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.
superior choices only
yoshotography
yosotography
yostography
yosography
yosgraphy
yosraphy
View Results
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

MrQueasy posted:

Guys, I've been loving around on the Lensrental site and I just can't decide on anything.

it's pretty difficult, yeah. what body are you going with?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

AnimeIsTrash
Jun 30, 2018

Do you all have a recommendation for an "entry" level camera? I was looking to shoot some nature and probably pets. Will any cheapo DSLR do?

MrQueasy
Nov 15, 2005

Probiot-ICK
I think I've narrowed it down to these three choices:

Canon 5D Mark IV, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II, Canon 135mm f/2L
Fuji X-T3, Fuji XF 16-55 f2.8 R LM WR, Fuji XF 56mm f/1.2 R
Sony Alpha a7 III, Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM, Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art

The 5D is closest to what I'm familiar with... I can use my 1.8 cheapo 50mm on it...
The Fuji is closest to what I'd probably buy if I was going to buy something and I actually wanted to use my camera more often...
The Sony intrigues me, but also scares me, which is probably good for personal growth.

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

AnimeIsTrash posted:

Do you all have a recommendation for an "entry" level camera? I was looking to shoot some nature and probably pets. Will any cheapo DSLR do?

go with something mirrorless for sure, they're technically not DSLRs though (there's no mirror to single reflex). if you read the previous pages you'd see i'm a huge fan of micro four thirds (MFT), and the cameras are cheap as poo poo because it's basically a dead format at this point; olympus doesn't make cameras anymore and panasonic has moved on to a different mount with a larger sensor.

however: that also means there are an absolute fuckton of lenses and some really great bodies available on the cheap. that said, there's other options out there, or course.

i've never used them, but the fuji XT series seems great; i've got a full-frame sony, but the a6xxx series is also fantastic, it just has a sensor that's aps-c sized, as most other mirrorless systems do.

canon and nikon were pretty late to the mirrorless game, and i've never used their newer kit (jusr DSLRs), so i can't really give a fair assessment. probably someone else can pop in here

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

MrQueasy posted:

I think I've narrowed it down to these three choices:

Canon 5D Mark IV, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II, Canon 135mm f/2L
Fuji X-T3, Fuji XF 16-55 f2.8 R LM WR, Fuji XF 56mm f/1.2 R
Sony Alpha a7 III, Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM, Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art

The 5D is closest to what I'm familiar with... I can use my 1.8 cheapo 50mm on it...
The Fuji is closest to what I'd probably buy if I was going to buy something and I actually wanted to use my camera more often...
The Sony intrigues me, but also scares me, which is probably good for personal growth.

go with the sony. i've got the a7iii too, and while it's a bit bulky, it's not hard to use if you've used an advanced camera before. you can bump it up to like iso 25000 without much noise. good lens picks also, but i'd throw in a shorter prime there too; maybe 50mm?

Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 23:11 on May 18, 2022

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy

Beeftweeter posted:

and to fully answer your question, lol, i carry a variety of lenses with me all the time; a normal shoot for me nets about 1,500 photos on average. i already posted this but,

yeah lol I shot about 1200 last shoot
a lot of people think it’s bad practice but welp


but, thankyou so much for the positive encouragement though. it really means a lot. I need to remember that there are a number of people who have been very encouraging, and to keep what they’ve said in mind. idk why it’s so easy to doubt but it is. seriously appreciate it though

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

echinopsis posted:

yeah lol I shot about 1200 last shoot
a lot of people think it’s bad practice but welp


but, thankyou so much for the positive encouragement though. it really means a lot. I need to remember that there are a number of people who have been very encouraging, and to keep what they’ve said in mind. idk why it’s so easy to doubt but it is. seriously appreciate it though

lol, gently caress that noise. i say if you have a 512 GB sd card/cfast/whatever, who the gently caress cares? it's not like you're wasting film

and no prob man. you're legit doing good work and it's great that you're trying to improve and seeking feedback. don't doubt yourself, and don't be afraid to just gently caress around for hours

