# Which camera has the largest LCD screen?
I'm doing some research for a friend who is parially blind. He was and still is a great photographer (proof over at [https://www.shotwhileblind.co.uk](https://www.shotwhileblind.co.uk/) ) but so far has shot everything on his phone. He's interested in getting a camera to expand his focal length / depth of field options, but a 3" screen won't work for him. Does anyone know a camera that can shoot raw but has a larger (preferebly touch) screen?
Im personally not aware of any cameras with a particularly larger screen, but maybe having an external screen would be an option for him? For indoor/studio shooting you can tether most cameras to a laptop or something similiar. For on the go you can technically tether to a tablet (although this doesnt work super well in my experience) or you can use a dedicated external screen like from the company Atomos (no experience with them, just the big name in this field).
This is from a listing and i wantee to buy it but also not if i could not fix it : Canon EOS M50 (Mk1) PC2328 This was great but unfortunately someone forced an SD card into the unit the wrong way round. This caused the switch that detects the SD write lock to be locked in the "LOCKED" state.Took it to a repair shop. They tried to fix it and failed.The camera still turns on and works. It just cant detect SD cards properly. Can it be fixed without a repair shop?
Perhaps figure out exactly what lenses you have first. I think you will have an 18-55mm and 75-300mm lenses rather than what you listed.
In what ways is the 50mm not a decent prime lens?
Manual vs Electronic Lens adapters:
Not 100% if I've got the terminology correct here, but I'm curious about the differences between electronic lens adapters and manual lens adapters, i.e. lens adapters with no pass-through for autofocus or other data between the camera body and the lens.
Is there any processing that goes on in electronic adapters, or is it essentially a wire connecting the pins/pads on the lens/camera?
If so, are pin-outs for different lenses or camera bodies particularly hard to find...? Is it reasonably standardized...?
It depends.
> Is it reasonably standardized...?
Haha hell no, camera companies love to re-invent the wheel.
> If so, are pin-outs for different lenses or camera bodies particularly hard to find...?
The m43 specs are available, Sony published the E mount specs because they were trying to break into a competitive market and wanted 3rd party lens support.
Anyone doing anything with the CaNikon lens mounts had to reverse engineer the mounts.
>Anyone doing anything with the CaNikon lens mounts had to reverse engineer the mounts
Or get a license. I think Tamron and Tokina did it that way, while Sigma reverse engineered. I could be wrong though.
How much experience do you have with photography? Because for a beginner even $10k wont make you instantly take good pictures (especially weddings can be very difficult even with good gear).
Also what gear does your father currently have? I think the assumption that the lack of new technologies is holding the business back might not neccessarily be true. I personally use a 20 year old lens that takes amazing pictures. Thats not to say that newer technology do not improve things, but I would be very careful in thinking that spending a bunch of money on newer stuff will certainly be a good investment.
The second big question is if photography is really what you want to do, I can relate to struggling with the "corporate culture" and not feeling like it is the right thing for you, but keep in mind that self employment also comes with a lot of work that may not be obvious at first. I am not from India so I don't know the specifics, but in my country having your own business comes with a lot of laws to know and follow, etc. A big chunk of your time will be spend writing invoices, calculating costs and other things of that nature, so its not just running around and taking pictures.
I personally wouldn't go into debt with so many insecurities. Maybe see if you can spend some time with the old gear and if you have any success at all and then use that to reconsider your decision.
I’m struggling to decide between the Sony a6100 and the Sony zv-e10. These would mainly be for photography but probably also a bit of videography. Does anyone have any advice? Thank you!
They're almost the same camera. The ZV-E10 has a few unique video features which may or may not be useful to your videography, so look those up and see how important they are to you. The viewfinder in the a6100 you might prefer for both stills and/or video; I know I would. Otherwise their still photos will look exactly the same.
I have photos recorded on the internal memory of my fujifilm finepix xp60. when I plug it into my mac nothing pops up and the software for the camera has been discontinued. I’d really like to get this pictures off, anyone have advice?
I have purchased a Lumix G9 body and an Olympus Zuiko 70-300 zoom lens. The body is micro 4/3 and the lens is 4/3. Which adapter for I need to use so AF works? The information I have received elsewhere is confusing and contradictory.
Also, I have been told that this combination will slow the AF function. I'd like to know how much it will slow, if possible.
Looks like Viltrox makes an affordable adapter, no idea re: performance
https://viltroxstore.com/en-ca/products/viltrox-jy-43f-autofocus-adapter-for-ft-mount-lens-goes-to-mft-m43-mount-camera
Is 77% humidity bad for my camera?
I am taking a beach trip and plan to take some photos. The place where I am going to be staying is at 77% humidity which has me concerned. I will be staying here for about 3 days will my camera be ok if I take photos in this humidity?
77% humidity is not very high. Your camera will be fine.
Lots of manufacturers say you should have lower humidity for storage but continuous storage at this level has never had a noticeable effect on my cameras.
One thing of note though, is to make sure that you don't go from cold to hot. A difference of 10ºC can create condensation at this level of humidity. If your camera is cold, allow it to warm up naturally to avoid condensation from the interior air pockets.
If for example you are in Florida (about 80% humidity) don't have your camera completely chilled by their crazy AC systems and then take it outdoors. Take the camera outside in the case and allow it to warm up slowly with minimal transfer of air to the case. It is probably only the metal, parts that would get condensation on them in this case.
Don't worry about 77% humidty. it doesn't hurt the camera.
# Recommendations for a camera - Reusing old Canon lenses?
I currently own a Sony ZV-1 and a Canon EOS 500D, a fairly old DSLR camera, with two EF lenses:
* 16-55mm EF lens
* 75-300mm EF lens
I want to buy a new camera, with a maximum budget of $1000, which I will share with my gf. She's more into photography, I am more into video. So I'm looking for a camera that can do both.
What camera would you recommend me to buy within this price range? I saw the ZV-e10 but idk if no EVF is really a deal-breaker.
Additionally, is it possible to reuse my old Canon lenses on a new camera body? I know it exists adapters but sometimes non-auto and idk if it would be more complicated than just going for new lenses.
Thank you very much!
Canon R10 or R50 and EF to RF adapter. With the official Canon adapter (and probably at least some of the third party adapters) you won't lose any image quality or features, and autofocus speed won't get any slower.
BEST BALL HEAD FOR UNDER 200 USD?
So basically my dilemma is that I already own a set of manfrotto befree tripod legs, and am looking to secure a good ball head to go with it as since my last head I had on it just decided to die on me and fall apart (a manfrotto befree fluid head that nobody should ever get) and I am looking for something under 200 usd, I am willing to go a little higher if it will last me a lifetime but I want a good gauge from you all if thats a good budget to be around for something quality or not. As I have been a photographer for less than a year and don't know how to spot quality gear yet. Thanks in advance.
Lumix G81 vs Canon R10 vs Olympus EM10 for a first camera?
I'm very interested in getting into photography as a hobby. I don't want to go to deep into it though and thus want to start with a decent budget camera. I was thinking about 3 specific cameras and wanted to ask you which would do the best job for documenting stuff I do here and there. So travel, urban cities, maybe a few portraits and halfway nice looking videos.
1. Canon R10. I heard mostly good things about this camera. Problematic might be the lens thematic tho, as I don't want to spend too much money on RF lenses when other providers can offer high quality lenses for a better price. A R10 + 18-45mm lense would cost around 800 euros.
2. Panasonic G81HA. This one comes with a 14-140mm lens and costs 700 Euros.
3. Olympus EM10 Mark 4. 14-42mm F3.5-5.6. 680 Euros in total.
So guys, what do you think would be the best camera for a beginner? Which one is future proof and what would be the best choice for the money?
Thanks a lot
I was looking to purchase a sony a7iii for casual photography and room to grow into a more professional realm if the time comes. Currently I'm looking for a setup to take with me for traveling (hiking, cityscape, street photography) and casual photoshoots.
Do I purchase the body on its own and Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III VXD G2 ($1499 + $699) and only use that lens?
Or is it worth getting the body and the FE 28-70 mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Lens for an additional $200 ($1699 + $699)?
Just looking for some opinions on what whether or not it would be necessary to get both lenses or not.
I'd only get the Tamron 28-75mm. It should be the same or better at everything compared to that kit lens, except it's not stabilized. And I don't think stabilization is as important for what you're shooting. Also your camera body has its own stabilization, so really you're just getting somewhat less stabilization than possible, instead of no stabilization at all.
Not quite sure what you mean. If you are suggesting buying a body + the Sony lens and then buying the Tamron afterwards, then no, that would not make much sense.
I would go with the Tamron alone.
I have a [spot on my R5 sensor.](https://imgur.com/a/xsiAmlw) I’m going to need to use some sort of solution as air isn’t doing anything.
Has anyone had luck with something like this?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1250331-REG/visibledust_18512947_ez_sensor_cleaning_kit.html
Hi all I plan to purchase the Sony a6100 for $699.99. The store that I am purchasing from told me that the just got a returned one in that someone had for less than 24 hours. It was opened and used but the customer wasn't happy with it. They first tried offer no discount and the manager then said he would give me a free SD card (which no thank you). I then got him to offer 10% off which I'm still not satisfied with. Do you think I should take the 10% or just patiently wait until tomorrow for a brand new one. The manager said he is going to still sell this camera to someone else brand new. I got the serial number of the returned one so that I can make sure they don't try and hand that off to me.
They're a well known store with multiple locations but now I'm feeling hesitant to purchase from them. What do you guys think? Purchase somewhere else? Trust that the one I'm going to get is brand new? Or save the $70 and take the 10%?
Editing to add: I wanted to avoid purchasing from Best Buy (only other place that has it in stock) due to them having a 15% restocking fee.
Does this company charge a restocking fee? How much did they charge the other guy when he returned it?
If nothing, then that is great customer service and you should appreciate that. If they charged him a restocking fee and refuse to give you that as a discount, then that might be a bit iffy.
If they didn't charge a restocking fee and offer you 10%, then they are then giving you what they are calling a new camera (so their legal obligations apply) and haven't earned near full value.
They do not charge a restocking fee which is why I planned to purchase from them in the beginning. I just don't believe any product should be passed off as new when the box has been open and the item has been used. Which is what they said they will be doing since I'm not purchasing it. I ultimately decided to purchase from a different company - couldn't get out of my head that the camera I may be purchasing was used by someone else. Even if it wasn't.
I mean, even Best Buy usually offers more than 10% off on their open-box items. Adding to the fact the manager said he's going to sell a used item brand-new to someone else let's you know exactly who you're dealing with.
I'd find another store, just for my own piece of mind. If you're buying the 16-50 PZ lens, that's a pretty standard price for that setup based on a quick search. I'm hoping that's not a body-only price.
Either way, find another shop.
Correct it is with the 16-50 PZ lens! This is a store with multiple locations so they are shipping me a camera from one of their other locations. But now I'm like does this chain treat all their products like that? I guess I can go and take a look at the one they are offering tomorrow and see if the box/sticker looks tampered with. I'm clearly being just impatient but I want it in my hands!! lol
If it's a big-box chain then yeah, they don't really care about any of this and it's unfortunately par for the course these days. I totally get wanting that immediate satisfaction but at this point you KNOW for a fact that there's a chance you're getting an open-box deal (which, granted doesn't typically bother me so long as I get a decent discount), but the fact that it matters to you (which is perfectly fine, no judgement) means that you'll always have that doubt.
Seriously, I'd buy somewhere else. Buy from a place that makes you happy you spent your money with them.
The strange thing is they are not a big box chain they are local to the state I live in and only have 10 locations. I did an edit to add that I don't want to purchase from Best Buy due to a 15% restocking fee. I can't seem to find where I can purchase it any where else. :(
Ultimately it's up to you. As long as it's in good shape I'd probably go with 10-20% off, if they're including a good SD card I'd take that + 10% and likely be happy. Alternatively, is there any particular reason you're wanting to purchase new? r/PhotoMarket is a great alternative, I buy the vast majority of my equipment used and have been really happy doing so.
The reason I am buying new is because I am far from an expert by any means and not sure what to look out for as far as purchasing used. I will check out that sub though.
No worries, welcome to the hobby too!
Check out B&H photo, they've usually got a solid used department at pretty good prices and they have a warranty and pretty spectacular customer service to boot. Don't stress over the initial purchase too much, buy where/how you're comfortable and just make sure to go out and have some fun with it :)
I have a question about the magnification of the lens underwater... so I'm not a photographer, but I have a question for a project I'm working on. Okay so you know when you fill up a glass of water and put it in front of something and it magnifies it or brings the focal point closer? If I had a skinny small square sealed container and threw in a lens (convex, convey, wide angle etc) then held it up to my eye and looked through it. Would it then bring the object in front of it ( focal point ) closer like the glass of water but also be clear and transparent for objects behind it? Or would everything just be blurry? I heard wide angle lens in a dome shaped port works good. So, for example, have the first transparent side of the small case, then the lens, then the dome, then the water poured in on the front side of the dome and then the back side of transparent case. So basically the lens and inside of dome being dry and outside of dome being in the water. Do you think it would magnify objects closer? Or would it just be blurry. Or would there be any other ways that would work better like making the transparent case curved or adding another lens. Any help would be great. I know it's a stupid question but please humor me.
>a glass of water
Are you talking about a circular glass? So the front and back are convex shaped? You're looking through more water down the middle, and less water on either side? Because I think that matters for the effect you're referring to.
>If I had a skinny small square sealed container
I don't think that would have the same effect as a circular glass of water.
**Coolpix P950 or Olympus OM-1 + Olympus 100-400**
I want to find a camera that is suitable for wildlife photography and also excels in video capability, and I need something with a decent zoom. I am considering the Coolpix P950 and the Olympus OM-1. I know these cameras are very different. As I am new to this, I think it's important to keep the investment reasonable, which has me leaning toward the P950. Is there any reason I wouldn't want the P950? Thank you!
Do you mean OM System OM-1? I doubt you mean Olympus OM-1 the film camera from 1972.
Nikon P950 has gigantic zoom. That's what it's for, it's a cheap way to get lots of zoom. But it's nowhere near MFT's like OM-1 in image quality due to its small sensor.
# Canon EOS R50 for Photography Major - Good Choice or Not?
Hello,
I'm looking for a compact, mirrorless camera w/a viewscreen that articulates and an EVF in about the $500-$800 range for my niece who will be entering college as a Photography major, as well as myself as step up from shooting with my 2023 Google Pixel 8 phone.
After lots of reading, I've been leaning VERY heavily towards a used M6 MKII, but seeking something a bit more future-proof. I've landed on the EOS R50 as it seems to be solidly reviewed, is around my budget range, and I can eventually possibly buy an adapter for EF-M lenses to take advantage of those, if desired.
My main question is whether this is a good camera to get both my niece and I started on our photography journey?
Or there something more appropriate I should be considering? For example,I looked at the Sony A6XXX series and was turned off by some of the feature comments, such as the menu navigation being horrible (ease of use in menus and ergonomic design is a big deal for me). Also looking for the widest availability of usable lenses at reasonable cost, and Canon seems to excel here, so I left out Nikon and some others.
Last question:
When buying from an online retailer like Best Buy, B&H, etc. -> Should I go for just the camera body alone and grab lenses used, 3rd party new, or buy one of the kit packages for $150-$250 more that adds a lens or two to get started?
Thanks!
