|
Are you looking for things that take standard AAs or are you willing to put some money into getting them working? I have an old Canon G1 that works on AC but the battery has long since given up the ghost. Unfortunately it's a custom style battery so you can't just pop in AAs.
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 16:19 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:Are you looking for things that take standard AAs? I have an old Canon G1 that works on AC but the battery has long since given up the ghost. Unfortunately it's a custom style battery so you can't just pop in AAs. Things that either have chargers/hold their charge, or use a standard battery would be preferred, since really old custom batteries are hard to track down. :-/
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 03:56
|
|
|
Yeah that's what I figured; If you're hard up for a camera you're welcome to it, but it sounds like it's not what you're looking for at the moment. e: without cluttering up the thread regarding battery discussions, I can't verify that the G1 takes the standard BP511, but it seems likely so if you're interested and it turns out you can get some working batteries then go ahead and email me, martytoof at somethingawful dot com. Sounds like a noble effort and I'd be happy to donate a working camera rather than have it sit in a box under my bed until I throw it out. some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Jun 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 03:57
|
|
|
Yeah, thanks, but they have to be usable. The idea I'm floating right now is a basics workshop, and I want to have people use these basic crappy cameras so they absolutely have to focus on composition and content.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 04:01
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Things that either have chargers/hold their charge, or use a standard battery would be preferred, since really old custom batteries are hard to track down. :-/ I'm pretty sure that the G1, like my old G2, uses the BP-511 battery that a gazillion Canon cameras, including most of the DSLRS through at least the 40D (?) use. I'd happily donate some of my old off-brand BP-511s that still hold a charge.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 04:08
|
|
|
thevoiceofdog posted:Also I'm looking for a relatively inexpensive intervalometer for my Nikon d7000 iirc doesn't it have one built in? or does it not let you do shutter speeds > 30s?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
thevoiceofdog posted:Also I'm looking for a relatively inexpensive intervalometer for my Nikon d7000, are there any decent options in the $50 price range? I don't really need wireless or anything like that, but I haven't really used too many of them so I'm kinda unfamiliar with all the terminology. All I really need is the ability to control my shutter speed longer than 30sec. I have the Pentax version of this: http://www.amazon.ca/Aputure-Contra...0681410&sr=1-11 For some reason the Nikon one is 10x the price of the Canon version. Mine was like $20, more than a year ago. There's a factory somewhere in China churning these things out, they show up with different brand names but otherwise identical. Hold the button down, or slide the little holder over it and walk away. Also does timer up to 24 hours, and intervals of anywhere between 1 second and 24 hours, repeating once, a specified number up to 1000, or infinite (i.e. until the camera runs out of battery or memory space). It uses batteries about as quickly as a digital alarm clock, more or less as quickly whether it's sending a signal to a camera or not; I replaced the AAAs in mine after about 18 months. Takes up very little space in my camera bag.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 04:34
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:iirc doesn't it have one built in? or does it not let you do shutter speeds > 30s? Yeah, most of the newer Nikon DSLR's have a decent interval timer but you still can't extend the shutter past 30sec. I suppose I would also use it as a remote trigger since going through menus each time to shoot is kind of annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
thevoiceofdog posted:Yeah, most of the newer Nikon DSLR's have a decent interval timer but you still can't extend the shutter past 30sec. I suppose I would also use it as a remote trigger since going through menus each time to shoot is kind of annoying. Hahnel makes a wireless intervalometer that's like 100 bucks, kind of spendy but still less than the wired Nikon MC-36 (which won't work with your camera anyway). It comes with adapters for your camera as well as the higher end bodies that use the 10-pin connection so if you upgrade you can still use it. I'm pretty sure it can do longer than 30sec but obviously check before you buy. There seem to be some super cheap Yongnou/etc remotes out there too but the Hahnel stuff is pretty decent and will actually hold up. http://www.hahnel.ie/index.cfm?page=dslrremotecontrols&id=80&pId=80 e: sorry, didn't see you were looking for ~$50 and no wireless 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 05:51
|
|
|
Reich, you live in Portland, right? I might have one or two cameras cameras that would work for you. I could just meet up and give them to you in person.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 07:09
