Support NeoGAF

[JadedWriter]

why do I even bother? good luck.

Some people just gotta learn photography the hard way, it's how I learned.

I just made that decision this week. I went with the Sony 35mm f/1.8 OSS. I have the 50mm but it's a pain to shoot indoors.

I also got a Pentax-M f1.4 that I got on ebay with an adapter. That's the lens I've been using the most lately. I paid $80 for that one and would highly recommend it if you want to play around with vintage lenses.

Is the Sony 50 an FE lens? If so then it's not a 50 on whatever you're using.

 

[opticalmace]

Some people just gotta learn photography the hard way, it's how I learned.

Is the Sony 50 an FE lens? If so then it's not a 50 on whatever you're using.

It's still a 50mm focal length, but with the crop factor it'll have the field of view of approximately a 75mm-ish lens on a FF camera (not sure the sony crop factor off hand).

 

[JadedWriter]

It's still a 50mm focal length, but with the crop factor it'll have the field of view of approximately a 75mm-ish lens on a FF camera (not sure the sony crop factor off hand).

I know all about crop factor, I do find it annoying at times honestly, especially on longer glass in doors. Sometimes you can't back up anymore.

 

[opticalmace]

I know all about crop factor, I do find it annoying at times honestly, especially on longer glass in doors. Sometimes you can't back up anymore.

Agreed. I have an old Minolta AF Maxxum 50mm f/1.7 lens that I use on my A55. It's great for face shots but it can definitely get too cramped for other uses.

 

[JadedWriter]

Agreed. I have an old Minolta AF Maxxum 50mm f/1.7 lens that I use on my A55. It's great for face shots but it can definitely get too cramped for other uses.

Yeah on crop 50 is pretty much a portrait lens. One time I had to do an event with using a cropped Canon and the 70-200...lets just say I almost couldn't do a group picture and I was standing at the back of the room. Didn't help that it was one of my first events either. I'm much more experienced now, but learning on the fly is stressful.

 

[Owari]

Looking at picking up a Canon M6 when they release. Going to be using it for vlogging mainly, with the 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM Lens.

Anyone got something to say about the mirrorless Canons? DSLRs are too big for me.

 

[JadedWriter]

Looking at picking up a Canon M6 when they release. Going to be using it for vlogging mainly, with the 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM Lens.

Anyone got something to say about the mirrorless Canons? DSLRs are too big for me.

Isn't the M6 just the M5 without the EVF? I'm a viewfinder person so just get and M5. I usually prefer the Fuji's when it comes to mirrorless, but I heard the M5 isn't too bad for Canon. Better than whatever Nikon would call a mirrorless.

 

[Ty4on]

Looking at picking up a Canon M6 when they release. Going to be using it for vlogging mainly, with the 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM Lens.

Anyone got something to say about the mirrorless Canons? DSLRs are too big for me.

The biggest flaw with them is probably the lack of lens selection (I think there are only 6 native lenses), but if has the lenses you need, go for it. That ultrawide zoom is also a good deal. Similar lenses on competing systems tend to be much more expensive.

Isn't the M6 just the M5 without the EVF? I'm a viewfinder person so just get and M5. I usually prefer the Fuji's when it comes to mirrorless, but I heard the M5 isn't too bad for Canon. Better than whatever Nikon would call a mirrorless.

The M5 screen only flips down so it's awkward for vlogging and useless if it's on a tripod or something.

 

[JadedWriter]

The M5 screen only flips down so it's awkward for vlogging and useless if it's on a tripod or something.

Oh ok. I just look at everything from a stills perspective...that and the M6 is the last camera I'm interested in. Just assumed the M6 was just a slimmed down M5.

 

[Ty4on]

Oh ok. I just look at everything from a stills perspective...that and the M6 is the last camera I'm interested in. Just assumed the M6 was just a slimmed down M5.

It is kinda funny how different the use cases are for some cameras. I looked at the specs to see if it had a mic jack (it does) and see it has 9fps burst rate. I wonder how many using them for video never take advantage of all the stills features

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I think the biggest issue your facing is your lack of knowledge in general. I'm sure I'll come across as an asshole, but really you should be looking at learning the basics. It seems like you jumped in feet first with this and aren't really that knowledgeable. You should get the book Understanding Exposure that's in the first post of this thread.