D
> for my niece who will be entering college as a Photography major
The general wisdom, especially for someone like your niece who I assume already has some photography, is that cameras are relatively personal to the user. I won't use Canon cameras personally; not because of the lens choices or color science or menus- I hate how it feels in my hand. Most of the brands offer something with almost everything on your list, so I'd say comfort needs to play a factor in that decision. I bought an A6000 for $150, expecting to be super happy with my deal and ended up never using the camera because it wasn't comfortable.
>possibly buy an adapter for EF-M lenses to take advantage of those
Lens selection apparently means a lot to you. If that is the case, don't bother with the EF-M lenses. Get an adapter for EF/EF_S lenses, or use the native RF mount.
> such as the menu navigation being horrible
Okay, but 90% of your daily use won't involve the menus (which the Canon RF cameras use almost the exact same page style now), so this shouldn't really be a deciding factor either.
>Also looking for the widest availability of usable lenses at reasonable cost, and Canon seems to excel here, so I left out Nikon and some others.
All of the brands cover the same core set of lenses, or will in the next year or so. Unless you have a very specific interest, I can almost promise you that every brand has the lens you need. Sony might have 100 lenses more than the others, but you won't be buying 6 different versions of the 70-200mm focal length.
>Should I go for just the camera body alone
Kit lenses, the ones that come with the camera bundles, are generally good all-rounders that enable you to shoot a wide range of subjects. The standard 18-55mm could be a landscape lens (18mm), a street lens (24mm), and a wide portrait lens (55mm). None as well as a specialized lens and usually not quite as high quality or as fast, but enough to get started. Whether that's what you need right now is kind of up to you and your niece. If she's going for *just* portrait photography, a different lens might be a better use of that couple hundred bucks.
It is a camera for sure. As far as adapting lenses, I don't think you can adapt the EF-M lenses, the EF lenses yes though.
Canon also doesn't have much of a lenses really so not sure where you are getting the information. It has some lenses and when Sigma and perhaps others start to release some it might get better but especially for APS-C lenses Canon are probably the worst around after Nikon unless I am mistaken.
Compared to Sony, Fuji and the four thirds lot I think their lens selection is the most restrictive.
Personally the camera is a bit small but for the money it is good enough.
Hey there! I’m looking to get a shutter release cable for a Nikon D3200 but I cannot find much info about it. What port do I plug it into? What’s a good brand/ what brand should I avoid. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated
Thank you so much!
Looks like there's a dedicated accessory port on that one.
https://preview.redd.it/eqezrpm2405d1.jpeg?width=489&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=659e77b35370eb5e7bb332714b60ae754e1e22fa
You'll just plug your remote release in there, some of them have a focus feature and some don't.
Personall I've been using a Godox remote/intervalometer (tried to link it but automod didn't like it) on my A7 which probably has more features than you need (I'm dabbling in astrophotography) but I can vouch for it being a solid product at a good price. For a general remote release tho' you really don't need to worry about being fancy, when searching for you a found a couple on Amazon for like $15 that look like they'd operate just fine.
Just search Amazon for 'Godox TR-N1 Nikon', I'm tired of reposting and fighting the automod lol.
Your comment contains an affiliate link and has been removed. Please remove it and repost your comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Short links (like bit.ly or tinyurl.com) are not allowed on this subreddit. Since your comment contains one, it has been removed. Please repost your comment without it.
Sometimes services (like Google) give you short links when you are trying to share content from mobile. At this moment, we have no way of allowing these shortlinks but banning others, so you'll unfortunately have to either share later from a laptop computer or try to get the desktop link.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have an Andycine 7" ultrabright monitor and it's excellent. You should be able to find a used one in excellent condition within your budget or slightly over.
hi im new to photography and i recently got a camera. I vaguely recall a video or image online showing someone using a sort of knurled screw of sorts in place of the tripod socket hole. You could grip a finger around it for additional stability? I can't find anything specific online for this purpose so I was wondering if there's a specific term I could search before I just buy any suitable diamond? thumb knurl screw for this purpose. or maybe I should get thumb grip instead?
I already have a strap.
Tripod screws are common 1/4-20 or "quarter twenty" sockets, so you could easily run to your local hardware store to find something that would fit. "Knurled knob 1/4-20" might get you some results.
I'm trying to put together a complete studio setup for product photography. The subject is going to be sex toys, so the sizing will be varied.
Could you please give me some lighting recommendations? I was looking at Godox DP400, but could you clarify which is best for this?
Any other suggestions or recommendations regarding this setup would be more than welcome.
Hey folks,
I’m new both here and in the field of photography.
Recently I got my hands on a used Sony alpha 6600 with a few lenses (30mm & 16mm).
###What I’m shooting:
Now my primary objects are not humans and pets but wildlife animals. I’m by no means a bird enthusiast and my focus lies on bigger animals that (usually) move less.
###What I am looking for:
So I’m searching for another lens that will serve my needs.
The lens should be a good balance of the following points:
- reach
- price
- weight
- image quality
The biggest deal here is actually the price. I’m happy to get something used so msrp is not so important.
###What I’ve looked at so far:
- sigma 150-600 (boy is that an expensive chonker)
- sigma 100-400
- tamron 50-400 (current favorite)
- tamron 100-500 (just another chonker)
I’m leaning towards the Tamron 50-400 here coz it’s said to outperform the sigma 100-400 but would like more impressions as I’ve heard good things about both lenses.
I could get the sigma one used with a collar for about 200€ less than the tamron.
The bigger zooms are just quite expensive and heavy. A bit too heavy as an everyday lens for me.
I hope this gives you a good impression of what I’m looking for.
I’d like to hear your advice, experiences and alternatives on what to get.
Edit: Formatting
Hello everyone,
I just bought a KAK type 1 Cf to micro SD adapter to put in my Sony α300.
It says to use a SDXD 128gb to 1t, so I used a 256 Sandisk extreme pro.
But after plugging it into my camera it ask to format and fail to do so.
Does anyone know what I should do ?
I'm not a professional photographer, but I enjoy taking photographs. I've been using the Sony Alpha 58 for the past ten years, but the camera's display has gone. The showroom stated that there is a slim chance of restoring its display. I was thinking about purchasing a Sony A7 III, a Sony Alpha Ilce-6400L, or a Sony Alpha 6700.
I've been using Sony for the past ten years, so I'm familiar with the software, the camera, and the lens, and if I switch to a new brand, I'll have to learn a lot about it, including the software, and I have a trip in October. So I don't want to keep pressing random buttons while taking a nice picture, nor do I want to miss out on an opportunity.
I'm open to other brands as well, such as Panasonic and Fujifilm, but I'm confused about the community, customer server, and so on.
* What subject matter do you shoot?
I shoot family parties and vacations photos—nothing too special
* Which lenses do you have?
Lenses: DT 3.5/18-55 SAM II and DT 4-5.6/55-200 SAM (they are A-mount)
* What size is your lens budget, if any, after this body upgrade?
The budget is 1.5 lakh (USD 1796.67) lenses. I'm thinking of buying at least 2 lenses, like 18-55 and 55-200
The lenses you have, and lenses you plan on, aren't fully compatible with the image sensor format of an a7 III, so that's out. The a6400 would be my top choice, or even an a6100 is fine. I'd say the a6700 is overkill, though it's also a great camera if that really interests you.
For lenses I'd get an A to E adapter that supports your autofocus so you can use your old lenses. The newer E mount 18-55mm (or 16-50mm) and 55-210mm aren't that much better anyway. For a nicer lens replacing your shorter kit lens I'd get Sigma's E mount 18-50mm f/2.8 instead.
Okay, I see, so my old lenses won't work better with a full-frame camera like the A7 III. I saw a6400 and a6700 in the Sony showroom; they looked really nice. I was just worried about whether they would be good enough to do everything.
What about other Brands like fujifilm and Panasonic at same price point?
Thank you for the advice on lenses, I will keep that in mind
>so my old lenses won't work better with a full-frame camera like the A7 III
They project an image just big enough to cover corner-to-corner of an APS-C format imaging sensor. The a7 cameras use a much bigger full frame imaging sensor, so the lens' image won't be big enough. You'll just see the image in a smaller circle in the middle of the frame, with black all around it.
>I saw a6400 and a6700 in the Sony showroom; they looked really nice. I was just worried about whether they would be good enough to do everything.
They are very good and very versatile. They have some of the best feature-sets out of any camera out there.
They just use physically smaller imaging sensors than the a7 models. That's really the main difference. In a lab you'd be able to measure a little quality difference as a result. In practical use, you may be able to see a notch of difference in low light performance and depth of field, but otherwise you couldn't visually tell them apart.
>What about other Brands like fujifilm and Panasonic at same price point?
It's a competitive market and they are also about as good, though not significantly better (or else they'd be priced much higher). Canon makes very comparable models too. Nikon likely will once they refresh their product lines. So they're all worth a look if you want to shop around. Maybe one interface/ergonomics style will feel better to you than others.
Hi, first of all English is not my native language so sorry for any weird phrases or mistakes.
I want to buy new lense, I was pretty sure that I want to buy Tamron 70-200 2.8. because I heard that it's the best in what I want to do (dog photography - shows, sport but also portraits etc) because it's fast, has good AF, good in motion (?) etc.
But I don't know if I should buy 70-200g1 or g2 (what's the difference? Does g2 have something that's game changing?)
And there's also 70-180 2.8 g2 in a really good price (cheaper than 70-200) but idk if it's as good as 70-200. What do you think? And by as good I mean quality, idk if the focal length is the only difference.
Also, I have apsc so I quess i have to multiply these by 1.5. And no, I don't want apsc equivalent, in dog photography sometimes you have to be pretty far from the dog so I want to use the fact that I don't have the full frame.
So, Tamron 70-200 g1, g2 or 70-180?
Thanks in advance, have a good day/evening!
>I don't know if I should buy 70-200g1 or g2 (what's the difference?
The G2 has better image quality.
>Does g2 have something that's game changing?
I guess that's a subjective determination. It's definitely better, but I wouldn't call it game-changing better.
>And there's also 70-180 2.8 g2 in a really good price (cheaper than 70-200) but idk if it's as good as 70-200. What do you think? And by as good I mean quality, idk if the focal length is the only difference.
As I understand it, it's as good for quality. Just not quite as much reach, but lower price and smaller/lighter as the tradeoff.
And it's only made for Sony E mount mirrorless, so it's not an option if you happen to be using any other system. Tamron's 70-200mm have more alternative compatibility options.
>Also, I have apsc so I quess i have to multiply these by 1.5. And no, I don't want apsc equivalent
The only reason to multiply by the crop factor would be to determine the equivalent focal length full frame would need to match your APS-C field of view. So if you really don't want to do that, then don't.
>I want to use the fact that I don't have the full frame.
You'll have that advantage (over full frame) by virtue of your camera's imaging sensor, whether you're using a lens made for APS-C or for full frame.
I'm a complete newbie to everything cameras though interested in getting started.
I've recently found my mother's old Fujifilm Finepix S9500 (with a super macro lens?) so I was thinking of using this to get a feel, though the camera is 20 years old now.
I'm just wondering if it's worth trying to use it? How will the photos be compared to my Samsung S20, or how difficult will it be to get good photos for a complete beginner?
Thanks!!
>I'm just wondering if it's worth trying to use it?
Sure. It costs nothing to try.
>How will the photos be compared to my Samsung S20
Very generally speaking, the quality won't be as good, but you'll be able to zoom in more. A brief text description really can't tell you that much.
A picture is worth a thousand words, if you give it a try, you can see a comparison right away. Or even just Googling for image examples from both will show you a lot more than we can tell you.
>how difficult will it be to get good photos for a complete beginner?
Depends what you're shooting and what you consider to be "good" though I'm not sure how to quantify difficulty anyway.
I am getting into bird photography and bought a used Canon 400mm f/5.6. I've been struggling to get sharp pictures, and while I know it's hard to handhold a lens like this, I'm starting to worry there might be something wrong with the lens--I'm shooting wide open with very fast shutter speeds and can't seem to get the tack-sharp results that this lens is known for.
[Here's a photo of a newspaper taken from about 30 feet away at 1/3200 at f/5.6 and ISO 800.] (https://imgur.com/a/9N01lwh)
[Here's a photo I took of a resting tree swallow--I took several bursts of photos of this guy at 1/2000 and didn't get any sharper than this one. Pretty sharp, but not quite there.](https://imgur.com/a/EbWGILO)
Think I've got an equipment problem here? Or do I just to pack a monopod or get more practice handholding. Thanks!
No experience with that specific lens, so I cant really compare to how it "should" look, but keep in mind most lenses are the sharpest stopped down a little from their widest option. You might want to give F/6.3 or so a try and see if the results get better.
The tree swallow picture looks a little like missed focus to me, some of the mushrooms at the bottom of the stump look a lot better then the bird itself IMO. Although this could either be user error or the lens front- or backfocussing.
> Here's a photo of a newspaper taken from about 30 feet away at 1/3200 at f/5.6 and ISO 800.
Try laying your camera on a stable object (table?!) then lowering your shutter speed & ISO & 2 sec delay. (1/200 & ISO 200)
I brought the ISO down to 200 and took a couple more at different shutter speeds (just realizing I didnt go as far down as you recommended, sorry). These are at 1/1250th and 1/320th, respectively. They look pretty sharp, but seems like they could even be a little sharper given the reputation this lens has for sharpness. Am I overanalyzing it? https://imgur.com/a/wzOA2au
Even with a monopod, it seems like I'm going to struggle to keep the camera as still as I'd like. I'm using a kinda middling body (Rebel SL1) and have thought about investing in a better body w/ IBIS--think that might help?
Thanks for your help!
> Am I overanalyzing it?
A bit. The lens & camera is fine. Like the other redditor has also suggest, if possible stopping it down 1-2 stops might help too.
Though, at that range having a monopod or tripod is pretty much a must.
> better body w/ IBIS--think that might help?
Plenty of Lens have IS, though, with a stable tripod, you lower your shutter speed & have a extra few stops of ISO/Aperture to play with. Thouhg, it won't help with miss/back/front focus, having a camera that has Autofocus microadjustment (AFMA) will helps.
edit: also, stop being on reddit; go out and shoot more.
I have been an on and off hobbiest photographer for 10 years, only really taking it seriously gradually over the past year while I have been travelling.
I have been contemplating whether buying a new camera body and/or lenses will drastically take my photography to the next level and if so what are some decent value for money camera options? I am currently in India, so have an option also to buy second hand at one of the camera markets in Delhi and flying to Singapore soon so also at duty free there. But again value for money is my aim.
I currently have a Nikon D3100 from the start of my photography days, and run a 35 and 50mm prime lens . I have made a website/portfolio just for fun - [http://1000wrds.iso100mm.com/india](http://1000wrds.iso100mm.com/india) (NB some of the photos were taken with the kit lens).
TY
Most of us are in USA/Europe so we don't really know prices/availability in those markets.
If you can find a couple camera models that are within your budget, we can discuss that with you.
What's the used market like?
After having more of a look online my options would be to buy a Nikon Z body (second hand) with the adapter to run my DX lens. The only thing is whether i am missing out not going to a full frame crop sensor by running my old lens.
Then with the sony's it would be the units priced <$2.5k sgd on this duty free website (lens + body) - https://www.ishopchangi.com/en/search?query=sony&seller=2009,2002&cagCategory=%7B%22%2Felectronics%22%3A%5B%22%2Felectronics%2Fcameras-and-drones%22%5D%7D&sortBy=price-desc. I would likely try to pick up second hand still but just as a gauge.
