|
Soopafly posted:Sony already does that with some things like in-camera double exposures. 
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
The only best thing about the D3XXX series is that you can get used ones for cheap because everyone winds up selling theirs down the line - either to move up to a better camera or because the photography thing didn't work out for them.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
AfricanBootyShine posted:The only best thing about the D3XXX series is that you can get used ones for cheap because everyone winds up selling theirs down the line - either to move up to a better camera or because the photography thing didn't work out for them. this but with rebel T(number)i cameras. i got a t5i body for $270
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
landgrabber posted:this but with rebel T(number)i cameras. i got a t5i body for $270 That's a good deal. Got my
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
President Beep posted:That's a good deal. it's definitely a buyer's market for sure. being a Gear Starved Teen is oddly satisfying when you realize that you can buy an older version of a sweet lens with this year's birthday amazon giftcard
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I would generally avoid recommending entry level DSLRs as the usability is deliberately crippled despite the on-paper stats. If you must go for a DSLR, you'll get a much better camera by going for a used/refurb model from a range or two above (for Nikon, this would be the 5xxx/7xxx range). Yeah, I was looking at my first DSLR about a month ago, and I was sold on going 5xxx over 3xxx as I figured it would give me a little more room to grow. It wasn't going to be an immediate purchase, but for the future. Then I was given a D3400 two lens kit, so I'd say I'm pretty drat lucky. I've been running around shooting everything in my path (mostly in manual mode), reading/watching as much as I can. I'm really trying to make the most of it. Right now, I'm trying to figure out what my next steps towards being camera poor will be. The timeframe is over the next year or two. My next purchase may become more obvious as I keep shooting, but for now I think it will be a tripod. There have been a few instances where I wanted to shoot in lower light but I didn't want to push the ISO any higher. Nothing was moving, so a lower shutter speed would've been fine apart from my shaky hands. I'm also most interested in landscape photography, but I think it's way too early to ~*specialize*~ in anything. After that, I might go for a wide angle lens? I've found that I tend to lean on the telephoto more than I thought I would, but I haven't had an opportunity to do anything big and landscape-y yet. Anyway, when I figure out what I want, what sort of price range should I shoot for? My thinking now is to get something disproportionately nice for the body, so that if/when I upgrade, it will make sense to keep using it. If I burn out on photography, then I'll probably have figured that out before I buy a new lens anyway. Is that reasonable? Any other thoughts on the progression of gear/stuff to get early on? Oh, and is there anything I should know about lens/camera care and maintenance that's not super obvious?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
Tripod is an important second upgrade. And yes, budget as much as you can on each lens purchase. It'll somewhat lock you into that system but if you stick with the hobby a quality lens will last you your whole life while a few bucks saved now will be wasted when you slam into the limitations in a year. Expensive lenses hold value way better too so if you drop the hobby you'll get a little bit more back in your wallet. I'd personally go for super tele first, hit that 400mm barrier before going ultra wide. But it all depends on what your goals are.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 01:03
|
|
|
I'd say also consider a constant aperture "normal zoom". Sigma and Tamron both make dated but very sharp 17-50 2.8s with image stabilisation. It'll let you take lower light photos without a tripod up to a certain point.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
Buy a cheap flash your can bounce off the ceiling or wall.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
The single most important thing you can buy for a Nikon camera is the Nikon 35mm f/1.8
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 07:38
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:The single most important thing you can buy for a Nikon camera is the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 It really bothers me that there's no Canon equivalent for this lens in terms of budget affordability. Everyone recommends the Nifty 50 1.8 but it's such an awkward focal length prime to shoot with for crop sensors.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 08:56
|
|
|
There's a Yongnuo 35mm f/2 for less than a hundo, I have no idea how good it is mind. But yeah, the equivalent first party lens is also an f/2 and is $550 or there's an f/2.8 macro for $300.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 10:01
|
|
|
Warheart525 posted:Oh, and is there anything I should know about lens/camera care and maintenance that's not super obvious? Others have already answered your "what should I lust after" questions, so I'll tackle this one. No It's all obvious. In fact, your camera is probably tougher than you think, and can handle a bit of wetness, a few knocks, and just generally being treated like "life happens".
