|
VoodooXT posted:There's always the Sigma Art 105mm f/1.4. 
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
My friend shoots with the 20-40-105mm 1.4 Art combo..
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 08:23
|
|
|
35 + 85 is the most popular prime combo in the wedding world for two cameras and zero lens swapping for a full day. It’s my setup most of the time as well, and I rarely feel like I need wider or longer.. I don’t know how folks two body with the 24-70 and 70-200 on their shoulders all day. I usually only pull out the 16 for dance floor stuff and the 70-200 for the ceremony and in both cases I out the other body down so I can move easier. I have a friend that shoots 95% of his wedding work on a 50 with one body and I envy that dedication and simplicity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 08:39
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:My friend shoots with the 20-40-105mm 1.4 Art combo.. idk if I could swallow going wider than 85mm, and also couldn’t justify a 85mm given i’ve already gotten a 135mm and they’re similar enough that I’d feel like it was a waste of time if a photo needs a wider lens …. someone else can take it imo
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 08:56
|
|
|
as Bottom Liner can attest, I am a clown of a photographer and I absolutely cannot take a good photo with a wide lens. idk how proper do it for a while I shot with a canon 100mm f/2.8 macro and tbf I took some photo I am very happy with, but the 135mm is better
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 08:58
|
|
|
Learn a new skill goddamn
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 09:00
|
|
|
Seriously, buy a 50 and leave the 135 at home one day and just make it work. Go for a walk and try it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 09:01
|
|
|
Megabound posted:Seriously, buy a 24 and leave the 135 at home one day and just make it work. Go for a walk and try it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 09:18
|
|
|
How many shutter actuations is too many for a used mirrorless camera?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 14:04
|
|
|
Depends on the camera? Panasonic says the S1 series is Good for like 300-400k frames. I’m close to 10k? after buying the camera in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 14:14
|
|
|
What are you shooting subject-wise? I feel like 50mm is too narrow lots of times and I’m eyeing a 28mm prime on ebay
Beve Stuscemi fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Oct 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 14:32
|
|
|
Ropes4u posted:How many shutter actuations is too many for a used mirrorless camera? Also depends on how shutter actuations are counted. Some (all?) only count the actuations of the mechanical shutter, so it is perfectly possible to get a camera "with a low number" even though the rest of the camera saw a lot of use/abuse. I should also add that MPB sold me a camera in excellent condition that turned out to have extensive corrosion from apparent water damage which was only visible once I started disassembling the camera body.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
Am I misunderstanding mirrorless cameras or do they not have a shutter? I know some like the fujis have a mechanical leaf shutter, but I thought most didn’t? At that point aren’t shutter activations just analogous to “number of reads from the sensor”?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
Depends. My Panasonic has a mechanical shutter, but it can be used in electrical shutter mode. Nikon Z9 has only electrical one, so no mechanical at all. Personally I can’t decide so I often carry many lenses. Yesterday I had a 24,50 and 85mm with me when photographing an event. Gala? Something like that. As a general lens I’d recommend 35mm if you can’t decide what to take, or don’t know what to buy, but must choose only one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Beve Stuscemi posted:Am I misunderstanding mirrorless cameras or do they not have a shutter? I know some like the fujis have a mechanical leaf shutter, but I thought most didn’t? Even if there’s no mechanical movement sensor time is a thing. That’s why cine cams measure shooting hours as a gauge. That said, plenty of twitch streamers use mirrorless cams as high end web cams and run them for thousands of hours. Mirrorless should last a good bit longer than DSLRS could hope to on average. Ihmemies posted:. As a general lens I’d recommend 35mm if you can’t decide what to take, or don’t know what to buy, but must choose only one. Yup, 35mm is my do it all and favorite focal length. I would pick it as my only lens if I had to with no hesitation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 15:29
|
|
|
It sounds like the $725 vs $937 for an extra 20,000+ actuations isn’t worth it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 15:35
|
|
|
The vast majority of mirrorless cameras have a shutter; it’s just the mirror and prism they don’t have. Usually the mechanical shutters have an actuation rating and they aren’t that different from dslr counts cause the shutter is similar. Notable exceptions being the z8 and z9.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 17:25
|
|
|
Oh, I did not know that. I assumed it was just a bare sensor behind a lens and when you want to take a pic it just reads from the sensor. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
You can do that, it's known as electronic shutter and it comes with upsides and downsides. The upsides is much faster image capture rate, no shutter slap, and it's quieter. The downsides is you can get rolling shutter effects, like the warped propeller photos that sometimes get passed around online. Mechanical shutters avoid that because it can collect light for a set amount of time and then close the shutter so the camera can read out the sensor in a leisurely fashion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 19:47
|
|
|
Yeah, some mirrorless cameras have faster sensor readout times that are important for video to stop the rolling shutter effect. For sports and birding, shooting full electronic is also a trade off because of that effect that can show up. IIRC on Canon R line you only get 12 bit color in full electronic as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
Megabound posted:Seriously, buy a 50 and leave the 135 at home one day and just make it work. Go for a walk and try it out. I have a 50 one of those canon 50mm f/1.8 usm things. i know it’s not a great lens but it’s OK and gives that perspective I used to pull it out often, especially when I found a scene I liked to get a different perspective. it always sucked (my photos) but maybe just for you I’ll give it another try, see if the 76th time is a charm e: in fact I might even post the photos echinopsis fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Oct 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Yeah, some mirrorless cameras have faster sensor readout times that are important for video to stop the rolling shutter effect. For sports and birding, shooting full electronic is also a trade off because of that effect that can show up. IIRC on Canon R line you only get 12 bit color in full electronic as well. I think the Canon R cameras read out native 14 bit in mechanical, but get reduced to 12 bit in electronic shutter? That's the general notion I've heard - electronic shutter has reduced dynamic range vs mechanical. I have no idea what the actual mechanics are behind that tho so take that with a grain of salt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
ishikabibble posted:I think the Canon R cameras read out native 14 bit in mechanical, but get reduced to 12 bit in electronic shutter yeah, at least the r5 and 6 do. In practice its not a big deal unless you need to push shadows a lot. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Oct 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
am I correct in thinking that log video is for the purpose of trying to fit the higher dynamic range the camera can take into the more limited dynamic range of the video format? and that if your scene fits in the histogram without log enabled, then log is not only pointless but reduces the effective bit depth of the data you do have?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
No, it's the opposite. At 10 bit and above, log will get you more color data and dynamic range. Think of it as raw for video (RAW video being a different thing entirely). 10 bit 4:2:2 log is the minimum standard for most production now. If your camera can't do 10 bit, then Rec709 is probably the better option. It also matters what codec you're shooting, as RAW vs Prores vs h.264 etc are going to affect all of this. Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Oct 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2023 23:31
|
|
|
ishikabibble posted:I have no idea what the actual mechanics are behind that tho so take that with a grain of salt. It's just a limitation of how fast they can pull data off the sensor. 12 bits is ~14% less data than 14 bits so apparently that's the amount of overhead they have to cut to hit the absurd fps that the electronic shutter can produce.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:No, it's the opposite. At 10 bit and above, log will get you more color data and dynamic range. Think of it as raw for video (RAW video being a different thing entirely). 10 bit 4:2:2 log is the minimum standard for most production now. If your camera can't do 10 bit, then Rec709 is probably the better option. It also matters what codec you're shooting, as RAW vs Prores vs h.264 etc are going to affect all of this. ok so the bit depth is the most important factor disregarding encoding? I thought and maybe this is too simplistic, was a way to squeeze a higher dynamic range onto a smaller dynamic range (the video codec), and done on a curve to preserve the more important parts of the image, and then in post you reverse it to get back close to the original, but also with flexibility to deal with highlights and shadows coz they weren’t clipped ok .. better question I suppose : are there cases where using log is a worse idea?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
Bottom Liner posted:At 10 bit and above, log will get you more color data and dynamic range
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 00:39