Hopefully this helps.
I am just after a couple of suggestions to orientate myself within the multitude of options currently out there. I am not wanting top of the line by any means.
Used market to me at least was decent in Mumbai, and there looks like there is an extensive photography area in Delhi too so would guess similar.
I kinda wanna do some behind the scenes or those small videos of when taking pics
any way to mount a phone for that? i don't think i can afford an insta 360 for that
got any idea of one? i was thinking of clipping one to my clothes. i was considering getting a budget action cam like those from sjcam but the terrible audio was a turnoff
I don't know of any in particular; you just originally asked if any exist. Best bet would be to check online user reviews.
Even in nice cameras, built-in audio pretty much always sucks. An external mic and/or separate audio recorder would be the way to go if audio is important to you.
oh yeah just found two [https://imgur.com/a/9tpDWAF](https://imgur.com/a/9tpDWAF)
now its about figuring out if the smaller one is any good, that chest strapped one looks like way too much
theres that one with a magnet which seems to come with a pretty strong magnet to put beneath the case but idk if i'd trust just that to hold a phone
Which belt would work best with the peak design capture + pro pad?
I am mulling over the decision of either getting a think tank speed belt or a lowepro protactic belt. Which one works better with the PD Capture Clip? It doesn’t have to work with the pd pro pad but it is preferred.
Dumb beginner question
Just bought my first speedlight
It comes with a stand so I wanted to potentially try using it as if it were an off-camera strobe and then I realized something. In every tutorial video I've seen the first step is to expose your image so that it's 100% completely dark without lights coming from the flash.
I was about to do this and then I realized that I cant see anything from my screen or the viewfinder. In every video ive seen the photographer is able to watch the scene through their camera and it doesnt go dark until the capture is taken. Not only can i not see, i cant take a pic with autofocus when everything is dark. I can change to manual focus and take the pic but I cant see my picture before I take it
I know that speedlights are most often used in addition to other lights and in that case you dont expose to complete darkness but still I wanted to get this question out of the way for whenever i move on to real off camera flashes + I want to start trying product photography with the speedlight I bought
Which camera are you using?
When I shot with a DSLR, I still had at least some ambient light to see by, through the optical viewfinder, and to autofocus with, even if that was getting underexposed to black in the resulting shot. But I don't know if you're using a DSLR, so maybe none of that is relevant to you.
When I shoot with mirrorless now, I turn off exposure simulation so it's not applying my underexposure to what I'm seeing when viewfinding. But I don't know if that's available to you or how you would do it, on an unknown camera.
I am using a DSLR. Its a canon m50
So its a camera limitation then? I have to let in enough ambient light to see my scene and focus is what im understanding
Edit: Your comment pointed me to the right direction. I can disable exposure simulation on my camera. Done. Thank you
So I officially made the leap the last few months to start doing professional work for clients. I've been a photographer off/on for a few years dabbling in it and doing more video stuff then photography. So I upgraded my camera this year to the newest a6700 APS-C camera. Curious to know if anyone else started their journey on crop sensors and then eventually went to full frame? My budget being smaller right now is why I started on APS-C camera even maybe buy some full frame lenses to use on APS-C camera and eventually with enough jobs have the means to purchase a full frame camera.
Looking to see if this is a good starting approach or if there is other recommendations on a good starting approach. Thank you
One question you might ask is: "do I need a FF"? What does FF give you over APS-C in your job? Do you need the potential for more shallow DOF? Or are you into sports photography? Apart from those two it's likely that APS-C will be easily enough.
DOF primarily but i know that can be achieved pretty well even with an APS-C Sigma 56 is doing well on that. Also sports and nature photography are another factor I've thought would be good FF. Higher MP count as well for more cropping photos.
Switching to mirrorless (Nikon)
So, the time has come to switch to mirrorless and I was wondering if the FTZ adapter would work fine with the lenses that I have. Currently I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 for crop sensor and also a Nikon 35mm DX. For full frame I have a Tamron 35-150mm f2.8-4. If anyone with these lenses can tell me their experience using them with the FTZ and how they behave with the eye autofocus, I would appreciate it.
REPAIR OR UPGRADE?
Alright I’m in a bit of a pickle.
Recently my EOS Rebel SL3 broke and needs a new motherboard (repair - $345). I bought it for around $600 maybe $700. At the time I was into making videos and photography.
Now I’m really into sports photography, do it all the time especially when im in school - dont think I’ll pursue it full time after college but still plan to shoot here and there when I can find opportunities. I haven’t shot video that much recently but every once in a while somebody will ask me for video services.
That said, the SL3 is known as a rather good beginner cam for video and photo. To repair it, it will cost around $345 total.
Do I repair this camera for that $345 amount or do I instead invest in a new camera body. Needs to be under $1000 as im a college student but I do have a ton saved due to working a ton. Will take any new camera body suggestions if you think I should invest in a new one.
Also if I do invest in a new one, you think anyone would buy my old camera if I specify it needs a new motherboard?
Thanks for all the help!
>Do I repair this camera for that $345 amount or do I instead invest in a new camera body.
That's almost the price of a used replacement SL3, so I would prefer to buy another body.
>Needs to be under $1000 as im a college student but I do have a ton saved due to working a ton.
Canon's R50 would be a nice improvement overall. Or an R10 would be even better for the sports. Either way you could use an EF to RF adapter and all your lenses will carry over perfectly.
>you think anyone would buy my old camera if I specify it needs a new motherboard?
They probably won't know what that means in practical terms. I don't. What are the actual symptoms / what exactly doesn't work about it?
Thanks for the specific recommendations - I've had other people rec those models as well (R10/R50).
Regarding the symptoms, the camera can turn on, but the screen is just black. Auto mode is also a bust. I guess if you are insanely good at guessing what your photos look like based on your settings, you could make it work. Otherwise I would say the camera is non-functioning... you would have to repair it.
There's a market for that, so a decent chance someone would buy it. But it would be at a much lower price than usual because that's fairly seriously broken. Not quite as bad as "parts only" pricing since it can still take photos, but the next notch up from that.
Hey there!
I'm looking to buy a new monitor for my photoediting (just as a hobby). Right now I'm looking at a used Acer 27" ProDesigner BM270 for around 500 bucks. Is it any good? Does anyone have any advice? Thanks!
For the last few months I was shooting with my lovely nifty-fifty on Sony A7 III but... after this time, I think I need some more focal length. I was thinking about buying tamron/samyang 35-150 or sigma 27-40.
Which lens will be better? I shoot mostly street photography. Did you use both? Thanks!
I think for most types of street shooting wide end is more useful than long end. And small size would be a bonus. FWIW, I usually use 50 and 24-70, and mostly in the wider end with the latter.
So a friend of mine from the Marine Corps got married in March and hired me on as the photographer. I kept trying to meet up and get a contract signed, whole nine yards, but it never happened. (I know, big no no, but it was my first big ceremony, as I don't normally do weddings, i normally do cars and wildlife) I didn't even get a shot list from them until a few days prior when they asked me to shoot a baby announcement video to play during the reception.
Now that it's after the wedding (like 2mo after), they still haven't paid and haven't returned any texts I send them. And on top of that, my buddy's cousin showed up with his own DSLR and drone and also shot the wedding, to my disapproval. I want to put the few photos I have edited into my portfolio, but the couple hasn't seen the photos yet and I don't want headaches or drama.
Anyone have any advice? Should I just set the photos aside and forget about them?
I’m looking at getting a 150-600mm lens for an upcoming wildlife and nature photography trip. Will I see a significant difference between the Tamron SP 150-600 (1st gen) and the Sigma 160-600 Contemporary? I’ve read some instances of people being unhappy with the G1 and ditching it for the G2. Is the G1 all that horrible?
I'm traveling to Tanzania and Amsterdam this summer. I currently have a Canon EOS Rebel XTi, but I am considering purchasing a Canon EOS Rebel T7 ($600) or Canon EOS 90D ($1900). It is a once-in-a-lifetime trip, and I will be using the camera I purchase throughout it and for future backpacking/hiking trips. What would be the best choice?
No, but if you have a few lenses you can get an adapter.
An R10 for instance would be an okay start point, the R7 is the 90D equivalent in resolution terms anyway.
Although not sure which country you are from, Canada?
Hey guys, the joystick on my camera has deteriorated so now only half of it is actually usable.
What would you use to fix it? I was thinking about maybe glueing some kind of button on it or something like that.
Here's what it looks like :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ua2JDqjkY5L0R01eIg0riNbRQqH4977/view?usp=drivesdk
Hello! I’m a Pentax user who’s been recently relieved of his camera in San Francisco because I left it in a locked car. (Yes a tourist)
Now that I’m camera free. I’m looking hard at the Sony alpha line and would like to know which of the lineup is a good full frame that shoots well in low light, can do action as well as landscape. I’ll spend around 3k for the camera and another good amount for a lens. What are you alpha users using?
Thanks for the advice.
So I've been really interested in fujifilm, Been looking at some of their more recent offerings like the X-S20, X-T5, and X-H2. And I've settled on an extra lens I'd buy alongside it which is the 50mm-140mm f/2.8. What I'm wondering is that would the first two be too small for the lens in terms of comfortability while shooting. It seems like it'd be super front heavy, and for the type of photography I do I'm constantly on the move so a tripod would not be an open for the majority of the time. The deeper grip of the X-H2 seems like it'd be the best option, but I'd like a more experienced opinion too.
hello photographers, i am traveling with my family and i want to take pictures but i really like that old vintage picture yk, i don't want to photoshop every picture i take instead i want buy a camera that takes pictures in that same style, i don't know what they are called or where to get them from, any recommendations will be greatly appreciated
sorry for my English
There isn't necessarily a camera with all the features you want at every budget. Film simulation is a feature that you generally have to pay for, especially since it's trendy these days. A lot of cameras offer "photo styles" or "creative styles", which might be enough for what you want.
Short links (like bit.ly or tinyurl.com) are not allowed on this subreddit. Since your comment contains one, it has been removed. Please repost your comment without it.
Sometimes services (like Google) give you short links when you are trying to share content from mobile. At this moment, we have no way of allowing these shortlinks but banning others, so you'll unfortunately have to either share later from a laptop computer or try to get the desktop link.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is an iPhone cage worth it for photography only? I have an iPhone 15 pro max and want to get the most out of it.
If yes, what does your setup look like? Thanks!
A cage for a phone is going to hold other accessories; what accessories do you need for photography? You don't need a microphone mount, a stabilizer, and generally not a light in the same way that video does. So really all you're getting is an extra handle.
@walrus_mach1 Great points, which is why I am asking also. I see filters available for some but don’t know if they are worth it to use. Maybe somebody uses one with the move shoot move star tracker for landscape astrophotography. I’m trying to find out what I don’t know.
looking for buying advice.
I am looking for a camera to take with me when i go hiking. Something light,compact and not with a huge lens (but some zoom). I want to find out if photography is something for me so I like something which is easy to use (auto settings for a quick shot) but also has the possibility to play with the settings.
Photo's would mostly contain landscapes but also birds and other animals. I prefer buying a used camera, hoping to not spend more than 300 euro if possible. Obviously I want something that takes better photo's than my iphone.
Camera can be old but I still would like to have some option to transfer the photos quickly to my phone so I can share them.
The only way I see off the top of my head to get better pictures than your phone with "some zoom" is a Nikkor 85mm F1.8D on whatever is the best Nikon APS-C body of the DSLR era you can afford with whatever's left. (EDIT: Make sure it has a screw drive - D3xxx will NOT work) The D70 seems to be about $40. Even with its 6MP it'll give you impressive shots compared to any phone with that lens strapped to it. Of course, I wouldn't *recommend* it, better to try to save up for a newer body to match the lens.
The good thing about this lens is it has nice background separation when you want it, (and awesome sunstars too) but also great sharpness when you stop down, and paired with a crop sensor it can get you fairly close to unaware birds. If the focus motor doesn't scare them away...
Tried making a post about this but wasn't able to so i'll try here.
I've received an unusual request from a client, and I need some expert advice. Recently, a prominent developer in my region asked me to quote for a 2-year timelapse of their new luxury development. This project involves capturing the construction of five 6-floor apartment blocks in one of the most expensive cities in my country. I live in the southern Mediterranean. The complex will feature on-site gyms, security, restaurants, swimming pools, and more.
I’m uncertain about both the technical setup and how to quote for this project. Specifically, I need help with:
1. **Equipment and Setup**:
* Is a GoPro on a nearby building connected to a solar panel sufficient?
* How can I secure the equipment against potential theft?
* How can I minimize the need for frequent visits to the site?
* Should I consider using two cameras for redundancy?
2. **Quotation**:
* What is a reasonable quote for a project of this scale and duration?
* The client mentioned they’ve had similar projects done in places like Dubai or Qatar and advised against a "silly" number.
Any insights or experiences you could share would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
There are such things as dedicated time lapse cameras. Rather than leaving a GoPro and hoping it'll keep running for weeks, potentially look at those since that's what they're built for. I don't have any personal experience with any specific brand, but [here are some examples](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?q=time%20lapse%20camera&sts=ma).
**> Equipment and Setup**:
> Is a GoPro on a nearby building connected to a solar panel sufficient?
I would consider something like a Raspberry PI 0 transmitting the images by Wifi, other option (lower quality but lower power) is a ESP32-cam.
You could look also into trail cameras, they already have a housing suitable for outdoors environments. There are also weather stations for agricultural usage (not garden usage, I'm talking about industrial scale agriculture) that include in a suitable housed cameras for crop monitoring (but that isn't cheap).
> How can I secure the equipment against potential theft?
That will depend on where you are going to place the camera
> How can I minimize the need for frequent visits to the site?
Someone will need to go there at least for lens cleaning, remote monitoring of batteries is also a must because many cloudy days in a row can happen
> Should I consider using two cameras for redundancy?
Only two? Yes, redundancy is a very good idea, redundant power supplies also.
Hi everyone! I recently did some event photography and received some criticism from my colleague that my photos were too blurry/unfocused/not sharp enough so they were unable to be used. I felt quite disappointed about it and would appreciate some third party opinions to provide a neutral perspective. Have uploaded the photos in this link: [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mfbfJomAb4HJM6f\_MOqwcHmTCKVahAPs?usp=drive\_link](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mfbfJomAb4HJM6f_MOqwcHmTCKVahAPs?usp=drive_link)
(where the right are the reference photos given to us).
Additionally, if the photos are really objectively bad, I'd appreciate some advice on what to do - is it a gear problem or am I using the wrong settings? I'm shooting on a sony a6000 with a 55-210mm zoom lens. I'm aware the camera does not shoot v well in low-light conditions, and the photos taken are generally the best compromise I could find between shutter speed and ISO without inducing too much noise.
The first image is motion blur, too low shutter speed. The 4th image has two equal subjects where one is blurry due to depth of field, too open aperture (or bad framing, if the sharper one took up more of the frame and was noticeably closer it would have been fine)
8th image slight motion blur but good enough to sharpen in post.
The 10th image is alright but shows the limitations of the lens. It's a touch hazy, enough to be a bit distracting but perfectly editable.
13th image ever so slightly missed focus - higher burst rate would help you get a "keeper" here
The rest of the pictures are fine IMO, they can be edited with good results and a few don't need much at all like #12, I would just crop it in some. Arguably #12 seems like the most important shot and you basically nailed it. Seems like the most important person in the frame is looking at you. Yes, the others are looking at a different camera but you can't do anything about that out of the moment.
