Threads by latest replies - Page 12
Anonymous
Hey /p/ I'm kind of new to photography and this Board. I wanna know your opinions on this shot.
Anonymous
>>3520927 >focusing on the knee instead of the face >shitty grain everywhere due to high ISO instead of tripodding very weak shoot over all.
Image Created 2019:08:03 20:14:34 Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Height 6000 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image Width 5999
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Looks to me like you focused on his knee. Portraits focus on the eyes
How high is the ISO? You don't need to go above 400 outside
>>3520932 Well thats the issue. He probably underexposed it like hell then cranked up the exposure in post. Doing that introduces way more noise than ISO.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522088 >shitty grain >tripodding It's actually ISO 100 and 1/640s.
You know shit and your snapshot is a typical creep shot. You lack the balls to shoot proper street, better try some flowers.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522088 Good job doing such a boring photo
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Oof nigger pretending to be a slav with a heinous background, and boring foreground. Just awesome anon
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Pentax K-S2 to pass edition
Approved by Brooklyn Beckham
Previous thread:
>>3514779 All discussion and questions related to gear should take place in this exact thread.
Redirection and answering questions in this thread is encouraged.
Anonymous
>>3522859 Lost the actual image
Image Created 2019:08:19 07:43:16 Brightness 1.2 EV White Balance Auto Focal Length 50.00 mm Light Source Unknown Camera Software RawTherapee 5.4 ISO Speed Rating 3200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Camera Model ILCE-6300 Compression Scheme Uncompressed F-Number f/5.6 Exposure Program Aperture Priority Flash No Flash, Compulsory Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Maximum Lens Aperture f/5.6 Saturation Normal Exposure Time 1/40 sec Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Image Height 1068 Metering Mode Pattern Contrast Normal Sharpness Normal Image Width 1600 Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Rendering Normal Pixel Composition RGB Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Equipment Make SONY
Anonymous
>>3522860 just make the new thread man
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522895 No, this thread is still good, just cut off the moldy parts, anon
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Thread limit hit.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Last one is auto saging, post some animals:
Anonymous
Anonymous
Wild fox kit, Washington, USA
Image Created 2019:08:18 09:15:48 Brightness 8.2 EV White Balance Auto Focal Length 400.00 mm Light Source Unknown Color Space Information sRGB Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.4 (Macintosh) ISO Speed Rating 250 Exposure Bias 0 EV Camera Model ILCE-7RM3 F-Number f/4.5 Exposure Program Manual Flash No Flash, Compulsory Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Saturation Normal Exposure Time 1/1250 sec Horizontal Resolution 320 dpi Metering Mode Pattern Contrast Normal Sharpness Normal Rendering Normal Photographer Nathan Luebbe Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Vertical Resolution 320 dpi Lens Aperture f/4.5 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 400 mm Equipment Make SONY
Anonymous
>>3522369 really a "kit lens" ha ha ha *dabs*
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3514613 >>3517155 >>3517277 >>3517895 >>3521970 >>3521972 Really like this kind of shot, when animal is firmly place in the environment. What's always on my mind is how rare it's to find a good ones involving birbs. Wondering if rareness is caused by environment often not allowing anything but blown out background, or demand and taste on photographers side for as close as possible pixelpeeping sharpness?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Why hasn't Sony made an FE 300mm f/2.8 lens yet? Why would they make a 600mm before a 300mm? I ask because I'd love to use my Sony to shoot football this season instead of my Canon rig.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522247 Because the auto focus doesn't work that way
Anonymous
>>3522200 It's not worth it, anon. I'm a full-time photog also, but these drips don't give a shit. They're all just here to argue.
>>3522140 It depends on the trip - some of them are on assignment for various publications, sometimes it's hired out by the DMO or a tour operator, and occasionally they're workshops I teach. I'd like to say you're invited, but it'll be a cold day in hell before I post any of my personal contact info on 4Chan.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522200 Nobody cares about your pesos faggot snoycuck
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522255 Also, as we said, it's a significantly more useful lens which will result in higher sales numbers also.
They're going to produce the lenses that people want the most of, first, and then move into the weird specialty lenses later. I know that everyone on this website has serious autism so concepts like this don't necessarily make sense, but this is a very common business practice, and it's extremely unsurprising that Sony is taking this approach.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522358 >I'm a full-time photog My condolences
Anonymous
>I'm getting into photography again
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522933 For that Nikon consult this chart:
https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm#cheap The N65 doesn't look particularly great.
