• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Donos
Member
(01-04-2016, 05:42 PM)
Donos's Avatar

Originally Posted by wachie

Bought a A6000 over boxing day for ~560. Looking for a prime, hopefully one of the budget Sigmas.

Any other recommendations?

Just bought a used (black) SEL50F18 for shooting my newborn. This lense is really good. I have the "old" Sigma 30mm F2.8 which is great for the price i paid. Got it used for 80 € (3 month old).
You can get the SEL50F18 for around 200 € used and the "new" Sigma 30mm for less new. SEL35F18 is supposed to be good but you can find a lot of discussion if it is really worth more then double the price of the Sigma 30mm.

That's from me as a photography casul.
itsbenoclock
Member
(01-04-2016, 07:49 PM)
itsbenoclock's Avatar

Originally Posted by Lucky Forward

I've had one for ten years (the Mk I) and I've been happy with it...you can get excellent results if your technique is good. (Snip.)

Thanks! I'm going to be using it for Wildlife photography, looks nice and sharp on those photos. I'll be using it on my Sony A7s so I wanted something as ideally sharp as possible.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-04-2016, 08:01 PM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

How in the hell does one send Raw files anyway? I like sending clients high res stuff, but holy fuck I have no idea how to conveniently send the stuff. With my current thing I'm compressing about 100 raws into a zip and uploading it to my google drive and sharing the link, but uploading a 2gb+ zip file takes god damn forever and it's eating into my storage space severely on there cause I'm not paying 10 bucks a month for 100 gbs of storage. Why is a tiff file so god damn huge anyway?

I wouldn't send the RAW files unless they specifically ask for it. I would export it from lightroom as a TIFF, just about anyone should know how to handle a TIFF.

Originally Posted by Rentahamster

I've met many a human who couldn't tell. Unless they're a commercial client, most people are probably going to use it for web and mobile purposes most of the time anyway.

And thats fine, but its not the photographers decision to make that determination, unless its specifically paid for in a manner that the file you receive is tiered, like you can buy a file that you can print 8x10 or 16x20 etc. Its like someone ordering 100mb internet and the company deciding to provide 10mb internet because the customer may never figure it out. Its just wrong.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-04-2016, 08:10 PM)
captive's Avatar
Phase One just announced the IQ3, 100 megapixel.

I thought they would go with 120 for the next one. 20 more than the IQ180/280 is going to be minuscule difference.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 08:11 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

I wouldn't send the RAW files unless they specifically ask for it. I would export it from lightroom as a TIFF, just about anyone should know how to handle a TIFF.

And thats fine, but its not the photographers decision to make that determination, unless its specifically paid for in a manner that the file you receive is tiered, like you can buy a file that you can print 8x10 or 16x20 etc. Its like someone ordering 100mb internet and the company deciding to provide 10mb internet because the customer may never figure it out. Its just wrong.

I must have been doing something way wrong if I ended up with a 170mb tiff then.
RuGalz
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:03 PM)

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

I must have been doing something way wrong if I ended up with a 170mb tiff then.

LR is probably exporting it as 16bit TIFF by default. If it's from Photoshop, don't forget to flatten the file as well for export.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:07 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by RuGalz

LR is probably exporting it as 16bit TIFF by default. If it's from Photoshop, don't forget to flatten the file as well for export.

Yeah I'll have to check that. I just hit tiff in Lightroom and just made the assumption that it would be smaller than a raw file...I was quite surprised by the end result, preview for finder wants not a fucking thing to do with those files. What do you mean by "flatten?"
snaffles
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:10 PM)
snaffles's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Yeah I'll have to check that. I just hit tiff in Lightroom and just made the assumption that it would be smaller than a raw file...I was quite surprised by the end result, preview for finder wants not a fucking thing to do with those files. What do you mean by "flatten?"

I assume he is talking about if you have created a bunch of different layers, you need to flatten them down to one before exporting.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:12 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by snaffles

I assume he is talking about if you have created a bunch of different layers, you need to flatten them down to one before exporting.

Man this sounds like a youtube tutorial in waiting. I didn't do much outside of fine tuning the picture in lightroom and exporting it.
snaffles
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:15 PM)
snaffles's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Man this sounds like a youtube tutorial in waiting. I didn't do much outside of fine tuning the picture in lightroom and exporting it.

If you are just using lightroom you don't need to worry about it, it would only be in photoshop.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:18 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by snaffles

If you are just using lightroom you don't need to worry about it, it would only be in photoshop.