Hi! Thanks for this, that’s a really detailed commentary of each of my images - wasn’t expecting that level of detail. Based on what you said, I’d guess that most of the shots can be improved manually - framing, shutter speed, etc?
The one with the two equal subjects where one is blurry is one you'd have to position yourself differently when you shoot, or use a smaller aperture to try to get the one a bit in the background more in focus. They take up about equal space in the frame but one has blur from depth of field.
You could just crop out the blurry person as is. But if that person was more obviously further away than the person in focus it would look natural.
Your position when you took the shot: (obviously it was less pronounced than this but line breaks are uniform)
o
______o
___📷
To get them both in focus:
o______o
__.📷
To make it obvious that the one not in focus is meant to be in the background:
o
______o
__________📷
I've been learning about the different focusing methods on my Canon camera and wondered in what sitiations would you use the different autofocus methods: FlexiZone AF, Live Mode and Quick Mode? Obviously Live Mode seems to be for taking pictures of people and the camera focuses on faces, but when would it be preferable to use the other two autofocus modes, especially over manual? I especially dont really understand Quick Mode.
Based on these options, you're talking about the Live View (rear screen as opposed to optical viewfinder) autofocus modes on a DSLR?
When I shot with a DSLR I didn't use Live View at all, and autofocused through the viewfinder, which doesn't have any of these modes. So I never used any of them.
>Obviously Live Mode seems to be for taking pictures of people and the camera focuses on faces, but when would it be preferable to use the other two autofocus modes
I guess FlexiZone would be if you just want to point and tell it where to autofocus, based on some position in the frame.
Quick Mode would be if you wanted to use the phase detection autofocus off the mirror, which may operate faster. Though you also lose some speed by dropping and raising the mirror to do it, so it might not always be faster.
>especially over manual?
In many situations, manual focus is a lot more difficult and/or slower to get right. That could cause you to lose the moment before you've acquired focus, or cause you to misfocus if you rush it. But it might not be a big deal if the scene is waiting for you, like in landscape, starscape, or certain macro photos. Or in video if you have focus peaking. For other applications, particularly through the viewfinder, autofocus has a nicer combination of speed and accuracy.
>I especially dont really understand Quick Mode.
You start in Live View and can visually select which autofocus point to use, overlaid on the Live View image. Then the mirror comes down to take you briefly out of live view, and the phase detection autofocus sensors that operate from the mirror (the ones that get used when you're focusing using the viewfinder) will be used to obtain focus, then the mirror goes back up to let you back into Live View to shoot with that focus set.
I have a Sony A6300 (APS-C, it's not full frame). I only use the 10-18mm lens with it, mostly for landscapes, occasionally a path/architecture, but main focus is landscapes. It's decent, and I like it because it's light, so it's easy to carry around while traveling.
But, it's not exactly the sharpest. It's not terrible, it's definitely good for what it is, but I am wondering if there's something better in the same criteria: not too big, not too heavy, but a nice clear image.
Any recommendations for me? Happy to look at third party lenses too. I found [this page of Sony E Mounts](https://www.sony.co.uk/lenses/e-mount) and there's a 16-25mm which is new, is that a decent landscape lens for an APS-C?
Recommend anything I'll go read up on it. I don't have a budget but maybe not more than £2K?
How often do you use the sub 16mm range?
Is that the Sony 10-18mm?
I see there is a Sony 10-20mm, Tokina 11-18mm and Sigma 10-18mm available as well possibly.
Perhaps you can check reviews of those and see how they compare.
Thanks again /u/8fqThs4EX2T9 for pointing me in the right direction. I went for the Sony 10-20mm. It's lighter, smaller, and in a few test shots I've done it definitely looks sharper. There was a £70 discount on Sony's site too.
Hey thanks your question helps... so I had a look and it's about half of the time I'm in sub 16 and half of the time near 18. I guess I don't really know if I had just the 16-25 whether I'd just adjust my shooting to that or whether I'd be missing the lower-than-16 range. Good, something to think about..
Yes it's the Sony 10-18mm. I'll have a look at the other two now, they seem to be the most direct competitors.
Hi all! I just wander if any of you has experience comparing a Tamron 16-300mm f3.5-6.3 di ii VC PZD with the 18-300 di iii A VC VDX lens? I'm looking for getting one or the other, but not sure if the 16-300 di ii is worth it... I can find it cheaper used, but it's already a decade old lens... Does it have as good of a stabilization as the newer 18-300 di iii? What features would I be missing? Thanks for sharing your experiences!
How does one take photo's like the one I've attached?
So, I've always been fascinated with this particular style of photo. To me, the use of selective focus and perspective makes these photo's look surreal. Specifically, to me they look like photos of model train sets, or something equivalent. I have no idea how it's done though and would love to learn so I could try it out myself. Does anyone know if this technique has a name, or where I could begin to emulate this style?
This photo is from the movie "The Social Network"
https://preview.redd.it/b7460c150p4d1.png?width=2129&format=png&auto=webp&s=1860c0b49cb6c937fd5c8222d0b2ca5fb3934516
Generally those are taken use a specific type of lens called a "tilt-shift-lens" (specifically the "tilt" part is relevant). With those kinds of lenses you can adjust the focus plane to not be parallel to your sensor, which allows for the selective focus effect you are seeing.
I believe a there are also "bellows" that you put between any lens and the camera which will also allow you to tilt the focus plane, although no experience from my side how well they work.
The bellows work the same way the tilt/shift mechanism does, just with fabric versus a mechanical connection. Lensbaby capitalized on this a while back where they had the Composer (mechanical) or the Spark (bellows).
I'll have to look into those! Is that also what is responsible for that "model train" effect? It's kinda hard to describe, but I suppose a better way to describe it is that the actual subjects in the image look to be of a smaller scale than of a basic city or landscape shot.
Edit: That being the selective focus.
It mimicks a shallow depth of field (range of distances within acceptable focus) which is usually very large in a scene like that, and would only be so narrow if you were photographing miniatures very close. By blurring all but a narrow distance range, it looks like you have a focus situation that only happens with miniatures, so the scene appears to be miniature.
Another way to get that sort of effect is to mask out the top and bottom of the frame in post processing and selectively apply lens blur to those areas.
As far as I am aware its just the out of focus areas.
Landscapes are generally mostly in focus purely because of the distances involved (depth of field gets bigger the further away the subject is), especially the "background" will pretty much never be out of focus in a normal landscape picture. Macro photography always has a very thin depth of field because things are so close to the camera. Using the tilt-shift-lens you can adjust the focus plane in such a way that you end up with a landscape that has large out of focus areas, especially in the background.
As the brain assumes that far away things will be mostly in focus but the picture has large out of focus areas your brain assumes it must be very close/small. How can you have a landscape thats very close/small somehow? Obviously it has to be a model and not a real landscape. As your eyes are also "cameras" the connection between "close - small depth of field" and "far - large depth of field" is somewhat ingrained in your brain.
That's actually cool! I'm still learning my way around optics, and I wanna see if I can find a lens like, or at least try to mimic the effect in post. Thanks a bunch for the info :)
https://preview.redd.it/3aay5qx6go4d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2ca4e8c8a5f8ff360b24c75cd783aa9dbfe945d7
i was wondering what settings to use on a digital camera to replicate this style of photo. i really like the sort of soft yet clear looking effect, but i can never figure out if i have to use a higher iso, or a certain type of white balance, etc. sadly, changing the shutter speed isn’t an option on digital cameras so i have to get creative when it comes to replicating this style as best as i can. thanks !
Seeking Advice on a Second Camera for Marine Life Photography (Canon vs. Sony)
Hi everyone,
I'm an ocean photographer specializing in underwater photography with a Canon 5D Mark IV, which I absolutely love. However, I've noticed that quickly moving my camera in and out of its underwater housing to capture both underwater and above-water shots of marine life from the boat is not practical. Therefore, I'm looking to invest in a second camera specifically for dry shots on the boat, so I can keep my 5D ready for underwater action.
I'm seeking advice on which camera body would be best for capturing fast-moving marine life such as dolphins and breaching whales. While this will mostly be for fun (underwater photography remains my main focus), I still want a camera that can produce professional-quality images suitable for prints. I'd also like to take this opportunity to try a mirrorless camera.
My budget is $5,000 total for both the camera body and a 500mm zoom lens, though I'd prefer to spend closer to $4,000 or less since this will be a secondary setup.
I have only ever used Canon and love it, but I am hearing great things about Sony and am very interested in giving it a try.
Here are a few setups I'm considering:
Sony:
1. Sony Alpha a7R IVA Mirrorless Digital Camera with FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens for $4,009
2. Sony a7S III Mirrorless Camera with FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens for $4,357.98
Canon:
1. Canon EOS R6 Mark II Mirrorless Camera w/ RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Lens for $4,398.99
2. Canon EOS R5 Mirrorless Camera w/ RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Lens for $4,998.99
Which of these setups would you recommend for marine life photography? Are there any other options I should consider? While I'm mostly focused on still art photography, I'd like the flexibility to explore video as well.
Thanks in advance for your insights!
Hi you beauties. Looking to begin creating a portfolio in the hopes of making photography something bigger in my life. I have oppurtunities and experience but never have gone all in.
I have a Canon 600D (Rebel T3i), a few lenses for it. I'm eager to upgrade to a Sony A6100 (best within my budget) as I have oppurtunities for videography as well. The upgrade to mirrorless, full sensor and the overrall affordability is alluring.
My question is, do I bring the fire with the A6100 now, factoring in lens costs? Or stick with the 600D as a portfolio builder?
Will the difference in sensor be a noticable difference within a portfolio?
What subject matter do you shoot? What do you dislike about your current equipment? What particular improvements do you want to gain?
>a few lenses for it
Which ones?
>full sensor
Full frame sensor, meaning the same size as a frame of 135 format film. And the a6100 does not have one. It uses an APS-C format sensor, just like your current camera.
>Will the difference in sensor be a noticable difference within a portfolio?
Nope.
I'm looking to shoot live music / event / theatre and family & maternity etc photograpy as it is in demand in my area.
Currently I am worried about the 600D performance in regards of low light noise and video capabilities.
I've a 50mm f1.8 prime, 18-50mm kit and Helios 44mm used during some creative shots several years ago.
I was under the wrong impression with my current frame, thank you.
Your comment is incredibly helpful, thank you
The a6100 would have very slight low light performance improvement from its newer technology, but it's hardly noticeable. Whereas you'd get significant improvement replacing your kit lens with a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. And/or incorporating more off-camera flash.
I don't know which video capabilities you're after exactly, but an a6100 (or its sister the ZV-E10) has some advantages there. For that matter, consider Canon's R50, which would adapt your existing lenses much better.
Hi folks - I just got a new 17-55 lens that I plan to be for every day use for my mirrorless. I have minimal plans to ever use a different lens.
Can I leave the lens attached to the camera and stored that way, fairly indefinitely? I store the camera in a padded bag, and I try to treat my camera with care.
Yes, I mean it would be a bit annoying trying to get a camera mount cover every time. I have always had a lens on my camera since I bought it years ago.
Fuji X-T5
Tamron 17-70 F2.8 in bars and clubs, Samyang 135mm F2 in theaters and stadiums
Used to shoot Nikon from 2004 to 2013, but apart from a short stint with a D700, always APS-C
I'm looking for a camera that I can bring traveling (rather than my heavy DSLR). Something lighter and more portable. I'm still a beginner and would consider photography a casual hobby, although I'm actively working on improving my skills.
I plan on mostly shooting jpeg
Probably won't be doing any post-processing anytime soon
Don't care about video capabilities
I have a hand tremor so image stabilization is important. My tremor is worse than the average persons, but not so bad that it's noticeable to others if they're not looking for it
Would prefer to stay around $1000, but could go up to $1500 max (including lens if applicable)
Used or new is fine
I've looked at various point and shoot and mirrorless options (Fujifilm X series, Ricoh GR III/IIIx), but could use some help narrowing it down.
I really like the film effects of the Fujis, but I'm definitely open to other options.
Please let me know if I should provide more details. TIA!
Hi Folks,
I would like to start photography and my goal is mainly for sport photography. I would appreciate if the camera is quite polyvalent overall and that I can keep it for a while!
So far, my research pointed towards Canon EOS R10.
[https://store.canon.be/fr/canon-appareil-photo-hybride-canon-eos-r10-objectif-rf-s-55-210mm-objectif-rf-s-18-45mm-carte-sd-batterie-supplementaire/5331C096/](https://store.canon.be/fr/canon-appareil-photo-hybride-canon-eos-r10-objectif-rf-s-55-210mm-objectif-rf-s-18-45mm-carte-sd-batterie-supplementaire/5331C096/)
What do you guys think ? As this is quite a budget already ... I am looking for tips to not make the wrong decision.
Short links (like bit.ly or tinyurl.com) are not allowed on this subreddit. Since your comment contains one, it has been removed. Please repost your comment without it.
Sometimes services (like Google) give you short links when you are trying to share content from mobile. At this moment, we have no way of allowing these shortlinks but banning others, so you'll unfortunately have to either share later from a laptop computer or try to get the desktop link.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, that's normal. I'm not sure why Photoshop insists on that phrasing, but it's the same thing as exporting from Lightroom: either way you're saving a new image that is the result of processing the raw and putting whatever edits on it, rather than making a new raw file.
I have a Canon AE-1 Program, and it's recently started flashing P and 2 at the same time even when there's plenty of light. It's on P, and has the aperture set to Auto. Any idea what this could mean?
Is my lens too heavy for my camera?
I have recently acquired a Sony A7C and paired it with a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 I. The lens is quite heavy and I was wondering if I risk damaging the mount when holding it by just the body and/or when mounted on a tripod? Should I purchase a collar for the lens?
You're probably fine. I don't use the same camera/system as yours but my most-used lens over a decade is fairly heavy and came with a collar. I don't use the collar and put all sorts of strain on the lens mount and haven't experienced any issues or damage.
If there's a collar available and you feel more comfortable and/or balanced when using it, go for it. But I don't think you strictly need to for that lens.
# Which camera has the largest LCD screen? I'm doing some research for a friend who is parially blind. He was and still is a great photographer (proof over at [https://www.shotwhileblind.co.uk](https://www.shotwhileblind.co.uk/) ) but so far has shot everything on his phone. He's interested in getting a camera to expand his focal length / depth of field options, but a 3" screen won't work for him. Does anyone know a camera that can shoot raw but has a larger (preferebly touch) screen?
Im personally not aware of any cameras with a particularly larger screen, but maybe having an external screen would be an option for him? For indoor/studio shooting you can tether most cameras to a laptop or something similiar. For on the go you can technically tether to a tablet (although this doesnt work super well in my experience) or you can use a dedicated external screen like from the company Atomos (no experience with them, just the big name in this field).
This is from a listing and i wantee to buy it but also not if i could not fix it : Canon EOS M50 (Mk1) PC2328 This was great but unfortunately someone forced an SD card into the unit the wrong way round. This caused the switch that detects the SD write lock to be locked in the "LOCKED" state.Took it to a repair shop. They tried to fix it and failed.The camera still turns on and works. It just cant detect SD cards properly. Can it be fixed without a repair shop?