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy

Beeftweeter posted:

lol, gently caress that noise. i say if you have a 512 GB sd card/cfast/whatever, who the gently caress cares? it's not like you're wasting film

and no prob man. you're legit doing good work and it's great that you're trying to improve and seeking feedback. don't doubt yourself, and don't be afraid to just gently caress around for hours

oh yeah I don’t care about taking lots. I think some people go on about being more intentional with your shots but there’s no reason to think I’m being less intentional


and thanks again. yeah I’m thinking about posting on insta and seeing if someone wants to come model for me while I gently caress around with my flash and see if I can take anything worthwhile. keep up that practice and continue to grow etc. thanks dude. i’m glad you’re back

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

echinopsis posted:

oh yeah I don’t care about taking lots. I think some people go on about being more intentional with your shots but there’s no reason to think I’m being less intentional


and thanks again. yeah I’m thinking about posting on insta and seeing if someone wants to come model for me while I gently caress around with my flash and see if I can take anything worthwhile. keep up that practice and continue to grow etc. thanks dude. i’m glad you’re back

i mean yeah, i get it, but most of the time i'm not using a tripod, you know? i've obviously got pretty steady hands but they're invariably going to shake a bit, especially if it's really loving cold. i also mostly use manual lenses, so something might not be at the focus i want. does that make the shot less intentional? maybe, but the following corrected ones certainly were intentional. it's kind of illogical to me, idk

again, no prob dude and thanks, it's good to be back :unsmith:

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
I’ve come to my own conclusion that the rule of thumb where you double your length and that’s your shutter speed isn’t sufficient for modern cameras and lenses. I shoot my 135mm at 1/500 because I wasted too many shots on my old camera that I blamed on poor focus but was probably just too slow, shooting 50mm on a crop at 1/100 was just not enough.

It’s mega satisfying zooming to 1:1 and seeing it’s totally in focus

sorry just a wee rant about shooting with hand

I hardly use a tripod except for capturing the odd video which I never know what to do with lol

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

echinopsis posted:

I’ve come to my own conclusion that the rule of thumb where you double your length and that’s your shutter speed isn’t sufficient for modern cameras and lenses. I shoot my 135mm at 1/500 because I wasted too many shots on my old camera that I blamed on poor focus but was probably just too slow, shooting 50mm on a crop at 1/100 was just not enough.

It’s mega satisfying zooming to 1:1 and seeing it’s totally in focus

sorry just a wee rant about shooting with hand

I hardly use a tripod except for capturing the odd video which I never know what to do with lol

protip: don't bother with a shutter speed, let the camera decide. 99% of the time i just use aperture priority mode, which with a manual lens works fantastically. with the auto ones, meh, since you have to set it in-camera it's actually a little more inconvenient imo. but either way it's better than just sticking with a set speed, because you're definitely gonna be getting a lot of wasted shots that way

qirex
Feb 15, 2001

I only do manual shutter when I want it really high for animal pictures or really low for landscapes

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy

Beeftweeter posted:

protip: don't bother with a shutter speed, let the camera decide. 99% of the time i just use aperture priority mode, which with a manual lens works fantastically. with the auto ones, meh, since you have to set it in-camera it's actually a little more inconvenient imo. but either way it's better than just sticking with a set speed, because you're definitely gonna be getting a lot of wasted shots that way

hmm I used to use AP and that was when I used to lose a lot of shots with my canon 7d because the camera chose too slow.


I mean, what am I likely to gently caress up if I am shooting at 1/500, if I am shooting portrait.

I shoot manual, stick to f/1.8 and 1/500 and ride the iso to get the exposure I want, because when I let the camera decide it ends up choosing something I don’t want. it definitely leans toward too slow, and honestly cos my lens is so sharp and decent amount of megapixels, it’s a low threshold before you can see the shot is blurred.

I always used to think manual mode was for wankers and used AP and the canon has a new mode called flexible priority which is good in theory but I found it a bit fiddly, and now just use manual. I even used to set the iso to auto under manual but even then I find the exposure metering isn’t what I want. the camera is iso-invariant or at least close to it so as long as I’m
not clipping I’ll be fine, but auto exposure seems a bit more laissez faire about clipping.
that’s my experience anyway. until you can actually tune the decisions the camera makes Ill probably stick with it


maybe this ain’t the best method but I generally only reject photos now because it wasn’t a good shot, not because it was a technical fail

EIDE Van Hagar
Dec 8, 2000

Beep Boop
iterative improvements are valid improvements in every other form of artistic expression, you can take a ton of photos so you might as well.

if you gotta catch like a sporting event yeah spend a ton of time making sure everything is set up before hand so you can catch that moment before it’s gone, but for landscape photos or to get a flattering portrait just keep shooting imo

MrQueasy
Nov 15, 2005

Probiot-ICK
I think it was an interview with Ira Glass that I read where he said that all artists who are serious about improvement reach a point where the knowledge accumulated shows off that you are both really good, but that you have so much work and effort to put in to move from good to great. At the same time, you become hyper-aware of your flaws because you have so much more knowledge that you can't help but see them clearer.