Ok, probably just means I should scale the file down or something. I'll have to mess around with that later when I have the time cause I think I tried to make the quality as high as possible thinking it would still be smaller than a raw, but bigger than a jpeg...wrong on both fronts.
Van
Member
(01-04-2016, 09:57 PM)
Van's Avatar
ive always liked taking pictures and ive decided to get a nikon d50.
photoGAF any sugesstions before i do?
theepicoftyler
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:08 PM)

Originally Posted by Van

ive always liked taking pictures and ive decided to get a nikon d50.
photoGAF any sugesstions before i do?

I would probably look for something a little more modern if it's a hobby you're serious about persueing. Fortunately, you're in the right thread to do it. The D50 is a really old camera at this point and you can find a more modern entry level camera for cheap used that will be a lot better to use and learn on I think.

Look at the OP as a jumping off point and think about what kind of photos you're interested in taking.

I jumped in with Sony's mirrorless cameras. I started off with a used Sony NEX-5T which I loved, and recently upgraded to a Sony a6000. Both are good entry level cameras and great to learn on, but you'll get more varied opinions, I'm sure.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:10 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by theepicoftyler

I would probably look for something a little more modern if it's a hobby you're serious about persueing. Fortunately, you're in the right thread to do it. The D50 is a really old camera at this point and you can find a more modern entry level camera for cheap used that will be a lot better to use and learn on I think.

Look at the OP as a jumping off point and think about what kind of photos you're interested in taking.

I jumped in with Sony's mirrorless cameras. I started off with a used Sony NEX-5T which I loved, and recently upgraded to a Sony a6000. Both are good entry level cameras and great to learn on, but you'll get more varied opinions, I'm sure.

Yeah I'd personally try to look for a refurbished D5200 or 5300, but that's just me.
Rand0m TAG
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:14 PM)
Rand0m TAG's Avatar
got a canon rebel 6ti as a present. any tips for a beginner photographer?
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:22 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rand0m TAG

got a canon rebel 6ti as a present. any tips for a beginner photographer?

Either get a book or look at video tutorials, and get out there and shoot. Don't be afraid to make mistakes cause you will make them and do your best to still have fun. I've come a pretty far way from when I first started and I have more fun freezing my ass off during an outdoor shoot than I do in my warm office.
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:25 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Ok, probably just means I should scale the file down or something. I'll have to mess around with that later when I have the time cause I think I tried to make the quality as high as possible thinking it would still be smaller than a raw, but bigger than a jpeg...wrong on both fronts.

In the LR export box, select 8-bit under the settings for TIFF, then change compression to LZW or ZIP (TIFF only uses lossless compression), then scale down from there if you wish. I'm usually exporting D800 files, so I usually always scale it down a bit.

And getting back to the earlier thing, you would never deliver RAW files unless specifically asked for them, they are NOT a delivery format.
jongkookie
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:26 PM)
jongkookie's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Either get a book or look at video tutorials, and get out there and shoot. Don't be afraid to make mistakes cause you will make them and do your best to still have fun. I've come a pretty far way from when I first started and I have more fun freezing my ass off during an outdoor shoot than I do in my warm office.

Funny you say that, I just got done doing some test shots of my Opteka 85mm lens in my warm office. I've been waiting for videos to finish exporting so I went ahead and just walked around and shot stuff lol.

I'll upload it when I get home later, but for quick impressions... I'm fncking impressed. This apparently cost my friend $150 bucks a few years ago, and her giving it away for free seems like a mistake haha.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:28 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

In the LR export box, select 8-bit under the settings for TIFF, then change compression to LZW or ZIP (TIFF only uses lossless compression), then scale down from there if you wish. I'm usually exporting D800 files, so I usually always scale it down a bit.

Oh ok, thanks for the help. I'm on a 7100 and getting 170mb files so how big would yours be uncompressed? Sounds like it would be the size of an mkv anime episode.

Originally Posted by jongkookie

Funny you say that, I just got done doing some test shots of my Opteka 85mm lens in my warm office. I've been waiting for videos to finish exporting so I went ahead and just walked around and shot stuff lol.

I'll upload it when I get home later, but for quick impressions... I'm fncking impressed. This apparently cost my friend $150 bucks a few years ago, and her giving it away for free seems like a mistake haha.

Sadly photography isn't my day job. I'm a desk jockey for the most part.
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:34 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Oh ok, thanks for the help. I'm on a 7100 and getting 170mb files so how big would yours be uncompressed? Sounds like it would be the size of an mkv anime episode.

Just tested and it was 220mb-ish.