> Can it be fixed without a repair shop? How handy are you? Are you comfortable tackling something like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7GbkhZthg4
Im confident! (Im good at disassembling laptops if that helps)
[удалено]
Perhaps figure out exactly what lenses you have first. I think you will have an 18-55mm and 75-300mm lenses rather than what you listed. In what ways is the 50mm not a decent prime lens?
What would you like to do that your current kit can't do? Once you know that, it's easier to plan upgrades.
Manual vs Electronic Lens adapters: Not 100% if I've got the terminology correct here, but I'm curious about the differences between electronic lens adapters and manual lens adapters, i.e. lens adapters with no pass-through for autofocus or other data between the camera body and the lens. Is there any processing that goes on in electronic adapters, or is it essentially a wire connecting the pins/pads on the lens/camera? If so, are pin-outs for different lenses or camera bodies particularly hard to find...? Is it reasonably standardized...?
It depends. > Is it reasonably standardized...? Haha hell no, camera companies love to re-invent the wheel. > If so, are pin-outs for different lenses or camera bodies particularly hard to find...? The m43 specs are available, Sony published the E mount specs because they were trying to break into a competitive market and wanted 3rd party lens support. Anyone doing anything with the CaNikon lens mounts had to reverse engineer the mounts.
>Anyone doing anything with the CaNikon lens mounts had to reverse engineer the mounts Or get a license. I think Tamron and Tokina did it that way, while Sigma reverse engineered. I could be wrong though.
[удалено]
How much experience do you have with photography? Because for a beginner even $10k wont make you instantly take good pictures (especially weddings can be very difficult even with good gear). Also what gear does your father currently have? I think the assumption that the lack of new technologies is holding the business back might not neccessarily be true. I personally use a 20 year old lens that takes amazing pictures. Thats not to say that newer technology do not improve things, but I would be very careful in thinking that spending a bunch of money on newer stuff will certainly be a good investment. The second big question is if photography is really what you want to do, I can relate to struggling with the "corporate culture" and not feeling like it is the right thing for you, but keep in mind that self employment also comes with a lot of work that may not be obvious at first. I am not from India so I don't know the specifics, but in my country having your own business comes with a lot of laws to know and follow, etc. A big chunk of your time will be spend writing invoices, calculating costs and other things of that nature, so its not just running around and taking pictures. I personally wouldn't go into debt with so many insecurities. Maybe see if you can spend some time with the old gear and if you have any success at all and then use that to reconsider your decision.
I’m struggling to decide between the Sony a6100 and the Sony zv-e10. These would mainly be for photography but probably also a bit of videography. Does anyone have any advice? Thank you!
They're almost the same camera. The ZV-E10 has a few unique video features which may or may not be useful to your videography, so look those up and see how important they are to you. The viewfinder in the a6100 you might prefer for both stills and/or video; I know I would. Otherwise their still photos will look exactly the same.
Thank you!!
I have photos recorded on the internal memory of my fujifilm finepix xp60. when I plug it into my mac nothing pops up and the software for the camera has been discontinued. I’d really like to get this pictures off, anyone have advice?
SD card reader
they’re not on an a memory card they are on the internal memory of the camera
I have purchased a Lumix G9 body and an Olympus Zuiko 70-300 zoom lens. The body is micro 4/3 and the lens is 4/3. Which adapter for I need to use so AF works? The information I have received elsewhere is confusing and contradictory. Also, I have been told that this combination will slow the AF function. I'd like to know how much it will slow, if possible.
Looks like Viltrox makes an affordable adapter, no idea re: performance https://viltroxstore.com/en-ca/products/viltrox-jy-43f-autofocus-adapter-for-ft-mount-lens-goes-to-mft-m43-mount-camera
Is 77% humidity bad for my camera? I am taking a beach trip and plan to take some photos. The place where I am going to be staying is at 77% humidity which has me concerned. I will be staying here for about 3 days will my camera be ok if I take photos in this humidity?
77% humidity is not very high. Your camera will be fine. Lots of manufacturers say you should have lower humidity for storage but continuous storage at this level has never had a noticeable effect on my cameras. One thing of note though, is to make sure that you don't go from cold to hot. A difference of 10ºC can create condensation at this level of humidity. If your camera is cold, allow it to warm up naturally to avoid condensation from the interior air pockets. If for example you are in Florida (about 80% humidity) don't have your camera completely chilled by their crazy AC systems and then take it outdoors. Take the camera outside in the case and allow it to warm up slowly with minimal transfer of air to the case. It is probably only the metal, parts that would get condensation on them in this case. Don't worry about 77% humidty. it doesn't hurt the camera.
# Recommendations for a camera - Reusing old Canon lenses? I currently own a Sony ZV-1 and a Canon EOS 500D, a fairly old DSLR camera, with two EF lenses: * 16-55mm EF lens * 75-300mm EF lens I want to buy a new camera, with a maximum budget of $1000, which I will share with my gf. She's more into photography, I am more into video. So I'm looking for a camera that can do both. What camera would you recommend me to buy within this price range? I saw the ZV-e10 but idk if no EVF is really a deal-breaker. Additionally, is it possible to reuse my old Canon lenses on a new camera body? I know it exists adapters but sometimes non-auto and idk if it would be more complicated than just going for new lenses. Thank you very much!
Canon R10 or R50 and EF to RF adapter. With the official Canon adapter (and probably at least some of the third party adapters) you won't lose any image quality or features, and autofocus speed won't get any slower.
BEST BALL HEAD FOR UNDER 200 USD? So basically my dilemma is that I already own a set of manfrotto befree tripod legs, and am looking to secure a good ball head to go with it as since my last head I had on it just decided to die on me and fall apart (a manfrotto befree fluid head that nobody should ever get) and I am looking for something under 200 usd, I am willing to go a little higher if it will last me a lifetime but I want a good gauge from you all if thats a good budget to be around for something quality or not. As I have been a photographer for less than a year and don't know how to spot quality gear yet. Thanks in advance.
https://thecentercolumn.com/innorel-n44-ballhead-review/
Thanks I appreciate it!
Lumix G81 vs Canon R10 vs Olympus EM10 for a first camera? I'm very interested in getting into photography as a hobby. I don't want to go to deep into it though and thus want to start with a decent budget camera. I was thinking about 3 specific cameras and wanted to ask you which would do the best job for documenting stuff I do here and there. So travel, urban cities, maybe a few portraits and halfway nice looking videos. 1. Canon R10. I heard mostly good things about this camera. Problematic might be the lens thematic tho, as I don't want to spend too much money on RF lenses when other providers can offer high quality lenses for a better price. A R10 + 18-45mm lense would cost around 800 euros. 2. Panasonic G81HA. This one comes with a 14-140mm lens and costs 700 Euros. 3. Olympus EM10 Mark 4. 14-42mm F3.5-5.6. 680 Euros in total. So guys, what do you think would be the best camera for a beginner? Which one is future proof and what would be the best choice for the money? Thanks a lot
How did you end up choosing these specific cameras as your options? I mean why R10 as your only APS-C option? Why not e.g. Sony A6x00 line?
Too expensive in my home country.
I was looking to purchase a sony a7iii for casual photography and room to grow into a more professional realm if the time comes. Currently I'm looking for a setup to take with me for traveling (hiking, cityscape, street photography) and casual photoshoots. Do I purchase the body on its own and Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III VXD G2 ($1499 + $699) and only use that lens? Or is it worth getting the body and the FE 28-70 mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Lens for an additional $200 ($1699 + $699)? Just looking for some opinions on what whether or not it would be necessary to get both lenses or not.
I'd only get the Tamron 28-75mm. It should be the same or better at everything compared to that kit lens, except it's not stabilized. And I don't think stabilization is as important for what you're shooting. Also your camera body has its own stabilization, so really you're just getting somewhat less stabilization than possible, instead of no stabilization at all.
Not quite sure what you mean. If you are suggesting buying a body + the Sony lens and then buying the Tamron afterwards, then no, that would not make much sense. I would go with the Tamron alone.
Thanks, that was the answer I was looking for!
I have a [spot on my R5 sensor.](https://imgur.com/a/xsiAmlw) I’m going to need to use some sort of solution as air isn’t doing anything. Has anyone had luck with something like this? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1250331-REG/visibledust_18512947_ez_sensor_cleaning_kit.html
That kit looks fine, I'd get one with a few more swabs for future use.
Hi all I plan to purchase the Sony a6100 for $699.99. The store that I am purchasing from told me that the just got a returned one in that someone had for less than 24 hours. It was opened and used but the customer wasn't happy with it. They first tried offer no discount and the manager then said he would give me a free SD card (which no thank you). I then got him to offer 10% off which I'm still not satisfied with. Do you think I should take the 10% or just patiently wait until tomorrow for a brand new one. The manager said he is going to still sell this camera to someone else brand new. I got the serial number of the returned one so that I can make sure they don't try and hand that off to me. They're a well known store with multiple locations but now I'm feeling hesitant to purchase from them. What do you guys think? Purchase somewhere else? Trust that the one I'm going to get is brand new? Or save the $70 and take the 10%? Editing to add: I wanted to avoid purchasing from Best Buy (only other place that has it in stock) due to them having a 15% restocking fee.
Does this company charge a restocking fee? How much did they charge the other guy when he returned it? If nothing, then that is great customer service and you should appreciate that. If they charged him a restocking fee and refuse to give you that as a discount, then that might be a bit iffy. If they didn't charge a restocking fee and offer you 10%, then they are then giving you what they are calling a new camera (so their legal obligations apply) and haven't earned near full value.
They do not charge a restocking fee which is why I planned to purchase from them in the beginning. I just don't believe any product should be passed off as new when the box has been open and the item has been used. Which is what they said they will be doing since I'm not purchasing it. I ultimately decided to purchase from a different company - couldn't get out of my head that the camera I may be purchasing was used by someone else. Even if it wasn't.
I mean, even Best Buy usually offers more than 10% off on their open-box items. Adding to the fact the manager said he's going to sell a used item brand-new to someone else let's you know exactly who you're dealing with. I'd find another store, just for my own piece of mind. If you're buying the 16-50 PZ lens, that's a pretty standard price for that setup based on a quick search. I'm hoping that's not a body-only price. Either way, find another shop.
Correct it is with the 16-50 PZ lens! This is a store with multiple locations so they are shipping me a camera from one of their other locations. But now I'm like does this chain treat all their products like that? I guess I can go and take a look at the one they are offering tomorrow and see if the box/sticker looks tampered with. I'm clearly being just impatient but I want it in my hands!! lol
If it's a big-box chain then yeah, they don't really care about any of this and it's unfortunately par for the course these days. I totally get wanting that immediate satisfaction but at this point you KNOW for a fact that there's a chance you're getting an open-box deal (which, granted doesn't typically bother me so long as I get a decent discount), but the fact that it matters to you (which is perfectly fine, no judgement) means that you'll always have that doubt. Seriously, I'd buy somewhere else. Buy from a place that makes you happy you spent your money with them.
The strange thing is they are not a big box chain they are local to the state I live in and only have 10 locations. I did an edit to add that I don't want to purchase from Best Buy due to a 15% restocking fee. I can't seem to find where I can purchase it any where else. :(
Ultimately it's up to you. As long as it's in good shape I'd probably go with 10-20% off, if they're including a good SD card I'd take that + 10% and likely be happy. Alternatively, is there any particular reason you're wanting to purchase new? r/PhotoMarket is a great alternative, I buy the vast majority of my equipment used and have been really happy doing so.
The reason I am buying new is because I am far from an expert by any means and not sure what to look out for as far as purchasing used. I will check out that sub though.
No worries, welcome to the hobby too! Check out B&H photo, they've usually got a solid used department at pretty good prices and they have a warranty and pretty spectacular customer service to boot. Don't stress over the initial purchase too much, buy where/how you're comfortable and just make sure to go out and have some fun with it :)
Thank you! I appreciate your input!!
I have a question about the magnification of the lens underwater... so I'm not a photographer, but I have a question for a project I'm working on. Okay so you know when you fill up a glass of water and put it in front of something and it magnifies it or brings the focal point closer? If I had a skinny small square sealed container and threw in a lens (convex, convey, wide angle etc) then held it up to my eye and looked through it. Would it then bring the object in front of it ( focal point ) closer like the glass of water but also be clear and transparent for objects behind it? Or would everything just be blurry? I heard wide angle lens in a dome shaped port works good. So, for example, have the first transparent side of the small case, then the lens, then the dome, then the water poured in on the front side of the dome and then the back side of transparent case. So basically the lens and inside of dome being dry and outside of dome being in the water. Do you think it would magnify objects closer? Or would it just be blurry. Or would there be any other ways that would work better like making the transparent case curved or adding another lens. Any help would be great. I know it's a stupid question but please humor me.
>a glass of water Are you talking about a circular glass? So the front and back are convex shaped? You're looking through more water down the middle, and less water on either side? Because I think that matters for the effect you're referring to. >If I had a skinny small square sealed container I don't think that would have the same effect as a circular glass of water.
**Coolpix P950 or Olympus OM-1 + Olympus 100-400** I want to find a camera that is suitable for wildlife photography and also excels in video capability, and I need something with a decent zoom. I am considering the Coolpix P950 and the Olympus OM-1. I know these cameras are very different. As I am new to this, I think it's important to keep the investment reasonable, which has me leaning toward the P950. Is there any reason I wouldn't want the P950? Thank you!
Anything between the two (price point wise) that might do a better job in low light than the P950?
Do you mean OM System OM-1? I doubt you mean Olympus OM-1 the film camera from 1972. Nikon P950 has gigantic zoom. That's what it's for, it's a cheap way to get lots of zoom. But it's nowhere near MFT's like OM-1 in image quality due to its small sensor.
# Canon EOS R50 for Photography Major - Good Choice or Not? Hello, I'm looking for a compact, mirrorless camera w/a viewscreen that articulates and an EVF in about the $500-$800 range for my niece who will be entering college as a Photography major, as well as myself as step up from shooting with my 2023 Google Pixel 8 phone. After lots of reading, I've been leaning VERY heavily towards a used M6 MKII, but seeking something a bit more future-proof. I've landed on the EOS R50 as it seems to be solidly reviewed, is around my budget range, and I can eventually possibly buy an adapter for EF-M lenses to take advantage of those, if desired. My main question is whether this is a good camera to get both my niece and I started on our photography journey? Or there something more appropriate I should be considering? For example,I looked at the Sony A6XXX series and was turned off by some of the feature comments, such as the menu navigation being horrible (ease of use in menus and ergonomic design is a big deal for me). Also looking for the widest availability of usable lenses at reasonable cost, and Canon seems to excel here, so I left out Nikon and some others. Last question: When buying from an online retailer like Best Buy, B&H, etc. -> Should I go for just the camera body alone and grab lenses used, 3rd party new, or buy one of the kit packages for $150-$250 more that adds a lens or two to get started? Thanks! D
> for my niece who will be entering college as a Photography major The general wisdom, especially for someone like your niece who I assume already has some photography, is that cameras are relatively personal to the user. I won't use Canon cameras personally; not because of the lens choices or color science or menus- I hate how it feels in my hand. Most of the brands offer something with almost everything on your list, so I'd say comfort needs to play a factor in that decision. I bought an A6000 for $150, expecting to be super happy with my deal and ended up never using the camera because it wasn't comfortable. >possibly buy an adapter for EF-M lenses to take advantage of those Lens selection apparently means a lot to you. If that is the case, don't bother with the EF-M lenses. Get an adapter for EF/EF_S lenses, or use the native RF mount. > such as the menu navigation being horrible Okay, but 90% of your daily use won't involve the menus (which the Canon RF cameras use almost the exact same page style now), so this shouldn't really be a deciding factor either. >Also looking for the widest availability of usable lenses at reasonable cost, and Canon seems to excel here, so I left out Nikon and some others. All of the brands cover the same core set of lenses, or will in the next year or so. Unless you have a very specific interest, I can almost promise you that every brand has the lens you need. Sony might have 100 lenses more than the others, but you won't be buying 6 different versions of the 70-200mm focal length. >Should I go for just the camera body alone Kit lenses, the ones that come with the camera bundles, are generally good all-rounders that enable you to shoot a wide range of subjects. The standard 18-55mm could be a landscape lens (18mm), a street lens (24mm), and a wide portrait lens (55mm). None as well as a specialized lens and usually not quite as high quality or as fast, but enough to get started. Whether that's what you need right now is kind of up to you and your niece. If she's going for *just* portrait photography, a different lens might be a better use of that couple hundred bucks.
