Post: #101

(03-22-2018 09:55 PM)ShotgunUppercuts Wrote:  Anyone shoot film?

While there are some cool aesthetics to it the effort isn't worth it usually with anything under medium format film IMO. Where film really stands out in 2018 is that it's allows you to shoot with a format much bigger than digital. 645 digital medium format bodies will run $30,000 new, thats pretty much aimed at high end fashion shoots or landscape work. You can get 6x7 Pentax for pretty cheap and those will produce outstanding results if you can use them correctly. The real difference makers are large format 4x5 and 8x10 but thats extremely slow and difficult workflow.

One of the biggest challenges is getting film in digital form which is really where digital rules because unless you are getting film scanned with a drum scanner many times your consumer scanners won't yield good results. But if you know what you are doing film can be downright amazing.

Post: #102

What is the best way to save film photographs in digital, getting to professionals which deal with scanning?

Since this thread is bumped, here is another question from me. If I go the route of getting old used digital camera, what would be a good choice? I know that there are cameras from early 2000s which are good, but I am not familiar with models from that age.
Does it make sense getting +6 years old camera that were in upper range in that time and what are differences in quality compared to beginner cameras today?

Post: #103

(03-30-2018 02:43 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  What is the best way to save film photographs in digital, getting to professionals which deal with scanning?

Since this thread is bumped, here is another question from me. If I go the route of getting old used digital camera, what would be a good choice? I know that there are cameras from early 2000s which are good, but I am not familiar with models from that age.
Does it make sense getting +6 years old camera that were in upper range in that time and what are differences in quality compared to beginner cameras today?

Get Canon 5D mark I, for example. It's a full frame, capable camera. You'll learn to use manual mode and will look like a pro with this big chunky thing!

Post: #104

This is Mark II but may be affordable, even though I don't like the fact that is from Australia (taxes + shipping increase the price):
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-5D-Ma...SwrLRavGOV

This is Mark I:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Used-Canon-EOS-...SwsU5Zymrb

Both need lenses and this is something I could also search for on ebay, of course for the most affordable ones for the beginning.

Post: #105

I'm looking at the Sony a6300, but frankly the amount of lenses available is overwhelming. Can anyone recommend lenses for shooting portraits, nature, and action shots outside?

At this point I don't think I would want to spend more than $500 per lenses, but am interested in the most value I get per money spent.

Post: #106

Portraits you can use a 35mm, 50mm or 85mm. A lot of people say that above 70mm is good for portraits because theres less distortion I think they call it. For nature or landscape shots a wide angle lens would be good, something like a 24mm. I first got a 24-70mm zoom lens so i can go to 70mm for portraits and 24 for those wider shots.

Post: #107

Thanks. Yeah I saw a lot of lenses in those sizes, my question was more, which specific lenses (by manufacturer/model) offer the most value per cost, that I can pick up in the $500 range. I could go over, if spending a little more gives a big enough improvement.

Post: #108

Tons of good info so far, never thought photography would be so overwhelming starting out..

My question -- what is a good standard, versatile travel camera? I have no experience but don't want to get overly technical, just want to take some cool ass pics, think the IG travel pages.

Doing some previous research the Sony A6000 came up many times, this was surprising to me because I always thought DSL was the standard.

Amazon has the Sony A6000 with a 16-50mm Power Zoom Lens (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00I8BICB2/ref...=UTF8&th=1) would that lens be good for what I'm looking for?

There's also the Nikon D3400 that was mentioned in here a few times.
This comes with a 18-55mm and a 70-300mm option as well (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01KITZRBE/ref...UTF8&psc=1)

Post: #109

(03-31-2018 06:55 PM)Biz Wrote:  Tons of good info so far, never thought photography would be so overwhelming starting out..

My question -- what is a good standard, versatile travel camera? I have no experience but don't want to get overly technical, just want to take some cool ass pics, think the IG travel pages.

Sony RX100 V is very pocketable and versatile (older marks, III, IV are fine as well).

Post: #110

(04-01-2018 06:24 AM)ksbms Wrote:  Sony RX100 V is very pocketable and versatile (older marks, III, IV are fine as well).

Should have mentioned I'm looking to cap it around $600-650

Post: #111

You can definitely find one on craigslist around that price. The difference is really sensor size and if your just using the photos for online stuff then a RX100 is really all you need.

Heres a video showing the difference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g66n_AoDQk

Post: #112

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/24270186...login=true

I'm really liking this style of lighting. I believe its called high key lighting. How would you recreate it?

Post: #113

The lighting is great in this setup too. But very studio, can't just take a light with you and make it.

Post: #114

(03-30-2018 10:47 AM)Repo Wrote:  I'm looking at the Sony a6300, but frankly the amount of lenses available is overwhelming. Can anyone recommend lenses for shooting portraits, nature, and action shots outside?

At this point I don't think I would want to spend more than $500 per lenses, but am interested in the most value I get per money spent.

My research into lenses is telling me that the Sony SEL1670Z Vario-Tessar T E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS lens would be good for the A6300.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ENZ...JQOYZKTUDZ

Because it seems to be so versatile, it would make a good "one size fits most" lens for a beginner, rather than needing to worry about bringing multiple other lenses.