You actually are limiting yourself by going fully manual. Especially because at fully manual you have to understand the relationship between the various things that go into a properly exposed photo. A camera has multiple features like Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority, Manual, and full Auto. Each one has a various function and addresses various situations you may encounter so knowing what function suits a situation expands your abilities and removes the limits you place on yourself by going fully manual before you even know how to use your equipment.

For example. When you are indoors, you may want to set the camera to Aperture Priority and put the lens at a low f-stop. You'll need those low f-stops in most interior shots as lighting is limited even if it seems very bright to your eye. Having the camera at Aperture priority means you can set the f-stop low and the camera will give the best shutter speed. ISO also helps as you can crank up the ISO inside at the risk of losing fine detail and introducing more gain but you get a proper exposure.

So, yes, if you say you are only going to shoot manual (nothing wrong with that if you understand the basics) and use no other functions on your camera, you are in fact limiting yourself and your equipment.

I mean your response to stuff being out of focus, is that infinity will fix it but that just isn't true which shows you don't quite understand that either. Put together with your other posts like 1/60 seems fast etc, leads me to believe your extremely limited knowledge is hampering your abilities to get the photos you want.

Also, you should post one of the photos you took that you're not happy with and include the metadata. We may be able to evaluate from there and help you a bit more.

My personal go-to for handheld photography is a Manual mode with ISO set to auto, unless I have a very specific shot or situation in mind in which I can control the circumstances and setup completely.

This allows me to have maximum creative control via shutter speed and aperture, but also be more or less guaranteed I'll at least get the shot, even if the noise ends up being pretty strong.

 

[JadedWriter]

It is kinda funny how different the use cases are for some cameras. I looked at the specs to see if it had a mic jack (it does) and see it has 9fps burst rate. I wonder how many using them for video never take advantage of all the stills features

Sometimes I wonder if Panasonic shooters buy their stuff for stills. Yeah I'm pretty sure they do, but at the same time it's not what they're known for.

 

[Sickboy007]

Sometimes I wonder if Panasonic shooters buy their stuff for stills. Yeah I'm pretty sure they do, but at the same time it's not what they're known for.

I certainly did, it does both great.

 

[JadedWriter]

I certainly did, it does both great.

That's good to hear. I'm always contemplating getting a cheap G7, but every time I pick on up at B&H I can barely work the damn thing.

 

[Astral/H3X]

question: What kind of equipment/editing/settings do people use to take pictures of like, stars and the moon and stuff?

I use an iOptron SkyTracker (Looks like they have an updated one here, a decent tripod, and whatever lens I feel like. Good, lowish investment astrophotos.

 

[Sickboy007]

That's good to hear. I'm always contemplating getting a cheap G7, but every time I pick on up at B&H I can barely work the damn thing.

The G7 is a bargain these days, I got the G85 only because of the stabilized body to use with older lenses. The EVF + Touchscreen combo is a pleasure to use, makes focusing on legacy lenses a breeze.

 

[JadedWriter]

The G7 is a bargain these days, I got the G85 only because of the stabilized body to use with older lenses. The EVF + Touchscreen combo is a pleasure to use, makes focusing on legacy lenses a breeze.

Doesn't help that I'm a sensor size person as well and pretty much the smallest I'm used to is APSC. Every time I look at M43 the noise pattern weirds me out.

 

[Sickboy007]

Doesn't help that I'm a sensor size person as well and pretty much the smallest I'm used to is APSC. Every time I look at M43 the noise pattern weirds me out.

I see where you're coming from, I'm not that bothered because coming from APSC IQ is honestly not that different. I'm sure these small sensors will keep getting better though, just look at the new Olympus line.

 

[Killer Queen]

I use an iOptron SkyTracker (Looks like they have an updated one here, a decent tripod, and whatever lens I feel like. Good, lowish investment astrophotos.

Thank you!

 

[Owari]

Isn't the M6 just the M5 without the EVF? I'm a viewfinder person so just get and M5. I usually prefer the Fuji's when it comes to mirrorless, but I heard the M5 isn't too bad for Canon. Better than whatever Nikon would call a mirrorless.