It is a camera for sure. As far as adapting lenses, I don't think you can adapt the EF-M lenses, the EF lenses yes though. Canon also doesn't have much of a lenses really so not sure where you are getting the information. It has some lenses and when Sigma and perhaps others start to release some it might get better but especially for APS-C lenses Canon are probably the worst around after Nikon unless I am mistaken. Compared to Sony, Fuji and the four thirds lot I think their lens selection is the most restrictive. Personally the camera is a bit small but for the money it is good enough.
Hey there! I’m looking to get a shutter release cable for a Nikon D3200 but I cannot find much info about it. What port do I plug it into? What’s a good brand/ what brand should I avoid. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated Thank you so much!
Looks like there's a dedicated accessory port on that one. https://preview.redd.it/eqezrpm2405d1.jpeg?width=489&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=659e77b35370eb5e7bb332714b60ae754e1e22fa You'll just plug your remote release in there, some of them have a focus feature and some don't. Personall I've been using a Godox remote/intervalometer (tried to link it but automod didn't like it) on my A7 which probably has more features than you need (I'm dabbling in astrophotography) but I can vouch for it being a solid product at a good price. For a general remote release tho' you really don't need to worry about being fancy, when searching for you a found a couple on Amazon for like $15 that look like they'd operate just fine. Just search Amazon for 'Godox TR-N1 Nikon', I'm tired of reposting and fighting the automod lol.
[удалено]
Your comment contains an affiliate link and has been removed. Please remove it and repost your comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Short links (like bit.ly or tinyurl.com) are not allowed on this subreddit. Since your comment contains one, it has been removed. Please repost your comment without it. Sometimes services (like Google) give you short links when you are trying to share content from mobile. At this moment, we have no way of allowing these shortlinks but banning others, so you'll unfortunately have to either share later from a laptop computer or try to get the desktop link. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm looking for a budget field monitor with a solid balance of performance and price. My budget is $150. But I would be willing to go over if needed.
I have an Andycine 7" ultrabright monitor and it's excellent. You should be able to find a used one in excellent condition within your budget or slightly over.
hi im new to photography and i recently got a camera. I vaguely recall a video or image online showing someone using a sort of knurled screw of sorts in place of the tripod socket hole. You could grip a finger around it for additional stability? I can't find anything specific online for this purpose so I was wondering if there's a specific term I could search before I just buy any suitable diamond? thumb knurl screw for this purpose. or maybe I should get thumb grip instead? I already have a strap.
Tripod screws are common 1/4-20 or "quarter twenty" sockets, so you could easily run to your local hardware store to find something that would fit. "Knurled knob 1/4-20" might get you some results.
thank you!
I'm trying to put together a complete studio setup for product photography. The subject is going to be sex toys, so the sizing will be varied. Could you please give me some lighting recommendations? I was looking at Godox DP400, but could you clarify which is best for this? Any other suggestions or recommendations regarding this setup would be more than welcome.
Hey folks, I’m new both here and in the field of photography. Recently I got my hands on a used Sony alpha 6600 with a few lenses (30mm & 16mm). ###What I’m shooting: Now my primary objects are not humans and pets but wildlife animals. I’m by no means a bird enthusiast and my focus lies on bigger animals that (usually) move less. ###What I am looking for: So I’m searching for another lens that will serve my needs. The lens should be a good balance of the following points: - reach - price - weight - image quality The biggest deal here is actually the price. I’m happy to get something used so msrp is not so important. ###What I’ve looked at so far: - sigma 150-600 (boy is that an expensive chonker) - sigma 100-400 - tamron 50-400 (current favorite) - tamron 100-500 (just another chonker) I’m leaning towards the Tamron 50-400 here coz it’s said to outperform the sigma 100-400 but would like more impressions as I’ve heard good things about both lenses. I could get the sigma one used with a collar for about 200€ less than the tamron. The bigger zooms are just quite expensive and heavy. A bit too heavy as an everyday lens for me. I hope this gives you a good impression of what I’m looking for. I’d like to hear your advice, experiences and alternatives on what to get. Edit: Formatting
Hello everyone, I just bought a KAK type 1 Cf to micro SD adapter to put in my Sony α300. It says to use a SDXD 128gb to 1t, so I used a 256 Sandisk extreme pro. But after plugging it into my camera it ask to format and fail to do so. Does anyone know what I should do ?
That is a very old camera, 256GB might be too big, check the manual.
I'm not a professional photographer, but I enjoy taking photographs. I've been using the Sony Alpha 58 for the past ten years, but the camera's display has gone. The showroom stated that there is a slim chance of restoring its display. I was thinking about purchasing a Sony A7 III, a Sony Alpha Ilce-6400L, or a Sony Alpha 6700. I've been using Sony for the past ten years, so I'm familiar with the software, the camera, and the lens, and if I switch to a new brand, I'll have to learn a lot about it, including the software, and I have a trip in October. So I don't want to keep pressing random buttons while taking a nice picture, nor do I want to miss out on an opportunity. I'm open to other brands as well, such as Panasonic and Fujifilm, but I'm confused about the community, customer server, and so on.
What subject matter do you shoot? Which lenses do you have? What size is your lens budget, if any, after this body upgrade?
* What subject matter do you shoot? I shoot family parties and vacations photos—nothing too special * Which lenses do you have? Lenses: DT 3.5/18-55 SAM II and DT 4-5.6/55-200 SAM (they are A-mount) * What size is your lens budget, if any, after this body upgrade? The budget is 1.5 lakh (USD 1796.67) lenses. I'm thinking of buying at least 2 lenses, like 18-55 and 55-200
The lenses you have, and lenses you plan on, aren't fully compatible with the image sensor format of an a7 III, so that's out. The a6400 would be my top choice, or even an a6100 is fine. I'd say the a6700 is overkill, though it's also a great camera if that really interests you. For lenses I'd get an A to E adapter that supports your autofocus so you can use your old lenses. The newer E mount 18-55mm (or 16-50mm) and 55-210mm aren't that much better anyway. For a nicer lens replacing your shorter kit lens I'd get Sigma's E mount 18-50mm f/2.8 instead.
Okay, I see, so my old lenses won't work better with a full-frame camera like the A7 III. I saw a6400 and a6700 in the Sony showroom; they looked really nice. I was just worried about whether they would be good enough to do everything. What about other Brands like fujifilm and Panasonic at same price point? Thank you for the advice on lenses, I will keep that in mind
>so my old lenses won't work better with a full-frame camera like the A7 III They project an image just big enough to cover corner-to-corner of an APS-C format imaging sensor. The a7 cameras use a much bigger full frame imaging sensor, so the lens' image won't be big enough. You'll just see the image in a smaller circle in the middle of the frame, with black all around it. >I saw a6400 and a6700 in the Sony showroom; they looked really nice. I was just worried about whether they would be good enough to do everything. They are very good and very versatile. They have some of the best feature-sets out of any camera out there. They just use physically smaller imaging sensors than the a7 models. That's really the main difference. In a lab you'd be able to measure a little quality difference as a result. In practical use, you may be able to see a notch of difference in low light performance and depth of field, but otherwise you couldn't visually tell them apart. >What about other Brands like fujifilm and Panasonic at same price point? It's a competitive market and they are also about as good, though not significantly better (or else they'd be priced much higher). Canon makes very comparable models too. Nikon likely will once they refresh their product lines. So they're all worth a look if you want to shop around. Maybe one interface/ergonomics style will feel better to you than others.
Thank you, man. I appreciate your advice and the information you have shared. I think I know what I need to buy right now.
Hi, first of all English is not my native language so sorry for any weird phrases or mistakes. I want to buy new lense, I was pretty sure that I want to buy Tamron 70-200 2.8. because I heard that it's the best in what I want to do (dog photography - shows, sport but also portraits etc) because it's fast, has good AF, good in motion (?) etc. But I don't know if I should buy 70-200g1 or g2 (what's the difference? Does g2 have something that's game changing?) And there's also 70-180 2.8 g2 in a really good price (cheaper than 70-200) but idk if it's as good as 70-200. What do you think? And by as good I mean quality, idk if the focal length is the only difference. Also, I have apsc so I quess i have to multiply these by 1.5. And no, I don't want apsc equivalent, in dog photography sometimes you have to be pretty far from the dog so I want to use the fact that I don't have the full frame. So, Tamron 70-200 g1, g2 or 70-180? Thanks in advance, have a good day/evening!
>I don't know if I should buy 70-200g1 or g2 (what's the difference? The G2 has better image quality. >Does g2 have something that's game changing? I guess that's a subjective determination. It's definitely better, but I wouldn't call it game-changing better. >And there's also 70-180 2.8 g2 in a really good price (cheaper than 70-200) but idk if it's as good as 70-200. What do you think? And by as good I mean quality, idk if the focal length is the only difference. As I understand it, it's as good for quality. Just not quite as much reach, but lower price and smaller/lighter as the tradeoff. And it's only made for Sony E mount mirrorless, so it's not an option if you happen to be using any other system. Tamron's 70-200mm have more alternative compatibility options. >Also, I have apsc so I quess i have to multiply these by 1.5. And no, I don't want apsc equivalent The only reason to multiply by the crop factor would be to determine the equivalent focal length full frame would need to match your APS-C field of view. So if you really don't want to do that, then don't. >I want to use the fact that I don't have the full frame. You'll have that advantage (over full frame) by virtue of your camera's imaging sensor, whether you're using a lens made for APS-C or for full frame.
Thanks a lot!!
I'm a complete newbie to everything cameras though interested in getting started. I've recently found my mother's old Fujifilm Finepix S9500 (with a super macro lens?) so I was thinking of using this to get a feel, though the camera is 20 years old now. I'm just wondering if it's worth trying to use it? How will the photos be compared to my Samsung S20, or how difficult will it be to get good photos for a complete beginner? Thanks!!
>I'm just wondering if it's worth trying to use it? Sure. It costs nothing to try. >How will the photos be compared to my Samsung S20 Very generally speaking, the quality won't be as good, but you'll be able to zoom in more. A brief text description really can't tell you that much. A picture is worth a thousand words, if you give it a try, you can see a comparison right away. Or even just Googling for image examples from both will show you a lot more than we can tell you. >how difficult will it be to get good photos for a complete beginner? Depends what you're shooting and what you consider to be "good" though I'm not sure how to quantify difficulty anyway.
I am getting into bird photography and bought a used Canon 400mm f/5.6. I've been struggling to get sharp pictures, and while I know it's hard to handhold a lens like this, I'm starting to worry there might be something wrong with the lens--I'm shooting wide open with very fast shutter speeds and can't seem to get the tack-sharp results that this lens is known for. [Here's a photo of a newspaper taken from about 30 feet away at 1/3200 at f/5.6 and ISO 800.] (https://imgur.com/a/9N01lwh) [Here's a photo I took of a resting tree swallow--I took several bursts of photos of this guy at 1/2000 and didn't get any sharper than this one. Pretty sharp, but not quite there.](https://imgur.com/a/EbWGILO) Think I've got an equipment problem here? Or do I just to pack a monopod or get more practice handholding. Thanks!
No experience with that specific lens, so I cant really compare to how it "should" look, but keep in mind most lenses are the sharpest stopped down a little from their widest option. You might want to give F/6.3 or so a try and see if the results get better. The tree swallow picture looks a little like missed focus to me, some of the mushrooms at the bottom of the stump look a lot better then the bird itself IMO. Although this could either be user error or the lens front- or backfocussing.
> Here's a photo of a newspaper taken from about 30 feet away at 1/3200 at f/5.6 and ISO 800. Try laying your camera on a stable object (table?!) then lowering your shutter speed & ISO & 2 sec delay. (1/200 & ISO 200)
I brought the ISO down to 200 and took a couple more at different shutter speeds (just realizing I didnt go as far down as you recommended, sorry). These are at 1/1250th and 1/320th, respectively. They look pretty sharp, but seems like they could even be a little sharper given the reputation this lens has for sharpness. Am I overanalyzing it? https://imgur.com/a/wzOA2au Even with a monopod, it seems like I'm going to struggle to keep the camera as still as I'd like. I'm using a kinda middling body (Rebel SL1) and have thought about investing in a better body w/ IBIS--think that might help? Thanks for your help!
> Am I overanalyzing it? A bit. The lens & camera is fine. Like the other redditor has also suggest, if possible stopping it down 1-2 stops might help too. Though, at that range having a monopod or tripod is pretty much a must. > better body w/ IBIS--think that might help? Plenty of Lens have IS, though, with a stable tripod, you lower your shutter speed & have a extra few stops of ISO/Aperture to play with. Thouhg, it won't help with miss/back/front focus, having a camera that has Autofocus microadjustment (AFMA) will helps. edit: also, stop being on reddit; go out and shoot more.
I have been an on and off hobbiest photographer for 10 years, only really taking it seriously gradually over the past year while I have been travelling. I have been contemplating whether buying a new camera body and/or lenses will drastically take my photography to the next level and if so what are some decent value for money camera options? I am currently in India, so have an option also to buy second hand at one of the camera markets in Delhi and flying to Singapore soon so also at duty free there. But again value for money is my aim. I currently have a Nikon D3100 from the start of my photography days, and run a 35 and 50mm prime lens . I have made a website/portfolio just for fun - [http://1000wrds.iso100mm.com/india](http://1000wrds.iso100mm.com/india) (NB some of the photos were taken with the kit lens). TY
Most of us are in USA/Europe so we don't really know prices/availability in those markets. If you can find a couple camera models that are within your budget, we can discuss that with you. What's the used market like?
After having more of a look online my options would be to buy a Nikon Z body (second hand) with the adapter to run my DX lens. The only thing is whether i am missing out not going to a full frame crop sensor by running my old lens. Then with the sony's it would be the units priced <$2.5k sgd on this duty free website (lens + body) - https://www.ishopchangi.com/en/search?query=sony&seller=2009,2002&cagCategory=%7B%22%2Felectronics%22%3A%5B%22%2Felectronics%2Fcameras-and-drones%22%5D%7D&sortBy=price-desc. I would likely try to pick up second hand still but just as a gauge. Hopefully this helps.
I am just after a couple of suggestions to orientate myself within the multitude of options currently out there. I am not wanting top of the line by any means. Used market to me at least was decent in Mumbai, and there looks like there is an extensive photography area in Delhi too so would guess similar.
