The Photography thread!

[TheLinguist]

2000 Honda Prelude. Friend shot in on a Digital Rebel or something back in the day.



upload pic without registration

Dope shots

 

[MikeMcMann]

Nice. You need an actual camera though. You seem like you like it.

ya. i've battled with that so many times. But i hate carrying stuff around with a passion, especially when I travel. I scorn my phone and wallet when walking around and having to carry them. So while I know I would like a nice little camera for the quality improvement, I also know I would hate carrying it around.

I think I had to burst take about 100 miss photo's to catch each lightning flash. It is a whole lot of deleting to get that one good shot.

 

[rj144]

As far as comparing this to the film/digital switch I think its not very similar to that(although its obviously talked up as being so as a sales gimmick). The former was a really fundamental shift where as when you look at it what is the latter? its shifting between a mirror based viewfinder/AF system and a sensor based one. The main difference is in terms of size but in terms of functionality your talking a much smaller shift.

I would add as well that the reason photographers didn't take up digital early on was because the quality wasn't there. Some like real estate shooters who didn't need quality did take up digital fast(as far back as the late 90's)but in other areas early digital simply wasn't good enough quality wise when it was at 6-8 MP and very poor higher ISO. When quality reached a level that was clearly superior to 35mm film(around the mid/late 00's) the vast majority of pro's switched over very quickly, the only ones who stayed using film as their main meduium were shooting larger formats and a few who liked the look.

Personally for me the big difference with EVF/OVF is still dynamic range, those pictures above for example even with a 2 stop grad filter being used the land was significantly darker than the sky and brightened in post. If I'd have been shooting on an EVF I simply wouldn't have been able to see the detail on the land at the same time as the sky when composing them. AF I don't test as much but I still hear a lot of talk that serious tracking still lags behind, a lot of net reviews I see really do not test this much, unpredictable subjects moving very quickly across the frame.

I think you'll see the point were mirrorless really goes after the pro market when it starts to release bodies of larger sizes offering balance/handing/controls on a level of pro DSLR's, so far only Leica and Panasonic have done that. I suspect you probably will see a shift away from DSLR's but its not going to be rapid, we've had talk that every generation of DSLR's will be the last for at least 5 years and its repeatidly been wrong, at the very least I suspect you will see them being released for another 5 years and it could be for a very long time. If your talking "wise investment" I would say mirrorless is more risky, DSLR lenses will be adaptable come what may due to the long register distance and the market is stable, mirrorless on the other hand will be very hard to adapt and the market is unstable with many companys involved, not all of whome will likely stay the course.

As far as Youtube reviewers go personally I trust/watch very few of them indeed, its a very shadey area if you ask me with people involved with companies(either directly or via free access to promo events with travel/accommodateion paid for) and people just out to generate maximum hits(the video above is pure troll bait made for forum posting) rather than offering honest option.

You can turn the EVF preview off and make it WYSIWYG.

I've commented before... I've used DSLR's for about 13 years, but bought a7iii last summer and it's better in nearly every possible way feature wise.

He's not wrong. DSLR's will be mostly dead in just a few years. Watch...

 

[rj144]

ya. i've battled with that so many times. But i hate carrying stuff around with a passion, especially when I travel. I scorn my phone and wallet when walking around and having to carry them. So while I know I would like a nice little camera for the quality improvement, I also know I would hate carrying it around.

I think I had to burst take about 100 miss photo's to catch each lightning flash. It is a whole lot of deleting to get that one good shot.

Ok... get a tripod at least when you're at home though.

 

[ssBaldy]

You can turn the EVF preview off and make it WYSIWYG.

I've commented before... I've used DSLR's for about 13 years, but bought a7iii last summer and it's better in nearly every possible way feature wise.

He's not wrong. DSLR's will be mostly dead in just a few years. Watch...

I won't be as harsh as you but yes, the shift has begun. The new D6 would most likely be the last of Nikon's DSLR flagships. Good news is all the existing optics work on mirrorless via the bayonet adapter so when Nikon and Canon ditch the DSLR's one won't have to get an entire new park of optics.

