|
Yeah i cant see that being a issue given that the olmp is giving me delta lenth changes that are with in 50ish micron of what the load frames LVDT is saying the specimen is moving
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:23 |
|
|
Fair nuff, just wasn't sure what kind of pixel level data you were looking for. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
Goons, help me spend money. I'm getting back into photography after a long hiatus because I was gifted a Rebel T6 for Christmas. Instead of doing the smart thing and returning the kit and buying a t6i, I opened it, so I'm stuck with it for a bit. Whatever, it's a camera, it shoots photos. It'll be plenty for me to mess around with until I inevitably buy a much more expensive body. First thing is I got a used Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 to replace the kit lens. I've been happy with that, but night photography and landscape photography are my current areas of interest so what I want to get next is a tripod, and I am having a real bitch of a time making a decision. Budget is $500, but the less I spend the better. Use will be mostly landscape, night photography of city architecture. I will likely end up hauling this around a bit so I'm hoping to get fairly compact and lightweight. I've spent hours looking at tripods and there's simply too goddamn many to choose from. I'm looking at 4 or 5 section carbon fiber travel-ish tripods. 3 Legged Things, Benro, and Sirui are brands that have stood out to me so far. Specifically at the top end of my bracket has been the Sirui N-2204X with a K-10X ballhead. Bottom end was the 3LT Punks Billy. Middle was the Benro Travel Angel and the MeFoto Globetrotter. I have been looking mostly at carbon because I figure this is a buy once buy right kind of deal (understanding I can't afford/justify Gitzo/RRS) but if aluminum was a much better value with reasonable comfort trade off I'm not opposed. What are y'all's experience/recommendations on tripods?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 17:37
|
|
|
Moved to the mirrorless thread.
Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Feb 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
My friend with the GF7 is now deciding that she wants to attach a ring flash to it. One of her use cases is taking pictures of her client's hair at her salon and she wants a way to get better light for the pictures. The GF7 has no hotshoe or any kind of sync socket so it looks like continuous light is the only option. There are plenty of small LED video lights for phones/small cameras, however she still needs a way to attach it to the camera. The salon has some free-standing lights but she really wants something smaller and more portable. I am sure that there's some kind of rig that attaches to the tripod bush and just has a coldshoe socket on it but for the life of me I can't find it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Korwen posted:Goons, help me spend money. I have no experience of any of the tripods you listed, but I do have a Sirui ballhead sitting on my Manfrotto actually-rather-heavy legs. I'm happy with the ballhead. It was not expensive (maybe $100, several years ago) and it's Arca-Swiss compatible which I like. I think any tripod you buy that you've already researched is going to be pretty good. Many of the differences between them will come down to highly subjective, individual preferences - I prefer lever-locks for the leg extensions, for example, but some people swear by twist-locks. There are lots of other differences, too, that mostly matter only in a head-to-head, which is a far cry from most realistic shooting scenarios. Buy a tripod, shoot more, worry less, be happy. EDIT: pick up a $20 (or cheaper, look on Amazon) remote shutter release with built-in intervalometer, it will be your favourite thing for night photography.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Thinking of upgrading my telephoto lens sometime this year. Currently using a mk1 ef-s 55-250. I like to do things on the cheap, and would prefer to spend $500 or less on a new piece of glass. At this point, I’ve tentatively narrowed it down to either a mk2 ef 70-300, or an ef 70-200L f/4 (non-IS)I’d likely go for a used copy in either case. I’m kind of stumped here. On the one hand, the 70-300 lens has more reach, IS, and can likely be had for around $50 or so less than what I’d spend on the L glass. On the other hand, the 70-200 is a faster lens, and I may benefit from better image quality overall(?). To further muddy the waters, I’ve seen some online insist that the mk2 70-300 is almost on par image quality-wise with the L stuff, but this might be BS. What do you goons think would be the better acquisition? For more context, I’ve recently started enjoying wildlife photography, so that’d be this hypothetical lens’ primary use.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
Even the 70-200L F/4 being the runt of the 70-200 pack is a huge optical upgrade from the consumer telephoto zooms. I'd only consider the 70-300 if you reaaaally need the IS like when shooting indoor high school sports games or something, or the extra reach for birding. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx Seems that past 200mm, sharpness drops with 300mm being the softest. Depending on what wildlife you're shooting, autofocus with the 70-300 isn't particularly great with speed, and the 70-200 is bloody fast. hope and vaseline fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:Even the 70-200L F/4 being the runt of the 70-200 pack is a huge optical upgrade from the consumer telephoto zooms. I'd only consider the 70-300 if you reaaaally need the IS like when shooting indoor high school sports games or something. I really don’t foresee much indoor event use. With the shorter, yet higher quality glass, do you think I could compensate for less focal length just by cropping?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