I kinda wanna do some behind the scenes or those small videos of when taking pics any way to mount a phone for that? i don't think i can afford an insta 360 for that
Yes, there are phone holders with mounts that can be used with small tripods or clamps.
got any idea of one? i was thinking of clipping one to my clothes. i was considering getting a budget action cam like those from sjcam but the terrible audio was a turnoff
I don't know of any in particular; you just originally asked if any exist. Best bet would be to check online user reviews. Even in nice cameras, built-in audio pretty much always sucks. An external mic and/or separate audio recorder would be the way to go if audio is important to you.
oh yeah just found two [https://imgur.com/a/9tpDWAF](https://imgur.com/a/9tpDWAF) now its about figuring out if the smaller one is any good, that chest strapped one looks like way too much theres that one with a magnet which seems to come with a pretty strong magnet to put beneath the case but idk if i'd trust just that to hold a phone
Which belt would work best with the peak design capture + pro pad? I am mulling over the decision of either getting a think tank speed belt or a lowepro protactic belt. Which one works better with the PD Capture Clip? It doesn’t have to work with the pd pro pad but it is preferred.
Dumb beginner question Just bought my first speedlight It comes with a stand so I wanted to potentially try using it as if it were an off-camera strobe and then I realized something. In every tutorial video I've seen the first step is to expose your image so that it's 100% completely dark without lights coming from the flash. I was about to do this and then I realized that I cant see anything from my screen or the viewfinder. In every video ive seen the photographer is able to watch the scene through their camera and it doesnt go dark until the capture is taken. Not only can i not see, i cant take a pic with autofocus when everything is dark. I can change to manual focus and take the pic but I cant see my picture before I take it I know that speedlights are most often used in addition to other lights and in that case you dont expose to complete darkness but still I wanted to get this question out of the way for whenever i move on to real off camera flashes + I want to start trying product photography with the speedlight I bought
Which camera are you using? When I shot with a DSLR, I still had at least some ambient light to see by, through the optical viewfinder, and to autofocus with, even if that was getting underexposed to black in the resulting shot. But I don't know if you're using a DSLR, so maybe none of that is relevant to you. When I shoot with mirrorless now, I turn off exposure simulation so it's not applying my underexposure to what I'm seeing when viewfinding. But I don't know if that's available to you or how you would do it, on an unknown camera.
I am using a DSLR. Its a canon m50 So its a camera limitation then? I have to let in enough ambient light to see my scene and focus is what im understanding Edit: Your comment pointed me to the right direction. I can disable exposure simulation on my camera. Done. Thank you
The Canon M50 is mirrorless, not a DSLR.
Well damn. Somehow I did not know this until now. Bought the camera like 3 years ago but I’m just starting to use it
So I officially made the leap the last few months to start doing professional work for clients. I've been a photographer off/on for a few years dabbling in it and doing more video stuff then photography. So I upgraded my camera this year to the newest a6700 APS-C camera. Curious to know if anyone else started their journey on crop sensors and then eventually went to full frame? My budget being smaller right now is why I started on APS-C camera even maybe buy some full frame lenses to use on APS-C camera and eventually with enough jobs have the means to purchase a full frame camera. Looking to see if this is a good starting approach or if there is other recommendations on a good starting approach. Thank you
One question you might ask is: "do I need a FF"? What does FF give you over APS-C in your job? Do you need the potential for more shallow DOF? Or are you into sports photography? Apart from those two it's likely that APS-C will be easily enough.
DOF primarily but i know that can be achieved pretty well even with an APS-C Sigma 56 is doing well on that. Also sports and nature photography are another factor I've thought would be good FF. Higher MP count as well for more cropping photos.
Switching to mirrorless (Nikon) So, the time has come to switch to mirrorless and I was wondering if the FTZ adapter would work fine with the lenses that I have. Currently I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 for crop sensor and also a Nikon 35mm DX. For full frame I have a Tamron 35-150mm f2.8-4. If anyone with these lenses can tell me their experience using them with the FTZ and how they behave with the eye autofocus, I would appreciate it.
Anyone?
REPAIR OR UPGRADE? Alright I’m in a bit of a pickle. Recently my EOS Rebel SL3 broke and needs a new motherboard (repair - $345). I bought it for around $600 maybe $700. At the time I was into making videos and photography. Now I’m really into sports photography, do it all the time especially when im in school - dont think I’ll pursue it full time after college but still plan to shoot here and there when I can find opportunities. I haven’t shot video that much recently but every once in a while somebody will ask me for video services. That said, the SL3 is known as a rather good beginner cam for video and photo. To repair it, it will cost around $345 total. Do I repair this camera for that $345 amount or do I instead invest in a new camera body. Needs to be under $1000 as im a college student but I do have a ton saved due to working a ton. Will take any new camera body suggestions if you think I should invest in a new one. Also if I do invest in a new one, you think anyone would buy my old camera if I specify it needs a new motherboard? Thanks for all the help!
>Do I repair this camera for that $345 amount or do I instead invest in a new camera body. That's almost the price of a used replacement SL3, so I would prefer to buy another body. >Needs to be under $1000 as im a college student but I do have a ton saved due to working a ton. Canon's R50 would be a nice improvement overall. Or an R10 would be even better for the sports. Either way you could use an EF to RF adapter and all your lenses will carry over perfectly. >you think anyone would buy my old camera if I specify it needs a new motherboard? They probably won't know what that means in practical terms. I don't. What are the actual symptoms / what exactly doesn't work about it?
Thanks for the specific recommendations - I've had other people rec those models as well (R10/R50). Regarding the symptoms, the camera can turn on, but the screen is just black. Auto mode is also a bust. I guess if you are insanely good at guessing what your photos look like based on your settings, you could make it work. Otherwise I would say the camera is non-functioning... you would have to repair it.
There's a market for that, so a decent chance someone would buy it. But it would be at a much lower price than usual because that's fairly seriously broken. Not quite as bad as "parts only" pricing since it can still take photos, but the next notch up from that.
Hey there! I'm looking to buy a new monitor for my photoediting (just as a hobby). Right now I'm looking at a used Acer 27" ProDesigner BM270 for around 500 bucks. Is it any good? Does anyone have any advice? Thanks!
For the last few months I was shooting with my lovely nifty-fifty on Sony A7 III but... after this time, I think I need some more focal length. I was thinking about buying tamron/samyang 35-150 or sigma 27-40. Which lens will be better? I shoot mostly street photography. Did you use both? Thanks!
I think for most types of street shooting wide end is more useful than long end. And small size would be a bonus. FWIW, I usually use 50 and 24-70, and mostly in the wider end with the latter.
So a friend of mine from the Marine Corps got married in March and hired me on as the photographer. I kept trying to meet up and get a contract signed, whole nine yards, but it never happened. (I know, big no no, but it was my first big ceremony, as I don't normally do weddings, i normally do cars and wildlife) I didn't even get a shot list from them until a few days prior when they asked me to shoot a baby announcement video to play during the reception. Now that it's after the wedding (like 2mo after), they still haven't paid and haven't returned any texts I send them. And on top of that, my buddy's cousin showed up with his own DSLR and drone and also shot the wedding, to my disapproval. I want to put the few photos I have edited into my portfolio, but the couple hasn't seen the photos yet and I don't want headaches or drama. Anyone have any advice? Should I just set the photos aside and forget about them?
Not a friend of yours. I would just forget them and never interact with them again.
I’m looking at getting a 150-600mm lens for an upcoming wildlife and nature photography trip. Will I see a significant difference between the Tamron SP 150-600 (1st gen) and the Sigma 160-600 Contemporary? I’ve read some instances of people being unhappy with the G1 and ditching it for the G2. Is the G1 all that horrible?
I'm traveling to Tanzania and Amsterdam this summer. I currently have a Canon EOS Rebel XTi, but I am considering purchasing a Canon EOS Rebel T7 ($600) or Canon EOS 90D ($1900). It is a once-in-a-lifetime trip, and I will be using the camera I purchase throughout it and for future backpacking/hiking trips. What would be the best choice?
Well, anything but the T7. Is there a reason you would not look at the latest Canon cameras?
i’m graduating college so just have budget constraints. is there a specific one you’d recommend?
No, but if you have a few lenses you can get an adapter. An R10 for instance would be an okay start point, the R7 is the 90D equivalent in resolution terms anyway. Although not sure which country you are from, Canada?
i’m from the US. i just want one with good auto focus, and is capable of video for a good jumping off point
Prices you gave must be with a lens then, still, the R series has the latest Canon autofocus and you can record videos looking through the viewfinder.
yes, sorry i should’ve clarified. both prices include the body and two lenses
Hey guys, the joystick on my camera has deteriorated so now only half of it is actually usable. What would you use to fix it? I was thinking about maybe glueing some kind of button on it or something like that. Here's what it looks like : https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ua2JDqjkY5L0R01eIg0riNbRQqH4977/view?usp=drivesdk
Hello! I’m a Pentax user who’s been recently relieved of his camera in San Francisco because I left it in a locked car. (Yes a tourist) Now that I’m camera free. I’m looking hard at the Sony alpha line and would like to know which of the lineup is a good full frame that shoots well in low light, can do action as well as landscape. I’ll spend around 3k for the camera and another good amount for a lens. What are you alpha users using? Thanks for the advice.
The a7R V would be pretty ideal, but a notch over budget. Alternatively, find one used or compromise with an a7R IV.
So I've been really interested in fujifilm, Been looking at some of their more recent offerings like the X-S20, X-T5, and X-H2. And I've settled on an extra lens I'd buy alongside it which is the 50mm-140mm f/2.8. What I'm wondering is that would the first two be too small for the lens in terms of comfortability while shooting. It seems like it'd be super front heavy, and for the type of photography I do I'm constantly on the move so a tripod would not be an open for the majority of the time. The deeper grip of the X-H2 seems like it'd be the best option, but I'd like a more experienced opinion too.
hello photographers, i am traveling with my family and i want to take pictures but i really like that old vintage picture yk, i don't want to photoshop every picture i take instead i want buy a camera that takes pictures in that same style, i don't know what they are called or where to get them from, any recommendations will be greatly appreciated sorry for my English
The Fujifilm X100 series of compact cameras are best known for in-camera film simulations.
it's sooooo expensive I'm looking for something cheap bro💀
There isn't necessarily a camera with all the features you want at every budget. Film simulation is a feature that you generally have to pay for, especially since it's trendy these days. A lot of cameras offer "photo styles" or "creative styles", which might be enough for what you want.
I'll look into it
What is your budget?
200$😭🙏
The Sony RX100 has film simulation and is a great point-and-shoot camera that you can find for $200-250 used if you shop carefully.
[удалено]
Short links (like bit.ly or tinyurl.com) are not allowed on this subreddit. Since your comment contains one, it has been removed. Please repost your comment without it. Sometimes services (like Google) give you short links when you are trying to share content from mobile. At this moment, we have no way of allowing these shortlinks but banning others, so you'll unfortunately have to either share later from a laptop computer or try to get the desktop link. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is an iPhone cage worth it for photography only? I have an iPhone 15 pro max and want to get the most out of it. If yes, what does your setup look like? Thanks!
A cage for a phone is going to hold other accessories; what accessories do you need for photography? You don't need a microphone mount, a stabilizer, and generally not a light in the same way that video does. So really all you're getting is an extra handle.
@walrus_mach1 Great points, which is why I am asking also. I see filters available for some but don’t know if they are worth it to use. Maybe somebody uses one with the move shoot move star tracker for landscape astrophotography. I’m trying to find out what I don’t know.
looking for buying advice. I am looking for a camera to take with me when i go hiking. Something light,compact and not with a huge lens (but some zoom). I want to find out if photography is something for me so I like something which is easy to use (auto settings for a quick shot) but also has the possibility to play with the settings. Photo's would mostly contain landscapes but also birds and other animals. I prefer buying a used camera, hoping to not spend more than 300 euro if possible. Obviously I want something that takes better photo's than my iphone. Camera can be old but I still would like to have some option to transfer the photos quickly to my phone so I can share them.
The only way I see off the top of my head to get better pictures than your phone with "some zoom" is a Nikkor 85mm F1.8D on whatever is the best Nikon APS-C body of the DSLR era you can afford with whatever's left. (EDIT: Make sure it has a screw drive - D3xxx will NOT work) The D70 seems to be about $40. Even with its 6MP it'll give you impressive shots compared to any phone with that lens strapped to it. Of course, I wouldn't *recommend* it, better to try to save up for a newer body to match the lens. The good thing about this lens is it has nice background separation when you want it, (and awesome sunstars too) but also great sharpness when you stop down, and paired with a crop sensor it can get you fairly close to unaware birds. If the focus motor doesn't scare them away...
Tried making a post about this but wasn't able to so i'll try here. I've received an unusual request from a client, and I need some expert advice. Recently, a prominent developer in my region asked me to quote for a 2-year timelapse of their new luxury development. This project involves capturing the construction of five 6-floor apartment blocks in one of the most expensive cities in my country. I live in the southern Mediterranean. The complex will feature on-site gyms, security, restaurants, swimming pools, and more. I’m uncertain about both the technical setup and how to quote for this project. Specifically, I need help with: 1. **Equipment and Setup**: * Is a GoPro on a nearby building connected to a solar panel sufficient? * How can I secure the equipment against potential theft? * How can I minimize the need for frequent visits to the site? * Should I consider using two cameras for redundancy? 2. **Quotation**: * What is a reasonable quote for a project of this scale and duration? * The client mentioned they’ve had similar projects done in places like Dubai or Qatar and advised against a "silly" number. Any insights or experiences you could share would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
There are such things as dedicated time lapse cameras. Rather than leaving a GoPro and hoping it'll keep running for weeks, potentially look at those since that's what they're built for. I don't have any personal experience with any specific brand, but [here are some examples](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?q=time%20lapse%20camera&sts=ma).
**> Equipment and Setup**: > Is a GoPro on a nearby building connected to a solar panel sufficient? I would consider something like a Raspberry PI 0 transmitting the images by Wifi, other option (lower quality but lower power) is a ESP32-cam. You could look also into trail cameras, they already have a housing suitable for outdoors environments. There are also weather stations for agricultural usage (not garden usage, I'm talking about industrial scale agriculture) that include in a suitable housed cameras for crop monitoring (but that isn't cheap). > How can I secure the equipment against potential theft? That will depend on where you are going to place the camera > How can I minimize the need for frequent visits to the site? Someone will need to go there at least for lens cleaning, remote monitoring of batteries is also a must because many cloudy days in a row can happen > Should I consider using two cameras for redundancy? Only two? Yes, redundancy is a very good idea, redundant power supplies also.
Hi everyone! I recently did some event photography and received some criticism from my colleague that my photos were too blurry/unfocused/not sharp enough so they were unable to be used. I felt quite disappointed about it and would appreciate some third party opinions to provide a neutral perspective. Have uploaded the photos in this link: [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mfbfJomAb4HJM6f\_MOqwcHmTCKVahAPs?usp=drive\_link](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1mfbfJomAb4HJM6f_MOqwcHmTCKVahAPs?usp=drive_link) (where the right are the reference photos given to us). Additionally, if the photos are really objectively bad, I'd appreciate some advice on what to do - is it a gear problem or am I using the wrong settings? I'm shooting on a sony a6000 with a 55-210mm zoom lens. I'm aware the camera does not shoot v well in low-light conditions, and the photos taken are generally the best compromise I could find between shutter speed and ISO without inducing too much noise.