The massive price increase isn't worth the feature to me. I've always relied on digital viewfinders, and I don't plan on doing much photography. I'll take a look at the Fujis though, thank you!!

The biggest flaw with them is probably the lack of lens selection (I think there are only 6 native lenses), but if has the lenses you need, go for it. That ultrawide zoom is also a good deal. Similar lenses on competing systems tend to be much more expensive.

Yeah, I noticed that .. but I guess there's some sort of adapter that allows it to work with other Canon lenses? I'm new to this whole thing, so sorry if I sound clueless. And yeah, I saw that lens and thought the same, pretty cheap all in one package comapred to the 1400 DSLR setup I was pondering.

 

[Astral/H3X]

Thank you!

No problem!

Here's two photos I took with that setup; sadly, things have been hectic and I haven't really gotten my ass out to use it more, but it only took a few trips out to feel like I've got a good handle on using the Skytracker. There are of course more elaborate setups, but this is easy and portable. (These were single exposure btw, still need to figure out how to really use stacking software.0


Lighnting Bug Through the Milky Way by Hunter Mauro, on Flickr
Mars, Saturn, and Antares by Hunter Mauro, on Flickr

 

[Ty4on]

Yeah, I noticed that .. but I guess there's some sort of adapter that allows it to work with other Canon lenses? I'm new to this whole thing, so sorry if I sound clueless. And yeah, I saw that lens and thought the same, pretty cheap all in one package comapred to the 1400 DSLR setup I was pondering.

That Canon lens isn't perfect (quite high vignetting, darkening of corners), but overall it's not really any worse than competing lenses that can cost almost twice as much.

The Canon lens adapter also works. One disadvantage is lenses for Canon EF usually aren't made for video AF (can be a bit noisy and jerky), but they should work just like they do on a Canon DSLR in video mode.
The adapter also adds some length to lenses.

I'm not sure what you're thinking focus wise. I don't shoot video, but I imagine for some vlogging (talking into the camera) you'd use manual focusing and for other (moving it around a lot) you'd use autofocus. If you're thinking of mostly manual focus one lens to look at could be the Samyang (or Rokinon or Bower, they have a lot of names) 12mm f2.0. It's for mirrorless cameras, but completely manual and a fixed prime so no zoom. The advantage of this lens is you can get it for Fuji X, Sony E, Micro Four Thirds or even Canon EF-M (which the M5 has) mounts, it's around $300 and f2 which means it let's in 4 times as much light as the 11-22mm (assuming the zoom is at the widest setting) and can blur the background that much more. It is pretty much the same size (10% heavier) as the 11-22mm. The disadvantage is, again, no autofocus what-so-ever and the aperture is also manual so you can't let the camera adjust it automatically for exposure control.

 

[Killer Queen]

No problem!

Here's two photos I took with that setup; sadly, things have been hectic and I haven't really gotten my ass out to use it more, but it only took a few trips out to feel like I've got a good handle on using the Skytracker. There are of course more elaborate setups, but this is easy and portable. (These were single exposure btw, still need to figure out how to really use stacking software.0


Lighnting Bug Through the Milky Way by Hunter Mauro, on Flickr
Mars, Saturn, and Antares by Hunter Mauro, on Flickr

These are damn gorgeous holy fuck. Another question I have is you know those pictures of like a landscape with the stars in the background, is this how they do it or is it added in later in Photoshop?

 

[JadedWriter]

I see where you're coming from, I'm not that bothered because coming from APSC IQ is honestly not that different. I'm sure these small sensors will keep getting better though, just look at the new Olympus line.

Yeah if I only did daytime stuff I'm pretty sure I wouldn't mind, but I take pictures in low light a lot and I'm usually floating around 2K iso so yeah...definitely sticking with full frame currently. For fun stuff I think it's either M43 or APSC, I just don't even know since no camera is light once you stick a 2.8 zoom on it.

 

[Astral/H3X]

These are damn gorgeous holy fuck. Another question I have is you know those pictures of like a landscape with the stars in the background, is this how they do it or is it added in later in Photoshop?

Thank you very much!