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 14:09
|
|
|
Only time I killed a DSLR is leaving it in a car in the sun. It was in there for 20 minutes tops but that was enough to fry something internally. Mud, seawater, sand, dust, none of my bodies have given a poo poo about getting any of that splattered on it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 14:19
|
|
|
Anybody know anything about Minolta adaptors? I was looking at upgrade lenses for my Pentax k-r and found out my Dad had an old Minolta with a couple manual lenses. I think like a 50mm, a 100m, and a 2x lens. I thought it might be worth getting an adaptor, but looking through the lenses (on the Minolta body) I can't even figure out how to work them. Like, there's a weird little bifocal circle in the middle, I assume as a manual focusing aid? So, I dunno. The online info I found about adaptors was mixed/conflicting. Also the lens cap fell apart when I touched it, ha ha.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:There's a Yongnuo 35mm f/2 for less than a hundo, I have no idea how good it is mind. But yeah, the equivalent first party lens is also an f/2 and is $550 or there's an f/2.8 macro for $300. I've got both the 50mm and the 24mm pancake. I wonder if there'd be much utility in purchasing something like that that's in between. I suppose it all comes down to individual use case...
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Anybody know anything about Minolta adaptors? I was looking at upgrade lenses for my Pentax k-r and found out my Dad had an old Minolta with a couple manual lenses. I think like a 50mm, a 100m, and a 2x lens. I dunno about adapters, but I'd say take off the lense and look through it. The bifocal circle was a manual focus aid, but was built into the bodies themselves (specifically, above the mirror in an SLR) and not the lens.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:I dunno about adapters, but I'd say take off the lense and look through it. The bifocal circle was a manual focus aid, but was built into the bodies themselves (specifically, above the mirror in an SLR) and not the lens. I guess that makes sense, or it would be in all the pictures.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 15:58
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:The single most important thing you can buy for a Nikon camera is the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 Why?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
Cheap, fast, and has the same rough view point as your eyes. It’s a good lens. I personally prefer the 50mm/1.8 and I replaced my 35mm with the Sigma 18-35mm as I like the extra wide angle that gives me.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Anybody know anything about Minolta adaptors? I was looking at upgrade lenses for my Pentax k-r and found out my Dad had an old Minolta with a couple manual lenses. I think like a 50mm, a 100m, and a 2x lens. That "weird little bifocal circle" is indeed an aid for manual focusing. You "work" the lenses by twisting the rings on the lens body - a prime lens will have 2, one for focusing (probably bigger, and obvious, and located near the middle of the lens), the other for aperture (thinner, and right up against the camera body). Zoom lenses may have a third ring, for controlling focal length, or may be "one-touch" and have a ring that controls focus (by rotating) and zoom by sliding along the length of the lens. Adjusting aperture does not appear to do anything, because even though you are changing the size of the aperture setting the aperture itself doesn't physically close down to the selected size until the shutter button is pushed and the mirror flips up. With the lens off the body you can see it work by moving the aperture lever - it's sticking out of the lens and interacts with parts inside the camera body when mounted. Your lenses might say "automatic" on them somewhere, because this action is automatic. It has nothing to do with focus. Even older lenses lacked this feature, and moving the aperture ring caused obvious darkening or brightening of the image when looking through the viewfinder. To put those lenses on your K-r you'd need an adaptor that included it's own glass lens to allow focusing at infinity, in addition to the necessary shape and moving parts to physically connect one side to a Minolta MD-mount lens and the other to a Pentax KAF-mount body. That adaptor is almost certainly quite expensive assuming you can find one for sale, and every additional piece of glass in a camera system has a chance to degrade image quality - not that those old Minolta lenses are likely to be stellar performers in any case.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Alrighty, I guess I'll have to find a different way to buy extremely cheap lenses. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Heresy! Minolta beercan lenses are the greatest lenses in the world! (Minolta and Sony share the “Sony Minolta A mount” mounting system, and the very serviceable Sony A33 with Focus peaking can be found for £100 if that helps)
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:That "weird little bifocal circle" is indeed an aid for manual focusing. My wife has an old Vivitar SLR with this setup. The two half-circles are clear, with the rest of the viewfinder frosted, if I remember right. I thought it was a pretty cool way to handle manual focusing. It was really easy to tell when you were in focus--just line up the two halves. When we got our first DSLR, I bought an adapter for our old 135mm Focal MC. It was a real bitch to manually focus that on a newer body, as you don't have that same frosted effect in the viewfinder to help you adjust.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
The good news is your K-r can wear and happily shoot with any K-mount lens going back to the invention of the K-mount in the early 1970's, and further back with cheap and readily available m42-mount adaptors for screwmount lenses. Push the magic green button and you don't have any issues with light metering. Pentax built in the backwards compatibility on purpose, and I love them for it. Browse the marketplace at PentaxForums.com, some lovely old M Series lenses routinely show up for quite reasonable prices. Real quick breakdown, from old to new:
For cheap lenses, look for M- and A-Series manual focus lenses. Except for some fairly rare stuff like the big supertelephotos, you'll have tons of options for under $200. I picked up a M-50/1.7 and a M-135/3.5 for $100 for the pair from a local seller a few years ago, and my K-5 has no trouble with them. I've also got a F-28/2.8 I got for $120 and a couple of rather cheap FA-series consumer zooms. A large number of third-party brands were slapped onto lenses with K-mounts, I'm especially fond of the old Vivitar Series 1 line of macro lenses. Some of those lenses came with film cameras, often a body and two zooms for like $60. Like your father, sometimes people clean out part of the house and discover an old film SLR and decide to get rid of it for cheap. Sometimes people are completely loving delusional and think their 30-year-old consumer-grade mass-produced paperweight is worth as much as it cost them in 1989, leaking batteries notwithstanding. learnincurve posted:Heresy! Minolta beercan lenses are the greatest lenses in the world! ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 20:47 on May 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Thank you for the excellent summary! And yes, Dad's lenses are manual.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
Also most old M42 lenses can be used on an full frame camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 13:48
|
|
|
All M42 lenses were designed for 'full-frame' cameras because the 36x24 film frame was the standard for 35mm analogue cameras. Smaller formats like half-frame or 110 generally didn't have interchangeable lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
I posted in this thread a year or so ago when I got my T6i and you guys gave me some good feedback. I haven't shot much lately due to lovely life stuff but I want to put some focus back into photography again. As a kick in the rear end would anyone be interested in checking out my flickr again and giving me some more pointers? https://www.flickr.com/photos/curbjumpinss/
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
my turn in the barrel posted:As a kick in the rear end would anyone be interested in checking out my flickr again and giving me some more pointers? yeah, those pictures of a fox carrying a spine are pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
I think that's a wolf or coyote. It was in Yellowstone and he was quite a ways off crossing a frozen lake. I'm assuming he found/killed a deer and was taking it back to his den. The fact it was frozen makes me think he scavenged it. I slapped my friends Canon 400mm on my T6i and got pretty close and cropped in a bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
Those are some very good photos. Cross post a handful of your favourites to the wildlife thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
Fair sure that's a coyote, based on the pointy ears and long snout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
What exactly can I expect out of rain tolerance for camera equipment? I live in very rainy area (PNW) but I'm a little concerned I might have to shelve things for a good portion of the year. Is the best I can do just mitigation? I would like the option of taking shots in the rain, but is it something only recommended in cover? Also, to what extent is "weather sealing" a guaranteed/very real thing? I'm seeing a bunch of back and forth through googling where people are being predictably disagreeable about its relevance or actual strength. I know as an entry into the hobby it's probably not the first thing to be asking, and obviously something I can work towards financially should it really sit with me, but I figured I'd ask anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 07:08
|
|
|
Pretty much any DSLR is fine in light rain. Just try to protect them as much as you can while you aren't shooting. If you're worried you can stick them in a small plastic bag with the lens sticking out. If you go for the higher end cameras with weather sealing they can easily handle heavy rain, though they do caution that they are technically only weather sealed when used with weather sealed lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 07:57
|
|
|
If you're real worried there's a few options out there for rain jackets for your camera.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 13:16
|
|
|
Kalsco posted:What exactly can I expect out of rain tolerance for camera equipment? I live in very rainy area (PNW) but I'm a little concerned I might have to shelve things for a good portion of the year. Is the best I can do just mitigation? I would like the option of taking shots in the rain, but is it something only recommended in cover? Also, to what extent is "weather sealing" a guaranteed/very real thing? I'm seeing a bunch of back and forth through googling where people are being predictably disagreeable about its relevance or actual strength. I know as an entry into the hobby it's probably not the first thing to be asking, and obviously something I can work towards financially should it really sit with me, but I figured I'd ask anyway. I’m in the PNW and I take my camera everywhere all the time. For light-moderate rain I just stick it under my jacket when I’m not actively shooting. For heavier rain I’ll use one of those rain cover things. I’m more likely to not shoot because my hands are cold and uncomfortable than being concerned about the camera.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
My mains experience with weather sealed cameras is from Fuji - both the X-T1 and X-T2. I was skeptical and overprotective at first but I ended up subjecting them to pretty much everything except total immersion in water and they are fine. Even with non weather sealed lenses I felt fine in moderate rain or snow but in heavy rain I did stick to the weather sealed lenses. I would imagine that not all weather seals are created equal though so I’d do some research on whatever brand you choose to get some info on what to expect, and particularly with non weather sealed lenses and how wet you could expect them to get without problems. They do make little rain bags for cameras and if you google it you can find how to make your own out of baggies. Not an elegant solution but it is something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
Yeah, it’s my understanding that weather sealing/no weather sealing isn’t really a binary state. When I bought my 7D I thought “cool, it’s weather sealed”. Then I started reading about newer bodies that have even better weather sealing. I think that realization helps me to avoid any false sense of security.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
Always take the shower caps from hotel stays.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 21:29
|
|