 

[rj144]

I won't be as harsh as you but yes, the shift has begun. The new D6 would most likely be the last of Nikon's DSLR flagships. Good news is all the existing optics work on mirrorless via the bayonet adapter so when Nikon and Canon ditch the DSLR's one won't have to get an entire new park of optics.

Yes, it's well begun and this coming year it will swing way more into mirrorless. It's already nearly even in terms of sales and the big push towards mirrorless just started in the last couple of years:

"A bit further down we see another set of charts that illustrate this. 62% of ILC volume is DSLR, 38% is mirrorless. 52% of ILC sales value was DSLR, 48% was mirrorless. In Asia, mirrorless now outsells DSLR. Europe and the Americas are the laggards still getting DSLRs."

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews...19-nikon-canon/the-state-of-camera-sales.html

Most likely within a year or two mirrorless will have more volume and outsell mirrorless.

 

[ssBaldy]

Yes, it's well begun and this coming year it will swing way more into mirrorless. It's already nearly even in terms of sales and the big push towards mirrorless just started in the last couple of years:

"A bit further down we see another set of charts that illustrate this. 62% of ILC volume is DSLR, 38% is mirrorless. 52% of ILC sales value was DSLR, 48% was mirrorless. In Asia, mirrorless now outsells DSLR. Europe and the Americas are the laggards still getting DSLRs."

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews...19-nikon-canon/the-state-of-camera-sales.html

Most likely within a year or two mirrorless will have more volume and outsell mirrorless.

Yes, they started making some excellent mirrorless cameras. However, DSLR would be dead not when it's first outselled by mirrorless, but when mirrorless are undoubtably better in image quality, and for now DSLR's are competitive - both platform have their advantages.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

You can turn the EVF preview off and make it WYSIWYG.

I've commented before... I've used DSLR's for about 13 years, but bought a7iii last summer and it's better in nearly every possible way feature wise.

He's not wrong. DSLR's will be mostly dead in just a few years. Watch...

That's not what I'm talking about, EVF's are still limited in the dynamic range they can display relatively to human vision so a mirror will allow you to see both highlights and deep shadows more effectively, that's something I use an aweful lot looking to compose dark areas of an image I will brighten in post.

As I said I think you probably will carry on seeing a shift towards mirrorless as tech improves but what is on offer now is still give and take and for me personally DSLR's still better suit my needs. His video is just hyperbolic attention seeking/marketing though and as I pointed out he's making some seriously questionable arguments about the shift between film and digital. Again we've heard this talk that DSLR's will be dead in the very near future for years and years, its become jam tomorrow talk when in reality your looking at a slower trend not something similar to the digital switch.

I would point out as well that DSLR's sticking around was also because they naturally matched up well with digital tech, lens designs for example with digital often need to be retrofocal even on non DSLR's because you can't have light sitting the sensor at too oblique an angle or you get dropoff and colour artefacts. That means the size advantage of lenses isn't nearly as great as it was on the film era of rangefinders and compacts relative to DSLR's, Leica actually needed to redesign a lot of their lenses for digital making them larger.

 

[rj144]

That's not what I'm talking about, EVF's are still limited in the dynamic range they can display relatively to human vision so a mirror will allow you to see both highlights and deep shadows more effectively, that's something I use an aweful lot looking to compose dark areas of an image I will brighten in post.

As I said I think you probably will carry on seeing a shift towards mirrorless as tech improves but what is on offer now is still give and take and for me personally DSLR's still better suit my needs. His video is just hyperbolic attention seeking/marketing though and as I pointed out he's making some seriously questionable arguments about the shift between film and digital. Again we've heard this talk that DSLR's will be dead in the very near future for years and years, its become jam tomorrow talk when in reality your looking at a slower trend not something similar to the digital switch.

I would point out as well that DSLR's sticking around was also because they naturally matched up well with digital tech, lens designs for example with digital often need to be retrofocal even on non DSLR's because you can't have light sitting the sensor at too oblique an angle or you get dropoff and colour artefacts. That means the size advantage of lenses isn't nearly as great as it was on the film era of rangefinders and compacts relative to DSLR's, Leica actually needed to redesign a lot of their lenses for digital making them larger.

