• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II

M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
Wasn't there an article a while back that suggested the DoF is roughly equal if you frame a subject the same way? I.e to frame a subject the same size with a 100mm lens as with a 50mm lens you'd have to be standing much further back and they balance out


Also - how can't your 85mm do f8? All lenses should do f8


Edit : this article - https://luminous-landscape.com/dof2/
 
T

Ty4on

Member
jongkookie said:
Can anybody help me understand this:

Using my 28 and 50mm primes to shoot my car, I can't get blur/bokeh/shallow DOF in the background. Looking at the focus distance on the ring, in order for me to get my entire car in the frame and get good focus, I have to set both at 15ft and 20ft respectively which also turns out to be their max focus distance. So, I'm basically at infinity focus and I won't be able to get any blur/bokeh/whatever.

That is correct right?

If that is right, then why can I get blur/bokeh/shallow DOF using my 85mm prime at about 16ft on the focus distance ring? Granted the max focus distance on the 85 is at 33ft so it can go pretty far.

Could this be the crop factor taking into effect on my 28 and 50mm primes?
Click to expand...

I think you need something much longer to really blur the background out.
The DoF when magnification is kept constant (whole car is in the frame) doesn't actually change with focal length, but longer focal lengths compress the backround more which makes the blur more apparent. Matt demonstrates it here.

I googled F1 photos until I found one with EXIF data. This one was taken on a D3 with a 500mm at f5.6 and doing the math a 300mm f4 is the closest equivalent on crop.
ferrari-formula-1-1.jpg
Click to expand...
 
M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
Ty4on said:
I think you need something much longer to really blur the background out.
The DoF when magnification is kept constant (whole car is in the frame) doesn't actually change with focal length, but longer focal lengths compress the backround more which makes the blur more apparent. Matt demonstrates it here.

I googled F1 photos until I found one with EXIF data. This one was taken on a D3 with a 500mm at f5.6 and doing the math a 300mm f4 is the closest equivalent on crop.
Click to expand...

The snag being you really want the background to be far away too.
 
G

giga

Member
mrklaw said:
Wasn't there an article a while back that suggested the DoF is roughly equal if you frame a subject the same way? I.e to frame a subject the same size with a 100mm lens as with a 50mm lens you'd have to be standing much further back and they balance out


Also - how can't your 85mm do f8? All lenses should do f8


Edit : this article - https://luminous-landscape.com/dof2/
Click to expand...
See the video posted below your post. That definitely illustrates what I'm talking about. Same dof, but very different out of focus rendition.

Edit: http://www.worth1000.com/tutorials/162260/theory-depth-of-field-vs-focal-length/1

This is good. So same dof, but the background is magnified more on longer focal lengths, even if the subject occupies the same frame of the picture, because of the narrower field of view.
 
B

bob page

Member
I got the 35mm f1.8 prime for my A6000 a few weeks back and I'm slightly disappointed with the sharpness. My $200 Sigma 30mm seems quite a bit sharper and images coming out of my 35mm so far seem to have less "pop." Has anyone else had a similar experience? Are there any settings I should be paying attention to that might impact this for basic city shooting?
 
J

jongkookie

Member
It was kinda the aperture.

Even with it wide open, there's some blur but not to the extent that I was hoping for lol.

28mm wide open at f/3.5:



50mm wide open at f/1.8:



nhlducks35 said:
Don't want to sound like a dick but bokeh refers to the quality of the DoF, not the actual effect of having a shallow depth of field
Click to expand...

Yep.

But I feel like it's become interchangeable these days, so I just went for all 3 that sounded similar just to avoid confusing people lol.

mrklaw said:
Also - how can't your 85mm do f8? All lenses should do f8

Edit : this article - https://luminous-landscape.com/dof2/
Click to expand...

I'd love to read that article if it didn't badger me about subscribing... is there an X button on that pop-up?

As for the lens, it's an Opteka, probably a B-stock Samyang clone. It was just gifted to me by a friend who jumped from Nikon to Sony.