There's a few ways of doing it...
For a single exposure, the idea is to take a long exposure with very little light, and a tight aperture to get everything in focus. You'll end up with a very brightly lit foreground, and a somewhat dim starry sky, depending on conditions (this can very wildly). Then you'd just use Adjustment brushes in Lightroom to control your post process exposure for the foreground and background separately, so that you can balance the exposure. But, this is a smidge tricky, as you have to fit both the stars and your foreground within your normal dynamic range. But, the post processing part is easy.

The second option is to use stacking, which shifts difficulty from getting the shot, to the post processing part (which is my weakness). With stacking, you'd take two separate exposures, one for the foreground, and one (or 20, depending on if you really want to stack) for the stars, properly exposing each, and then using post processing to merge the two results together, which could be done in Photoshop by placing one over the other, and then erasing the top layer. Personally, I would lay the "stars exposed" photo under the "foreground exposed" photo, and erase the foreground photo's stars (to allow the properly exposed stars to show through), almost purely because it would be more lenient to erase too many/too few stars, than it would be to erase too mich foreground and suddenly, say, a chunk of a rock is way too bright, etc.

Personally I suck at both stacking and at landscapes' so EH single exposure stars it is for me.

 

[Killer Queen]

Thank you very much!

There's a few ways of doing it...
For a single exposure, the idea is to take a long exposure with very little light, and a tight aperture to get everything in focus. You'll end up with a very brightly lit foreground, and a somewhat dim starry sky, depending on conditions (this can very wildly). Then you'd just use Adjustment brushes in Lightroom to control your post process exposure for the foreground and background separately, so that you can balance the exposure. But, this is a smidge tricky, as you have to fit both the stars and your foreground within your normal dynamic range. But, the post processing part is easy.

The second option is to use stacking, which shifts difficulty from getting the shot, to the post processing part (which is my weakness). With stacking, you'd take two separate exposures, one for the foreground, and one (or 20, depending on if you really want to stack) for the stars, properly exposing each, and then using post processing to merge the two results together, which could be done in Photoshop by placing one over the other, and then erasing the top layer. Personally, I would lay the "stars exposed" photo under the "foreground exposed" photo, and erase the foreground photo's stars (to allow the properly exposed stars to show through), almost purely because it would be more lenient to erase too many/too few stars, than it would be to erase too mich foreground and suddenly, say, a chunk of a rock is way too bright, etc.

Personally I suck at both stacking and at landscapes' so EH single exposure stars it is for me.

Thank you so so much, this is a lot more in depth of an answer than I thought I'd get and it helps a lot!

 

[Joelstinton14]

Had my first big shoot with my new Nikon D750 and enjoyed it immensely. I have gone out a coupe of times before with it, but weather or lack of photo opportunities meant i hadn't been able to really try it out yet. The autofocus is so quick and accurate it is ridiculous. Even in low light conditions.

I do wish that it's focus point selection coverage covered a larger area, it is actually something i found myself looking for and missed from my X-pro 2. And to be honest it is only something i would miss when i do still life , and in that case i would probably end up using manual focusing anyway. But it is something i wish nikon would improve. Just nice to have!

Only issue i had really was towards the end of the day, when it started to get quite dark and gloomy, the camera started to overexpose quite a lot, but nothing i can figure out and rectify later on in post processing. Even the exposure compensation in post processing is really generous. So learning when to use what what metering and learning the Nikon D750 quirks in metering may take some time.

 

[Crazyorloco]

Valentines gift to myself: new camera and equipment: Sony A6500 attached with Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS

Loving the camera. Touch screen to focus is wonderful and I like how clear shots are even when taking burst shots. -
I'm really happy with he a6500 and all the features. I can see myself going out more just to get some shots with this.

Gaf, any lens recommendations? The lens I have on now is pretty good for most situations, but I know I'll want something for macro or far distances. I purchased everything at b&h and my my....Sony lenses are expensive! I'll have to save a bit for my next lens or wait till Black Friday.

url=https://flic.kr/p/Rye8q1]

[/url]Taking a pic of my new camera #sonya6500 by Armando Severino, on Flickr

Spoiler

iPhone 7 plus pic

-

I am going on a vacation soon and wanted to get some additional stuff for my camera. I have a cheap EOS Rebel T5i with the stock 18-55 mm lens and a lens hood, nothing else.I also use this to shoot video, I have been pretty pleased with the results so far considering the price.