I guess the dynamic range point is somewhat different. But, in the end, what the sensor sees is what you process, so I still think it makes more sense, even in that situation, to use an EVF.

Also, I highly disagree the video is hype at all. He's a lifelong Nikon shooter (check his older vids) and he now uses a Sony a9, I think. It might not be an a9, but it's a mirorrless Sony. He's not even remotely sponsored by Sony at all. He was also, on record, a huge DSLR fanboy for a long, long time.

I would be more likely to believe it was hype if I didn't experience the advantages myself personally. Like I said, I think 3 times already, I've used Nikon DSLRs for about 13 years as my only real camera. Took 100,000's of pics with them. But, my a7iii is so much better to use now than my D750. It's not even debatable for me.

But, do what you want, it's all good. Mirrorless will kill DSLR very soon though. Quote me on this in a couple of years if it doesn't.

 

[rj144]

Yes, they started making some excellent mirrorless cameras. However, DSLR would be dead not when it's first outselled by mirrorless, but when mirrorless are undoubtably better in image quality, and for now DSLR's are competitive - both platform have their advantages.

I didn't said they would be dead when outsold. I'm implying everything is trending in that direction. They'll be dead when they aren't profitable any more. That is determined by sales. Dead meaning that camera manufacturers won't produce many if any in the near future.

And, it's not really about image quality. They both basically use the same sensors. It's about feature sets. Mirrorless provide far more tools than DSLRs do right now.

 

[aerius]

DSLR vs. Mirrorless. I think we need to look at the overall picture here, why are DSLRs so common in the first place and do their owners actually need them? The DSLR format is a carryover from film SLRs, the sensor readout and electronic display technologies of 20 years ago weren't up to the task of making a reasonably usable mirrorless camera, plus you had the legacy lens issue and retooling for mass production of digital lenses. Transitioning to DSLRs was a logical move back then, and that's why we have a fairly large pool of DSLR camera & owners.

So let's move to today. Sensor, auto-focus, and EVF technologies are a lot better than in the past, and more importantly, they're good enough for the vast majority of camera owners. There's not many folks who need (or want) the no lag natural light display of an optical viewfinder or the advanced auto-focus capabilities of a modern DSLR. If you don't need those capabilities, and let's be honest, most photographers don't, then mirrorless with its smaller camera & lens sizes begins to make a lot of sense. The picture quality is there, and is potentially better since we can use closed-loop focusing systems on mirrorless. Plus it's cheaper to manufacture (note that I didn't say cheaper for the consumer) since it's simpler and there's no need to assemble & align a bunch of optics in the mirror system, which is why we're now seeing a transition towards mirrorless.

Personally, I'd run out and buy a Fuji X-Pro 2 if I were getting serious about photography again. Anything that isn't an entry level DSLR is literally twice the size & weight of my Olympus OM-2SP film camera. I am NOT lugging that much shit around, period. And despite the many improvements in EVFs I still can't get used to them and they bug the shit out of me most of the time. So that leaves me with Fuji's X-Pro series or Leica's M series as the only reasonably small interchangeable lens cameras with an optical viewfinder. Since I'd like to have auto-focus and modern automation, it leaves Fuji as the only choice.

 

[Woodstock99]

Taken on my Moto, just look at those beautiful bus seats

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I guess the dynamic range point is somewhat different. But, in the end, what the sensor sees is what you process, so I still think it makes more sense, even in that situation, to use an EVF.

If your taking images with the view to processing them to reveal more shadow detail though being able to see that shadow detail as you are taking them is an obvious advantage. In those images I posted the foreground wasn't just random, it was carefully positioned.

Also, I highly disagree the video is hype at all. He's a lifelong Nikon shooter (check his older vids) and he now uses a Sony a9, I think. It might not be an a9, but it's a mirorrless Sony. He's not even remotely sponsored by Sony at all. He was also, on record, a huge DSLR fanboy for a long, long time.

