|
The thing is, if you get a camera with decent manual controls you don't really need to to do AEB. You can just set it to manual and move the shutter speed up and down as many stops as you like. Sure AEB do it in one button press but if you are gonna put it on a tripod anyways it's no big deal .
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 03:29 |
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Well, if you think about it, it's just what the lens normally does, but backwards. The light rays bend the same way. I actually have and tried that lens, but the cheapo canon 50mm seemed to work the best out of what I own.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
akadajet posted:I actually have and tried that lens, but the cheapo canon 50mm seemed to work the best out of what I own. Time to take my pixel peeping to a whole new level. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Best tripod I can get via amazon prime for <$250? Weight doesn’t matter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
Are any of the phone lenses actually worth getting? Kilometers Davis posted:Best tripod I can get via amazon prime for <$250? Weight doesn’t matter. If you want one with a head, people seem to like the Mefoto Globetrotter which is currently 200 on Amazon for most colors. Don't have any experience with it but apparently it's a bit beefier than the Manfrotto BeFree. I've never owned a tripod nice enough to come headless so someone else will have to answer that. e: maybe this? https://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-MT190XPRO4-Section-Aluminum-Tripod/dp/B00G36G9Q4 Moatman fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
I have an older, carbon fiber version of that Manfrotto 190. 3 section not 4. I think I paid $200 for it on eBay, then added an Inturo ballhead from Adorama that was on sale for $99. Always been happy with both, personally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
Moatman posted:Are any of the phone lenses actually worth getting? You mean like the wide angle/zoom/fisheye/macro ones you can get that clip onto a phone? I have a set and they're fun. Wide angle:  Zoom:  Fisheye was worth every penny for this sort of image, which isn't exactly high photography but still fun:  I dunno if there exists a higher grade of the things than what I bought, but for the collective $18 or whatever I paid for the two kits was totally worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
Cross-posting from the mirrorless thread because I just realized this thread exists!dy. posted:Not sure if there is a "recommend me a camera" thread or what so starting here. I'm in the market for my first "real" camera and would like to go mirrorless for the portability. I don't need something that's going to fit entirely in my jeans pocket but I would like to be able to throw it into a small backpack when traveling. I don't have anything super-specific that I'm looking for, but I always love pictures with sharp, vibrant colors. I enjoy landscape and nature photography. I don't feel like I'm going to need to shoot a lot of moving subjects. I would love to get into something that is reasonably weather-sealed if possible just so I can take it camping or hiking without worry too much about the conditions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
I have a tiny cavalcade of cameras: Sony Alpha NEX-5N (2011) with an E-mount 16 mm F2.8 Wide Angle lens Sony Cybershot TX-10 (2011) [sadly there's a little chip in the bottom of the body next to the camera compartment so I don't think it's as waterproof anymore] Canon PowerShot A60 (2004) 35mm Nikon EM (1981 or 80, according to my dad) with a 28 mm Rokinon lens and a 35mm Smena Symbol (it has a little made in USSR mark on the bottom of it and I have no idea what year it was made but it's still light tight and that's all I care about) I've been eyeing bridge camera bundles in the sub-$400 range to maybe replace my TX-10 as a travel camera when I'm in the middle of nowhere.. is this the wrong tree to be going up? Should I be braver about where I take my NEX? It takes lovely pictures but I've never really shopped around for other lenses since they seem to cost so much and I like the idea of a big zoom; the one I have on it now only does digital zoom to middling results. Something like the Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX400V seems really neat (and relatively cheap) since it has built in GPS, but as far as I can tell it isn't weatherproofed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 07:38
|
|
|
rincewind101 posted:I've been eyeing bridge camera bundles in the sub-$400 range to maybe replace my TX-10 as a travel camera when I'm in the middle of nowhere.. is this the wrong tree to be going up? Should I be braver about where I take my NEX? It takes lovely pictures but I've never really shopped around for other lenses since they seem to cost so much and I like the idea of a big zoom; the one I have on it now only does digital zoom to middling results. The problem with superzoom (ultrawide to ultra-long) is that the quality tends to suck, and they tend to have a slow aperture that requires good lighting. You really should have a kit lens for your camera (the 18-55 OSS), and Sigma makes a couple nice pancake primes (the 30/2.8 and 19/2.8). You can also adapt a wide variety of cheap telephoto lenses (eg Nikkor 105/2.5, Pentax 135/2.5, or Samyang 135/2) if you are OK with manual-focus. What is your concern about bringing your NEX? The 5N is dirt-cheap at this point, it's like a $150 camera. You're not going to find anything much more disposable than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
