|
MadlabsRobot posted:Looking to by a CPL, are there any dorkroom recommended brands/models? Price seem to vary a lot between brands and also within brands depending on if it is a "PRO", multi-coated, slim etc. Marumi is who I’ve seen recommended. I’ve used their CPLs and they were top notch.
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
Marumi super dhg
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
Ah, yes now I remember reading about it earlier in the thread. Marumi seem to be strangely non-existent here in Sweden though but I guess I can order it from the UK instead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
I have a Breakthrough Photography X4 which is way overengineered but is a really nice piece of kit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
I bought the NiSi v5 because I'm a dork that uses square filters. It comes with a CPL that you can rotate with a little wheel on the edge of the ring and I dig it. If the filter they ship with has a cast on it, I'm too blind to detect it. It does review well though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
Is a Sony RX100 original version still a reasonable buy for a point and shoot? I am moving country to somewhere pretty and want to have something handy to take places with me. I already have an oldish dSLR, it's a Canon 550 which I use with a Tamron 17-50 and gets nice photos but it's annoying to carry around. I don't really have a budget but the £279 for the RX100 looks reasonable and it seems a good compromise between size/weight and image quality. I appreciate it's an old model but it's 1/4 the cost of the latest version.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:Is a Sony RX100 original version still a reasonable buy for a point and shoot? I am moving country to somewhere pretty and want to have something handy to take places with me. Get at least the M2 imo, with no EVF the tilty screen is a must have. I had one for like a month and it wasn't quite what I wanted but I would have kept it if I didn't own an x100f.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:Is a Sony RX100 original version still a reasonable buy for a point and shoot? I am moving country to somewhere pretty and want to have something handy to take places with me. Sony RX100s are great. I have a m2 and its become my go to travel camera. Its small and takes shockingly good photos for a pocket camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
For my fellow Austinites: turns out Precision Camera is going to start carrying Godox gear. They're still waiting on the stock to get here (quite literally on a boat from China) but it will be nice to buy the stuff locally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
I’ve been looking at weird Lenses and wondered if anyone had any suggestions? I’m looking for a lens to do landscapes with as well as entertaining something like a 500mm. I have a 5D Mk iii and am not sure about the compatibility of some of the lenses. I’ve heard that sometimes the mirror hits the lens during infinity focus on some models. The cheaper the better, but if something is super unique, I’ll put it on the list of stuff to eventually get.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Reflex lenses are a weird cheap way to get to 500mm.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
How are they for astrophotography?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Soulex posted:How are they for astrophotography? Oh wow you must really hate having money then Pretty poo poo, you should look for something like a 300mm or 400mm EDIF, it starts getting pretty expensive after there. Nikon does some decent stuff, Pentax 645/67 lenses are pretty nice since you're sweet-spotting a huge image circle. Of course either way you'll need a tracking mount too, if you don't have one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
God dammit. Why does this hobby have to be so expensive? There’s got to be an easier way!!!! e: No lomography! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
Had our house broken into last week and learned a few things. Renters/homeowners insurance is a must, BUT get a separate rider for your camera gear and talk to someone at your insurance company to ensure you have proper coverage for your stuff, especially if you make money from it. Most homeowners only covers theft/fire/flood inside the home. A separate rider can cover accidents/drops in and outside the home. We lost about $9,000 worth of stuff, mostly my camera gear and my handgun, but some other electronics and jewelry. Insurance cut us a check for $4800 which won't even replace my camera gear let alone the other stuff. I get depreciation but the insurance company told me that I should have a rider for my camera gear if I want better coverage. A few more dollars per year in insurance costs are a lot cheaper than replacing your gear. Keep detailed records of your gear including photos, receipts and keep the serial numbers somewhere. I did a pretty good job of this but I had 2 lenses I couldn't find receipts/serials for (including my canon 70-200 2.8L IS) but I did have photo evidence of ownership. Replace the screws on your entry doors with 3.5" screws. Hinges (into the door, and into the wall), deadbolt/lock into the door, and the strike plate on the door frame where your lock goes into the wall. Most hardware for doors are only 1" screws that get screwed into a thin pine door frame. It doesn't take much to break through that 1" of pine trim and your door is open, usually only a swift kick or two and your door or the frame is broken. 