The budget is around $1000 for upgrades and wasn't sure what would be best. For the type of stuff I am going to be shooting, it is pretty much everything. Portraits, cityscapes, landscapes, buildings. I am probably going to also be shooting a bunch of shots with people standing in front of things (typical family vacation stuff). I am most concerned with low light shots, we are doing a ton of stuff at night.

How should I use my budget? Get a different camera? Lenses? Would it be worth getting a microphone for when I shoot video? Is a prime lens worth it?

In the mean time I have been going around practicing with different lighting conditions and have a few books I am going through to help out.

If you do get another camera, I think the Canon M5 is sweet. Photo quality seems comparable to the canon 80D. Check this video out for those low light M5 shots : https://youtu.be/PhHpV0kc7as

I felt the touch screen was even better than the camera I just got. It would be a nice transition especially if you have canon lenses. Just need a converter though. I just noticed your post is from last month. What did you decide?

 

[Radec]

Valentines gift to myself: new camera and equipment: Sony A6500 attached with Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS

Loving the camera. Touch screen to focus is wonderful and I like how clear shots are even when taking burst shots. -
I'm really happy with he a6500 and all the features. I can see myself going out more just to get some shots with this.

Gaf, any lens recommendations? The lens I have on now is pretty good for most situations, but I know I'll want something for macro or far distances. I purchased everything at b&h and my my....Sony lenses are expensive! I'll have to save a bit for my next lens or wait till Black Friday.

url=https://flic.kr/p/Rye8q1]

[/url]Taking a pic of my new camera #sonya6500 by Armando Severino, on Flickr

Spoiler

iPhone 7 plus pic

-



If you do get another camera, I think the Canon M5 is sweet. Photo quality seems comparable to the canon 80D. Check this video out for those low light M5 shots : https://youtu.be/PhHpV0kc7as

I felt the touch screen was even better than the camera I just got. It would be a nice transition especially if you have canon lenses. Just need a converter though. I just noticed your post is from last month. What did you decide?

Get a prime. Either the sigma 30mm art or the zeiss 55mm (this one is FE so fov is narrower on your cam. Also expensive.)

 

[theepicoftyler]

Valentines gift to myself: new camera and equipment: Sony A6500 attached with Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS

Loving the camera. Touch screen to focus is wonderful and I like how clear shots are even when taking burst shots. -
I'm really happy with he a6500 and all the features. I can see myself going out more just to get some shots with this.

Gaf, any lens recommendations? The lens I have on now is pretty good for most situations, but I know I'll want something for macro or far distances. I purchased everything at b&h and my my....Sony lenses are expensive! I'll have to save a bit for my next lens or wait till Black Friday.

url=https://flic.kr/p/Rye8q1]

[/url]Taking a pic of my new camera #sonya6500 by Armando Severino, on Flickr

Spoiler

iPhone 7 plus pic

-



If you do get another camera, I think the Canon M5 is sweet. Photo quality seems comparable to the canon 80D. Check this video out for those low light M5 shots : https://youtu.be/PhHpV0kc7as

I felt the touch screen was even better than the camera I just got. It would be a nice transition especially if you have canon lenses. Just need a converter though. I just noticed your post is from last month. What did you decide?

Nice! I have an a6000 and I love it. Figure out what your setup is weak with (for what you want to shoot, no reason to buy lenses you won't use often), and check out Sigma and Samyang/Rokinon's lineup for solutions. They're cheap (read: cheaper) alternatives to Sony's lineup. Also look into vintage lens adaptation!

 

[TheCochese]

I've been looking at different bags for different purposes, and last night the Lowepro Fastpack BP 150 AW II caught my eye. Looks like I can carry the body and an attached lens, another lens, plus a small laptop or tablet (hoping for both)? Anyone have this bag? What's the verdict?

 

[The Salt Life]

Getting my Sigma 150-600mm in the mail Tuesday, saved up a lot to get it and can't wait to play with it.

 

[m_shortpants]

Valentines gift to myself: new camera and equipment: Sony A6500 attached with Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS

Loving the camera. Touch screen to focus is wonderful and I like how clear shots are even when taking burst shots. -
I'm really happy with he a6500 and all the features. I can see myself going out more just to get some shots with this.

Gaf, any lens recommendations? The lens I have on now is pretty good for most situations, but I know I'll want something for macro or far distances. I purchased everything at b&h and my my....Sony lenses are expensive! I'll have to save a bit for my next lens or wait till Black Friday.

url=https://flic.kr/p/Rye8q1]

[/url]Taking a pic of my new camera #sonya6500 by Armando Severino, on Flickr

Spoiler

iPhone 7 plus pic

-



If you do get another camera, I think the Canon M5 is sweet. Photo quality seems comparable to the canon 80D. Check this video out for those low light M5 shots : https://youtu.be/PhHpV0kc7as

I felt the touch screen was even better than the camera I just got. It would be a nice transition especially if you have canon lenses. Just need a converter though. I just noticed your post is from last month. What did you decide?

Get the Sigma 30mm f1.4. It's incredibly sharp. Good focal range for walking around as well. I think DxoMark said it's the sharpest e mount lens, and for the price that's a bargain. I bought it when I went to Japan for my honeymoon and I'm so glad I did. If anything I wish I had bought it earlier.

 

[Fox1304]

Had a chance to try my chinese adapter these few days. ( Sony Alpha / Minolta ==> Fuji X mount ).
Build quality is nice, fits nicely and doesn't move (using a Tamron 70-300 lens).
There is a "ring" for aperture, but anything other than "locked" (as written") seems quickly blurry, so I have to compose with very shallow DOF.
Paid 20€ for the lens, and 15€ for the adapter, so it'll work great to add a tele lens to my stuff, and for very cheap.
As for the lens ... build quality is SO far from my two Fuji/Samyang lenses that's it's not even funny.

 

[xkramz]

A Lil OT

But how can I get rid of star effect

 

[VisceralBowl]

A Lil OT

But how can I get rid of star effect

Post an example?

 

[giga]

http://www.canonrumors.com/four-new-sigma-lenses-leak-ahead-of-cp/

Four new Sigma lenses have leaked out ahead of CP+

Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DGArt (wow, we were wrong!)
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS Art
Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG Art
Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS Contemporary

 

[xkramz]

Post an example?

KEV_1194 by kevin ramirez, on Flickr
settings:
FL:35mm
A: f/22
iso:100
SS:30 seconds

the star effect on light sources.

heres another example:
KEV_1198 by kevin ramirez, on Flickr
settings:

fl:18mm
a: f/16.0
iso:100
ss:30 seconds

note how on the streak of light on the middle right on the building with small star artifacts from light source...

idk i just wanna learn to control that. but im not too sure how.

 

[Astral/H3X]

KEV_1194 by kevin ramirez, on Flickr
settings:
FL:35mm
A: f/22
iso:100
SS:30 seconds

the star effect on light sources.

heres another example:
KEV_1198 by kevin ramirez, on Flickr
settings:

fl:18mm
a: f/16.0
iso:100
ss:30 seconds

note how on the streak of light on the middle right on the building with small star artifacts from light source...

idk i just wanna learn to control that. but im not too sure how.

That's partially a result of shooting at f16, but beyond that, I'm sure others have more in depth info.

You can use ND filters to lower your exposure without having to sacrifice shutter speed, and then open up your aperture some. That should reduce those.

 

[BlueTsunami]

KEV_1194 by kevin ramirez, on Flickr
settings:
FL:35mm
A: f/22
iso:100
SS:30 seconds

the star effect on light sources.

heres another example:
KEV_1198 by kevin ramirez, on Flickr
settings:

fl:18mm
a: f/16.0
iso:100
ss:30 seconds

note how on the streak of light on the middle right on the building with small star artifacts from light source...

idk i just wanna learn to control that. but im not too sure how.

Where each point of light turns into a pointed star, thats due to stopping the aperture down. You're seeing where each point of your lenses aperture leaf meet another to create a point.

The only way I know of, to deal with this, is to open up the lens to larger apertures. Wide open will give you unaffected points of light at the cost of Depth of Field. Some lenses have rounded apertures but I dont think this effects points of light, more of a bokeh thing.