Moatman posted:Are any of the phone lenses actually worth getting? I started to spend a million hours researching tripods and ab testing until my eyes started bleeding but I said gently caress option paralysis and went with a globetrotter. Thanks for the recommendation! It seems like exactly what I want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The 5N is dirt-cheap at this point, it's like a $150 camera. wait what poo poo I never realized it got so cheap - I remember paying $600 for it years ago. It goes for $150 on ebay, or...? Could I get the next step or two up in the NEX line for 300? whatever that is I've never tried adapting a lens before
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Reading up, that sounds like it'd do what I need, too, where exactly is that a $150 buy?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 09:23
|
|
|
rincewind101 posted:wait what Javid posted:Reading up, that sounds like it'd do what I need, too, where exactly is that a $150 buy? Yup, ebay or at KEH or whatever (none in stock at the moment). If you are buying a camera I would go for a 5R or 5T, they are pretty close to the same price but they have the phase-detect sensor which drastically improves autofocus speed/accuracy on moving targets. The 5T model adds wifi, which is dumb and useless, but whatever. The A6000 is a little more expensive but has the PDAF sensor and also an electronic viewfinder too, which is nice. I think it might focus a bit faster too, it's an overall better camera. If you have a $300 budget that's not a bad option. Sony's low-end E-mount cameras are super cheap and super good. They are far and away the best bang for your buck IMO. Adapting lenses is easy, buy Fotodiox adapters off Amazon (there are cheaper options but quality can be a bit hit-or-miss), then you just put it on the lens and then mount it normally. In your settings, turn on focus peaking and whatever's in focus will sparkle. It makes manual-focusing piss-easy. Then, if you ever want to shoot film, you can get a cheap body like a Pentax MX or Nikon FM and get even more use out of your lens kit. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 09:41 on Dec 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 09:32
|
|
|
Javid posted:Reading up, that sounds like it'd do what I need, too, where exactly is that a $150 buy? I can confirm that the Nex-5N is a nice camera in a pretty wide variety of situations - even in my amateurish hands.      Paul MaudDib posted:The A6000 is a little more expensive but has the PDAF sensor and also an electronic viewfinder too, which is nice. I think it might focus a bit faster too, it's an overall better camera. If you have a $300 budget that's not a bad option. What are the odds the A6000 goes down another hundred next year? Amazon's got it at $448. I guess I was just wary of rain damaging my old NEX but if they're so replaceable I have no excuse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 09:50
|
|
|
rincewind101 posted:What are the odds the A6000 goes down another hundred next year? Amazon's got it at $448. There's nothing wrong with used MILCs/DSLRs, especially if you are buying from a camera store that gives you a bit of a warranty. Unlike P+S cameras they usually don't crap out for no reason.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 10:02
|
|
|
Where do you shop for cheap old manual telephoto lenses?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 11:07
|
|
|
rincewind101 posted:Where do you shop for cheap old manual telephoto lenses? Wherever. KEH, PentaxForums, APUG, ebay, etc. Or your local thrift shops, although you will have to take what you can get (it's a cheap way to try new lenses). The ones I named are the ones I think are the best value - in rough order of cost, the Nikkor 105/2.5 (particularly AI-S since it has a built-in hood), the Pentax 135/2.5, and the Samyang 135/2 (often rebadged as Rokinon/Bower as well). For Samyang, prefer either Pentax or Nikon mounts and buy an adapter for future flexibility - there is no reason to buy an E-mount lens even if it is available since they're full-manual anyway. The Samyang 35/1.4 is also fantastic, as is pretty much everything except their 85/1.4, which is a touch soft (for portraits) but dirt cheap. They are really shaking up the manual-focus lens market, they are as good or better than the name-brand lenses at a fraction of the price. eBay likes to run 8-10% eBay Bucks promos at least once a month, there was one last night. A lot of stores have eBay storefronts now and that can be a good value (check your CC for bonus cashback as well, or use eBates). The only downside to eBay bucks is they redeem once a quarter and you have to use them within a month. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 11:27 on Dec 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 11:16
|
|
|