President Beep posted:I really don’t foresee much indoor event use. With the shorter, yet higher quality glass, do you think I could compensate for less focal length just by cropping? With the megapixel count our cameras are reaching at this point, you can be pretty liberal with cropping depending on what your output is gonna be. Unless you're making large prints I think you're fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
I'm sure the 70-300mm is good but the 70-200mm f/4 is very good. Unless you really need IS or 300mmm I'd go with that personally. IS is cool and all but it doesn't help you freeze subject motion so it's not always as helpful as you think it might be when shooting moving objects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
I also forget that you can use extenders, the ef 1.4x extends the reach to 280 mm. But they are pretty pricey.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:I'm sure the 70-300mm is good but the 70-200mm f/4 is very good. Unless you really need IS or 300mmm I'd go with that personally. IS is cool and all but it doesn't help you freeze subject motion so it's not always as helpful as you think it might be when shooting moving objects. That’s a good point. For shooting birds and stuff, The larger aperture of the 70-200 would be of more utility than IS on a slower lens, it seems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
I'm going to be contrarian and say that for birds you'd be better off with the 70-300. The thing with birds is most are small, and most hate you, so they tend to be far away. at 200mm they will be small enough that you'll almost always be focusing on the bigger, more contrasty thing in the environment (like the rest of the tree they are sitting on). No doubt the 70-200L is going to be better for almost everything else. do you have a Canon? Maybe check out the 400 f/5.6 L. No IS, but light and sharp, and used it should be close to your price range. The 150-600's from Sigma/Tamron are much much bigger but some are not too far north of your $500 target.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
Yeah when you said wildlife I wasn't thinking birds specifically. You need as munch reach as possible for birbs. A used Tamron 150-600mm is about $150 over your budget but would be better than either of the lenses listed.
8th-snype fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
Shoot I didn't even think of Sigma's lineup. Their 100-400 is considerably cheaper than canon's.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
The Sigma 100-400 is probably a good choice as well just 400 is still like entry level for birding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
I can't recommend the Tamron 150-600 enough for baby's first supertele. I know that's way over the $500 budget but it buys you so much flexibility.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
Yeah, I have the Tammy 150-600 too. The zoom lock switch broke a little while back which makes it less fun to walk around with, but I'm still getting a lot of nice photos with it. My father in law got the gen2 version for Sony and it looks pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
Yeah, I was thinking mostly birds. Why can’t you all just read my mind?! Looking at second-hand, it appears that the Tamron 150-600 can be had for ~$650. Looks like it might be time to streeeetch my funding goal!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
President Beep posted:Looking at second-hand, it appears that the Tamron 150-600 can be had for ~$650. Looks like it might be time to streeeetch my funding goal!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 07:25
|
|
|
I bought a few Blackrapid fasten-Rs because previous ones had been lost to time and I know they went from being metal to plastic, but did they somehow get thicker? I can't get the clamp on my cross shot attached to them now at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2018 13:58
|
|
|
I needed to get the Peak Design plate off of my X100F to get at the memory card but forgot to bring the allen wrench, and I realized that the bolt has a slot running across it that's the exact thickness of a standard key. So, thanks Peak Design dudes for making it easy to attach and remove stuff 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2018 02:43
|
|
|
It's also probably a good fit for a coin too. I usually end up using a 10¢ coin to undo mine whenever it needs to come off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
