File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
hey /p/ so im thinking about getting a new camera.
any recommendations?
>> Anonymous
Just read all ten pages of /p/
>> Anonymous
I have a d70 - have had for a while now. imo, most bang for buck. D40 is good, but less buttons - all has to be done via gui - annoying.
>> Anonymous
>>69160

D80 is sex.
>> Photon
D200 is porn
>> Anonymous
¯\( o °)/¯ I dunno, lol
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>69177
All ten? Should be able to find eight or nine of these threads in the first three pages...
>> Anonymous
My canon 30D DSLR has never seen me wrong :D
>> Anonymous
get a d40
>> Anonymous
Nikon D40x. Have one, love it. It's more expensive than the D40, but has 4 more megs and an "x" at the end if its name
>> Anonymous
>>69969
useless unless you intend to blow up your pictures bigger than A3. Thye both fail for the limited range of lenses they take
>> Anonymous
Judging by your picture, we're talking about amateur SLRs? There's no really "bad" stuff in this segment, and the differences between cameras from different makers are often so small that it's often advised to get the one which is the most comfortable to hold.
>> Anonymous
I have a D40 and a Canon Powershot S2 IS. The D40 is a great camera for point and shoot but it does not do videos and the big display on it does not preview pictures so you're forced to look through the viewfinder. The S2 IS is a great camera too but its slower than the D40 but its faster than the cameras in its class.
>> Anonymous
yeah, FUCK NIKON
>> Anonymous
>>69976
More like "there is no really good stuff". Trust me, once you try a real DSLR with a full-frame sensor, you'll never want to touch these plastic toys again.
>> Anonymous
>>69984

Fuck you nigger.

Most of us don't have that kind of cash to blow on a camera that really isn't necessary.
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>69986

>>69984here.
If you don't have the cash even for an used 5D+24-105, might as well go back to shooting pics with your cellphone and enjoy your lack of real color and dynamic range.
..Ah, I forgot, the cellphone doesn't do HDR. Too bad lol.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>69984
Pfft. Full 35mm-frame dSLR? Basically a glorified Kodak Funsaver. *Real* photographers won't use anything less than a P45 on a Hasselblad.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
INTERNET FIGHT!

>>69987
i can do HDR with my cellphone, take 3 pics with different EV values, smack them into Photomatix, hey presto, HDR with cellphone!
anyway, what do you mean by "doesn't do HDR" ?
>> Anonymous
>>69987

http://www.robertclarkphoto.com/

special projects --> image america

you=riggityrocked
>> Anonymous
>>69988
yeah, ok...
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>69988
P45 = Kodak CCD, anyone who thinks it's the holy grail of photography is either a retard or haven't used a Phase One back at all. Using lenses intended for real 6x6 on a cropped digital back doesn't help, too, trust me.
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>69990
Good for you, I'm not interested in cellphone shots for obvious reasons.

>>69991
Oh yeah, postage stamps. The guy also obviously thinks that selecting "B&W" mode on his cellphone makes him Cartier-Bresson.
>> Anonymous
Canon 1d mkIII. Best cam out there
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>69998
For shooting soccer and ADHD children. Those who care about quality should wait for the 1Ds version.
>> Anonymous
>>69984
I have. No discernable difference in image quality, even on large prints, from a 1.6x crop.

In fact, one could argue for crop sensors having superior quality because they only use the best part of the lens. See, theoretical masturbating works both ways.
>> Anonymous
P45 is only good with stills. massive...

By the way, everybody who can afford a P45 with a hasselblad or a Mamiya have a Canon EOS
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>69993
>>70012
You two realize that I was just sarcastically mocking the "The only real cameras are the EOS 5D and 1Ds series" guy, right?
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
     File :-(, x)
>>70010
The best part of WHAT lens, might I ask? A crop-only lens you'll have to use to get wide angle on your cropped-sensor camera? A cheap DG series from Sigma? They have no best parts to use, really.

On the contrary, an actually good lens is good no matter what sensor you use it with; but it will definitely produce the best results on a good (read: non-cropped) one. Picture very related.

And if you can't tell the difference between a real camera and a cropped one, even on a large print (although the superior shadow detail is easily discernible even on smaller ones), well, why the hell are you on a photography board?
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>70022
NEWSFLASH: 5D and 1Ds are not the only ones with a normal sensor. And far from the best ones for some uses, like studio shooting, too.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>70030
>>70030
...