Hello goon friends... I am looking to take a journey into some basic studio lighting to start doing photos of my son. I've done paid gigs before but all of them were outdoors or instances where on-camera 580EX II was enough. What's the best approach to get started? For this year I'd like to do some great Christmas tree photos with my 1 year old in front of the tree. I am thinking of getting a nice umbrella + tripod for my 580EXII. I assume I need to invest in a radio transmitter as well? I have an off-camera cord that I've used as well which could suffice. (looks like this: https://www.amazon.com/Neewer-Camer...+cord+speedlite). Do I go umbrella, soft box, or a continuous light system? I've got a 7D, a couple L lenses, but I'd probably just be using my Tamron 17-50 or Sigma 30m.. 1.2 since it will be close range. I was looking at something like this: https://www.amazon.com/LimoStudio-P...ASIN=B00E4YS2XU Or https://www.amazon.com/Photography-...ds=lighting+kit ... However they wouldnt make use of my 580 EXII. Munkaboo fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Dec 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Took my 5D2 out for some portrait shooting at a friend's request. Things came out OK, but it couldn't have been a paid job. That camera has been used & abused so much, I'm remembering why I relegated it to digitizing film with a 100mm macro. Any situation more active/less controlled than that is too much for it. I don't think the performance reaches specification anymore; it feels worn out, inaccurate, and vibration-prone. I switched to my E-M10 whenever I didn't need the dof of the 100mm, and it was an all-around better performer. But the shoot was fun. I'm thinking about upgrading to a consistently usable, new mid-tier camera. $2000 is the ceiling, and I think I've narrowed it down to two options: Fuji X-T2 or Nikon D750. They're about as different as two ILCs can get and still be usable for my purposes: portrait and landscape. But they have different secondary uses that would be appealing to me. D750: Full frame; all-around greater RAW flexibility. 24-120/4 kit lens is more usable for portraits and landscapes out of the box, with decent subject separation at the long end and 24mm vs 28mm(equivalent, on the Fuji kit) at the wide end. Decent 1080p video with video-friendly features. 200-500/5.6 ED VR lens is about $400 cheaper than the Fuji, making the Nikon a better choice for my secondary objective of getting a good wildlife photography lens. X-T2: APS X-Trans & Fuji JPEG engine; less RAW flexibility, but capable, and with great color rendition out of camera. If there's a chance I could shoot deliverable OOC JPEGS even sometimes, that's a big incentive. Some reviewers say that the Fuji sensors aren't great for landscapes, but there are some things out there that I really like (these big white borders notwithstanding). 18-55/2.8-4 kit lens is great by all accounts, but I would need to find another solution for big bokeh hunter portraits. Even adding the 55-200 would push me over the $2K limit, so I might have to adapt an MF tele for now, which would be a big compromise. 4K video capability and video features make it superior for my secondary objective of having a truly decent video camera. 100-400/45-5.6 is more expensive than the Nikon 200-500, pricing me out of a wildlife photography upgrade for a while, especially if I need to get an XF portrait lens first. So, all-in-all, even though the D750 kit is $200 more, it's more capable out of the box. The X-T2 is a slicker overall package and has better video. It's also smaller and (in theory) not as tied to post-processing on a computer, which are both features that would make it more usable day-to-day. I have my 35mm film camera that kind of addresses those issues already, though. Right now I'm leaning toward the D750. It seems like a better value. But I've used my coworker's X-T2, and I know it's siren song. Maybe there are some factors I've missed, or certain other ineffable qualities that you think either camera has. I need some camera counseling.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:Hello goon friends... I am looking to take a journey into some basic studio lighting to start doing photos of my son. I've done paid gigs before but all of them were outdoors or instances where on-camera 580EX II was enough. Get an umbrella, a cheap stand, and some radio slaves. Also read strobists 101 articles, they are a legitimately good source of info as long as you ignore the weirdo DIY stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:D750: Full frame; all-around greater RAW flexibility. If you do go Nikon I would get the new Tamron or sigma 24-70s rather than the 24-120 nikon. Or if you do want the 24-120 pick it up used—you can usually find it pretty cheap. You could adapt your Canon 100mm to the Fuji which could be a point towards it. Really I think you should try to get some time on both cameras as they’re pretty different in feel. I’d way rather have the D750 myself but I don’t know that there’s a perfect argument for one vs. the other in your case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 07:09
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Get an umbrella, a cheap stand, and some radio slaves. Also read strobists 101 articles, they are a legitimately good source of info as long as you ignore the weirdo DIY stuff. Thanks.... Any recs for a cheap radio?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:Thanks.... Any recs for a cheap radio? I personally use Godox flashes and triggers but if you aren't super concerned about off camera TTL you could pick up a cheap Neewer or Cowbody studio set of dumb triggers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
I've heard good things about the Godox triggers. I've personally had great success with cactus triggers for cheaper options. v5 are great dumb triggers (transceivers) and v6 are TTL (also transceivers) if I remember correctly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