This lens and the A6300 together new would run about $1,896.

Can someone correct me if this is not a good idea, and if not, what would be a better option?

Post: #115

(03-30-2018 10:47 AM)Repo Wrote:  I'm looking at the Sony a6300, but frankly the amount of lenses available is overwhelming. Can anyone recommend lenses for shooting portraits, nature, and action shots outside?

At this point I don't think I would want to spend more than $500 per lenses, but am interested in the most value I get per money spent.

Post: #116

My first lens I bought with my Canon 6D, has been the 50mm 1.4 by Sigma.

I am looking at the 70 - 200mm now, the portrait shots are great and with soft bokeh.

Anybody have this lenses? Is F4 any good.

Post: #117

(04-02-2018 06:53 PM)Repo Wrote:  

(03-30-2018 10:47 AM)Repo Wrote:  I'm looking at the Sony a6300, but frankly the amount of lenses available is overwhelming. Can anyone recommend lenses for shooting portraits, nature, and action shots outside?

At this point I don't think I would want to spend more than $500 per lenses, but am interested in the most value I get per money spent.

My research into lenses is telling me that the Sony SEL1670Z Vario-Tessar T E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS lens would be good for the A6300.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ENZ...JQOYZKTUDZ

Because it seems to be so versatile, it would make a good "one size fits most" lens for a beginner, rather than needing to worry about bringing multiple other lenses.

This lens and the A6300 together new would run about $1,896.

Can someone correct me if this is not a good idea, and if not, what would be a better option?

As an update, I did buy the Sony A6300, as well as the stock 16-50 lens, and a Zeiss 1.8/85 lens. Have been pretty busy with work so haven't got to experiment as much as I want, but things should start clearing up soon.

Post: #118

(06-04-2018 09:44 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  My first lens I bought with my Canon 6D, has been the 50mm 1.4 by Sigma.

I am looking at the 70 - 200mm now, the portrait shots are great and with soft bokeh.

Anybody have this lenses? Is F4 any good.

The F4 70-200 is a stellar lens, but f4 isn't very good for portraiture if you want that nice bokeh. Invest in the f2.8 version if you want to shoot portraits with it.

Post: #119

(06-05-2018 08:50 PM)TheUsual Wrote:  

(06-04-2018 09:44 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  My first lens I bought with my Canon 6D, has been the 50mm 1.4 by Sigma.

I am looking at the 70 - 200mm now, the portrait shots are great and with soft bokeh.

Anybody have this lenses? Is F4 any good.

The F4 70-200 is a stellar lens, but f4 isn't very good for portraiture if you want that nice bokeh. Invest in the f2.8 version if you want to shoot portraits with it.

Yeah that is what I am thinking.

Do you have one?

Post: #120

(06-05-2018 09:19 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 08:50 PM)TheUsual Wrote:  

(06-04-2018 09:44 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  My first lens I bought with my Canon 6D, has been the 50mm 1.4 by Sigma.

I am looking at the 70 - 200mm now, the portrait shots are great and with soft bokeh.

Anybody have this lenses? Is F4 any good.

The F4 70-200 is a stellar lens, but f4 isn't very good for portraiture if you want that nice bokeh. Invest in the f2.8 version if you want to shoot portraits with it.

Yeah that is what I am thinking.

Do you have one?

I've used the f4 version and I had a first generation f2.8. As of yesterday I switched to Sony so all my Canon gear is gone.

Post: #121

What did you sell?

This guy came in the gym last week with the new Sony A7R!!! and a 24-70mm 2.8 lens. $8000 worth of equipment.

Post: #122

The Nikon D3400 is Nikon's entry level model, and its a good body. I started with that. It's main downside is that it doesn't do well in low light situations. It came with the 18-55mm kit lens and I ended up picking up a 35 mm prime lens

Post: #123

(06-06-2018 09:20 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  What did you sell?

This guy came in the gym last week with the new Sony A7R!!! and a 24-70mm 2.8 lens. $8000 worth of equipment.

I sold my 6d body, battery grip, and some remote shutters. The 35mm lens I had left was sold a few months ago.

Post: #124

Opened this thread in March this year and it took till today to buy a camera. I bought Panasonic FZ300 (this is a bridge camera) which I deduced to be perfect beginner camera option for me.

It seemed that bridge cameras offer either one or two things that DSLR and compact cameras offer but model I mentioned offers much more. To this day, 3 years after it entered market, this camera is king in its price range.

What do you guys think?

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Review

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300

Post: #125

(12-09-2018 02:47 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  Opened this thread in March this year and it took till today to buy a camera. I bought Panasonic FZ300 (this is a bridge camera) which I deduced to be perfect beginner camera option for me.

It seemed that bridge cameras offer either one or two things that DSLR and compact cameras offer but model I mentioned offers much more. To this day, 3 years after it entered market, this camera is king in its price range.

What do you guys think?

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Review

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300

Not bad, you'll have to let us know how you like it.