Ty4on said:
I think you need something much longer to really blur the background out.
Click to expand...

I do have a 75-250mm sitting around my room somewhere. I'll try that out tomorrow once the sun is out.
 
D

Dr.Horrible

Member
I know there is a separate photos thread, but wanted to post in here for feedback since this was my first real outing with my new A6000.

Edit - Nevermind, can't figure out how to get the pics to show off Flickr. Will try again later.
 
T

theepicoftyler

Member
Dr.Horrible said:
I know there is a separate photos thread, but wanted to post in here for feedback since this was my first real outing with my new A6000.

Edit - Nevermind, can't figure out how to get the pics to show off Flickr. Will try again later.
Click to expand...

You can find a BB Code option in the share menu of Flickr that will make it very easy for you to copy and paste.
 
F

Fox1304

Member
I'm starting to get very annoyed at the AF of my 700D. It just nearly never manages to focus on the center area, no matter the setting. Could that be a material issue ? Or am I missing some setting ?
 
A

Aurongel

Member
Fox1304 said:
I'm starting to get very annoyed at the AF of my 700D. It just nearly never manages to focus on the center area, no matter the setting. Could that be a material issue ? Or am I missing some setting ?
Click to expand...

Do you have this issue with any other AF point? Have you tested this with multiple lenses?

bob page said:
I got the 35mm f1.8 prime for my A6000 a few weeks back and I'm slightly disappointed with the sharpness. My $200 Sigma 30mm seems quite a bit sharper and images coming out of my 35mm so far seem to have less "pop." Has anyone else had a similar experience? Are there any settings I should be paying attention to that might impact this for basic city shooting?
Click to expand...

Does it seem any better stopped down to where the Sigma is? (f2.8?)

Prime lenses (less than f2-ish) aren't very sharp when shot wide open, that's normal behavior. But if it doesn't shape up and look like your Sigma by f2.2-ish then something is way, way wrong.

oatmeal said:
Officially in for the Scarlet-W.
Click to expand...

Madman... :O

LeadProtagonist said:
Well, KEH had a 10% off sale, so I have an X100S on its way here.

I feel like I've gotten in over my head. Time to start reading books on photography while I wait and figuring out what to start shooting. Any recommendations for reading material?
Click to expand...

That's a solid beginner camera, you chose well. The best way to learn is with a prime lens (which you have in the x100s) and shoot in manual, which shouldn't be too hard for you because the Fuji has some decent manual controls.

Futureman said:
So I do product photography at work. They want me to suggest three different cameras. Low end probably $200 and up to around $1000.

For mid-range I'm thinking something like the Canon T5 or T5i? Can you get these body only? Body only with something like the 50mm 1.8 seems like it would work for me. I've currently been using my 5D2 with a 50mm lens, though with the Rebel I would have to deal with the crop sensor.
Click to expand...

I shot product photos for eBay for several years using a 60D (same sensor as what you mention) and the (now old) 50mm f1.8. The results were pretty good straight out of camera but what really took my product photography to new heights was using a strobe and bounding the flash.

My puny $100 Yongnuo flash brought more life to my product photos then my (eventual) full frame camera and Sigma lens did. Canon sensors are all extremely, extremely similar from camera to camera so you don't even really need something as new as a T5i to accomplish what you want. Don't rule out going for a cheaper body like a T3i.
 
F

Fox1304

Member
Aurongel said:
Do you have this issue with any other AF point? Have you tested this with multiple lenses?
Click to expand...

Don't have other lenses with me now. By "other AF point" you mean setting for example the leftmost point for AF and see if it focuses correctly on this point, correct?
 
A

Aurongel

Member
Yeah, if every AF point is spotty then it's probably either your lens or your method of focusing. Testing with multiple lenses helps you narrow down if it's the body or lens. Lenses being the culprit of odd focusing issues is far more common than issues with an AF system but I wouldn't write either out at this point.
 
andythinkpad

andythinkpad

Member
People are really posting image here to compare dof? There are a lot of dof calculators online. Go to flickr and search "85mm 1.4" will show you plenty of dof samples. Add a body name keyword if you want to check specific m43 APSC size (I assume you know your dof if you have a FF body).

No you can't separate your subject from the background with a 28mm lens until your subject is 10 inch from you.
 
O

oatmeal

Banned
TerryLee81 said:
Crazy. What do you do that you need such a camera?
Click to expand...
I'm a commercial director, but I do stuff for myself on the side. I have a Scarlet-MX that I'm currently selling that we just shot a feature on.

The Weapon version is gonna last longer, mx was great but it wasn't complete package like the W is.
 
A

Astral/H3X

Member
bob page said:
I got the 35mm f1.8 prime for my A6000 a few weeks back and I'm slightly disappointed with the sharpness. My $200 Sigma 30mm seems quite a bit sharper and images coming out of my 35mm so far seem to have less "pop." Has anyone else had a similar experience? Are there any settings I should be paying attention to that might impact this for basic city shooting?
Click to expand...

The Sigma is known to be sharper, especially if you are comparing both at wide open. The Sony's main advantage is faster AF and that it opens wider. That being said, there is probably a good chunk of change difference between shooting at 1.8 and shooting at 2.8 on the Sony.
 
M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
andythinkpad said:
People are really posting image here to compare dof? There are a lot of dof calculators online. Go to flickr and search "85mm 1.4" will show you plenty of dof samples. Add a body name keyword if you want to check specific m43 APSC size (I assume you know your dof if you have a FF body).

No you can't separate your subject from the background with a 28mm lens until your subject is 10 inch from you.
Click to expand...

Images can help visualise things compared to a dry calculator with numbers?
 
J

jongkookie

Member
andythinkpad said:
People are really posting image here to compare dof? There are a lot of dof calculators online. Go to flickr and search "85mm 1.4" will show you plenty of dof samples. Add a body name keyword if you want to check specific m43 APSC size (I assume you know your dof if you have a FF body).

No you can't separate your subject from the background with a 28mm lens until your subject is 10 inch from you.
Click to expand...

Oh noooooo.

He's posting pictures in a photography thread asking for help/advice, what would we ever doooo?

/Kai
 
T

Ty4on

Member
andythinkpad said:
People are really posting image here to compare dof? There are a lot of dof calculators online. Go to flickr and search "85mm 1.4" will show you plenty of dof samples. Add a body name keyword if you want to check specific m43 APSC size (I assume you know your dof if you have a FF body).

No you can't separate your subject from the background with a 28mm lens until your subject is 10 inch from you.
Click to expand...
DoF calculators don't really tell you what the background will look like, just whether or not it'll be "sharp". They don't really tell you if anything is sharp either, but that's a different topic.
 
D

Dr.Horrible

Member
andythinkpad

andythinkpad

Member
Ty4on said:
DoF calculators don't really tell you what the background will look like, just whether or not it'll be "sharp". They don't really tell you if anything is sharp either, but that's a different topic.
Click to expand...

What the background will look like belongs to the topic of "bokeh quality." Dof calculator tells you how thin the dof is with a given lens, or rather a given lens's ability to separate the foreground and background. The calculator is still very useful if you want to compare two real world lens. For example compare the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 to the Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-4, or compare the RX100 to the Canon G9X at the tele ends.

As far as hyperfocal distance goes, you would need to know the dof formula to understand hyperfocal distance. I am all for learning the dof formula.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
I'm going to convert one of my old wooden cabinets into a storage space for my camera stuff. I tried looking to see if anyone sells a cabinet setup that's specifically designed to store camera equipment, but I couldn't find any.

In the case of using an existing cabinet, I would like to be able to add some padding or dividers, like you see in camera bags so that my lenses don't roll around too much. Does anyone have any suggestions? Like, should I just buy some Pelican Case dividers and stick 'em inside the cabinet and be done with it?

Or, alternate solutions for camera gear storage?
 