|
|
|
Someone gave me a monolight a while back, but I don't have a lightstand for it. What's a decent $50ish lightstand I can get for this thing? http://www.amazon.com/SP-Studio-Excalibur-Strobe-Compact/dp/B000GTNC0K 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 00:26
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Someone gave me a monolight a while back, but I don't have a lightstand for it. What's a decent $50ish lightstand I can get for this thing? Check out Impact stands. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/253069-REG/Impact_LS_96HAB_Air_Cushioned_Heavy_Duty_Light.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 00:46
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Check out Impact stands.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 13:35
|
|
|
I recently bought a Canon ELPH 300 because I didn't feel like dropping 300+ for something without more knowledge of it. It is currently my only camera. I like how fast it goes from off to ready, but I'm finding some problems already. I don't like not being able to set my shutter speed and I don't like not having manual focus. I'm also borrowing my brother's Nikon D3100 at the moment and I really like turning the lens. I dunno it's just a really cool feeling using that instead of pushing a button. I like turning knobs. I don't like the size of it. Before I make some big purchase, what are some things I should be looking for to evaluate my current camera more? My favorite photos are vivid landscapes, and that's what I want to shoot when I invest in something more than a pocket camera, but I'm still just learning. Right now I know all I can do for landscapes is set ISO to 100, focus to infinite, and click. There's gotta be more to it on the technical side than that. Eventually, for my next camera, the budget I have in mind is around 500 dollars for a low end slr or x10 or something like that. My feeling right now is I want everything to be as manual as possible while staying digital. What should I be paying attention to on my current camera to better inform my next purchase? I mean, I see a bunch of "what to look for in your first DSLR" and "what to look for in a mirrorless" but nothing to really inform me as to what type of camera would suit me to begin with. edit: Is there a "I'm a complete loving newbie" thread I missed? signalnoise fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Jun 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 15:43
|
|
|
I need a circular polarizing filter for my Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens. Do I need to get a slim version? I bought the lens used and the seller included a Tama Ultra-Slim 77mm UV filter. Which brand or specific one should I get? Also, I may want a neutral density gradient filter as well. Recommendations? Thanks for any advice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 15:45
|
|
TO UNDERAGE GYMNASTS
|
signalnoise posted:Is there a "I'm a complete loving newbie" thread I missed? It sounds like you want something that can do aperture priority and shutter priority. It also should have interchangeable lenses. That means you want a dslr or a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera (Sony NEX or micro 4/3 style). If size is an issue, perhaps mirrorless would be better for you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 16:22
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:I need a circular polarizing filter for my Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens. Do I need to get a slim version? I bought the lens used and the seller included a Tama Ultra-Slim 77mm UV filter. Which brand or specific one should I get?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:I need a circular polarizing filter for my Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens. Do I need to get a slim version? I bought the lens used and the seller included a Tama Ultra-Slim 77mm UV filter. Which brand or specific one should I get? I just picked up one of these: http://www.amazon.com/Marumi-Super-Circular-Polarizer-Filter/dp/B003QSG0HK but in a 67mm version for my Tamron 17-50. It's pretty slim, so it shouldn't vignette very much.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 01:35
|
|
|
I'm looking to purchase another lens for my Canon T1i. So far I have the 18-55 kit lens, the Canon 55-250 IS f/4-5.6, and the Canon 50 1.8. After playing around with this setup for a couple of years, I landed my first paid gig taking photos for adult sports leagues (kickball, flag football). It's a casual deal and doesn't pay a whole lot, but it should enable me to upgrade my equipment a bit. I'd like to get a lens that will produce sharper photos than the 250 zoom that I already have, in a similar range. This lens would be used for the sports photography I mentioned above, as well as wildlife photography. I'd like to keep it in the $500 range, which I know will limit my options. So far, I have my eye on the Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD as my best option. Can anyone speak to the increase in image quality a lens like this would provide over my current 250mm zoom? Are there any other options that I should consider in this price range? A really killer lens that can be had for just a bit more money? The tamron above has a rebate that expires tomorrow.. it's making me want to pull the trigger now before I've done my research!
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 02:02
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:I have a B+W Kaesemann Circular Polarizer. If I remember correctly it doesn't vignette even at 10mm on my 10-22, but I can try tonight. Please do. I looked at the slim version of the 77mm and people say it's good, but many complaints of not being to use a lens cap or that the included cap that comes with the filter is garbage because it falls off easily. The slim one is around the same price. Turd Nelson posted:I just picked up one of these: Good reviews for this one, but "it shouldn't vignette very much" isn't very reassuring. I do have a 1.6x crop camera, so maybe that helps too. Dudebro fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Jun 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 02:30
|
|
|
Stochastic posted:I'm looking to purchase another lens for my Canon T1i. So far I have the 18-55 kit lens, the Canon 55-250 IS f/4-5.6, and the Canon 50 1.8. After playing around with this setup for a couple of years, I landed my first paid gig taking photos for adult sports leagues (kickball, flag football). It's a casual deal and doesn't pay a whole lot, but it should enable me to upgrade my equipment a bit. It's nothing special. the digital picture posted:Center of the lens image quality slowly degrades through 200mm - remaining usable. Stopping down provides only slight improvement in center of the lens sharpness. Corner performance worsens by 100mm but then holds through 200mm - remaining reasonable. Again, stopping down provides only slight improvement in sharpness.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:Please do. I looked at the slim version of the 77mm and people say it's good, but many complaints of not being to use a lens cap or that the included cap that comes with the filter is garbage because it falls off easily. The slim one is around the same price. The Marumi circular polarizer is pretty much consistently rated the best for the price. When I had my 10-22, I used a B+W slimline one, which is similarly priced and also good - although not multicoated: http://www.amazon.com/77mm-Slim-Line-Circular-Polarizer/dp/B0000BZLAE It didn't add significant vignetting. Pretty much anything you put on that lens is going to increase the slight vignetting that the lens already has... but a slim filter won't actually be visible in the images.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 03:09
|
|
|
Stochastic posted:A really killer lens that can be had for just a bit more money? Define 'a bit more' The Canon 70-200L models are all highly regarded and the cheapest one isn't that far away from $500
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:Good reviews for this one, but "it shouldn't vignette very much" isn't very reassuring. I do have a 1.6x crop camera, so maybe that helps too. I haven't used it on an ultra wide, so I can't tell you how much or little it vignettes. What I was trying to convey in that post is that the marumi is a slim filter, and slim filters vignette less. Also, I am happy with my purchase but I wish I use a cpl AND a lens hood
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 07:53
|
|
|
Stochastic posted:I'm looking to purchase another lens for my Canon T1i. So far I have the 18-55 kit lens, the Canon 55-250 IS f/4-5.6, and the Canon 50 1.8. After playing around with this setup for a couple of years, I landed my first paid gig taking photos for adult sports leagues (kickball, flag football). It's a casual deal and doesn't pay a whole lot, but it should enable me to upgrade my equipment a bit. It's time for your first L - get the 70-200/4L for about $500 used and don't look back. It'll be perfectly adequate for outdoor sports.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 08:29
|
|
|
I'm in the market for a Sigma 30mm 1.4. Can I sell my 50 1.8 afterwards, or will I miss it for some reason? It's definitely awkwardly long for my purposes (walkaround and event photography). e. I should mention that I am still missing the focus on lots of low light shots at 1.8 as it is. Is the aperture drop to 1.4 going to make this significantly worse?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 09:03
|
|
|
Tshirt Ninja posted:I'm in the market for a Sigma 30mm 1.4. Can I sell my 50 1.8 afterwards, or will I miss it for some reason? It's definitely awkwardly long for my purposes (walkaround and event photography). Never trust a photographer who'd part with his nifty fifty. I doubt you'd get much for a used 50/1.8 anyway, it's best to keep it since it's still a useful portrait lens on a crop body. The 30mm will give a wider DoF at the same aperture as the 50mm, I don't think the extra half-stop will shrink it too much, but missing focus can be a combination of factors, if you're having to shoot wide open you're probably going to miss shots from time to time. You may get some benefit from getting a camera that can shoot at a higher ISO speed, then you can stop down more (or from using a flash).
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 09:44
|
|
|
Remember the Canon 50 1.8 is tiny and lightweight. The Sigma 30 1.4 is by contrast a monster (weighs the same as a Tamron 17-50)
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 09:52
|
|
|
I am going to say 'no' and 'yes' for the exact reasons that these two already posted. Walking around, you will find that the 30mm can take everything the 50mm can and more. However, if you take a lot of portraits, the 50mm is worth keeping. For the price, it is worth keeping as a very light lens to carry about when weight is an issue. As for focussing: you have to really push the 30mm to the limits to get it complaining about focus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 10:05
|
|
|
Turd Nelson posted:I haven't used it on an ultra wide, so I can't tell you how much or little it vignettes. What I was trying to convey in that post is that the marumi is a slim filter, and slim filters vignette less. Okay, I'll try it out. But are these two the same thing? I would get it from Amazon, but they don't ship this to Canada. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Marumi-77mm-CPL-77-Super-DHG-MC-Slim-Thin-PL-D-Filter-Circular-Polarizer-Japan-/190604948354#shId http://www.ebay.com/itm/Marumi-77mm-CPL-77-Super-DHG-MC-Slim-PL-D-Filter-Circular-Polarizer-Japan-EXC-/360466713275#ht_1571wt_1396 The first one is more expensive, but the only difference is the product name has "thin" in it the EXC+. The descriptions are the same. Seems like a listing error or something, but I strangely feel safer getting the one that's closer to the Amazon price. I only see one version on the Marumi website. vvvvvvvvv poo poo, I didn't even see the new/used. Thanks! Dudebro fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Jun 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 16:36
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:The first one is more expensive, but the only difference is the product name has "thin" in it the EXC+. The descriptions are the same. Seems like a listing error or something, but I strangely feel safer getting the one that's closer to the Amazon price. I only see one version on the Marumi website. The cheaper one says it was returned by a customer. I assume the other is new/unopened.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2012 17:08
|
|
|
rawrr posted:It's time for your first L - get the 70-200/4L for about $500 used and don't look back. It'll be perfectly adequate for outdoor sports. Emphasis added. I have no opinion on that lens (except that it has a good reputation 'round these parts). But, used is the way to go - especially for something like the 70-200/4L that has a clear upgrade path (70-200/2.8L) so the second-hand market will have a steady supply as other people spend their money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 07:20
|
|
|
If you need that focal length and f/4 is cool for what you're doing, that lens is nothing short of amazing. It's surprisingly light, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 11:12
|
|
|
rawrr posted:It's time for your first L - get the 70-200/4L for about $500 used and don't look back. It'll be perfectly adequate for outdoor sports. nielsm posted:Corrections and suggestions for more FAQ stuff welcome. (Maybe something about ND and POL filters?) When light is reflected off of a nonmetallic surface, such as glass, a car's paint, water, or the air and water vapor in the atmosphere, the reflected light is polarized - the reflected waves of light are oriented in the same direction. This light can be blocked partially or entirely by using a polarizing filter. There are two types of polarizing filters that are used in photography, linear and circular. The difference is linear and circular polarization is shown in this Youtube video. The most important difference is that Linear polarizers interfere with phase detection autofocus and through-the-lens metering. Unless you're manually focusing and manually setting exposure, you want a circular polarizer. Polarizing filters can be adjusted to pass, partially pass, or block polarized light. This allows you to take pictures of reflective surfaces like cars or bodies of water and cut most or all of the reflection so you can see the car's real paint color and see through the windows, see what's under the surface of the water. The other common effect is to darken the sky. Light from the sky is maximally polarized 90° from the sun. One thing to remember about a polarizing filter is that it's one of few effects that can not be replicated in post-processing. A good polarizer is an important piece of your kit if you're ever going to take pictures of anything reflective. The best bang for your buck when it comes to circular polarizers is the Marumi Super DHG CPL. Get it to fit your biggest lens (probably 67mm unless you have a Canon or Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8, in which case it's 77mm) and a set of step-down rings to fit it on the rest of your lenses. Neutral Density Filters: ND Filters reduce the amount of light that passes through them. A good ND filter does this evenly for all wavelengths, meaning it just makes your image darker without imparting any sort of color cast. Why is this important? Say you're shooting in broad daylight. The good old sunny 16 rule says that at ISO 100, you'll get a proper exposure at 1/100 and f/16. Let's say you wanted to shoot a portrait wide open at f/2.0. That's 6 stops faster, so you'd have to increase shutter speed to around 1/4000. What if your camera doesn't go that high? Or, let's say you want to shoot a long exposure of water flowing to get that smooth, silky look everyone knows, let's say 1/2 second. that's also 6 stops more light and unless you're shooting large format, your lens probably doesn't stop down that far. The solution is the Neutral Density Filter. The light reducing property of an ND Filter goes by powers of two, with each power being another stop of light reduction. 