make all that much and this city is expensive as gently caress, so what might seem cheap and cheerful to you may still leave me with my jaw on the ground. I can definitely answer any followup questions you may have, and I am entirely aware that a lot of this is "until you know exactly what you're doing, we can't tell you what you should be doing" type nonsense, and I'm sorry about that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
For indoor photos you have a few options: 1) Get a modern, rather expensive camera, that can do high-ISO pictures with low noise. 2) Use a tripod to make longer exposures than you reliably can handheld. 3) MORE LIGHTS! Actually looking at your current photos, you're already doing very well having the set-up right by a window, so there might not be a lot to improve on it. I think you'd be fine buying any 5 year old used DSLR with a kit lens. I don't think any model introduced after around 2008-2010 is outright bad, so really just get whatever. If you have the option to buy/get new, any current entry-level Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax DSLR is a fine choice. I don't have any experience with mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras but those are probably also good for your purposes. They're definitely more compact and lower weight, but I have pretty large hands and want my cameras to fill them out. As for macro, a good rule of thumb is that non-macro lenses have a closest focus distance equal 10 times to their focal length, so a 50 mm lens will have a closest focus of 500 mm = 0.5 meter (1½ ft). You probably won't get good results with a zoom+macro lens. Use a decent zoom lens for general purpose, and a dedicated macro lens for when you want close-ups.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 09:42
|
|
|
nielsm posted:I think you'd be fine buying any 5 year old used DSLR with a kit lens. I second this. In my recent experience, the 18-55 Canon kit lens I’ve been using can take some fairly sharp, clean pictures, assuming there’s ample light. In a controlled environment like shooting game boards on a table, I bet such a kit lens would work pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
speaking of modern expensive cameras that can do high ISO's with low noise.... What's the best bang for buck.. MY D7000 is lackign in low noise high ISO feature. I'd like to stick with Nikon and DLSR since I have a small collection of lenses and likely wont' be making a move anytime soon but would like to keep an eye on prices when they hit my budget.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
If you're angling for a possible gift, then I guess you'll be mostly looking at new systems. The amount of money you can spend is fairly wide, but let's stick to the cheap end. Sub $200. You are mostly limited here to low-end point and shoot cameras that are basically phone cameras with slightly better lenses. They will be better than what you have because the tech has moved on quite a lot since your Sony was current, but it won't be very flexible. $200-300. This is bridge camera territory. You get a camera that's basically a point and shoot but with a much better lens attached. This might be what you are looking for, if you don't need anything too heavy duty. $300+ This is the entry level DSLR and interchangeable lens mirrorless area. In my opinion, entry level DSLRs are terrible value with gimped functionality and unergonomic controls. If your use cases are very limited however that might not be important to you. The18-55mm kit lens which most of them will come with is going to struggle a bit in lowlight but you can mitigate that with a tripod. A midrange mirrorless system will weigh in at a bit more but will generally be a lot more competent than a basic DSLR. I would suggest that walking into a big box store and picking up a few cameras will give you a much better idea of what you want. None of your use cases are particularly extreme, they aren't going to tax any reasonably current system, especially if you pair it with a tripod (which you will need for timelapse sequences anyhow).