A

Astral/H3X

Member
Rentahamster said:
I'm going to convert one of my old wooden cabinets into a storage space for my camera stuff. I tried looking to see if anyone sells a cabinet setup that's specifically designed to store camera equipment, but I couldn't find any.

In the case of using an existing cabinet, I would like to be able to add some padding or dividers, like you see in camera bags so that my lenses don't roll around too much. Does anyone have any suggestions? Like, should I just buy some Pelican Case dividers and stick 'em inside the cabinet and be done with it?

Or, alternate solutions for camera gear storage?
Click to expand...

All I can really think of, is having the shelving itself with little divots for you to set the lenses on on top of their lens caps. That's about all I can think of.
 
T

the better twin

Member
bob page said:
I got the 35mm f1.8 prime for my A6000 a few weeks back and I'm slightly disappointed with the sharpness. My $200 Sigma 30mm seems quite a bit sharper and images coming out of my 35mm so far seem to have less "pop." Has anyone else had a similar experience? Are there any settings I should be paying attention to that might impact this for basic city shooting?
Click to expand...

Got any examples? Just about to buy the lens myself.
 
andythinkpad

andythinkpad

Member
Rentahamster said:
I'm going to convert one of my old wooden cabinets into a storage space for my camera stuff. I tried looking to see if anyone sells a cabinet setup that's specifically designed to store camera equipment, but I couldn't find any.

In the case of using an existing cabinet, I would like to be able to add some padding or dividers, like you see in camera bags so that my lenses don't roll around too much. Does anyone have any suggestions? Like, should I just buy some Pelican Case dividers and stick 'em inside the cabinet and be done with it?

Or, alternate solutions for camera gear storage?
Click to expand...


You want one of these if you live in wet climic.

http://m.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=C...C0.Xcamera+dry+cabinet&sqp=camera+dry+cabinet
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
H3XAntiStyle said:
All I can really think of, is having the shelving itself with little divots for you to set the lenses on on top of their lens caps. That's about all I can think of.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was having a crisis of imagination too :)

andythinkpad said:
You want one of these if you live in wet climic.

http://m.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=C...C0.Xcamera+dry+cabinet&sqp=camera+dry+cabinet
Click to expand...

I was thinking I'll just put a bunch of desiccant bags inside. I have a few lying around from goods that have been shipped to me. I also want to re-purpose the old cabinet into something more useful.
 
F

FStop7

Banned
Gonna try doing D-76 and C-41 processing at home. D-76 is easy enough. C-41 isn't much harder except you have to be spot on with temperature.

The prices that labs are charging to process and scan these days are outrageous.
 
T

Ty4on

Member
FStop7 said:
Gonna try doing D-76 and C-41 processing at home. D-76 is easy enough. C-41 isn't much harder except you have to be spot on with temperature.

The prices that labs are charging to process and scan these days are outrageous.
Click to expand...

Your post was the drop of water that got me to finally process a roll I had lying :p

I wanted to reply to your last post regarding film catching on like vinyl. I don't disagree, but I think that because of the processing and scanning it will be much more muted. There needs to be something like Kodak's recent Super8 push for 35mm/120. Hopefully that doesn't mean 50$ per roll :p
 
L

LProtag

Member
Well, my X100s comes in tomorrow. Excited to start messing around with it.

I've also got a copy of Understanding Exposure on its way as well.
 
F

FStop7

Banned
Ty4on said:
Your post was the drop of water that got me to finally process a roll I had lying :p

I wanted to reply to your last post regarding film catching on like vinyl. I don't disagree, but I think that because of the processing and scanning it will be much more muted. There needs to be something like Kodak's recent Super8 push for 35mm/120. Hopefully that doesn't mean 50$ per roll :p
Click to expand...

$50 per roll seems so crazy, but... the price quote I got from Richard Photo Lab to develop and scan 3 rolls of 35mm film just happened to be $147. With an 8 to 10 day turnaround time! And in reality, the price may have been higher because my film was shot on an Xpan - certain labs charge more for this.

A "press kit" of C-41 chemicals is $30 and is rated for 12 rolls but apparently can last for up to 24. I already have the D-76 chems, I think they were also around $30.

