|
suck my woke dick posted: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. Oh yeah I changed out the head quickly for a Markins Q3T which is pretty solid.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 11:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 10:33 |
|
|
I'll definitely give the Benro and Sirui offerings a look. Given how and what I usually shoot, whatever I do get won't see heavy use (at least initially). If and when the provided head does crap out then I'll figure out a better replacement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 12:48
|
|
|
Fragrag posted: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? Yes, Epoxy cement as opposed to epoxy resin. Look for brands like Araldite or whatever your local equivalent is. It's two parts, one adhesive and one curing compound. You put a small amount of each on a bit of scrap plastic, mix them together and then apply it to whatever you need to fix. You'll want to clean the parts with rubbing alcohol or lighter fluid beforehand too. It's not a permanent bond but it is very strong, and should hold your camera together if you handle it carefully. It also means that when you do get an opportunity for a real fix, you should be able to crack it open again and chisel off the adhesive without damaging anything else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
Blue loctite sounds like it’s exactly what you need: a sorta strong and sorta temporary fix
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
Local camera store went out of business and sold their entire stock at 50%+ discounts. Went there to stock up on M43 gear (scored a 7-14, 100-400 and 45 macro), and got this little thing at 75% off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Local camera store went out of business and sold their entire stock at 50%+ discounts. Went there to stock up on M43 gear (scored a 7-14, 100-400 and 45 macro), and got this little thing at 75% off. I am so jealous that I would want to punch your face if I didn't like you so much
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Local camera store went out of business and sold their entire stock at 50%+ discounts. Went there to stock up on M43 gear (scored a 7-14, 100-400 and 45 macro), and got this little thing at 75% off. $2500? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Local camera store went out of business and sold their entire stock at 50%+ discounts. Went there to stock up on M43 gear (scored a 7-14, 100-400 and 45 macro), and got this little thing at 75% off. jesus dude, you cleaned up
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:$2500? 25000 SEK, around 3000 USD. They go for 107,000 SEK new here. Got a 55/2,8 SDM with it. Ordered a 150/3.5 and looking for a 35 as well. So drat fun being back to using medium format with big floppy mirrors and oversized cameras. This one is built really well too (weather sealing etc) and basically acts like a large DSLR. Good button layout, articulated screen, useful high ISO etc. Love it. The files are glorious but that's to be expected. Had no intentions of buying something like this, but the conversation went something like "Oh, is that a 645D up there?" "No, it's the Z." "Oh, well, nevermind then, bit out of my budget." "How about 25k?" "Are you loving joking?" *pulls out wallet* Clayton Bigsby fucked around with this message at 14:11 on Apr 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2018 14:08
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:25000 SEK, around 3000 USD. They go for 107,000 SEK new here.  congrats, take some pictures
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2018 00:19
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
suck my woke dick posted:
Oh, been out with it quite a bit. What a machine. Took some pics of the kids with their grandparents in a darkish room at ISO 25,600 and could easily make a nice size print of that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2018 07:48
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:ISO 25,600 and could easily make a nice size print of that. That’s awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2018 11:06
|
|
|
I have no interest in shooting film, but this is sitting at a local thrift store and seems to work. Is it worth anything/enough to warrant buying it and throwing it on ebay or something?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
Javid posted:I have no interest in shooting film, but this is sitting at a local thrift store and seems to work. I'd guess if the lens is in pretty good condition, it'd fetch around 60 together. $35 for the lens, $25 for the body.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
I got a tamron 70-200 g2 in last night and gently caress I'm impressed. The image stabilization is like nothing I've ever used, the image just completely stops moving on a shutter half press. I've rented a lot of canon L lenses and their IS works but the image still kind of floats around as it tries to keep up with my wobbly hands. I think there's a wizard in this lens. Oh I guess the images look nice too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I got a tamron 70-200 g2 in last night and gently caress I'm impressed. The image stabilization is like nothing I've ever used, the image just completely stops moving on a shutter half press. I've rented a lot of canon L lenses and their IS works but the image still kind of floats around as it tries to keep up with my wobbly hands. Nice. Isn't that lens like $600 or so cheaper than the second gen L too?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
Yes. The Canon still edges out on image quality but it's very close and anyone that worries about the faint differences is one of those filthy pixel peepers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Yes. The Canon still edges out on image quality but it's very close and anyone that worries about the faint differences is one of those filthy pixel peepers. It’s the same for the Tamron 100-400.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2018 09:59
|
|
|
Hey guys, I'll be going on a snorkeling-centric vacation soon, and I am playing with the idea of doing a better job with documenting things. I've used a Canon PowerShot G15 with a Canon underwater enclosure in the past. While the images were ok, I was not impressed by the image quality in the corners. I've also used a GoPro HERO3+. While it was infinitely easier to haul around, the image quality in the corners was again lame. I'm curious what my options are. Assuming I had a $1k budget (with some flexibility), could I buy a system that gives me better images than the ones I've taken with my old gear? Or would I better off renting a more sophisticated system for 10 days? I'm not fully committed to photographing underwater on this trip. Because I will be snorkeling only (not diving) I won't be super close to the subjects. But if the technology has advanced significantly, I would not mind trying it out. How would a Olympus TG-5 compare to the Canon PS G15 and the Hero3+? How do they stack up against a Leica X-U? Thanks. theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Apr 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
I work (on land) with a crew of SCUBA divers and they have an older Olympus TG that they use for all their underwater work documentation. It takes decent pictures for sure; better than the GoPro they had been using. I had an a6000 with one of the Meikon underwater housings for a while. The Meikon (or whatever other brand name it's sold under) was perfectly watertight down to the 10ft or so I took it to on multiple snorkeling excursions. Considering the price of other third-party housings like Ikelite, the price of the Meikon is much, much cheaper. So besides just coming from China and not having any name recognition, what else keeps them so cheap? It's the lens port. The port included in the basic model is made of plastic and tends to reduce the level of detail shown vs photos you'd get with the same lens outside of the housing. And the kit lens is the only one that the port is really designed to work with. You might have luck with other lenses as long as they stick out too far and aren't too wide, but ymmv. Still, even with those limitations, the image quality is ok. You'll probably get better results shooting in available light underwater with a larger sensor camera, so an APSC a6000 at least theoretically outclasses a 1/2.3" compact sensor from the Oly TG or GoPro. You could definitely get into an a6000 with kit lens (or small prime) and Meikon underwater housing for less than $1K.   Olympus also sells its own underwater housings for OMD E-M5 and -EM1 series cameras. They're doubtlessly much better than my old setup, even though the 4/3 sensor in the OMD series is slightly smaller.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
The ease of use of a point and shoot without have to buy (and care for!) a separate underwater enclosure is a big selling point to me, and that draws me toward the Olympus TG-5 (or similar). I'm just not certain that the image quality will be better than that of my old (and now dead) Canon G15 w/ underwater enclosure. Then again, the price is low enough that I can just try it and know that even if IQ is average, the camera can take a beating better than other cameras. The Leica X-U looks sexy as hell, but I read that the autofocus is slow and that you can't fully open the aperture when shooting at close range, even in manual mode. While a fully open aperture is not needed for snorkeling (constant motion and shallow DOF don't mix well), I would want to have that capability in other situations. The fixed lens is also a bummer at that price it commands. Oh well, another $3k not spent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 06:02
|
|
|
There's also the Nikon 1 AW1 that came out a few years ago. I've heard the autofocus on the Nikon 1 system is pretty quick and its got a 1 inch sensor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 11:39
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I work (on land) with a crew of SCUBA divers and they have an older Olympus TG that they use for all their underwater work documentation. It takes decent pictures for sure; better than the GoPro they had been using. I can't shake this image of you working in an office environment, surrounded by colleagues wearing neoprene, masks and fins as they do their photocopying and filing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 12:14
|
|
|
Ziggy Smalls posted:There's also the Nikon 1 AW1 that came out a few years ago. I've heard the autofocus on the Nikon 1 system is pretty quick and its got a 1 inch sensor. A couple of user reviews on amazon talk about the camera flooding. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
Dammit, AW1! You had ONE job to do!
