|
Headhunter posted:I finally got round to buying my first tripod today. Holy poo poo I can't believe how much of a difference they make. It should be the law that all first time camera purchasers also get a tripod. Mind. Blown. It would be a waste of money for most people I know, even those that bought a tripod never use it anymore. I think I'm the only one who actually uses a tripod to shoot (macro) in my entire circle of photographer friends. Most just buy it because they believe (rightfully) that it will make their photos sharper but then they realise it's an added thing to carry around and they didn't want to spend on the lightest carbon fibre ones and it just stays in the storeroom forever after that.
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:This was exactly how it was for me. "Oh man, I have a tripod! Now I can... uh..." Well nowadays I've noticed Canon and Nikon like to give out free tripods with DSLR purchases, but they're lovely like a rebranded Slik, so I guess from there they'll know if they need one or not.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
beergod posted:There's an eyelash in my viewfinder. It doesn't show up in photographs. Should I be concerned and how would I go about removing it? Try using a rocket blower or compressed air canister.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
beergod posted:Like remove the lens and blow the air into the camera? That depends on where the eyelash is located. Viewfinder, prism box, focusing screen, mirror?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2013 07:06
|
|
|
Yeah I think it's really about whether you like to edit your photos or not. I only shoot in RAW because I want to have finer control over the range of editing I can do to a photo and still maintain the tonal quality of it, as compared to JPG. I do have a friend who uses the Fuji X cameras and was so happy with his JPGs SOOC that he never bothered to shoot raw, until recently he experimented with RAW and found that he can control highlight recovery/shadow boost etc etc all to his liking. But for convenience he still mostly shoots only JPG.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
barbudo posted:apologies if this has already been covered in the thread. OP is great, just wondering if there are any caveats for news photography. I'm a reporter and like to carry something along with me to shoot my own photos. I'm looking for a good camera but also a decent lens (or, if absolutely necessary, a combination of lenses) that gives me a good range to do both close-ups and distance shots. size isn't a huge factor because I like carrying around a decent sized bag anyway. You really need to state a budget otherwise I'd recommend the Canon 5D3 with 24-70/2.8 II and 70-200/2.8 lenses, which are all perfect for your requirements.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 09:46
|
|
|
Geektox posted:There are some photojournalists in the Dorkroom and I know at least one (Fart Car '97) uses a X-T1 with the kit lens and Fuji is coming out with a 50-140mm that is shaping up very nicely. Haha if he had said size matters then the recommendation would have definitely been either the EM1 or XT1.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 10:06
|
|
|
On the topic of recommending new cameras: http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...ing-advice.html
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
Select all, delete.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
I agree, don't think too much on trying to shoot street or landscape or whatever photography - just go out and shoot a poo poo-ton of whatever you like, and then when you come back and go through the photos, pick out what you like, then go out again and shoot. Once you've repeated this 1000 times, your own natural style/vision should slowly bubble to the surface.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
Yeah champagne court has a lot of used camera shops but I'm not sure if they're all just trying to rip you off.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
wormil posted:Sorry to ask this but ... Consider the Fuji X-T2, tho I'm not sure if it's in that budget range. Otherwise, really just get the camera that feels good in her hands, or that she likes the look of.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
wormil posted:Realistically she's only going to have about $450-500 so that's out of the budget. Realistically, $400-500 is not going to get you a lens that does proper sport and animal photography (on APS-C), not to mention camera. At this point, I highly recommend getting a used OMD EM5 or EM10 instead. Their AF is pretty darn fast, just get the 12-50mm kit zoom.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
wormil posted:Keep in mind she's 13 and won't be filming cheetahs from a speeding Land Rover or trying to catch the touchdown reception at the superbowl. She'll be shooting birds, lizards, cats, flowers, the moon, a 1,000 pics a day of our pooch, friends running around, etc. She says "action shots" but within the realm of an 13 year old kid. Maybe look for a used original RX100?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
ButtWolf posted:I just bought a t5 with a 18-55mm and a 75-300m from best buy for $450. Did i waste money? Im not or have no intentions of being a pro, just something ive wanted to do for a while. Decent reviews and starter, no? You'll know in hindsight later whether you wasted money or not.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
ButtWolf posted:Yeah I'm gonna buy one this weekend. For some reason I figured theyd all be like $125. I would suggest not buying a tripod unless you are really sure you need a proper one. And if you're talking about tripods, this is the classic page to read about them: http://bythom.com/support.htm
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:Thanks for the replies. I should clarify that I'm fine with buying something, even if I'd prefer free. However, I can't justify going for software that rents for $120 per year, for what is a very very casual part-time hobby of mine. And yes, I'm aware you can go monthly and there are free trials and sales and whatnot, so no need to start a derail about Adobe licensing. I think you'll do just fine with RawTherapee. If you need more power, just get GIMP.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
Empress Brosephine posted:I downloaded Affinity Photo, should I use Lightroom instead? I tried messing around with Affinity but was kind of lost; haven't had the time to really sit down and learn it though to be fair. Affinity is supposed to compete with Photoshop, so it should be a lot more powerful than Lightroom for editing. However I'm sure Lightroom is a lot more user-friendly. Most of the time LR can do 80% of what you need, then the remaining 20% needs to be taken into Photoshop/Affinity to fix.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 06:48
|
|
