File :-(, x, )
39 megapixels Anonymous
78megabyte photos

http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2500

i held one of these today. they are hueg but surprisingly ergonomic
>> Anonymous
i like my holga better
>> Anonymous
I bet it can't shoot 60 motherfucking frames per second.
>> Anonymous
"Resolution insufficient for my needs. A good starter digital camera for kids."
>> Anonymous
"I had one of these to take pictures of fecal matter…didn’t work to well though…not waterproof enough and smelt really bad afterwards."
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
You know, my Yashica A makes >100 megapixel photos. Now granted, I need to pay for film and developing, but $30K will buy a shit-ton of 120.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Still no better than the photographer behind it.
>> Anonymous
Did anyone look at the last comment there...o_0
>> Anonymous
>>110747

MF digital like that gets more detail than MF film, so no. The latest generation is more on a par with LF film now. I've seen tests done and samples. It's amazing. HELLA EXPENSIVE, but amazing. Those who can afford it will buy it.
>> Anonymous
>>110748

Probably the camera is worth more than most photographers though, so it will be better than the person behind it in some cases.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Maybe if I am good this year Santa will bring me it.
>> Anonymous
>>110751
ITT: People with no experience on film.
>> Anonymous
>>110815

ITP: Someone who has no experience with a $30000+ camera and yet still criticises someone's opinion. Idiot.
>> Anonymous
>>110816
Worked with Mamiya RZ67s.
>> Anonymous
>>110818

And? Unless you've used this camera extensively and compared it to others you've not much of a point there. I'll believe those who DO use it and test and compare results carefully over someone who hasn't touched it.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
Overall, I see the Phase One P45 as being a better option than the Hassy stuff. It's top notch, no doubt, but the Phase One is more versatile given the platforms you can run it on. Also, while Zeiss is great, I prefer Mamiya glass. Of course, it's all just conceptual unless you actually work with this stuff. I wonder - are any of you actually involved in commercial photography or intend to go in that direction? That's a serious question - I'm curious to know.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
phase one is kiddy shit.
http://www.gigapxl.org/
1/60th of a frame persecond bitches.
>> Anonymous
>>110837
Not me. I'm also a moron, though.
>> Anonymous
39 MEGA PIXEL, against nikon d300 : 12,2.

pictures like football fields.
SO huge
>> Anonymous
Is that 78MB raw or jpeg? That's pretty fucking small for raw.
>> Anonymous
It's so big i shat pixels
>> Anonymous
>>110903
if compressed, it would be ok size

also,
>>110739
OLD NEWS IS OLD
>> Anonymous
39 MEGAPICKSELS? DATS SUM PICKSEL MASHAN REZOLUSHUN
>> Anonymous
>>OLD NEWS IS OLD

vs.

>>i held one of these today. they are hueg but surprisingly ergonomic
>>i held one of these today.
>>today
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Sheesh. When I see people snapping up that it makes it all the worse when I'm trying to save my pennies for lenses or camera bodies. :P

Still looking forward to my next purchase (still deciding - GEAR LUST), even if it isn't something as awe inspiring as that!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111004
What're you looking at?

I'm trying to decide whether to pick up a 40D or a EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM next. Leaning towards the 40D...
>> Anonymous
>>111041
Get the 70-200mm f/4L IS unless you really need that extra 100mm.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
i want the 8-200/2.8 so much but i know ill be using the 20-40/2.8 a lot more.

why is gear so expensive?!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111046
It's the extra five-hundred dollars in my bank account that attracts me to the 70-300, not the extra hundred millimeters. Although the extra reach is a nice plus, too.
>> Anonymous
>>111041
40D. Once you've got a usable viewfinder and two command dials, you'll wonder how you ever shot with the Rebel.

Alternatively, you could save some money and go with a 20/30D. 10D's probably too much of a dip.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111061
Yeah, it's the two command dials that's really attracting me to it. I've been shooting a lot with flash in full-manual mode, and setting my aperture with the button+dial is annoying. Also, the 6.5 MOTHERFUCKING frames per second appeals to me, and the easier customization (with the user modes on the command dial and the custom menu).

I'd rather not go with the 20d/30d. There are a bunch of little improvements in the 40d over those two models that I really want. Also: While I know on an intellectual level that megapixels don't really matter, the thought of upgrading from a 10MP camera to an 8MP camera just rubs me the wrong way, you know?

I'm anticipating getting over $1000 from my company for my annual bonus sometime in February, so that should finish off my current credit card debt so I can start it right back up again with a new camera.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
     File :-(, x)
>>111041

I'm trying to decide between a 70-200L or a 40D. Assuming that all goes well and I don't end up out of pocket (again) I'll not be spending anything until *at the very least* the trade show around February (I can't remember exactly when it starts) as then they might make a lot of announcements about lenses or cameras. New cameras might mean price drops of the current stock. I might have to wait longer depending on how funds go.