|
|
|
hmm
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:ok so the bit depth is the most important factor disregarding encoding? There are a couple things going on with log in reference to video, and it is sorta related to fitting data in but not quite in the way you'd described. For one, the image you get in post after putting a LUT on a log file or adjusting the curves isn't "reversing to the original" — non-log image with a baked in Rec.709 look or whatever isn't what the camera originally saw — it's also gone through processing and curves. Secondly, the data file's relation to dynamic range is more about what parts of the image you're putting information to vs. being able to fit the extents. Like, even if your file only had black or white, you could set those to be the furthest extent of the sensor and capture the camera's full dynamic range. But of course those steps in the middle matter, and the log curve is about taking the image the camera sensor sees and using the available data where it does the most good. The main reason we use log curves is because cameras see linearly (and our eyes don't) and if you encode that directly you spend a lot of data on gradations on the highlight end of the image and comparitively not much on the shadow end. That doesn't map well to how we see the world with our eyes. This page has some good discussion of it: https://cinematography.com/index.php?/forums/topic/50062-gamma-curve-and-log/ From that link: quote:Let’s assume that we want to capture an 8 stops image from a sensor that has 12 bits internal processing that’s 4096 steps of light intensity to an 8bit compressed H264 file that’s 256 steps like a 5D camera is doing. Again, from that link, here's sorta what it winds up looking like with linear grayscale at the top and log at the bottom:  When you record the log version, you get a lot more detail where it counts, but when spread the data like that if you look at it without a LUT it'll seem washed out. But a linear file would also look "wrong," just in a different way. The finished out of the box image you think of as normal has a different curve too. As for when you wouldn't use LOG or it causes problems, in cameras that have lower bit depth files you can wind up with color banding that looks nasty. This was a thing that'd happen on FS5s a lot I recall. Otherwise not shooting in log is more about saving time in post with a closer to finished image.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
I've been shooting film for a couple of weeks on a Pentax ME Super. Its been going well (I think? I havent gotten any of my negatives back yet) and I've been enjoying the ME Super immensely. However, the Pentax has broken me. I went back to my Canon EOS T3i today, and it is now nearly impossible for me to focus. The split circle focusing mechanism in the ME Super is so, SO good. The canon has nothing like that. I basically only have the back screen and a 5x or 10x zoom option for it. The problem is that the screen on the back isnt so great for starters, and its hard to see in daylight, and there is no in-body stabilization (I'm shooting with the Pentax lenses on it), making focusing a chore. The T3i isnt long for this world though, and I'm considering replacing it with a Fujifilm X-E1, which I understand has focus peaking, the next best thing to an in-eyepiece focusing screen. Does anyone know if the Fuji does the focus peaking in the EVF? I'd rather not have to look at the back screen to focus at all anymore after being able to completely focus through the OVF on the ME Super.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
Does anyone have a recommendation for a waist pack for lens swapping? I think I'm looking for a belt system that will keep easy access around my front as I have a 2 strap harness setup for my cameras on my sides so I need my sides free and a back/sling strap won't work. I'm not opposed to a sling in front if the angle isn't too bad for swapping a 70-200 2.8 in and out. Also needs to be able to hold a 24-70 2.8 and a prime.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 19:36
|
|
|
Beve Stuscemi posted:The T3i isnt long for this world though, and I'm considering replacing it with a Fujifilm X-E1, which I understand has focus peaking, the next best thing to an in-eyepiece focusing screen. Does anyone know if the Fuji does the focus peaking in the EVF? I'd rather not have to look at the back screen to focus at all anymore after being able to completely focus through the OVF on the ME Super. From this article, it sounds like you can use it with the EVF or rear screen: https://cameragroove.com/how-to-use-focus-peaking-on-the-fuji-x-e1/ That would match how the X-T2 works where the EVF and rear screen always (or pretty much always?) show the same information.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 19:52
|
|
|
Cognac McCarthy posted:From this article, it sounds like you can use it with the EVF or rear screen: Awesome, thats what I was hoping for
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