Changing to 8-bit and adding LZW compression shrank that to 40mb


Now let me tell you about these Phase One 80mp files i am working with right now: 466MB TIF exports.

Largest single file I've had laying around after panoramic stitching and edit layers was about 6GB. (When you have to use PSB files and not PSD in photoshop)
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-04-2016, 10:35 PM)
captive's Avatar
uncompressed 8bit TIFF from my D800e is ~100mb, LZW compressed is ~70mb. File size will vary with how much information is in the image. B&W images will be smaller than the same image thats in color.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:43 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

Just tested and it was 220mb-ish.

Changing to 8-bit and adding LZW compression shrank that to 40mb


Now let me tell you about these Phase One 80mp files i am working with right now: 466MB TIF exports.

Largest single file I've had laying around after panoramic stitching and edit layers was about 6GB. (When you have to use PSB files and not PSD in photoshop)

Holy shit. I'm going to assume Tiff is definitely a more professional file format than Jpeg then? I work for the PR division of a university chain and have heard "tiff" being shouted out a few times, just never cared to investigate it.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-04-2016, 10:48 PM)
captive's Avatar
jpeg is a lossy format, meaning the file system disregards information within the image when it creates the jpeg. TIFF is lossless. Has nothing to do with professional or not, they are just file types. Most camera RAW files are essentially TIFFs just changed slightly, no idea why manufacturers insist on making their own proprietary file types.

when stitching my Phase One IQ180 files or my working with my scans from my Fuji 617 the files easily balloon up to several gigs when you add layers in photoshop. Just looking at my panoramas folder they average about 750mb with the high being 4gb. A while back i actually went through and flattened most of them just so they would take up less space.
Quake1028
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:54 PM)
Quake1028's Avatar
Gave my wife her A6000 for Christmas. We immediately left for a vacation on Christmas Day, so I didn't have time to test anything out for her. The memory card that came bundled with the camera from Best Buy was not recognized by the A6000. I thought it might be a faulty memory card, so I got another one from Wal-Mart, same thing. Really bummed and annoyed we couldn't use it our entire trip. Going to exchange it at Best Buy tonight unless someone sees some glaring fault in what I am doing.
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:54 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

jpeg is a lossy format, meaning the file system disregards information within the image when it creates the jpeg. TIFF is lossless. Has nothing to do with professional or not, they are just file types. Most camera RAW files are essentially TIFFs just changed slightly, no idea why manufacturers insist on making their own proprietary file types.

Well, RAW should be the data dump direct from the sensor (more or less), which is why they end up being 1/3 or less of the size of the TIFFS (and even more if compressed), since they are pre-debayering. Also TIFFs will have the in-camera tone curves baked into them.

Originally Posted by captive

when stitching my Phase One IQ180 files or my working with my scans from my Fuji 617 the files easily balloon up to several gigs when you add layers in photoshop. Just looking at my panoramas folder they average about 750mb with the high being 4gb. A while back i actually went through and flattened most of them just so they would take up less space.

Also the RAM footprint for working with those types of files in PS gets pretty nuts. Would run into paging issues even with 24GB in my machine.
theepicoftyler
Member
(01-04-2016, 10:56 PM)

Originally Posted by Quake1028

Gave my wife her A6000 for Christmas. We immediately left for a vacation on Christmas Day, so I didn't have time to test anything out for her. The memory card that came bundled with the camera from Best Buy was not recognized by the A6000. I thought it might be a faulty memory card, so I got another one from Wal-Mart, same thing. Really bummed and annoyed we couldn't use it our entire trip. Going to exchange it at Best Buy tonight unless someone sees some glaring fault in what I am doing.

Standard SD cards work with my A6000 just fine.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-04-2016, 10:56 PM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

Also the RAM footprint for working with those types of files in PS gets pretty nuts. Would run into paging issues even with 24GB in my machine.

Before i bought my surface i used to have a 120gb SSD to use as a scratch disk. I told photoshop to use that, it helped a little bit, but yea nothing like seeing photoshop using up 95% of your memory as your computer chokes on your files.

Originally Posted by Quake1028

Gave my wife her A6000 for Christmas. We immediately left for a vacation on Christmas Day, so I didn't have time to test anything out for her. The memory card that came bundled with the camera from Best Buy was not recognized by the A6000. I thought it might be a faulty memory card, so I got another one from Wal-Mart, same thing. Really bummed and annoyed we couldn't use it our entire trip. Going to exchange it at Best Buy tonight unless someone sees some glaring fault in what I am doing.

i have compact flash cards that dont work in my D800 or my friends D800 but worked perfectly fine on my phase one.
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-04-2016, 11:01 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

i have compact flash cards that dont work in my D800 or my friends D800 but worked perfectly fine on my phase one.