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
that’s interesting. I might be bold enough to say I’m
good, and the skill and knowledge required to get here also let’s me see clearly the difference between myself and someone else.

well, in fact that was until I visited a much more professional photographer and after spending some time listening to him talk about the decisions he made behind some photos, I did not realise the huge chasm between someone like myself and him. it was almost like, without him pointing out a few things, I wouldn’t be able to say what really separates this great photo he took vs the likely only ok photo that I would have taken in the same situation.

there’s a lot of knowledge and learning to do to get to the next level. i’d be tempted to just fiddle along like I have done with blender, but if someone else’s time is involved, I don’t want to waste their time and and actually give them the best I can

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

echinopsis posted:

that’s interesting. I might be bold enough to say I’m
good, and the skill and knowledge required to get here also let’s me see clearly the difference between myself and someone else.

well, in fact that was until I visited a much more professional photographer and after spending some time listening to him talk about the decisions he made behind some photos, I did not realise the huge chasm between someone like myself and him. it was almost like, without him pointing out a few things, I wouldn’t be able to say what really separates this great photo he took vs the likely only ok photo that I would have taken in the same situation.

there’s a lot of knowledge and learning to do to get to the next level. i’d be tempted to just fiddle along like I have done with blender, but if someone else’s time is involved, I don’t want to waste their time and and actually give them the best I can

imo, this is exactly the reason why i basically said "gently caress around and find out". someone else's workflow isn't necessarily going to work for you and it's folly to think "well, they're good because they do it this way, not like that"

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
honestly dude i think you're smart enough to figure out what works for you personally and what doesn't, a la blender. loving around on your own without models also helps, if not just to expand what you might think you're good at or capable of.

basically: free yourself from the shackles of the bourgeoisie oppressive workflow regime

AnimeIsTrash
Jun 30, 2018

Beeftweeter posted:

go with something mirrorless for sure, they're technically not DSLRs though (there's no mirror to single reflex). if you read the previous pages you'd see i'm a huge fan of micro four thirds (MFT), and the cameras are cheap as poo poo because it's basically a dead format at this point; olympus doesn't make cameras anymore and panasonic has moved on to a different mount with a larger sensor.

however: that also means there are an absolute fuckton of lenses and some really great bodies available on the cheap. that said, there's other options out there, or course.

i've never used them, but the fuji XT series seems great; i've got a full-frame sony, but the a6xxx series is also fantastic, it just has a sensor that's aps-c sized, as most other mirrorless systems do.

canon and nikon were pretty late to the mirrorless game, and i've never used their newer kit (jusr DSLRs), so i can't really give a fair assessment. probably someone else can pop in here

I was going to ask about mirrorless since they seem to be the new hotness but forgot. Thanks for the response. :tipshat:

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
having immediate feedback on the exposure means that with mirrorless, you’re taking the photos you want. better camera bodies don’t (necessarily) allow for better photos, they just make it easier to get what you want

I was skeptical about mirrorless* but immediately after I tried it I dropped the cash


*was concerned about the viewfinder resolution and response and also battery life

Beeftweeter posted:

honestly dude i think you're smart enough to figure out what works for you personally and what doesn't, a la blender. loving around on your own without models also helps, if not just to expand what you might think you're good at or capable of.

basically: free yourself from the shackles of the bourgeoisie oppressive workflow regime

thanks man. I should definitely do what I can to borrow established knowledge on what looks good. there’s a difference between finding my own way and reinventing the wheel. thanks again

EIDE Van Hagar
Dec 8, 2000

Beep Boop
i have the fuji x-t4 and i like if, there are a fair number of lenses but i don’t know enough to go crazy there. ~3 lenses is good enough for me to learn with.

the sensor is non-bayer weirdness so you may have trouble handling raw photos, but you can find stuff to do that too, even though i have only bothered once.

