Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Krakkles
May 5, 2003

SoundMonkey posted:

I don't know, and yes, in that order.

Also if you find the advice in this thread good, consider changing your vote :v:
The VR (VC, to be pedantic) would be worth it, if it wasn't so heavily associated with worse glass.

Buy the Tamron (it's a huge upgrade over the Nikon kit - huuuuuuge), but do NOT buy the VC model.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

SoundMonkey posted:

Sell it, buy the 17-50 f/2.8, it's a better lens.

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

SoundMonkey posted:

Son, if you know someone who'd give me a 17-50 2.8 for an 18-135, by all means let me know. Then get them back on their meds.
im sure anyone would do it for an 18-135 and enough cheap photography dollars!

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

evil_bunnY posted:

If anything you're less likely to get a bum body when buying refurb. They must test them more thoroughly than even the new stuff.
Anecdotal, of course, but the whole reason I shoot Nikon is a bad experience with this. I bought a refurb XSi from Canon and when the flash release stopped working within two days, they refused to replace it - three levels of "customer service" said they would only repair it again. I didn't like that option, so I returned it, bought a brand new Nikon, and never looked back.

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

beergod posted:

Like remove the lens and blow the air into the camera?
Yep. I've had the best results facing the camera body downward and firing the shutter a few times while using the rocket blower. Seems to help dislodge things.

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

hcenvirons posted:

I was doing some basic editing in post today and I noticed that my jpegs from when I shoot in jpeg+raw are noticeably cropped vs my raws. I wouldn't care so much but I usually just throw the jpegs to facebook since it'll mangle them anyway.

Is there any way to prevent this forced cropping or should I just suck it up and do the conversions in Lightroom myself from now on? I'm assuming that the cropping is occurring in camera or while the photos are imported.
What camera? Are they cropped (actual image area reduced) or just resized (all area still there, but smaller)?

What version of Lightroom are you using?

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

CLAM DOWN posted:

I'm scared I'm asking a really stupid question here (in my defense I'm tired as poo poo), but how do I determine what size of filter to get? ie. https://www.amazon.ca/Polaroid-Optics-Circular-Polarizer-Filter/dp/B003USTMN0/
Look at the markings on your lens: There should be something that looks like ø52 (the digits will change, the leading character, an o with a line through it, will not) which indicates the size (in mm) filter which is required. (In the example I posted, 52mm.)

It's not stupid.

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

ukrainius maximus posted:

Holy crap, you all are awesome and I really appreciate the responses.

My wife wouldn't mind a secondhand camera as long as it's in good condition so I'm not too worried about that. I'm also not too worried about the size - we visited my sister in Alaska last year and she brought my father in law's DSLR and loved having it, plus she's talked about how much she's wanted to get one so I think I'm good there too.


Are you actually selling a D3400? I checked the buy/sell thread but only saw you post about another model (I only went back a few pages). If so I'd definitely be down for seeing what you have.
Looks like he's selling a D7100. Take it from someone who started on a D3100, moved to the 7000 within a year, and now (chasing features) moved to the D500: just buy the 7100. She will want it within a short time if she starts on the 3x00.

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

Hey, I only recommended the 7100 because other guy was selling it for very near his price.

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

Sony RX100 vs Fuji X100: which should I get?

Also, I probably would be buying a used earlier model, which also leads to the question, is there a steep drop off in features as I go back? (I.e. is it worth paying a bit more for one of the newer iterations?)

I finally got rid of my S95 and want something smaller than my DSLR to carry. Budget ... I dunno. Let’s say less is better, definitely not $1200, maybe 5-600 if stretching to that would get me better features.

I’m seeing first editions of each for about 200-250 on eBay, newer models up from there.

Edit: meant to post this in P&S thread, but found its archived. Sorry!

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 20:38 on May 4, 2018

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Krakkles
May 5, 2003

learnincurve posted:

Chalk and cheese Sony has a worse sensor but zoom. Fujifilm X100 has a cracking sensor but fixed lens.

I’ve owned the X100 since launch and it’s as close to shooting with an old school film camera as you can get, but with that it has it’s quirks and it’s certainly not for the beginner. Focusing time in low light is a bastard, but with that the noise at iso 3200 has a film quality to it rather than a digital mess, so it looks great converted to black and white.

I looked at the original Sony RX100 when choosing a compact zoom for out door stuff and decided that the mark III would be the one in the range to get, but ultimately settled on the Fujifilm X20. Battery life is poo poo but you can pick up spare ones for £10.

This shot and the others in the set were set with the X20 on auto https://flic.kr/p/25nBguj

X100 at iso 3200 in black and white https://flic.kr/p/24CmbuP and colour at iso 2500 https://flic.kr/p/24CmcGD
Great info, thanks!

The low light thing makes me think RX100 is better for me - I do a lot of photography in iffy lighting. How’s manual focus on the X100? That’s always a possibility as well.

  • Locked thread