The D800 is so fucking fussy about CF cards. And yeah, the Kingston ones I used in my D200 that my D800 wouldn't even look at worked just dandy in the iq280 we rented.

I wouldn't expect that from a body that uses SD cards though.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-04-2016, 11:10 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

Before i bought my surface i used to have a 120gb SSD to use as a scratch disk. I told photoshop to use that, it helped a little bit, but yea nothing like seeing photoshop using up 95% of your memory as your computer chokes on your files.

i have compact flash cards that dont work in my D800 or my friends D800 but worked perfectly fine on my phase one.

Oh god lol. Sounds like my laptop would melt through my lap and bake itself into the earths core if I tried running it like that. Does the D750 run into that kind of flash card problem?
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-04-2016, 11:13 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Oh god lol. Sounds like my laptop would melt through my lap and bake itself into the earths core if I tried running it like that.

Eh, it's an IO issue more than anything, not so much processing. Once it starts paging you're just going to be waiting forever for the HD.

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Does the D750 run into that kind of flash card problem?

Not that I know of. The D800 CF card thing is a very specific issue to that specific body.
Peru
Member
(01-04-2016, 11:13 PM)
Peru's Avatar

Originally Posted by lrt75914

I've been going through my dad's gear, trying to find a suitable lens for some wide field astro photography. .

Unrelated to your request, but I just picked up the fujinon xf 55-200mm (300mm) lens today and fell in love instantly. First because the image stabilizer seems stupid good - I was shooting handheld at half a second with sharp results. Secondly because every stupid idea I got seemed to work, including just pointing it at the first nebula available (namely the orion nebula) on a semi-polluted night sky, 200mm, 5 secs, no stacking. Obviously with some work I can get a better result but I just love seeing the nice colors of a nebula by point and shooting.



For this camera (x-t1) though my wide angle night sky lens is the samyang/rokinon 12mm f2, also newly aquired. This brand has got great cheap wide angle lenses.
Ty4on
Member
(01-04-2016, 11:25 PM)
Ty4on's Avatar

Originally Posted by itsbenoclock

Thanks! I'm going to be using it for Wildlife photography, looks nice and sharp on those photos. I'll be using it on my Sony A7s so I wanted something as ideally sharp as possible.

It's probably from watching too much Northrup, but they always recommend the Canon 400mm f5.6 prime. It is a bit pricy and lacks IS, but (I'm pretty sure) it's sharper than anything in its price range and much lighter.

For wildlife the A7s using Canon glass might focus quite slowly, so be careful of that. Again the Northrups, but they pair it with a secondhand 7D for fast AF, burst and crop (like a 1.6 teleconverter).

Edit: This is all assuming you'll struggle to fit your frame and have to crop in post.

Originally Posted by Ty4on

[...]I'd recommend the Samyang 12mm f2.[...]

It's the 12mm, not 10mm as I originally said.
jongkookie
Member
(01-05-2016, 12:51 AM)
jongkookie's Avatar
So as I said earlier, here's some sample shots of the Opteka 85mm f/1.8:


The rest of the 11 are here: https://flic.kr/s/aHskrrzSrQ

All were shot at f/1.8 since I'm an idiot and wasn't paying attention and not much post-processing was done either, I just hit auto on the white balance and tone settings in LR before I uploaded it.

I still need to mess around with it some more before I fully use it on shoots, but I gotta say, this lens is pretty surprising. There's issues with it, such as the stiff focus and aperture ring but the performance seems pretty damn good especially considering it's retail price of $100. I think once I get a UV filter and find the sweet spot, this is gonna be a killer piece of glass.

Anyway, I have a feeling this is a rebranded Rokinon/Samyang glass, but I'm not exactly so sure since those 85mm's start at f/1.4. Unfortunately, there isn't much info about it either. Just a thread on DPReview about some examples being excellent and a dud, luckily I believe I got an excellent example.

I think I owe my friend some money now haha.

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Sadly photography isn't my day job. I'm a desk jockey for the most part.

I actually haven't been out on work shoots the last few weeks, we've been on an editing crunch for CES. I spent all of today color grading our videos. -_____-
John Blade
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:12 AM)
John Blade's Avatar

Just got myself a Sony 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Zoom Lens SEL18200 lens today used and it look fine from some test shot I did. I will try to use it when I have a chance to go out during my spare time after work. It's very big on my NEX-5N right now but do hope to bring that lens to either A6000 or the A7 series once I have more experience taking photo.