 

[xkramz]

That's partially a result of shooting at f16, but beyond that, I'm sure others have more in depth info.

You can use ND filters to lower your exposure without having to sacrifice shutter speed, and then open up your aperture some. That should reduce those.

Where each point of light turns into a pointed star, thats due to stopping the aperture down. You're seeing where each point of your lenses aperture leaf meet another to create a point.

The only way I know of, to deal with this, is to open up the lens to larger apertures. Wide open will give you unaffected points of light at the cost of Depth of Field. Some lenses have rounded apertures but I dont think this effects points of light, more of a bokeh thing.

ah i see thanks! maybe next time ill open the aperture a lil bit more to see if it removes some.

also only ND i have is a 10 stop and using that at night would make my expoure much more longer.

 

[Astral/H3X]

ah i see thanks! maybe next time ill open the aperture a lil bit more to see if it removes some.

also only ND i have is a 10 stop and using that at night would make my expoure much more longer.

I think you're at 5 or 6 stops down as it is... a little ISO management and you could avoid having to buy a new one, without having to go to some crazy ass long exposures.

With the shots you're taking (cityscapes), you won't need to worry too much about the DOF effects, since almost everything you are shooting is past the infinity focus point.

 

[Ty4on]

ah i see thanks! maybe next time ill open the aperture a lil bit more to see if it removes some.

also only ND i have is a 10 stop and using that at night would make my expoure much more longer.

Yours doesn't seem too bad (almost every lens will do that at f16), but you could look for lenses with more rounded aperture blades if it doesn't go away at f5.6~. The number of blades has a big impact. A 7 bladed aperture will give 14 rays while an 8 bladed will give 8 rays. More rays generally means they're more diffuse, but a more rounded aperture will make a bigger difference.

6 quite sharp vs 7 more rounded:

 

[Radec]

Those new sigma lenses man..

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/first-images-four-new-sigma-lenses/

I wonder if that 24-70 is as big as Nikon and Canon's

 

[Astral/H3X]

Those new sigma lenses man..

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/first-images-four-new-sigma-lenses/

I wonder if that 24-70 is as big as Nikon and Canon's

Hrm, a 24-70 2.8... I could honestly use one. Let's see how those prices are.

I guess eventually I should get their SA or EF adapter. Can't quite afford Sony's native lenses.

 

[adoboy12]

I've always wanted to get into photography and I think now would be a great time to actually start and get into it. I was wondering which starting camera to go with. I'll be using it mainly for when my babies are born as well as some nature/scenic photography.

I was looking into the Pentax KS-2(though I honestly don't know why).

Looking for some recommendations:
1. What is your budget budget? - $550
2. Main purpose of the camera? - photos of the wife and soon to be babies
3. What form factor is most appealing to you? - flexibility in choices for additional lenses
4. Will you be investing in the camera? (buying more stuff for it later) - Yes; once I get more into it(it's been something I've always wanted to get into)
5. Any cameras you've used before or liked? - Used my niece's Canon Rebel T4i

Thanks in advance!

 

[JadedWriter]

Those new sigma lenses man..

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/first-images-four-new-sigma-lenses/

I wonder if that 24-70 is as big as Nikon and Canon's

Based on provided pics it doesn't seem as big as Nikon's I don't even care though since I think more thought was put into the Nikon version and the AF is probably more accurate on the Nikon too.

 

[Art Teitlebaum]

I've always wanted to get into photography and I think now would be a great time to actually start and get into it. I was wondering which starting camera to go with. I'll be using it mainly for when my babies are born as well as some nature/scenic photography.

I was looking into the Pentax KS-2(though I honestly don't know why).

Looking for some recommendations:
1. What is your budget budget? - $550
2. Main purpose of the camera? - photos of the wife and soon to be babies
3. What form factor is most appealing to you? - flexibility in choices for additional lenses
4. Will you be investing in the camera? (buying more stuff for it later) - Yes; once I get more into it(it's been something I've always wanted to get into)
5. Any cameras you've used before or liked? - Used my niece's Canon Rebel T4i

Thanks in advance!