3.5" screws go through the door frame and into the studs of your wall which will make it much more secure. On the bright side, I was already planning to upgrade (5D2 to A7R3) so a check is easier than selling used gear. Replacing my lenses is going to be the lovely part as I was planning to carry over my Canon glass. My buddy works at a camera store so he can get me a great deal on Sony/Sigma stuff. I'll look to pick up a 24-70 2.8, a 70-200 2.8, and maybe a 85 1.4 or 135 1.4 prime, plus flash etc. I shoot a few weddings per year so I need enough to get back up and running. I don't have one until mid summer so I have a lot of time to gear up and shoot before the gauntlet approaches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
Sounds like you have lovely coverage.. I'd argue that check.they gave you with a price list of what it would cost to replace with used equipment or similar. Having an itemized list of equipment and stuff in your house with model numbers is nearly a must Soo you can get actual replacement cost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Talked to insurance, because my wife admitted I make money on my photo gear (I shoot 1-3 weddings per year at most) it gets considered business coverage which our policy only had $1500 worth of coverage. So im getting $1500 for 5-7k worth of gear. They said if my camera gear was for personal use, it would have been covered (minus depreciation). We also exceeded our jewelry limit (mostly my not nice watches). Apparently we only had $500 of jewelry coverage. Ill have to go over our policy to ensure we have adequate coverage for everything now. Funny thing is they valued my10 year old laptop at $200 but if I prove with a receipt that I replaced it with a new one they will pay another $800. I'm waiting on them to send me the inventory list to see what each item was valued at. Talk to your agent. Ensure your coverage. I learned my lesson. Also sigma, release the 70-200 2.8 art already.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:21
|
|
|
If you make money at all from your photos insurance is inexpensive. I have 1 mill liability and 7k of equipment coverage through Hiscox for $35 a month.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
If you have USAA, Valuable Personal Property riders are stupid cheap. I think I pay like $30 a year for $1500 of coverage or something stupid like that. Thanks for reminding me though, I need to go through and inventory my gear again and update the policy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Oh wow you must really hate having money then Yeah tracking mount is on the list but I promised myself that the next long piece of glass would be used to at least look at the stars. I’ve always wanted to shoot them and figure if I could use old crazy vintage poo poo no one uses, I’ll be ok. I’m looking for a 35 or 28 for landscapes too. Paul MaudDib posted:If you have USAA, Valuable Personal Property riders are stupid cheap. I think I pay like $30 a year for $1500 of coverage or something stupid like that. Thanks for reminding me though, I need to go through and inventory my gear again and update the policy. Me too. I have USAA and have up to 10k I think. My camera gear is half that, including my laptop. I’m trying to make the transition to getting paid but I have a year of school left.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
Soulex posted:Yeah tracking mount is on the list but I promised myself that the next long piece of glass would be used to at least look at the stars. I’ve always wanted to shoot them and figure if I could use old crazy vintage poo poo no one uses, I’ll be ok. The absolute cheapest you're going to get off for a lens that long is the Pentax 400/500 or possibly the Takumar variants. The manual-focus Nikkor EDIFs (300/4.5 and 400/5.6 or 3.5) and the Pentax 645 EDIFs (300/4 and 400/5.6) or Pentax 67 EDIFs (300/4 or 400/4) are a significant step up optically over that. Any of the older non-tele long lenses with doublets/triplets are going to be rear end with massive amounts of coma and field curvature at wider apertures, realistically the price of entry for a lens 300mm or longer is a nice EDIF telephoto design. You can still have fun with something in the 100-200mm length, it's cheaper for fast lenses in those focal lengths, they have much less coma and curvature at wider apertures, and with a shorter FL you can run longer exposures before you blur. 35/28 are my favorite focal lengths for landscape, and I'd definitely recommend the SMC Pentax/SMC Takumar 35/3.5, the SMC Pentax 28/3.5, and the Samyang 35/1.4 or 24/1.4 if that's your cup of tea. Unfortunately, all of these (including the long lenses) are manual-focus and Canon is kind of rear end at manual-focus poo poo. Unfortunately, you are better off going Nikon for DSLR or NEX/A7 for MILC. It'll be fine if you are willing to chimp on the display for every shot, but the red-dot focus confirmation is rear end and you cannot get open-aperture/stopdown metering, so most of the (cheap) MF lenses are useless for any sort of fast shooting. In fact for fast shooting you are better off buying for Pentax or Nikon since they can be adapted to Canon with an equivalent level of functionality, while also leaving open the choice of upgrading to a not-poo poo platform down the road. edit: if you want a fun toy for astrophotography in the 100-200 range, you may want to look at the Samyang 135/2 because it's supposed to be another of their brutally-sharp competitors to the first-party lenses. Again, buy the Pentax or Nikon variants and then a Fotodiox PK/F-to-EOS adapter because there's literally no advantage to buying native EOS. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Apr 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 04:22