Wait, what?

The only full frame 35mm digital cameras out there are the 5D and the 1Ds/1Ds Mk II. Are you really saying that only good digital cameras are medium format?
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>70048
And these people are trying to "mock" me? Jesus Christ. Google for "DCS Pro", then get back when you're enlightened.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>70050
Fine, fine. Allow me to restate:

You two realize that I was just sarcastically mocking the "The only real cameras are the EOS 5D, 1Ds series, and an obscure discontinued Kodak SLR from 2004" guy, right?
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
>>70062
People pay thousands for "obscure discontinued" Zeiss glass. If you have never used a good camera - and looks like you haven't even seen the 5D in action - don't act as if you're a guru.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>70066
Sorry, deleted that post after I read a bit more. Didn't realize at first that there were actually three (the DCS 14n, DCS Pro SLR/c and DCS Pro SLR/n. I'm guessing the difference between the /n and /c is the lens mount).

The reason people pay thousands for obscure, discontinued Zeiss glass is that it's really good. Ditto things like Leicas.
>"What can I say other than it's sad that Kodak haven't learnt anything from the poor performing 14n which was a slow camera by anyone's standards. To compound things however the SLR/c is even slower taking an eternal six to seven seconds to start up, another eight seconds if the camera needs to 'Recalibrate' (occassionally and if you change to certain ISO's), then we get on to Auto Review which takes six seconds for a RAW file and an pretty shocking fourteen seconds for a JPEG. This falls well short of even the cheapest digital SLR's, and prosumer digital cameras." --dpreview
Yeah, that camera sounds like a winner, all right.
>> Anonymous
>>70029
I'm on a photography board because I spend my time taking photographs, not staring at 100% crops, and because I spend my print money on actual prints, not making test shots and duplicate test prints, and then staring at them for inconsequential differences in shadow detail. Comparing different shots shot with full-frame cameras and crop sensor cameras, I can't see any flaws in the crop sensor camera output or find any particular identifying marks between the two.

I don't own any of them, but the shots I've seen from the Sigma DG series wide lenses look awesome: sharp, nice bokeh, etc. Don't just dismiss Sigma: they've made bad lenses and good lenses.

And from what I've heard, the Canon full-frame DSLRs are superior to Kodak's in ever way, by the way. I'm not sure, though: everything I've heard has been third-hand.

The whole point of this is that you're very silly if you think that only a full-frame (a totally arbitrary sensor size, chosen just because that's the size of the most commonly used film) camera can produce good results.

Of course a full-frame camera, all other things being equal, will best a crop sensor. The point, however, is three-fold:

1. All other things aren't equal. Ergonomic considerations might dictate a different body for one person over another. If someone hates the way the 5D feels, and loves the feel of an Olympus E-410, should he get the latter just because of a larger sensor. (Hypothetical; the 5D feels fine to me and I've never held a 410.)

2. Cost. A better, more noticable increase in sensor quality will come from having better lenses than a slightly larger sensor. Given a choice between a crop sensor camera with an L series lens and a full-frmae camera with a cheaper lens, which do you think is going to turn out better quality?

3. It isn't half as hard to get wide angle on a crop sensor as people make it out to be, unless you're going for something absurdly wide, like a 10mm equivalent.
>> Alexandro !7EL4OtHlbo
     File :-(, x)
>>70067
>>70068
tl;dr I'm going to sleep now guys. I'll educate you tomorrow on how MF film is infinitely better than any digital will ever be (using a different tripcode, of course).
By the way, I shoot with an Olympus.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.Camera ModelE-500Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Color Filter Array Pattern654Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:08:20 01:22:02Exposure Time1/25 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1024Image Height768RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessSoft
>> Anonymous
>>70081
You'll "educate us" on how "how MF film is infinitely better than any digital will ever be?"

I lol'ed, especially considering the full-frame digital we've been discussing bests MF film easily. As cliched as this is, crop sensor digital = 35mm film; full-frame diigtal = MF film.

And why do you shoot Olympus is full frame is so crucial/why are you pimping full frame if you shoot Olympus?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>70085
>You'll "educate us" on how "how MF film is infinitely better than any digital will ever be?"

I believe what he's telling us is that we have been trolled.

And quite skillfully, too. Dammit.
>> Anonymous
>>70087
Damn, I think you're right. The Voigtlander lens was a nice touch.