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
honestly if i had to choose a non-MFT entry level mirrorless i'd probably go with fuji, not despite but because of

EIDE Van Hagar posted:

the sensor is non-bayer weirdness so you may have trouble handling raw photos, but you can find stuff to do that too, even though i have only bothered once.

this.

it actually provides better color reproduction. since i've been trying to move away from adobe entirely, most of the actually-good alternatives are on linux, believe it or not. darkroom is a great lightroom alternative and rawtherapee kicks adobe camera raw's rear end by a mile. both also use dcraw so they have great support for just about any raw format you can imagine

i'm still partial to MFT though, and if it's just something you want as a hobby the sensor size is absolutely not a problem; most of the pics on the previous page i posted are from various MFT kit. the bodies are also very affordable, and there's a ton of available lenses and new ones are still being introduced. maybe it's just me but the value proposition is pretty compelling

because it's mirrorless you can use an adapter for other lens systems too, but the same holds true for just about every other mirrorless system

one word of caution about the sony a6xxx series: they're great, but sony doesn't seem to give much of a poo poo about them and the line isn't updated often. there's a ton of cheapish E-mount lenses though (really wish they were FE :argh:)

Improbable Lobster
Jan 6, 2012

What is the Matrix 🌐? We just don't know 😎.


Buglord

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
is that a frog or something

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
I had and shot with my canon 7d for ages and loved it but had always thought I’d switch to sony and go mirrorless because of all the great word about it, but lol when I used the canon eos R I was so sold on it I just got that poo poo.

i’ve never really had a chance to use other systems so I can’t compare, but word on the street is that when the R first came out it was a bit underwhelming spec wise, but a few years down the track it’s been reconsidered quite a good wee camera and an example of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. I can’t actually put my finger on what I love about it, it certainly feels good in hand, but something about it makes me want to use it all the time.

anyway moral of that story is that the camera matters in that, whatever system you pick, its gotta be something you wanna use. although I am catastropisimg a bit here because I’m sure any system is fine really.




there’s this new collaborator who seems keen to do a shoot soon and hopefully on this weekend. that would be sick because it’s good fun, but this time I’m going to go in with actual plans of poses etc. maybe come out with incredible work.. LOL ok

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face

echinopsis posted:

is that a frog or something

i think it might be, here's another frog

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
goddamn jerk frogs!

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
ahhhh god they're growing

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
lol after actually going through my library i have concluded those are actually really bad frog photos! please accept these other frogs, which i converted straight from raw because i never actually bothered going through them all (so yes, there's a lot of green/magenta chromatic aberration)







e: i can post more if you guys want. while joking about frogs, the ones in my previous posts really are actually pretty bad, imo.

Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 21:34 on May 19, 2022

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy
good photos of bad frogs is something I am defo on board with


big chungus frog

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
imgur hosed up so this isn't all of them (i'll redo if someone wants), but here's part of Beeftweeter Goes to the Zoo, in no particular order










(not a particularly great pic but drat that bird weird)

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
also yeah those are also unprocessed, so there's also fringing and the contrast is a bit weird. enjoy nonetheless

Improbable Lobster
Jan 6, 2012

What is the Matrix 🌐? We just don't know 😎.


Buglord
i love critters

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

by Fluffdaddy

Beeftweeter posted:

also yeah those are also unprocessed, so there's also fringing and the contrast is a bit weird. enjoy nonetheless

amazing photos. really great poo poo friend

Kazinsal
Dec 13, 2011



decided to grab the lightroom app for my iphone and drat even without the telephoto lens of the pro you can still get some nice near-macro shots with this thing

also actually having an adjustable shutter speed is great, I can actually take photos of CRTs with my phone now

qirex
Feb 15, 2001

one "nice" thing about having fixed lens cameras is it's never worth even attempting wildlife photos

it's good for pets though

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
fun fact: some of those were literally taken with a lens cap, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B009C74508

try to guess which :smuggo:

Jenny Agutter
Mar 18, 2009

qirex posted:

one "nice" thing about having fixed lens cameras is it's never worth even attempting wildlife photos

it's good for pets though


agreed

qirex
Feb 15, 2001

good dog

I frequently forget to step up to f4 for pointy dogs and miss focus on the nose

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

a medium-format picture of beeftweeter staring silently at the camera, a quizzical expression on his face
pointy dogs own

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply