>>4308723
This is mine
>Leica M11 monochrom
>Voigtlander 35mm f2 apo
>Chance the stallion flared XL
I think you should check out these links
https://thecinelens.com/2018/07/21/noct-your-average-58mm-prime/
https://www.reddit.com/r/cinematography/comments/133rgid/advice_i_bought_a_vintage_nikkor_lens_kit/

>>4308719
/qa/ lost

>>4308725
thank you
very niche things
I don't even know if they have any resale value
they're going to stay on ebay for a long time before selling
I'd like gears that I can liquidate FAST

>>4308725
oh wait are you just a troll that have no gear but likes to critique?

>>4308725
>Chance the stallion flared XL
What hardness?

>>4308710
Aint you the dude that said you didnt need the extra reach of the 24-120 like a month ago?

>>4308721
Yes.

I cope with my bad purchases a lot.

>>4308717
explain, I don't use zuckstogram
Is it an ad for somebody's instagram profile on instagram? That's honestly hilarious, how pathetic do you have to be to pay for ads to get internet friends. Is this a common occurrence?

>>4308727
>Is it an ad for somebody's instagram profile on instagram
yes you can pay to have your pics shown
the hilarious part for me was the overexposed photo
it's just so shit

File: 20240429_165816.jpg (1.55 MB, 1751x3294)

1.55 MB JPG

>>4308717
The overexposed corner of a gas station shot on pushed portra. I'm thinking he wears 3 beanies when out 'togging, as he calls it.

>>4308715
Dang, based. You can get the significantly cheaper elan, and it has basically all the same AF electronics/speed with less goofy features. It doesn't look as well made as the 1v either.

(I know I need to clean my lens. He slobbered on it immediately after placing it down.)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-G998U1
Camera Software	G998U1UESAFXD1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Compression Scheme	JPEG Compression (Thumbnail)
Image Height	1800
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:04:29 16:58:16
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	4000
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Color Space Information	sRGB
Unique Image ID	XA8XLNF00SM
Image Height	1800
Brightness	0 EV
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
Flash	No Flash
F-Number	f/1.8
ISO Speed Rating	400
Image Width	4000
Focal Length	6.70 mm
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

>>4306322
All 4 of these consistently released horribly bad lenses as well but if you're a fanboy it's a soulful lens and if you're not a fanboy it's a bad one with a brandfag markup

File: L1054495.jpg (871 KB, 854x1500)

871 KB JPG

oouugh fuuuuuckkkkk...

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Leica Camera AG
Camera Model	M8 Digital Camera
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:04:27 21:33:02
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/2.4
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	854
Image Height	1500
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	000000000000000000000000000033AF

>>4308098
based

>>4308106
i need to get a summifucks just so i can smear vaseline on the front and take 80's style snapshits with it
bet that'll pull some chains

>>4297438

The images from the Leica sub might be bad, but still better than 99% of the images posted here.

It doesn‘t matter what camera you use. If there was a cheap APSC or MFT camera that offered the same shooting experience as Leica, I would buy those instead. After years of Sony plastic and using a X-Pro 2 I tried a friends M240, the experience immediately sold me on Leica.

Photography should be fun. Who cares what gear you are using or what anyone else thinks? Yes, the sub is cringe and pretentious, but so is /p/. I have never seen a good image posted here, but that‘s just my opinion, and you should 100% ignore it and just enjoy photography.

Why would anyone buy this when they have the A7SIII ?

>>4308711
Cause it can
- record indefinitely
- has time code
- focus breathing compensation
- shares mobile app/tablet control with FX3/6/9(?)
- better color science
- cheaper
- super 35 is the cine standard, even red cameras use super 35, full frame cine is rare

>>4308714
Nobody in cine cares full frame as much as photography snobs do.
I donno, like, photography has turned into a consumer oriented audiophile thing, that's most of the buyers anyways, they don't produce anything.

>>4308714
The A7SIII record limit is of 13 hours. No one is going to record more than 13 hours of anything.

>>4308729
in the sun?