My father was interested in photography in his younger days, when his children were kids, but kinda stopped doing it in his 40s. He wants to pick up photography again (maybe inspired by the photography interest my sister and i have) and has set his eyes on a Sony A7R3. (Both me and my sister have Canon 5-series cameras and L-glass so i'd argue he would be better off picking that so we could all share/borrow gear) Anyways, he is looking for recommendations on what stuff to get. I am very unfamiliar with the Sony stuff: If he is buying the Sony A7R3 and wants the Canon 24-70L "equivalent", is the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Lens the correct lens to get? I see that there is a "Vario-Tessar" line of lenses that are similar in price to the GM lenses, what is the difference between these 2 lineups? Does he need a bunch of extra batteries or do the newest mirrorless cameras have better battery life?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
He'll want some spare batteries, any mirrorless is going to use far more battery than your canon dslrs just by the nature of being mirrorless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2018 10:37
|
|
|
I'm probably overthinking this, but I'm thinking about what to bring on a trip to Italy, and could use some advice. What I've got:
What I'm considering renting
Any thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:I'm probably overthinking this, but I'm thinking about what to bring on a trip to Italy, and could use some advice. In Europe, I would almost always shy away from length and focus on width and speed. My zoom is also a 70-200 2.8 which is pretty huge and annoying to carry around old cities. My 17-50 or a 30 f 1.4 was almost always on my camera. Then I switched to an RX100 so it all went out the window.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
If he's getting the A7RIII he doesn't need a pocket full of batteries, just a spare one, as it has the new Z-type battery that has over 2X the capacity of the old batteries. It's also a more power efficient body.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:I'm probably overthinking this, but I'm thinking about what to bring on a trip to Italy, and could use some advice. Bring the 17-50 and consider getting either a 35mm or 24mm prime for walking around. Tamron makes a nice 35mm f/1.8 with VC that I would own in a heartbeat if I owned a Nikon DSLR but the Nikon DX 35mm is cheap as hell. The D5500 has decent high ISO so don't fret too much. I use one at work and regularly push it to 6400 for eBay product shots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 02:22
|
|
|
I shoot crop sensor and 10mm is too wide pretty much all the time. I get the allure of being able to get everything in frame, and I can see some real utility in having a super wide angle for the squished places of europe, but after a year of lugging the 10-22 I gradually stopped using it while my 17-55 stays mounted all the time. I'm still glad to have it in the bag just in case I need it, but armed with some hindsight if I had to choose it or something else I'd go with the "something else."
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
We’ll be in York later this year and I’m really hoping that my 24mm pancake will be wide enough. I’ll likely lug my 18-55 kit lens along too, just in case, but I’d obviously prefer the faster prime.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 02:43
|
|
|
Bring the plug adaptor for your battery charger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
I don't think I could do city walkabouts without my 10-18mm in addition to a normal zoom. Especially in downtown areas, when you're trying to get architectural shots and there's just no room to walk back to get more in the frame.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:I don't think I could do city walkabouts without my 10-18mm in addition to a normal zoom. Especially in downtown areas, when you're trying to get architectural shots and there's just no room to walk back to get more in the frame. I have a feeling I’ll be wishing I had one while we’re there. How’s the barrel distortion at the wide end?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
President Beep posted:I have a feeling I’ll be wishing I had one while we’re there. How’s the barrel distortion at the wide end? It's noticeable but easily correctable in post. There's almost none at 14mm and very slight pincushion at 18mm. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Distortion.aspx?Lens=950&Camera=736&FLIComp=0&LensComp=0&CameraComp=0&FLI=0 edit: i assume we're talking canon. I think I saw you at the canon thread at least? hope and vaseline fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Feb 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:It's noticeable but easily correctable in post. There's almost none at 14mm and very slight pincushion at 18mm. Yep. I have a Rebel right now and I’ll likely be sticking with Canon crop for the foreseeable future. A buddy of mine has that lens. I might have to borrow it from him to see if I like it. There’s time before our trip to save up for one if I do...
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
Yeah I'm on Fuji but couldn't live without my 10-24. I do a lot of urban landscapes and 14-20 is my sweet spot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
I almost always find the 17-50 is wide enough to do shots of cathedrals, tight spaces etc. I wouldn't worry too much about carrying an extra lens to go wider. Source: I live in a mediaeval city, and there's a 12th century gothic cathedral 100m from my apartment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 13:23 |
|
|
Yeah I get to travel a ton and unless I'm actively trying to shoot the local wildlife, I'm almost always on the wider end of things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2018 19:38
|
|