On an aside and part of my reasoning for stretching for a 70-200L rather than the other zooms I was considering: I found out that the 70-200 2.8 L really takes well to 1.4x TCs. I saw some samples from this and it seems to work much better if you stack two 1.4x TC than use a single 2x TC.

It's more expensive than buying one 2x TC, but the TCs can be bought over time to spread the cost for me and it means if I wanted 400mm I don't need to get a 100-400L, just use the TCs and get more flexibility. Easier to carry than two big zooms and cheaper too. If you are shooting with the the two TCs you've basically got a 100-400L. As the light drops you can open it up more while you remove TCs each time you need more light. Sounds good, no? Picture related. See if you can guess which was the 100-400L and which was the 70-200L with stacked 1.4x TCs.


>>111049

Because they know they have us by the proverbial balls and don't need to drop prices unless the rest do.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2005:07:28 22:21:08Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width800Image Height600
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111063

Same kind of thoughts I had with the 40D. That and the better autofocus, viewfinder and quieter shutter.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111067
Oh, yeah, better autofocus was a big plus for me, too. I've spent too much time fighting with my XTi while the AF motor buzzes back and forth in search of a line.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111073

By all the user reports and reviews it does seem like a big step up that way. Hopefully those autofocus woes would be a thing of the past. It seems able to snap into focus quite quickly compared to the rest. I remember seeing a user test comparing them and he found it did the job in that test (book case and tracking trucks on the interstate) about as quick as his Canon pro model (the 1D MKII). It was also a lot faster than the Rebel or 20D types.

I've had a few frustrating moments where it'd not auto focus as I wanted or needed a little help to kick start it.

I just have to decide if I am better off with a camera that makes everything a little easier or with a lens that allows me to do new things. I'm leaning towards the lens right now. That might change if there are price drops with the new Rebel and the speculated 5D MKII.
>> Anonymous
>>111073
Plus on the 40D: The viewfinder's actually surprisingly great, so you can manually focus with no problems.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>111155

If only the 30D had changeable screens like 40D. I have three older than random 4chan perv sitting around useless, mainly because it's not that great to focus with them without manual focus screen.
:(

(Bought shiny M42toEOS adapter from internets.)
>> Anonymous
who gives a shit
i was working with CCDs twice as big ten years ago
/p/ sucks
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111160

If you don't mind a more permanent change you could go with those Katzeye screens.
>> Anonymous
>>111164
no u
>> Anonymous
Is there still autofocus after 2 TCs? Or do you have some pro bodies?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111160
It's not officially supported, but you can get a Katz Eye split-prism focusing screen for the 30D for about $100.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111171
All Canons have the focusing motor built into the lens, so the only thing that two teleconverters adds to the mix is a slightly longer wire to carry the power and control signals. So yeah, autofocus still works.
>> Anonymous
>>111175

Oh, maybe I'm thinking of extention tubes then.
>> Anonymous
>>111175
The focusing motor has nothing to do with it. The issue is that teleconverters reduce the amount of light transmitted to the film/sensor. Autofocus can only work when there is enough light, and most autofocus systems don't work with lenses slower than about f/5.6-f/8. Even if the AF will work, it will work a lot better with more light.

A 2x teleconverter takes 2 stops of light, a 1.4x teleconverter takes 1 stop. With a lens that has a maximum aperture of f/2.8, 2 1.4x teleconverters puts you at f/5.6- getting into the gray zone for AF. 2 2x converters will put you at f/11, where most likely no AF will work at all.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>111190
Oh yeah, good point.

Although, in my defense, the previous guy's reply suggests that my potentially incorrect answer was correct for the question he was asking. :)
>> Anonymous
I used my canon rebel T2, with kodak BW 400 film.
i used photoshop + genuine fractals to enlarge the scan form ~6000x4000 to 9000x6000, and then i ordered a 20x30 print of it. (too bad i lost the picture)
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
I don't think Canon 1.4x TCs like to stack with the same and some lenses work with one brand and the other so it's probably best to mix. The best samples I saw were with a Canon 1.4x and a Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x.
>> Anonymous
>>111190
you're a stupid douchebag that neither understands physics or photography
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Autofocus will still work with a 70-200L, as well as stationary targets I saw someone use it for birds and air shows. He tended to use his xxD bodies for a lot of his stuff.

The 100-400L is 5.6 on the long end anyway, so it isn't too bad to have your 70-200 2.8 with two 1.4 TCs to lose those two stops to end up at 5.6. If you're going to have trouble handling a 5.6 zoom you aren't going to be able to use a 100-400L anyway (and some other FFL lenses). If it gets darker and you need a wider aperture then rather than giving up with your 100-400L you can take off a TC and you've got a wider aperture. Sure it's shorter when you do that, but you can shoot while the other one can't right up to a 2.8 zoom. Works great for something like sports by the pitch side. It's lighter and cheaper than two lenses that way and more flexible than just picking one.

Note that the point of this is that stacking the 1.4x TCs works better than a single 2x and the example I'm talking about and had the image up there is for those (like me) procrastinating over the 70-200L or 100-400L which are in similar price ranges. It is more expensive to have two rather than one obviously, but worth it as you get better IQ and it seems that the AF works just fine too. Pretty sweet bonus for not that much more money. I was disappointed about the IQ from using 2x TCs and made the mistake of assuming that one of them would be better than two 1.4x TCs. I was well off the mark, it seems. Just shows that you can't always assume. My bad, but I'm glad to be proven wrong for a juicy bit of info like that.

Anyone mad enough to start stacking 2xTCs is on their own, BTW. Good luck.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Another suggestion I've heard from some is that autofocus can be tricked into working (in a lesser but still functional capacity) by taping some of the pins. Useful if it will refuse to AF for those with narrower apertures. I've seen this brought up a lot as being a good solution, probably for those stuck with adding TCs to f4 zooms or something, but it's not something I've had to try myself yet. If you have a look around with Google I'd imagine someone has a guide on it.
>> Anonymous
>>111219
That's an option, but I think the better option is don't fuckin do it in the first place. You don't need that much reach, and if you do you should buy the proper lens for it.
>> Anonymous
>>111244

I'm sure everyone will be happy to if you will pony up the $5000+ a piece for us. A check will be fine.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111244

How do you know what they need, want or can afford? I saw some nice photos taken with that method, so it can't be all that bad. Why get all high and mighty about someone else daring to tape pins on their own gear? You don't have to do it if you don't want to. All that matters to everyone are the results. It's certainly a viable option for some people judging by their photos and I can't complain about what they want to do.

Maybe they didn't want to spend £5500 for a giant 600L for a few days doing moon shots or something else? Sure it'd be nice to have, but unless Canon hand them out for free or do the rebate of a life time I don't seem them choosing it. Grabbing a few TCs and a little tape might let them have some fun experimenting. They can learn from experimenting. Your attitude is like the ANTI-STROBIST. :P

Don't be so dismissive of their efforts. It's all good if it's not coming out of our pockets, no?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>111218
I know people who have stacked TC's, mostly for fun but they still work, f8 is quite useable in daylight.

I'm planning on getting the 80-200/2.8G and a 2x TC, which on my beloved mount means getting the minolta TC as the sigma ones work only with sigma lenses and minolta only works with minolta/sony lenses. It is a lot more useful than buying an 80-200 AND a 160-400 (which doesnt even exist afaik).

500 lense + 200 tc << 3000 lense (and as a bonus, all of these lenses are white)
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111259

Can you get Kenko TCs and would they work with what you're wanting to use? I saw someone test them and he concluded that they were one of the better third party ones. The folks doing the stacking were using a Canon with the Kenko for the good results.

Have you checked to see if the two 1.4x TCs might be better for Sony instead too? I don't know if it is just a Canon thing.

I was thinking the same as you then with your 80-200 2.8. I was going to get the similar Canon model and later get the TCs. Best part is that those TCs will be useful for other lenses that we might add later. A very flexible set up and easy to take around.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>111244

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1D Mark IICamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:11:15 15:24:41Exposure Time1/1000 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/5.7Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length600.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1002Image Height515RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>111263
Im not sure about the 2x vs 1.4x but the 2x paired to the G lenses doesnt lose 2 stops so i dont think its going to be better, plus its more expensive.

Generally TC's are awesome things, cost very little and give you so much more back, only be careful of cross compatibility.
>> Anonymous
>>111259I know people who have stacked TC's, mostly for fun but they still work, f8 is quite useable in daylight.

Someone said it already but most non pro bodies can't AF past 5.6.

And manually focusing a big lens isn't exactly fun.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111268

Sounds like they've got a pretty sweet 2x TC then. With Canon it's the 1-stop 1.4 or the 2-stop 2x so it's possible to choose one or the other combo.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>111268

http://pdf.crse.com/manuals/2685152111.pdf

It says in that manual from Sony that lenses still lose 2 stops with it. Is it some other model of Sony TC or something? This sounds quite interesting.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>111298
nah it does loose TC i missread something (as usual)

>>111279
it wasnt AF, i was just saying you can use them.