Was wondering, should I get either the FE 28mm f/2 Lens or the Sony 16mm f/2.8 Wide-Angle Lens for everyday shoot. I want something wide so I can go out to Toronto and take picture of building or location.
lrt75914
Junior Member
(01-05-2016, 01:17 AM)
lrt75914's Avatar

Originally Posted by Peru

Unrelated to your request, but I just picked up the fujinon xf 55-200mm (300mm) lens today and fell in love instantly. First because the image stabilizer seems stupid good - I was shooting handheld at half a second with sharp results. Secondly because every stupid idea I got seemed to work, including just pointing it at the first nebula available (namely the orion nebula) on a semi-polluted night sky, 200mm, 5 secs, no stacking. Obviously with some work I can get a better result but I just love seeing the nice colors of a nebula by point and shooting.



For this camera (x-t1) though my wide angle night sky lens is the samyang/rokinon 12mm f2, also newly aquired. This brand has got great cheap wide angle lenses.

Good god man, that's an amazing (point and shoot) image. I would love to see what your camera/lens could do when put on a tracking mount.
Any Questions
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:31 AM)
Any Questions's Avatar
I picked up the Panasonic LX100 to use as a travel camera. Didn't fancy bringing my D300 and gear on my three week trip to Loas and Vietnam.

Am extremely happy and have got some great pics out of it.

Some handy features like auto HDR shots and combining 6 fast shots in low light have given me some lovely pictures.

I recommend especially if your after a handy point and shoot.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:40 AM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by jongkookie

So as I said earlier, here's some sample shots of the Opteka 85mm f/1.8:



The rest of the 11 are here: https://flic.kr/s/aHskrrzSrQ

All were shot at f/1.8 since I'm an idiot and wasn't paying attention and not much post-processing was done either, I just hit auto on the white balance and tone settings in LR before I uploaded it.

I still need to mess around with it some more before I fully use it on shoots, but I gotta say, this lens is pretty surprising. There's issues with it, such as the stiff focus and aperture ring but the performance seems pretty damn good especially considering it's retail price of $100. I think once I get a UV filter and find the sweet spot, this is gonna be a killer piece of glass.

Anyway, I have a feeling this is a rebranded Rokinon/Samyang glass, but I'm not exactly so sure since those 85mm's start at f/1.4. Unfortunately, there isn't much info about it either. Just a thread on DPReview about some examples being excellent and a dud, luckily I believe I got an excellent example.

I think I owe my friend some money now haha.



I actually haven't been out on work shoots the last few weeks, we've been on an editing crunch for CES. I spent all of today color grading our videos. -_____-

I haven't been on a proper shoot in months. I'm usually just an assistant camera operator. That 85 looks good. Makes me want to get Nikon's 85 1.8 like now.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-05-2016, 02:09 AM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

I haven't been on a proper shoot in months. I'm usually just an assistant camera operator. That 85 looks good. Makes me want to get Nikon's 85 1.8 like now.

its fantastic, my friend has it. Personally i like my 135f2.0 defocus control lens. I like longer telephotos for portraits and cadids. But i may pick up an 85mm for pano landscape stitching
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:14 AM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

its fantastic, my friend has it. Personally i like my 135f2.0 defocus control lens. I like longer telephotos for portraits and cadids. But i may pick up an 85mm for pano landscape stitching

My next lens I aim to get is either the Nikon 105 or 135 DC
wachie
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:15 AM)
wachie's Avatar
Looks like A6100 may be coming sooner than I expected? (March)

Wondering if I should stick with the A6000 or wait out a few months for the A6100. It's going to have a 36MP BSI sensor.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:30 AM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

its fantastic, my friend has it. Personally i like my 135f2.0 defocus control lens. I like longer telephotos for portraits and cadids. But i may pick up an 85mm for pano landscape stitching

Should that be my next lens even if it's like a 127 on a crop sensor? I have no really good wide angle lens, but I really want that damn 85. Other than that I want a Sigma 2.8 17-50.

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

My next lens I aim to get is either the Nikon 105 or 135 DC

How's the Nikon 60mm 2.8D lens? It's the one before the current G series.
jongkookie
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:37 AM)
jongkookie's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

I haven't been on a proper shoot in months. I'm usually just an assistant camera operator. That 85 looks good. Makes me want to get Nikon's 85 1.8 like now.