There is a lot of good manual focus Nikon glass out there and this thing won't meter with any of it.
Don't know shit about the other two.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>update
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522964 Came here to comment this.
OP go on eBay and buy a cheap F100 for like $150 (which isn’t expensive in any sense of the word). Don’t even bother with Nikon’s cheap shit, it was bad then & its bad now.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522964 Second this. The F80 is also pretty decent as long as you don't want to use old manual lenses.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
What cameras achieve this look? I think this is the most aesthetic, nostalgic, and dream-like appearance photos can have and I want to base my style with it. Do disposable film cameras give this aesthetic in the most authentic way? Or are there vintage (90s) point and shoot cameras that can do it? Maybe even 90s SLR cameras?
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>3522927 If you're after a softer look definitely go for a zoom like the one you posted. The Minolta zoom-date series are decent and they're all pretty cheap except for the one that Ren Hang used. Olympus zooms that aren't used by Instagram influencers aren't that bad either. Just make sure that you can live with the slow speed, a lot of these lenses have something like a max opening f/6-10 throughout their range.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522937 i would definitely go for a scanner with a high dpi because i don't want any trace of pixelization as it ruins the aesthetic i'm looking for
>>3522956 i don't plan on shooting fast moving subjects. more like buildings, landscapes, and still stuff
Saturation Normal Camera Model HP pst3200 Horizontal Resolution 200 dpi Vertical Resolution 200 dpi Image Height 840 Color Space Information sRGB Sharpness Normal Image Width 562
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Think about the characteristics of the kind of film cameras you're trying to emulate:
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522956 here's a photo i found that was taken with a minolta freedom zoom 125. it has an aesthetic close to what i have in mind
Anonymous
Should i buy Sony E 35mm f/1.8 OSS or Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC DN Contemporary ?
Anonymous
>>3522768 thats a gay move desu
Anonymous
>>3522773 only if fucking hipster girls is gay
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522852 Fucking girls is gay. Every time you fuck her your dick is touching all the other dicks that have been inside her and getting smeared with their leftover jizz. Super fucking gay.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
Two questions
Anonymous
Quoted By:
1. Yes. I have a micro four thirds camera (Panasonic GX85) which came with a compact 12-32mm pancake lens. That's a good focal length range for general photography.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522691 1)came with no lens
2)just the one 12-40 mft covers everything for me
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522691 Yes, the 1650 from your pic in particular, it's so small
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522691 1) yes, when want the flexibility of a normal zoom and don't require bigger apertures than f/4.5
2) i didn't evenbuy this "kit" lens with the camera, so i've actually had other lenses for longer than i've had it; but its definitely the same lens that is sometimes packaged as a kit lens
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522815 I'm not sure if 50 is actually cheaper when talking about a D5600 because you're comparing an FX 50mm lens to a DX only 35mm lens. That evens the prices out, at least on a quick google. So just get whatever you like.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I was recently gifted a DSLR camera by a photographer relative. But there is a problem where I can visibly see small dust particles, which are either inside the lens, or, more likely, between the lens and the sensor.
Anonymous
>>3522848 That's sensors. Also, that kind of amount is usually left alone. When you've whole sensor filled with them you start cleaning. It'll be invisible on most shots, easily removed when it's visible, and it won't degrade image quality at all.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522877 thank you for the answer
and yeah, I decided not to touch it for now. I wouldn't want to risk damaging anything anyway.
Anonymous
Does the D90 do automatic self sensor cleaning on shutdown/startup?
Rero
>>3522882 >self sensor cleaning I don't want to derail the thread but thanks for letting me know about this. Man... Humanity has sure advanced.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3522915 It's not perfect. They have fancy names for it, but it's just camera stabilization thing shaking sensor a little as it boots up. Ok, for some particles, useless for stickier smudges.
Anonymous
I want to be able to make out with girls at a distance of 2m or so from my Canon 6D and have it focus, take a shot, wait 3 seconds, focus again...
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3521983 >a gear thread died for another gear thread The absolute horror.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3521868 >magic lantern i read about this thing blowing up so that you lose all the pics on the card. how common is this? maybe its not such a big deal if you only use the card for this set of shots
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>3521864 You can buy a Bluetooth one. Connects to any phone.