powderific posted:If you do go Nikon I would get the new Tamron or sigma 24-70s rather than the 24-120 nikon. Or if you do want the 24-120 pick it up used—you can usually find it pretty cheap. I'd heard that the 24-120 was good, but since you mentioned it I dug a little deeper and found some decidedly mixed reviews for it. Good to know. I thought that its main compromise was in the level of distortion (which alone is kind of a bummer since I would've liked to use it with my Nikon film camera), but yeah it also seems to not be that sharp. One pretty objective review called it 'seemingly designed for no more than 12MP sensors' - sounds like a bad investment for the future. With the 24-120 being less good, the value proposition for the D750 is evening out with the X-T2. Unless the pre-ART (DG EX) Sigma 24-70/2.8 or older Tamron version are any better than the Nikon 24-120.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Verman posted:I've heard good things about the Godox triggers. I've personally had great success with cactus triggers for cheaper options. v5 are great dumb triggers (transceivers) and v6 are TTL (also transceivers) if I remember correctly. Yeah I had v2 cactus triggers for almost a decade.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Thinking of getting this stuff: Godox XPRO Transmitter: https://www.amazon.com/Godox-TTL-Co...+triggers&psc=1 Godox X1R-C Receiver: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B016QAK3TU/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?smid=AMIHU7JS0U6DA&psc=1 Godox S-type Bracket Bowens Mount Holder for Speedlite: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JS3MINC/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=A11SIRN2SMBLGK&psc=1 StudioPRO 43 Inch Photography Black/White Umbrella Reflector: https://www.amazon.com/StudioPRO-Photography-Black-Umbrella-Reflector/dp/B00FJ1JJRA/ref=sr_1_12?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1513651732 Is this everything I need? Munkaboo fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Dec 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I'd heard that the 24-120 was good, but since you mentioned it I dug a little deeper and found some decidedly mixed reviews for it. Good to know. I thought that its main compromise was in the level of distortion (which alone is kind of a bummer since I would've liked to use it with my Nikon film camera), but yeah it also seems to not be that sharp. One pretty objective review called it 'seemingly designed for no more than 12MP sensors' - sounds like a bad investment for the future. Replied in the Nikon thread too but the 24-120 was my main zoom when I had a D800 so it's not like it only works with 12 mp or something. And the range on it is really convenient.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:Thinking of getting this stuff: Pretty much. Consider getting a shoot through umbrella as well, or a convertible one. They lose lots of light but can give you a very soft source especially in a room with low ceilings.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Also consider a full set of these versatile modifiers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:
Holy poo poo finally TCM is coming to Godox
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 06:36
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:Thinking of getting this stuff: I'd say get a convertible umbrella instead so you can also use it to shoot through. You'll also want a light stand if you don't have one. And that trigger and receiver will serve you well -- down the line if you decide to add more flashes, you can go the Godox / Flashpoint route and buy into a system that have Godox X receivers built in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Any thoughts on walkaround lenses for my D850? The 50 1.8g is about the perfect size but I'd rather have a 28 or 35 and none of the options seem ideal. I'd really like to have autofocus or the Voigtlander 28mm would be perfect. Options I see:
Did I miss anything? I really wish Nikon had some pancakes like Pentax.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
If it were my money it’d be the tamron or the 35/1.8. I’ve liked every tamron lens I’ve used. The Nikon is just passable, but cheap and light.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
I'm a huge Tamron fanboy. Of my lenses, I've bought more Tamron than any other company, with a close second of Sigma.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:I'm a huge Tamron fanboy. Of my lenses, I've bought more Tamron than any other company, with a close second of Sigma. I bought some Sigma lenses when starting out and they couldn't autofocus for poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
The focus ring rubber on my 24-70 G2 tamron fell off in the first week so I'm a little wary of their finish quality, but could have been a fluke. Their parts department is completely out of replacements though so I wonder if it's a design flaw. edit: I've always had better AF experiences with first party lenses, but I don't remember the Sigma 35 1.4 I rented being too bad on focus. Don't want one for this cause they're heavy and expensive though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
akadajet posted:I bought some Sigma lenses when starting out and they couldn't autofocus for poo poo. Dunno what to tell you. I've never had a problem with that, so maybe I just got lucky. It's entirely possible that my experiences aren't representative of the greater whole
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 03:29 |
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:Dunno what to tell you. I've never had a problem with that, so maybe I just got lucky. It's entirely possible that my experiences aren't representative of the greater whole Same, but I got twice burned on them. Which is a shame because the optics were fabulous.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 22:12
|
|