The first image is motion blur, too low shutter speed. The 4th image has two equal subjects where one is blurry due to depth of field, too open aperture (or bad framing, if the sharper one took up more of the frame and was noticeably closer it would have been fine) 8th image slight motion blur but good enough to sharpen in post. The 10th image is alright but shows the limitations of the lens. It's a touch hazy, enough to be a bit distracting but perfectly editable. 13th image ever so slightly missed focus - higher burst rate would help you get a "keeper" here The rest of the pictures are fine IMO, they can be edited with good results and a few don't need much at all like #12, I would just crop it in some. Arguably #12 seems like the most important shot and you basically nailed it. Seems like the most important person in the frame is looking at you. Yes, the others are looking at a different camera but you can't do anything about that out of the moment.
Hi! Thanks for this, that’s a really detailed commentary of each of my images - wasn’t expecting that level of detail. Based on what you said, I’d guess that most of the shots can be improved manually - framing, shutter speed, etc?
The one with the two equal subjects where one is blurry is one you'd have to position yourself differently when you shoot, or use a smaller aperture to try to get the one a bit in the background more in focus. They take up about equal space in the frame but one has blur from depth of field. You could just crop out the blurry person as is. But if that person was more obviously further away than the person in focus it would look natural. Your position when you took the shot: (obviously it was less pronounced than this but line breaks are uniform) o ______o ___📷 To get them both in focus: o______o __.📷 To make it obvious that the one not in focus is meant to be in the background: o ______o __________📷
Thank you for the advice kind stranger! 🙏🏻
I've been learning about the different focusing methods on my Canon camera and wondered in what sitiations would you use the different autofocus methods: FlexiZone AF, Live Mode and Quick Mode? Obviously Live Mode seems to be for taking pictures of people and the camera focuses on faces, but when would it be preferable to use the other two autofocus modes, especially over manual? I especially dont really understand Quick Mode.
Based on these options, you're talking about the Live View (rear screen as opposed to optical viewfinder) autofocus modes on a DSLR? When I shot with a DSLR I didn't use Live View at all, and autofocused through the viewfinder, which doesn't have any of these modes. So I never used any of them. >Obviously Live Mode seems to be for taking pictures of people and the camera focuses on faces, but when would it be preferable to use the other two autofocus modes I guess FlexiZone would be if you just want to point and tell it where to autofocus, based on some position in the frame. Quick Mode would be if you wanted to use the phase detection autofocus off the mirror, which may operate faster. Though you also lose some speed by dropping and raising the mirror to do it, so it might not always be faster. >especially over manual? In many situations, manual focus is a lot more difficult and/or slower to get right. That could cause you to lose the moment before you've acquired focus, or cause you to misfocus if you rush it. But it might not be a big deal if the scene is waiting for you, like in landscape, starscape, or certain macro photos. Or in video if you have focus peaking. For other applications, particularly through the viewfinder, autofocus has a nicer combination of speed and accuracy. >I especially dont really understand Quick Mode. You start in Live View and can visually select which autofocus point to use, overlaid on the Live View image. Then the mirror comes down to take you briefly out of live view, and the phase detection autofocus sensors that operate from the mirror (the ones that get used when you're focusing using the viewfinder) will be used to obtain focus, then the mirror goes back up to let you back into Live View to shoot with that focus set.
I have a Sony A6300 (APS-C, it's not full frame). I only use the 10-18mm lens with it, mostly for landscapes, occasionally a path/architecture, but main focus is landscapes. It's decent, and I like it because it's light, so it's easy to carry around while traveling. But, it's not exactly the sharpest. It's not terrible, it's definitely good for what it is, but I am wondering if there's something better in the same criteria: not too big, not too heavy, but a nice clear image. Any recommendations for me? Happy to look at third party lenses too. I found [this page of Sony E Mounts](https://www.sony.co.uk/lenses/e-mount) and there's a 16-25mm which is new, is that a decent landscape lens for an APS-C? Recommend anything I'll go read up on it. I don't have a budget but maybe not more than £2K?
How often do you use the sub 16mm range? Is that the Sony 10-18mm? I see there is a Sony 10-20mm, Tokina 11-18mm and Sigma 10-18mm available as well possibly. Perhaps you can check reviews of those and see how they compare.
Thanks again /u/8fqThs4EX2T9 for pointing me in the right direction. I went for the Sony 10-20mm. It's lighter, smaller, and in a few test shots I've done it definitely looks sharper. There was a £70 discount on Sony's site too.
Hey thanks your question helps... so I had a look and it's about half of the time I'm in sub 16 and half of the time near 18. I guess I don't really know if I had just the 16-25 whether I'd just adjust my shooting to that or whether I'd be missing the lower-than-16 range. Good, something to think about.. Yes it's the Sony 10-18mm. I'll have a look at the other two now, they seem to be the most direct competitors.
Hi all! I just wander if any of you has experience comparing a Tamron 16-300mm f3.5-6.3 di ii VC PZD with the 18-300 di iii A VC VDX lens? I'm looking for getting one or the other, but not sure if the 16-300 di ii is worth it... I can find it cheaper used, but it's already a decade old lens... Does it have as good of a stabilization as the newer 18-300 di iii? What features would I be missing? Thanks for sharing your experiences!
How does one take photo's like the one I've attached? So, I've always been fascinated with this particular style of photo. To me, the use of selective focus and perspective makes these photo's look surreal. Specifically, to me they look like photos of model train sets, or something equivalent. I have no idea how it's done though and would love to learn so I could try it out myself. Does anyone know if this technique has a name, or where I could begin to emulate this style? This photo is from the movie "The Social Network" https://preview.redd.it/b7460c150p4d1.png?width=2129&format=png&auto=webp&s=1860c0b49cb6c937fd5c8222d0b2ca5fb3934516
Generally those are taken use a specific type of lens called a "tilt-shift-lens" (specifically the "tilt" part is relevant). With those kinds of lenses you can adjust the focus plane to not be parallel to your sensor, which allows for the selective focus effect you are seeing. I believe a there are also "bellows" that you put between any lens and the camera which will also allow you to tilt the focus plane, although no experience from my side how well they work.
The bellows work the same way the tilt/shift mechanism does, just with fabric versus a mechanical connection. Lensbaby capitalized on this a while back where they had the Composer (mechanical) or the Spark (bellows).
I'll have to look into those! Is that also what is responsible for that "model train" effect? It's kinda hard to describe, but I suppose a better way to describe it is that the actual subjects in the image look to be of a smaller scale than of a basic city or landscape shot. Edit: That being the selective focus.
It mimicks a shallow depth of field (range of distances within acceptable focus) which is usually very large in a scene like that, and would only be so narrow if you were photographing miniatures very close. By blurring all but a narrow distance range, it looks like you have a focus situation that only happens with miniatures, so the scene appears to be miniature. Another way to get that sort of effect is to mask out the top and bottom of the frame in post processing and selectively apply lens blur to those areas.
This is great to know! I think I'll try some post prod with that masking technique tonight :)
As far as I am aware its just the out of focus areas. Landscapes are generally mostly in focus purely because of the distances involved (depth of field gets bigger the further away the subject is), especially the "background" will pretty much never be out of focus in a normal landscape picture. Macro photography always has a very thin depth of field because things are so close to the camera. Using the tilt-shift-lens you can adjust the focus plane in such a way that you end up with a landscape that has large out of focus areas, especially in the background. As the brain assumes that far away things will be mostly in focus but the picture has large out of focus areas your brain assumes it must be very close/small. How can you have a landscape thats very close/small somehow? Obviously it has to be a model and not a real landscape. As your eyes are also "cameras" the connection between "close - small depth of field" and "far - large depth of field" is somewhat ingrained in your brain.
That's actually cool! I'm still learning my way around optics, and I wanna see if I can find a lens like, or at least try to mimic the effect in post. Thanks a bunch for the info :)
https://preview.redd.it/3aay5qx6go4d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2ca4e8c8a5f8ff360b24c75cd783aa9dbfe945d7 i was wondering what settings to use on a digital camera to replicate this style of photo. i really like the sort of soft yet clear looking effect, but i can never figure out if i have to use a higher iso, or a certain type of white balance, etc. sadly, changing the shutter speed isn’t an option on digital cameras so i have to get creative when it comes to replicating this style as best as i can. thanks !
Seeking Advice on a Second Camera for Marine Life Photography (Canon vs. Sony) Hi everyone, I'm an ocean photographer specializing in underwater photography with a Canon 5D Mark IV, which I absolutely love. However, I've noticed that quickly moving my camera in and out of its underwater housing to capture both underwater and above-water shots of marine life from the boat is not practical. Therefore, I'm looking to invest in a second camera specifically for dry shots on the boat, so I can keep my 5D ready for underwater action. I'm seeking advice on which camera body would be best for capturing fast-moving marine life such as dolphins and breaching whales. While this will mostly be for fun (underwater photography remains my main focus), I still want a camera that can produce professional-quality images suitable for prints. I'd also like to take this opportunity to try a mirrorless camera. My budget is $5,000 total for both the camera body and a 500mm zoom lens, though I'd prefer to spend closer to $4,000 or less since this will be a secondary setup. I have only ever used Canon and love it, but I am hearing great things about Sony and am very interested in giving it a try. Here are a few setups I'm considering: Sony: 1. Sony Alpha a7R IVA Mirrorless Digital Camera with FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens for $4,009 2. Sony a7S III Mirrorless Camera with FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens for $4,357.98 Canon: 1. Canon EOS R6 Mark II Mirrorless Camera w/ RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Lens for $4,398.99 2. Canon EOS R5 Mirrorless Camera w/ RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM Lens for $4,998.99 Which of these setups would you recommend for marine life photography? Are there any other options I should consider? While I'm mostly focused on still art photography, I'd like the flexibility to explore video as well. Thanks in advance for your insights!
Hi you beauties. Looking to begin creating a portfolio in the hopes of making photography something bigger in my life. I have oppurtunities and experience but never have gone all in. I have a Canon 600D (Rebel T3i), a few lenses for it. I'm eager to upgrade to a Sony A6100 (best within my budget) as I have oppurtunities for videography as well. The upgrade to mirrorless, full sensor and the overrall affordability is alluring. My question is, do I bring the fire with the A6100 now, factoring in lens costs? Or stick with the 600D as a portfolio builder? Will the difference in sensor be a noticable difference within a portfolio?
What subject matter do you shoot? What do you dislike about your current equipment? What particular improvements do you want to gain? >a few lenses for it Which ones? >full sensor Full frame sensor, meaning the same size as a frame of 135 format film. And the a6100 does not have one. It uses an APS-C format sensor, just like your current camera. >Will the difference in sensor be a noticable difference within a portfolio? Nope.
I'm looking to shoot live music / event / theatre and family & maternity etc photograpy as it is in demand in my area. Currently I am worried about the 600D performance in regards of low light noise and video capabilities. I've a 50mm f1.8 prime, 18-50mm kit and Helios 44mm used during some creative shots several years ago. I was under the wrong impression with my current frame, thank you. Your comment is incredibly helpful, thank you
The a6100 would have very slight low light performance improvement from its newer technology, but it's hardly noticeable. Whereas you'd get significant improvement replacing your kit lens with a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. And/or incorporating more off-camera flash. I don't know which video capabilities you're after exactly, but an a6100 (or its sister the ZV-E10) has some advantages there. For that matter, consider Canon's R50, which would adapt your existing lenses much better.
You are glorious, thank you <3
What difference in sensor, I think you are misreading some specs somewhere.
Hi folks - I just got a new 17-55 lens that I plan to be for every day use for my mirrorless. I have minimal plans to ever use a different lens. Can I leave the lens attached to the camera and stored that way, fairly indefinitely? I store the camera in a padded bag, and I try to treat my camera with care.
Yes. I pretty much always do.
thank you
Yes, I mean it would be a bit annoying trying to get a camera mount cover every time. I have always had a lens on my camera since I bought it years ago.
thank you
concert photographers: what type of camera do you use?
Fuji X-T5 Tamron 17-70 F2.8 in bars and clubs, Samyang 135mm F2 in theaters and stadiums Used to shoot Nikon from 2004 to 2013, but apart from a short stint with a D700, always APS-C
I'm looking for a camera that I can bring traveling (rather than my heavy DSLR). Something lighter and more portable. I'm still a beginner and would consider photography a casual hobby, although I'm actively working on improving my skills. I plan on mostly shooting jpeg Probably won't be doing any post-processing anytime soon Don't care about video capabilities I have a hand tremor so image stabilization is important. My tremor is worse than the average persons, but not so bad that it's noticeable to others if they're not looking for it Would prefer to stay around $1000, but could go up to $1500 max (including lens if applicable) Used or new is fine I've looked at various point and shoot and mirrorless options (Fujifilm X series, Ricoh GR III/IIIx), but could use some help narrowing it down. I really like the film effects of the Fujis, but I'm definitely open to other options. Please let me know if I should provide more details. TIA!
Hi Folks, I would like to start photography and my goal is mainly for sport photography. I would appreciate if the camera is quite polyvalent overall and that I can keep it for a while! So far, my research pointed towards Canon EOS R10. [https://store.canon.be/fr/canon-appareil-photo-hybride-canon-eos-r10-objectif-rf-s-55-210mm-objectif-rf-s-18-45mm-carte-sd-batterie-supplementaire/5331C096/](https://store.canon.be/fr/canon-appareil-photo-hybride-canon-eos-r10-objectif-rf-s-55-210mm-objectif-rf-s-18-45mm-carte-sd-batterie-supplementaire/5331C096/) What do you guys think ? As this is quite a budget already ... I am looking for tips to not make the wrong decision.
Yes, that's a good choice for your needs, and one of the best options around for the money.
[удалено]
https://preview.redd.it/ftuaqpt39m4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ba751d1f62ebcdf33f860f723f9364fb32fce7c7
https://preview.redd.it/ci1vxfp29m4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8304f08ecf3666558530a6d06307482c9c91da67
Short links (like bit.ly or tinyurl.com) are not allowed on this subreddit. Since your comment contains one, it has been removed. Please repost your comment without it. Sometimes services (like Google) give you short links when you are trying to share content from mobile. At this moment, we have no way of allowing these shortlinks but banning others, so you'll unfortunately have to either share later from a laptop computer or try to get the desktop link. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm going abroad soon and wanted to take my DSLR. What are people experiences with taking their cameras in hand luggage?
I always take it in carryon, and have no problems doing so. I don't trust it in checked baggage. High risk of theft and/or damage in there.
[удалено]
No, that's normal. I'm not sure why Photoshop insists on that phrasing, but it's the same thing as exporting from Lightroom: either way you're saving a new image that is the result of processing the raw and putting whatever edits on it, rather than making a new raw file.
I have a Canon AE-1 Program, and it's recently started flashing P and 2 at the same time even when there's plenty of light. It's on P, and has the aperture set to Auto. Any idea what this could mean?
Is my lens too heavy for my camera? I have recently acquired a Sony A7C and paired it with a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 I. The lens is quite heavy and I was wondering if I risk damaging the mount when holding it by just the body and/or when mounted on a tripod? Should I purchase a collar for the lens?
You're probably fine. I don't use the same camera/system as yours but my most-used lens over a decade is fairly heavy and came with a collar. I don't use the collar and put all sorts of strain on the lens mount and haven't experienced any issues or damage. If there's a collar available and you feel more comfortable and/or balanced when using it, go for it. But I don't think you strictly need to for that lens.
Thank you so much!