|
|
|
Thanks. This is what I figured. The only actual canon lens I plan on getting is that 5x macro. I’ll take a look at these, thanks so much. I’m exploring options and trying to find stuff that makes it easier to do what I want to do. The ideal set up is gonna cost thousands and I don’t have that money at all. I’d sell my gear and get a different bunch of stuff if I wasn’t as invested already.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 07:56
|
|
|
Soulex posted:I’ve been looking at weird Lenses and wondered if anyone had any suggestions? I’m looking for a lens to do landscapes with as well as entertaining something like a 500mm. I have a 5D Mk iii and am not sure about the compatibility of some of the lenses. I’ve heard that sometimes the mirror hits the lens during infinity focus on some models. Arax do a range of MF lenses converted to tilt shift for various 35mm mounts including Canon, µ4/3rds, etc. They are a whole lot cheaper than Canon's tilt-shift offerings too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:If you make money at all from your photos insurance is inexpensive. I have 1 mill liability and 7k of equipment coverage through Hiscox for $35 a month. Did your insurance company make you get an underwriter's report for your gear? I have a bunch of old used gear, so it's not like I had receipts to present them. Funny thing is, the first time the insurance company mentioned an underwriter, the first thing that popped in to my head was: BONG.... Dead man writing... Bah gawd!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
HPL posted:Did your insurance company make you get an underwriter's report for your gear? I have a bunch of old used gear, so it's not like I had receipts to present them. No they didn't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The absolute cheapest you're going to get off for a lens that long is the Pentax 400/500 or possibly the Takumar variants. For quirky lenses, look into the Vivitar Series 1 line. Vivitar must be taught in business schools as a case study in taking a brand name from mid-high to the very bottom of the market. In the mid-80's their lenses (made by Japanese lensmakers like Komine before having the American brand name slapped on) were well-regarded as worthwhile third-party glass, but something happened in the late-80's and into the 90's and the brand entered the new millennium as a line of 35mm film point-and-shoot cameras for olds who can't figure out this new-fangled digital malarky. The name also shows up on those terrible 800-1600mm f/terrible supertele zooms, and on wide-angle or other effects that screw onto the filter ring of real lenses, and a line of such things that clip onto cellphones. This is a good place to start for Vivitar S1 information. I have the V4 non-3D version of the 70-210 in Pentax K mount, it's not very good and after my upcoming move I should dig it out of storage and sell it for beer money. That's the thing about the Vivitar S1 lenses - the best, most highly-regarded lenses wearing that brand name sell for around $200, like the V3 70-210. For whatever reason, Vivitar S1 includes several quite good macro lenses. I have the 105mm f/2.5 (again in Pentax K) and it always comes with me when I take my camera out (which is normally weekly). They made a few zooms and primes with 1:2 or 1:1 macro capability; I also have the 28-105 f/2.8 1:2 macro but I tried to fix a minor problem with it and ended up breaking it. I need to get it fixed, it's quite good fun. The 19-35mm zoom (available in either MF or AF) is also very good, I have the MF in Minolta MD mount for my X-700.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Astrophotography values wide-open performance (which is why it's so demanding), and those first-gen non-EDIF teles are really going to be pushing your luck. Like I said, I think the 300mm and 400mm AI-S Nikkor EDIFs or the 300/400mm P645/P67 EDIFs are probably going to be the minimum buy-in for acceptable flatness/CA/coma at wide apertures. That probably does come closer to $1.50-2 per mm though, and they are not quite as long. I also think the Samyang lenses destroy most of the shorter legacy glass for pure technical performance, and the prices are very reasonable for what you're getting. I love my Pentax K135/2.5 and Nikkor 105/2.5 for terrestrial photography, and they may be passable at astrophotography (never tried seriously) but you just can't expect a 70s-vintage 5/4 spherical design to keep up with a modern 11/7 design with exotic glass and aspherics like the Samyang 135/2. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Apr 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
Anyone have any experience with this tripod?: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015A2MN2A/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_ogKYAb377W6Q6 I’ve currently got some cheap-rear end abomination made by Targus, which I absolutely don’t trust to hold my 7D, so pretty anything would be a significant upgrade. I also like the notion of getting a monopod to boot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
Dude tripods are the thing you want to buy once, buy right. If you keep going for sub $100 models you'll keep having to replace them. I learned this the hard way, and after two $75 tripods it would have been cheaper than the used entry model Manfrotto that I ended up buying on eBay for $110. 6 years later going strong and I've learned my lesson.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
There's a really sharp curve with legs, everything under $100 is going to be complete poo poo. But anything over that mark is going to be pretty good. $150 legs won't be THE BEST but you'll get years of use out of them. As the price climbs it becomes a function of exotic materials, weight, and fancy features.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
Thanks. This is just the kind of guidance I was hoping for. I’ll gladly do $100-$150 if it means not having a jankity piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
We’ll be flying to the UK for Christmas, and I’d like to go up into to Yorkshire Dales to do some landscape shots. I might snag this Manfrotto travel dealy. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00COLBNTK/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_yqLYAb959VHXV
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
The crank on my Mamiya 645 1000S broke off and this is what I see And this is how it should look like:  As far as I can tell, the screws and/or the screw holes that I circled are stripped. What's the best way to fix it, even if temporarily? Is it even possible to somehow source replacement screws that size? I was thinking of maybe put a drop of superglue in each screw hole and see if it holds that way but I want a second opinion first before I try that solution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
Don't put superglue in your camera. The fumes from it will deposit everywhere, gumming up the mechanical parts and covering the optical bits with a white powder coating. If it's just the screws that are stripped, you can probably source some new ones if you know the thread and pitch for them. If the female threads are stripped then you are probably going to have to tap them out with new threads or use a thread insert to replace them. As a temporary measure, you can use some epoxy cement to hold it together but you'll want to be gentle with it until you've fixed it properly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
President Beep posted:We’ll be flying to the UK for Christmas, and I’d like to go up into to Yorkshire Dales to do some landscape shots. I might snag this Manfrotto travel dealy. Manfrotto makes decent legs but their low end heads wear out relatively quickly (like, a few years). Plus they don't use arca swiss plates because they're stubborn or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Manfrotto makes decent legs but their low end heads wear out relatively quickly (like, a few years). Plus they don't use arca swiss plates because they're stubborn or something. Piss. Any lower end (but not garbage) brands you’d recommend?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
President Beep posted:Piss. Any lower end (but not garbage) brands you’d recommend? Take a look at benro. They're as cheap as I'd go.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
President Beep posted:Piss. Any lower end (but not garbage) brands you’d recommend? Sirui is pretty decent as well, if you can source for them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Don't put superglue in your camera. The fumes from it will deposit everywhere, gumming up the mechanical parts and covering the optical bits with a white powder coating. Thanks! It was a camera that I retired after it broke right after finishing my lastproject but now I've been asked to shoot MF for a project so the epoxy cement solution is the most interesting. What do you mean exactly with that? Looking epoxy cement up at locally gives me either the resin that they pour out on floors, or binary glues. I'm assuming you meant the binary glues?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 08:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
Verman posted:Also sigma, release the 70-200 2.8 art already. It'll be a 70-200 2.8 sports though, given it's one of two standard pro lenses. alkanphel posted:Sirui Ehhhhhhhhhhhh. I tried the ballheads and was not impressed, they're minimally adequate for light gear but you have to tighten them for way too many turns until they don't sag with even a slightly heavy lens pointed at an angle. suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 11:05 on Apr 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 10:59
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!