An Epson V850 scanner is $925. It's a big expense but it would literally pay for itself in less than 20 rolls vs. outsourcing to a lab.

The thing I like about film is that the pleasing color characteristics of something like Portra 400 just can't be replicated digitally. I've tried. And film offers so much more latitude when it comes to dynamic range, particularly with highlights. I think digital will get there, someday. But it's got a long way to go and with a vanishing consumer market, it seems like the only company still pushing ahead with sensor tech is Sony. Nikon and Canon seem pretty checked out.
 
R

Radec

Member
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OfAwd_8aklE&time_continue=243

Damn, zeiss uv filter.

- -

Sony A6300

original.jpg


Specs:

New 24MP sensor

11fps

4D focus

4K video (no pixel binnning 14 stops dynamic range)

World’s fastest af 0.05 sec

425 phase detect AF points

Silent shooting

Ships in March for $1000

Also announced:

FE 24-70/2.8 GM ($2200 in May)

FE 70-200/2.8 GM OSS

FE 85/1.4 GM ($1800 in March)

Two teleconverters 1.4x, 1.2x

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/03/son...s-fastest-af-and-highest-number-of-af-points/
 
T

TerryLee81

Member
Radec said:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OfAwd_8aklE&time_continue=243

Damn, zeiss uv filter.

- -

Sony A6300

original.jpg


Specs:

New 24MP sensor

11fps

4D focus

4K video (no pixel binnning 14 stops dynamic range)

World’s fastest af 0.05 sec

425 phase detect AF points

Silent shooting

Ships in March for $1000

Also announced:

FE 24-70/2.8 GM ($2200 in May)

FE 70-200/2.8 GM OSS

FE 85/1.4 GM ($1800 in March)

Two teleconverters 1.4x, 1.2x

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/03/son...s-fastest-af-and-highest-number-of-af-points/
Click to expand...

Man, those lenses are expensive.
 
R

RuGalz

Member
Can't wait to see physical size comparison of those lenses. They all look like alpha lenses with converter attached.
 
R

RuGalz

Member
Groof said:
The 70-200/4 at the top the 2.8 at bottom. Somehow it's smaller
Click to expand...

Based on Sony's spec page FE 24-70 mm F2.8 GM vs VARIO-SONNAR® T* 24–70 MM F2.8 ZA SSM II (alpha lens):

Code: 
3.45x5.35 (in)   vs   3.27x4.37 (in)
1.95 (lb)        vs   2.14 (lb)
82mm Filter      vs   77mm

FE 70-200 MM F2.8 GM OSS vs 70–200 mm F2.8 G SSM II (alpha lens)
Code: 
3.46x7.87 (in)   vs   3.43 x 7.74 (in)
3.26 (lb)        vs   2.95 (lb)

A mount flange distance is 44.5mm E mount is 18mm so the difference of 1.04 inches. Almost the length difference for the 24-70...
 
L

LProtag

Member
My X100S is here!

I didn't realize KEH didn't provide the original strap, and I'm terrified to bring it anywhere without something. What should I get? I've heard good things about Gordy's sling or Black Rapid, but is that going overboard for what I need?
 
A

Astral/H3X

Member
LeadProtagonist said:
My X100S is here!

I didn't realize KEH didn't provide the original strap, and I'm terrified to bring it anywhere without something. What should I get? I've heard good things about Gordy's sling or Black Rapid, but is that going overboard for what I need?
Click to expand...
Get a Peak Design strap. Affordable, and most importantly, easily and quickly removable.
 
S

snaffles

Member
The auto focusing on that new A6300 looks impressive in their commercial, will be interested in how well it actually performs in reviews.
 
M

Mr. Hyde

Member
Is 1764 a good price for a Canon 5d mark iii used with a shutter count of 2700 of should I patiently wait for the mark iv to knock down prices further?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NeoGAF Photography & Camera Gear Community
|OT| 5 6 7 8 9
400
41K
professionala replied
Top Bottom