>>4308655
The p1000 has a babby sensor, but the lense is no toy. Move further back and zoom in, if you can out 3-5m between the camera and the subject you'll get good separation.
If you want a close-up/wide angle and blurred background, you will just need to change to a "real" camera and good lense.

tf is that statue

File: bug.jpg (278 KB, 1195x899)

278 KB JPG

>>4308657
I tried again and got a picture of this bug today. Looks nice. But the f-setting only allowed me to pick from 5 to 8. Sometimes it goes below 3, sometimes not. I'm not sure what governs that. But backing up and zooming helped here since there was like zero noticeable difference between the f values. I guess 5 and 8 are just too close to see much change.

>>4308690
idk, I think my grandfather carved it. I'm not really sure, I never asked. It's just always been here.

>>4308692
Most zoom lenses, and all cheap ones, have a more limited range of f-stops when zoomed all the way.

>>4308692
Col photo anon

>>4307043
>the better noise performance of full frame
That's only because of the larger photosites, a benefit taken away by projecting less light onto them.

>>4307708
Yeah that's pretty much what I said, it evens out

>>4305779
>Buy entry level aps-c to get into digishit photography
>Went with Canon in particular because it adapts easier to the old glass I already had
>Learn about the inherent limitations of the format after buying
>End up buying fat cunt 5D
>Smoll sensorlett camera lives on as dedicated telephoto lens holder that I only ever leave at home anyway, along with the 5d
Such is the life of a gearfag.

>>4307709
It doesnt even out. No real 45-61mp apsc

File: Screen Shot 2024-04-29 at(...).jpg (262 KB, 1162x1174)

262 KB JPG

>>4307708
>That's only because of the larger photosites, a benefit taken away by projecting less light onto them.
FF has less noise due to higher SNR overall (larger surface area collecting more light). With gapless micro lenses pixel size is almost irrelevant. I say "almost" because it starts to become relevant at extreme ISOs (i.e. 50k and higher). Below that it's just not a significant factor. People like to point to the A7R V as a counter example, but the A7R IV has the same pixel density and doesn't break the pattern. Something else is going on in the V's electronics.

Now if the AF sensors are the same size and tech then yes, apsc will have a ~1ev AF advantage when a teleconverter is on FF. Same size/tech is not necessarily a safe assumption though as manufacturers like to throw their best into FF. And for mirrorless a FF AF sensor can be larger than an apsc one without noticeable disruption to the image. Beyond that, teleconverters tend to be used in brighter light. If you're above a certain threshold it's not going to matter.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Image Width	1162
Image Height	1174

File: poland.png (2.9 MB, 1417x1890)

2.9 MB PNG

>>4308708
Bump

File: Coomer.png (185 KB, 1044x869)

185 KB PNG

>I can’t even comprehend people who get into photography and don’t shoot nudes.

>>4307784
it's already been answered 10 times, you hire escorts

File: 20221016-CBM_4230-web.jpg (439 KB, 2000x1333)

439 KB JPG

>>4307784
I’m not in the boudoir business, seems fun and like nice work if you can get it. The key would be don’t be creepy, collaborate with your subject to make something that makes them feel good and empowered. Nudes are a lovely challenge. How can you make the human body into origami? What can you do that hasn’t been done a million times already? I just tried to ape some Edward Weston stuff. Would love to have another swing soon with a cool model. I’d like to work on some more male nudes too.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D850
Camera Software	Capture One 22 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	135 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	1.67 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1333
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4308687
>The key would be don’t be creepy, collaborate with your subject to make something that makes them feel good and empowered. Nudes are a lovely challenge.
You sound so gay dude

>>4307946
>>4307947
Yeah buddy!

Any tips for getting coeds to shoot? I live in a large college town. Should be a good supply.

File: Screenshot_20240429_15083(...).jpg (295 KB, 1440x1493)

295 KB JPG

>>4308686
Shit. So true. This one could fit the bill, maybe? It weighs like 1lb 2oz with battery, and you could surely get a pancake lens that's shorter than the grip.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Android UP1A.231005.007.G998U1UESAFXD1
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1440
Image Height	1493

File: Sony_Mirrorless_Compared_(...).jpg (289 KB, 1600x1067)

289 KB JPG

>>4308688
>you could surely get a pancake lens that's shorter than the grip
You could, if the image plane was anywhere near the back of the (s)camera.

>>4308670
Why are you calling me an idiot? Idiot.
I'm agreeing with you.

>>4308684
These things break all the fucking time

>>4308695
And yet nikon Z has one

>>4308519
Yes

>>4295676
>>I,m Walking around I'm with a 70-200 mm
>take photo with phone
>crop in
My photo's composition looks just like the one you took and the resolution is just fine for social media.

>>4308614
Back in reality your photo looks like crispy ken rockwell shit and my photo is not on social media, its on my wall, because social media is for pathetic friendless narcissists who prefer the company of AI chatbots and IRL art is for real men who can take heat that hasnt been distilled down to robot operated like and dislike buttons.

>>4298627
A true autist wouldn't care.

>>4308316
or dog fuckers

>>4308702
No, no one has heard of those. Can you explain this in detail including where you came up with the idea and why it's on your mind despite being practically unheard of?

>>4298286
people actually think men went to the moon
>meanwhile
>these gloves
>literal Shrek sized fingers
I'm not saying there aren't men with huge ass hands on this earth, but even if the moon were real, we wouldn't be sending a giant up to it.
Just like we don't have giants racing horses.

My camera is cool and has actually went someplace cool, a coral reef, no camera has been to space as the earth is flt and a the moon is a projection originating from the secret labs on Antarctica.

File: 160254925.jpg (74 KB, 1000x1000)

74 KB JPG

>>4307959

>>4307968
If space is real, tell me.
What does it smell like?
What does it look like?
What does it taste like?
What does it feel like?
What does it sound like?
What does it auids like?

I think they used a F5 back in the day, I have a F5, so I guess my camera is cool and "space worthy"

>>4298286
I donno
if it's water proof then it can survive in that space water tank lol

>>4308188
yeah that was a cool video, I thought I bookmarked it but I guess not. very impressive how thorough those nips were, polishing the lenses and everything.
In my family we always pulled the cameras apart to fish the film out and sent it to a lab like normal film because the processing was cheaper that way for some reason. So we sent a lot of those cameras straight to the landfill.

OP here thanks for the info. I’m going to shelve this one. That $20 can be better spent on more 35 or 120 film instead that actually looks good

>>4308282
Save it for when your dumb zoomer girlfriend wants "hella retro photos like scott pilgrim you know bro like we're gonna be playstation one today"

File: image_123650291.jpg (635 KB, 2372x1683)

635 KB JPG

Old here. I think this is one of the pics I took with the camera like OP. It and the others that I suspect of being from that camera are prints 3.5 x 4.375 inches in size.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2372
Image Height	1683

>>4308045
I mean...if you want to play with it just because, go ahead. But 110 and Kodak Disc were dog shit. They looked bad at 3x5.

File: fixed.jpg (1.52 MB, 1351x1781)

1.52 MB JPG

>>4286788

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

File: DSCF8777.jpg (433 KB, 2048x1365)

433 KB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Capture One 22 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1365

File: DSCF8571.jpg (895 KB, 2048x1365)

895 KB JPG

>>4304671

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Capture One 22 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1365

File: DSCF8578 1.jpg (664 KB, 2048x1365)

664 KB JPG

>>4304672

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Capture One 22 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1365

>>4288586
Recognised it as norway instantly, really is something about them street lights

>>4308450
Define “flat” in objective terms.

>>4308458
Flat perspective.

If you don't get it, you don't get it.

>>4307573
I took photos at a coworker's concert at a bar, and the lighting was so shitty that I had to shoot at ISO 8000 (also so I could use a higher shutter speed for certain moments). I came out of my comfort zone with lower ISOs and learned to love the grain.

>>4308465
>If you don't get it, you don't get it.
Ah ok so it’s schizo nonsense like “3dpop” and “microcontrast”, thanks for clearing that up.

>>4308691
>he doesn't get "flat perspective"
actual ngmi