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 17:10
|
|
|
President Beep posted:Dammit, AW1! You had ONE job to do! And it doesn't have image stabilization either. Looks like I'll pick up an Olympus TG-5.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:And it doesn't have image stabilization either. Looks like I'll pick up an Olympus TG-5. Ive really enjoyed the combination of my RX100V and Sony’s URX100a housing. It’s great quality and you have access to everything but the rear control wheel. The housing will fit any RX100, so you could combine it with a III or IV and come in under $1k, especially if you wait for the frequent sales on the housing where it dips to about $280.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
Since the tripod thread is ancient and archived, what's babby's first decent tripod these days? I need it to keep a D700 and telephoto/macro lenses stable, so 2-3kg I'd guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
JSW2 posted:Ive really enjoyed the combination of my RX100V and Sony’s URX100a housing. It’s great quality and you have access to everything but the rear control wheel. The housing will fit any RX100, so you could combine it with a III or IV and come in under $1k, especially if you wait for the frequent sales on the housing where it dips to about $280. I have only used one underwater housing and it was the one for my Canon G15. I found that after a few days of using it, a drop of water would inevitably dry out on the dry side of the housing. It was impossible to clean off (my hands couldn't reach it - I think) and it left a mark that resulted in vignetting in all future images. It was not catastrophic, but for a snob as myself it was obviously visible in all the images. Is the Sony underwater enclosure easier to maintain? Is it ok if I don't immediately wash the enclosure with fresh water after exiting ocean water? I really don't want my vacation to be hijacked by gear maintenance. theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Apr 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
the yeti posted:Since the tripod thread is ancient and archived, what's babby's first decent tripod these days? I need it to keep a D700 and telephoto/macro lenses stable, so 2-3kg I'd guess. This may prove to be ill advised, but I picked up a Neewer 66” carbon fiber jobbie for $100. Needs suiting so far, but all I’ve used before was those god awful things that cost like $15.  One of the legs unscrews to use as a monopod, which, along with the build material, was one of the big draws.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
the yeti posted:Since the tripod thread is ancient and archived, what's babby's first decent tripod these days? I need it to keep a D700 and telephoto/macro lenses stable, so 2-3kg I'd guess. How much are you looking to spend? Tripods generally fall under the "buy once, cry once" category where you'll eventually buy a fairly decent one so may as well get it right away and enjoy it rather than spending 2x as much on inferior ones to eventually arrive at it. So get a nice Gitzo. You've earned it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:How much are you looking to spend? Tripods generally fall under the "buy once, cry once" category where you'll eventually buy a fairly decent one so may as well get it right away and enjoy it rather than spending 2x as much on inferior ones to eventually arrive at it. Yeah that's my understanding as well, and I def have gone through a few 20-50 dollar ones. If I could get a ball head with a deec quick release (think I read the Manfrotto ones suck?) & aluminum legs and get out for less than 300 bucks I'd be happy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
Manfrotto heads are mostly outdated now, but they have one outstandingly good one, the X-Pro ballhead with the Arca-compatible (not the Manfrotto proprietary) option. Legs I'd recommend anything Feisol, though with the Manfrotto X-Pro they'd probably slightly bust your budget.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:Is the Sony underwater enclosure easier to maintain? Is it ok if I don't immediately wash the enclosure with fresh water after exiting ocean water? I really don't want my vacation to be hijacked by gear maintenance. I’ve not had any issues at all in cleaning or maintaining the Sony housing, though I will say I’ve yet to try and find a replacement O ring — though it’s a super simple thing to take it out and grease it so I doubt that will be a struggle. The port is reachable even with my fat fingers, so if something does get inside I don’t foresee any difficulty in cleaning. I’ve not had anything like your experience happen though that necessitated it. We’re not the most diligent in dunking it in fresh water and it’s gone a couple hours before. No bad effects yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
JSW2 posted:I’ve not had any issues at all in cleaning or maintaining the Sony housing, though I will say I’ve yet to try and find a replacement O ring — though it’s a super simple thing to take it out and grease it so I doubt that will be a struggle. The port is reachable even with my fat fingers, so if something does get inside I don’t foresee any difficulty in cleaning. I’ve not had anything like your experience happen though that necessitated it. Thanks. I went ahead with the TG-5. The sample images online seemed perfectly fine. While the Sony would have a much better IQ I just didn't want to mess with an enclosure. The Nikon had lousy reviews regarding water resistance and menu navigation, and it lacked IS (though it did have better images than the TG-5), the Sealife DC2000 had poor reviews regarding build quality, and the Leica was missing IS, an interchangeable lens, and full manual control (=hard pass at the price point) although I thought the IQ was fantastic. theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Apr 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
JSW2 posted:Ive really enjoyed the combination of my RX100V and Sony’s URX100a housing. It’s great quality and you have access to everything but the rear control wheel. The housing will fit any RX100, so you could combine it with a III or IV and come in under $1k, especially if you wait for the frequent sales on the housing where it dips to about $280. That's cool I didn't know Sony made an underwater housing for the RX100. I bet that's a nice combo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
I use a gopro for snorkeling but I would gladly use a housing for my Rx100 ii instead. It takes much better photos and video than my go pro (hero 3?). It also shoots in raw for more powerful editing. Get a red underwater filter though and save yourself editing time. Do wash your housings the day you use it. Salt water can make things gross and crusty very fast. Even just running a bottle of water over it, rinsing it out in the sink or taking it in the shower helps. It's the barrier between water and your expensive camera. Take care if it unless you want your camera to be ruined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
I’d have to dig out my tripod because I haven’t used it in a while but it was nice and had a swivel arm too. I want to say it was through adorama or something. Had three options of heads and I chose pistol grip.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:Manfrotto heads are mostly outdated now, but they have one outstandingly good one, the X-Pro ballhead with the Arca-compatible (not the Manfrotto proprietary) option. Yeah, they do lol. Are these any good? Or is that head literally the only deec thing Manfrotto makes anymore?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 10:33 |
|
|
I’ve had a set of manfrotto 055xprob legs for something like 10 years and have no complaints. Not sure how they compare to the newer stuff but while I hated the head the legs seem good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2018 02:22
|
|