A little bit of namedropping for the region around $550:

Entry level DSLRs: Canon Rebel T5 (or refurbished T5i) with a kit zoom. Nikon D3400. Pentax K-S2 (weatherized!). Sony A68.

Mirrorless cameras: Lumix G7 or GX7. Olympus E-M10 II. Fuji XE-1, X-A3 (or XE-2 refurbished). Sony A6000.

All of them do their job just fine (as long as you don't start pixel peeping at your monitor) and differ mainly in the user experience (speed, autofocus, menu system).
Nikon and Canon have the biggest choice of lenses, but for your needs every brand has more than enough good lenses to choose from.

I know this might be not very helpful but you'll have to try them in your own hands, I'm afraid. Different strokes for different folks... For example I couldn't live without a viewfinder, no matter if optical or electronic, when shooting in bright sunlight. Some other people don't need that (and are pissed when they can't see shit on the display in the summer...)

Some starting points:
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/buying-guide-best-slrs-for-beginners-1251700

www.dpreview.com/buying-guides

 

[Got]

Lmao, you're absolutely right though so I'm seconding this asshole lolol.

Infinity focus doesn't mean shit unless it's above f/11. Hell even at f/16 or f/22 some subjects can still be out of focus.

If you really want us to help you figure it out then post the pictures with full metadata(I recommend Flickr). Otherwise your posts are sorta meaningless coz we can't really see what's going on.

Some people just gotta learn photography the hard way, it's how I learned.

Is the Sony 50 an FE lens? If so then it's not a 50 on whatever you're using.

Thanks, I expected I'd get slammed for my viewpoint but good to see I wasn't too far off from my opinions on trying to help people with their photography. and no doubt, Jaded, sometimes you gotta dive in feet first but asking for advice and then ignoring it is such a fucking insult. Though seeing how many threads get started on here with people asking for advice and then just going with what they think I guess I shouldn't be surprised lol.

My personal go-to for handheld photography is a Manual mode with ISO set to auto, unless I have a very specific shot or situation in mind in which I can control the circumstances and setup completely.

This allows me to have maximum creative control via shutter speed and aperture, but also be more or less guaranteed I'll at least get the shot, even if the noise ends up being pretty strong.

An interesting approach. Not my speed but the fact that there options to achieve the end result photo is what makes this fun. So many ways and so many approaches and utilizing all of the features in a camera is a great way to get the end result.

 

[JadedWriter]

Thanks, I expected I'd get slammed for my viewpoint but good to see I wasn't too far off from my opinions on trying to help people with their photography. and no doubt, Jaded, sometimes you gotta dive in feet first but asking for advice and then ignoring it is such a fucking insult. Though seeing how many threads get started on here with people asking for advice and then just going with what they think I guess I shouldn't be surprised lol.

Man you should fish out my first "what camera should I buy" post on here. It took me a bit to learn what I wanted and that overall my first camera wasn't too great. You gave worthwhile advice though, sometimes people just don't want to admit that they're wrong or don't have the appropriate knowledge yet to know what the problem is or how to fix it. I actually think fucking up first and asking for advice next is the best teacher.

A little bit of namedropping for the region around $550:

Entry level DSLRs: Canon Rebel T5 (or refurbished T5i) with a kit zoom. Nikon D3400. Pentax K-S2 (weatherized!). Sony A68.

Mirrorless cameras: Lumix G7 or GX7. Olympus E-M10 II. Fuji XE-1, X-A3 (or XE-2 refurbished). Sony A6000.

All of them do their job just fine (as long as you don't start pixel peeping at your monitor) and differ mainly in the user experience (speed, autofocus, menu system).
Nikon and Canon have the biggest choice of lenses, but for your needs every brand has more than enough good lenses to choose from.

I know this might be not very helpful but you'll have to try them in your own hands, I'm afraid. Different strokes for different folks... For example I couldn't live without a viewfinder, no matter if optical or electronic, when shooting in bright sunlight. Some other people don't need that (and are pissed when they can't see shit on the display in the summer...)

Some starting points:
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/buying-guide-best-slrs-for-beginners-1251700

www.dpreview.com/buying-guides

I don't buy shit without a viewfinder or dedicated Iso button, I'm not joking.