2x is one stop, 4x is two stops, 8x is three stops, and so on. Generally, you can't go wrong with B+W filters, but the quality is reflected in the price. I don't know if there are any cheaper ones that are good but still worth the price. Same goes for ND Filters as polarizers, get one to fit your biggest lens and step down rings to adapt to others. As far as primes, the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 in EF mount has a reputation for being a good fast prime, although quality control is hit-or-miss. If you're willing to accept the possibility that you might have to exchange your first one, it's great for the price.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:advice Thanks, added it to the OP. Still waiting for someone on Sony, Pentax, etc. to recommend some primes 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Thanks, added it to the OP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
Yup, Sony's 35mm f/1.8 fits the bill. $220 new, fantastic image quality, pretty much the best bang for your buck out of the Sony lineup.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Pentax primes Manual focus: SMC-M 135mm f/3.5 Cheap, light, compact, very well built. SMC-M 50mm f/1.4 As for the 135 * I own both of these lenses, and I love them on my MX, my ME Super, and on my K10D (though they look a bit goofy on the DSLR, they work well). Either lens sells for $50 or less second hand. Autofocus: SMC-FA-31mm f/1.9 AL Limited Expensive, but ridiculously sharp and an excellent focal length for 1.6 crop sensors (i.e. the entire Pentax DSLR lineup currently) SMC-FA-43mm f/1.9 Limited 43mm is close to the diagonal on the image rectange for 35mm film - the hypotenuse of the triangle with sides 24mm and 36mm. Somehow that makes it closer to a "normal" view than 50mm (or so I have been told). Also, this lens is very well regarded for sharpness and colour. SMC-FA-35mm f/2 For those wishing for the 31mm but on a tighter budget. Most of the FA-series lenses are out of production, but these three are still being made. SMC-DA-15mm f/4 ED AL Limited A very wide rectilinear prime. Landscape photographers love it. SMC-DA-35mm f/2.4 AL Cheap (around $200 new), light, well built and available in about 20 different colours including purple, pink, gold, silver, red, etc. SMC-F-50mm f/1.7 SMC-F-50mm f/1.4 SMC-FA-50mm f/1.7 SMC-FA-50mm f/1.4 (still in production) These autofocus "nifty fifties" from the 90's are pretty similar in size and optical properties (with the obvious difference between the f/1.7 and f/1.4 models). The f/1.7 prices tend to hover around $150-$200 used, while the f/1.4 push towards $400 typically. Pancakes (one of the the biggest strengths of the Pentax system, the variety of available pancake lenses): SMC-M-40mm f/2.8 Not actually very well regarded for its optical properties (it's basically middle-of-the-road), but it's tiny and thin and turns a small manual camera like the ever-popular Pentax ME into a pocketable point-and-shoot. SMC-DA-21mm f/3.2 Limited SMC-DA-40mm f/2.8 Limited SMC-DA-70mm f/2.4 Limited The three DA-series pancakes together constitute a complete set of primes for Pentax DSLRs. Wide(ish), Normal, and medium-tele, in a set that takes as much space as any one lens in that range (prime or zoom). But not cheap - hey, I said "available pancakes", nothing about their pricing structure making sense. Ultracompact: SMC-DA-40mm f/2.8 XS The "kit" lens for the mirrorless K-01 camera, in K-mount so useable on Pentax SLRs and DSLRs. Ridiculously small and light (52g, 9.2mm thick), with an oddball 27mm filter ring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 07:34
|
|
|
I'm a big fan of my 21mm Limited, it's pretty close to a 35mm wide angle on crop bodies. It never leaves the camera unless I really need a zoom. It is a bit expensive but I'd wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone who likes shooting moderately wide, it's got a bit of barrel distortion and the bokeh looks a bit funky but I love it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 10:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 16:19 |
|
|
I would like to buy a polarizing filter for my GF1's lenses. From reading the first post in this thread I believe I need a circular polarizing filter. Is this the right one? http://www.amazon.com/Marumi-67mm-Super-Filter-Japan/dp/B003QSG6SS/ Here is the 52mm, which is quite a bit cheaper. http://www.amazon.com/Marumi-DHG-Polarizer-CPL-52mm/dp/B003LCKN24/ The two lenses I have use 46mm and 52mm threads. Doing a quick search, the largest m4/3 threading size I noticed was 67mm. I think I may get the 52mm since it will cover my current lenses and who knows if/when I will get others. Am I on the right track here? Can anyone recommend 'step-down" rings? I am aiming for cheap, if you haven't noticed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 20:36
|
|
Associate Christ