Cognac McCarthy posted:From this article, it sounds like you can use it with the EVF or rear screen: Yup, and newer models allow for different colors to be the peak highlights (red/yellow) if you need. The nature of the ‘what you see is what you get’ EVF and rear screen are real nice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 03:51
|
|
|
Big shout out to mpb.com. I bought a manfrotto 561HBDV monopod from them in “good” condition (it was the only one they had, so I had no other choice). It’s basically brand new. I can’t see any wear marks on it at all. I thought that “good” would have more wear, but I’m not gonna complain also, this might be the nicest piece of camera gear I’ve ever owned. It’s super beefy and way overbuilt for what I’m gonna use it for, but that means it shouldn’t get too beat up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2023 00:29
|
|
|
So I think I want to move to DXO PhotoLab from Lightroom. I played around with it a little bit the other night and its noise reduction algorithm seems incredible. My desktop computer is a bit too old (2010 Mac Pro 5,1) to run the latest versions though. I recently bought a 2020 M1 MacBook Air with the intention of using it for mobile photo culling/editing (which is the machine I played around with the new DXO on). I've edited a few batches of photos using Lightroom on this machine and I do notice they tend to come out different than my desktop; it's a bit more difficult to nail down exposure and tone balance. What am I doing wrong here? I think I've disabled any sort of 'dynamic brightness' or other screen adjustments, and I've got one of those DataColor Spyder things that I've briefly used to calibrate the laptop and my big 4K at home - colour profiles do escape me, so it's possible I'm not using the ideal one. Is the MacBook Air's screen just not great for photo editing; should I stick to mobile culling and wait to do the editing at home? Thanks for your help. EDIT: It literally just occurred to me that I can connect the MacBook to the auxiliary input on my 4K monitor. So I'll be moving around some files and juggle some HDMI/USB ports like a neanderthal, but can ultimately edit pics with the laptop but at home. I'd still like to get its screen as dialed-in as possible though, in case I do need to do it on the road. Mister Speaker fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Oct 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2023 21:49
|
|
|
powderific posted:There are a couple things going on with log in reference to video, and it is sorta related to fitting data in but not quite in the way you'd described. For one, the image you get in post after putting a LUT on a log file or adjusting the curves isn't "reversing to the original" — non-log image with a baked in Rec.709 look or whatever isn't what the camera originally saw — it's also gone through processing and curves. thanks man that was enlightening
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 12:07
|
|
|
there's probably a conversation in this thread that already answers my question, so please link me to it if so. in any case, here goes: -- What you are looking to buy i got rid of my smartphone, so a digital camera that fits comfortably in my pocket. it does not need to be of the highest quality, but obviously the higher quality, the better. i am just looking to take some simple, non-staged photos while on vacation or out hiking. it will not be on me at all times. i hate instagram and will not upload these anywhere. maybe i'll send some select shots to friends after vacation. it will not need bluetooth or video or anything beyond being a still-photography camera. something absolutely simple and does one thing and does it reasonably well. i basically want a compact/ultracompact phone from before smartphones and everything tried to get 'smart'. something simple. i am not a photographer or ever want to be. i really don't have that good of an eye or anything. again, just wanting to take random photos on outings with my family and friends where a photo might be fun. when i did have a smartphone, i took like...200 photos/yr? and half of those were me taking photos of things i wanted to sell on craiglist, at least. so yea, an amateur of amateurs. Budget less than 500, ideally, but will pay if it's the correct fit. i also do not mind used or old so long as i can trust the seller. just something that meets the above. Your photo gear you already have i have some sd-cards around, but no lenses or batteries or anything like that. What you plan on using your purchase for answered in first one. What you find limiting about what you have now everything--i have nothing. -- hopefully that helps? can clarify whatever. thanks in advance! abelwingnut fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Nov 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
The Sony RX100 series might be worth a look. It's a compact point-and-shoot, so should fit in a pocket. Image quality won't be as good as something with a bigger sensor, but it's small. There's like 7 different generations of it available, so look into buying a used one that fits your budget. If you're in the US, trustworthy used sites are places like KEH, MPB, B&H and Adorama. If you're in the EU, I think it's pretty much just MPB, possibly CVP?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2023 21:39
|
|