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Anybody have a suggestion for a good loupe I could use to inspect medium format and 35mm slides on the light table? Should I just look for something old on eBay?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
akadajet posted:Anybody have a suggestion for a good loupe I could use to inspect medium format and 35mm slides on the light table? Should I just look for something old on eBay? Try using a 50mm lens, with the mount-side close to the film.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Try using a 50mm lens, with the mount-side close to the film. Oh my god that works better than I thought it would!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
This would probably go in the point & shoot thread, but it's archived, so here we go: Months ago I got a Mavic (camera drone) and it's awesome. So awesome I've realized it's the best camera I actually own. The only downside being it's (for a standalone camera) huge as gently caress and not really convenient to take non-flying photos with. It shoots amazing photos and the lens/sensor part is hilariously tiny, so as a result, I find myself wondering how expensive a handheld camera that's on that level would be. Most of what I do is shoot 5-shot AEB in RAW, with some occasional manual-mode long exposures at night, though with a tripoddable camera I'd do a lot more of the latter. I don't know which of the specs matter but here they are: Mavic camera specs posted:Sensor 1/2.3” (CMOS), Effective pixels:12.35 M (Total pixels:12.71M) tl;dr suggest me a camera that's roughly equal to that one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Your cell phone?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
All the apps to shoot AEB or long exposure have sucked pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Javid posted:This would probably go in the point & shoot thread, but it's archived, so here we go: What you're suggesting is the flexibility of a DSLR but the weight of a point and shoot, which means you're looking mirrorless. e: that's not me being an unhelpful dickwad, I literally know nothing about mirrorless, but there is a thread dedicated to them which is probably worth checking out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
What phone do you have? My S7 will do up to 10 seconds exposures on the default app (which has almost full manual controls other than aperture), and for some reason A Better Camera is free on the galaxy store (think its still paid on the play store), that does 3 AEB pretty well IME. Any 'long exposure' apps are garbage, if the default camera app on your phone won't do it to your taste then third party ones probably won't either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
That Mavic camera looks fairly similar spec-wise to a GoPro Hero 6. It also has the tininess factor too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
tater_salad posted:Your cell phone?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
hexwren posted:Hello, goons. Here's the latest "idiot doesn't know what they need" post that I apologize for in advance. A couple of options:
I know the most off the top of my head about DSLRs. For a beginner with low budget and minimal requirements (essentially “better quality photos and more control”), I’d recommend something like the Canon 60D/70D used. You only need the body, I’d also recommend an inexpensive normal zoom (17-50mm range, the Tamron 17-50 2.8 should be your starting point). The body might be overkill but those are the “pro-sumer” level - better than entry level, but not the weather-sealed monsters that pros use. But importantly a gently used body can be had under $500, which is a good start.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
So I appreciate all the advice that's been passed my way so far, I'm definitely going to continue to do my own exploration, but my major issue with trying to research the topic thus far has been determining what models are current and of what generation and what happened when. For example, my first search for a Canon 70D like harperdc was talking about led to a page of results of $1000+ new kits and $6-700 used bodies on ebay, some of which seem like they just need the lens,
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
Theophany posted:What you're suggesting is the flexibility of a DSLR but the weight of a point and shoot, which means you're looking mirrorless. Actually DSLR size would be fine, I just don't have DSLR money to throw at this. I don't need a TINY camera, just a camera-sized one. The drone is about the size of a Chihuahua.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
Literally any advanced point and shoot (Sony RX100 or Canon G series or entry level MILC or DSLR will crush the Mavic's IQ with the level of control you want. You can get into something for as little as maybe $150-200. If you are willing to spend $500-600 you can grab something like a used Oly OM-D or Fuji XE-2 with a kit lens and be set for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
One thing I'd note here though is that if you're doing a lot of AEB shooting the earlier RX100s at least only did up to a .7 stop increment out which is kinda pointless IMO. My guess is that normally if companies bother with having it it'll go wider but do check first if that's something you care about.hexwren posted:So I appreciate all the advice that's been passed my way so far, I'm definitely going to continue to do my own exploration, but my major issue with trying to research the topic thus far has been determining what models are current and of what generation and what happened when. For example, my first search for a Canon 70D like harperdc was talking about led to a page of results of $1000+ new kits and $6-700 used bodies on ebay, some of which seem like they just need the lens, Just pick some site you like the format of ok and check there for release dates. Here, have these DPreview links for the cameras you mentioned: G6 2013 https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dmcg6 G7 2015 https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dmcg7 70d 2013 https://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/slrs/canon_eos70d And there's lots of other sites that are totally acceptable for that level of research.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
akadajet posted:Oh my god that works better than I thought it would! Well, if you think about it, it's just what the lens normally does, but backwards. The light rays bend the same way. Works with any normal lens, you can do it with medium format too. My loupe is a Pentax 67 105/2.4 
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 06:04 |
|
|
8th-snype posted:Literally any advanced point and shoot (Sony RX100 or Canon G series or entry level MILC or DSLR will crush the Mavic's IQ with the level of control you want. You can get into something for as little as maybe $150-200. If you are willing to spend $500-600 you can grab something like a used Oly OM-D or Fuji XE-2 with a kit lens and be set for a long time. Thanks for the info, I'll look into those! powderific posted:One thing I'd note here though is that if you're doing a lot of AEB shooting the earlier RX100s at least only did up to a .7 stop increment out which is kinda pointless IMO. My guess is that normally if companies bother with having it it'll go wider but do check first if that's something you care about. The Mavic only does .7 and I'm quite happy with it, but that's worth looking into as well!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 04:57
|
|