That's actually what I was planning to do this month, pick up an 85mm then wait for the end of tax season to pick up a Dx00/D7x00 or the A7 Mk 1 or 2 body. But then this showed up on my doorstep so now I'm wondering if I should go for the D7100 now since it's under $700 at Best Buy or save up some more for a full frame instead.

But yeah, the lens is shockingly good. I personally wouldn't recommend it since there seems to be a 50/50 chance of getting a shitty example of the lens, but if you know 100% that the example you're getting is decent, it might be worth a shot. Otherwise, stick with the tried and true lenses out there.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:44 AM)
JadedWriter's Avatar
My dad showed me a picture of this thing:

We have come a long fucking way.

Originally Posted by jongkookie

That's actually what I was planning to do this month, pick up an 85mm then wait for the end of tax season to pick up a Dx00/D7x00 or the A7 Mk 1 or 2 body. But then this showed up on my doorstep so now I'm wondering if I should go for the D7100 now since it's under $700 at Best Buy or save up some more for a full frame instead.

But yeah, the lens is shockingly good. I personally wouldn't recommend it since there seems to be a 50/50 chance of getting a shitty example of the lens, but if you know 100% that the example you're getting is decent, it might be worth a shot. Otherwise, stick with the tried and true lenses out there.

Yeah I don't touch lenses I've never heard of. D7100's are getting pretty cheap now. I love mine, it's very sturdy and user friendly.
Bold One
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:03 AM)
Bold One's Avatar
I'm looking to do quite a bit of commercial filming and small scale projects, which camera makers would be best

Sony, Canon, Nikon?

what model would be ideal of any of the above?
Cfh123
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:03 AM)
Cfh123's Avatar
Anyone have the Panasonic LX100? I've had my eye on it for a while.

I rarely use my Nikon D300 now - it is just too big to haul around. With young kids I have enough to haul around as it is.

I have the Panasonic ZS30 which is a nice travel zoom but low light performance is just not there and won't be there from this kind of camera. I had the ZS3 before and have been much impressed by Panasonic's travel zooms.

How is the LX100 with indoor photography (without flash), and night photography of city landscapes and that sort of thing? Without a tripod.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-05-2016, 03:19 AM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

My next lens I aim to get is either the Nikon 105 or 135 DC

the 135 is probably my most used lens, that said i only have 3, a 35mm a 300mm and 135. Its really fantastic, id post some pictures but about all i use it for is for my kid and friends kids.

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Should that be my next lens even if it's like a 127 on a crop sensor? I have no really good wide angle lens, but I really want that damn 85. Other than that I want a Sigma 2.8 17-50.

How's the Nikon 60mm 2.8D lens? It's the one before the current G series.

i have no idea, i dont know what lengths you like to shoot at, and what you currently have.

Personally i have zero desire for the 50mm range, others produce great photos at that focal length. I like 35mm for full body portraits and my landscapes and my 135 for long portraits.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:23 AM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

i have no idea, i dont know what lengths you like to shoot at, and what you currently have.

Personally i have zero desire for the 50mm range, others produce great photos at that focal length. I like 35mm for full body portraits and my landscapes and my 135 for long portraits.

I have an 18-105 and 18-55 kit lens that I barely touch, their just too soft for photo shoot work or anything else for that matter. My work horse lens is the 1.8G 50mm that I have. Sounds like I should just get the 85mm first. I will admit to being really interested in Sigma's 1.4 30mm Art lens.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
(01-05-2016, 04:26 AM)
BlueTsunami's Avatar
50mm comes into its own on FF. I cut my teeth on it when I started out with a Canon Rebel 350D but knowing what I know now, I would definitely suggest a wider lens starting out on APS-C.

It's funny, I've always liked the 28mm FoV on APS-C and once I jumped to FF I come to find that 50mm if some between 28mm and 35mm in feel. 28mm is also awesome on FF. Need to get my hands on a Nikon 28/2 AI again.
giga
Member
(01-05-2016, 04:38 AM)
giga's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

My next lens I aim to get is either the Nikon 105 or 135 DC

i'm waiting for the inevitable sigma 135 art
Dr.Horrible
Member
(01-05-2016, 04:42 AM)
Dr.Horrible's Avatar
Not convinced yet, but I've been eyeing the A6000 and am curious what bundle/options would be recommended for someone just getting into photography. I like taking landscapes, pictures of my dogs, and general shots of family, etc.

Edit - amazon link for reference.


https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00I8...zkL&ref=plSrch

Thread Tools