I would be more likely to believe it was hype if I didn't experience the advantages myself personally. Like I said, I think 3 times already, I've used Nikon DSLRs for about 13 years as my only real camera. Took 100,000's of pics with them. But, my a7iii is so much better to use now than my D750. It's not even debatable for me.

But, do what you want, it's all good. Mirrorless will kill DSLR very soon though. Quote me on this in a couple of years if it doesn't.

DSLR's will not vanish in the next two years, I can tell you that with near certainty.

Honestly I don't know his background in terms of involvement with companies but I do know this video is clearly hyperbolic and aimed at getting the maximum number of views. As I said the argument he makes relating it to film/digital is simply dishonest, it looks to trivialise the reasons people had for not shooting digital at the time and cast anyone who disagrees with him as some ignorant fool.

 

[rj144]

If your taking images with the view to processing them to reveal more shadow detail though being able to see that shadow detail as you are taking them is an obvious advantage. In those images I posted the foreground wasn't just random, it was carefully positioned.



DSLR's will not vanish in the next two years, I can tell you that with near certainty.

Honestly I don't know his background in terms of involvement with companies but I do know this video is clearly hyperbolic and aimed at getting the maximum number of views. As I said the argument he makes relating it to film/digital is simply dishonest, it looks to trivialise the reasons people had for not shooting digital at the time and cast anyone who disagrees with him as some ignorant fool.

I'm not saying they will vanish. I'm saying they will barely be produced. Two years is probably too small of a timetable though. In 5 to 10 years, all camera manufacturers will produce few or any. But the writing will be on the wall in a year or two.

What are the actual reasons then? Many years after DSLRs became affordable and for the most part caught up with film, there were still a lot of pros using film. What were there reasons? I think his reasons are valid.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I'm not saying they will vanish. I'm saying they will barely be produced. Two years is probably too small of a timetable though. In 5 to 10 years, all camera manufacturers will produce few or any. But the writing will be on the wall in a year or two.

What are the actual reasons then? Many years after DSLRs became affordable and for the most part caught up with film, there were still a lot of pros using film. What were there reasons? I think his reasons are valid.

10 years is a more sensible time frame although still I think far from certain and of course you can have mirrorless cameras with DSLR mounts to them.

Besides the high cost I'd say the main reason the takeup on DSLR's from pro's took awhile was that the resolution wasn't as good as 35mm film. Your probably talking the 1Ds in 2002 as the first one to have a decent case for better performance and that cost $8000 on release, when the original 5D came out in 2005 though movement towards digital was pretty rapid and by the time the 5D mk2 came out in 2008 pro's using film became rare.

 

[rj144]

10 years is a more sensible time frame although still I think far from certain and of course you can have mirrorless cameras with DSLR mounts to them.

Besides the high cost I'd say the main reason the takeup on DSLR's from pro's took awhile was that the resolution wasn't as good as 35mm film. Your probably talking the 1Ds in 2002 as the first one to have a decent case for better performance and that cost $8000 on release, when the original 5D came out in 2005 though movement towards digital was pretty rapid and by the time the 5D mk2 came out in 2008 pro's using film became rare.

I think it's closer to 5 years than to 10 years.

Sure you can still find them and people will still be using them but it'll be like 1080p TVs as of right now as most TVs made nowadays are 4k. Same idea with mirrorless in as little as 5 years... possibly sooner.

 

[esant707]

One my friends does photography/video for a living. He's the one who got me interested it but I just usually do it for fun when I'm on vacation or going somewhere cool around where I live.

The obligatory Tunnel View in Yosemite at sunrise

Vernall falls (i believe) in Yosemite

The Bay Bridge

Akaka Falls on the Big Island

Sunset in Kona at Magic Sands Beach

Waikiki looking towards Diamond Head

Palace of fine arts

Canyon Bridge in Zion National Park

Looking the other way on that bridge at night

The Narrows hike in Zion

Some more of the bay bridge and golden gate

This was just pulled over on the side of the highway by bodega bay

I have plenty more but I don't want to flood more than I have. I'll post some pics my buddy takes. He takes way better pictures than I do.

 

[esant707]

Here are some my friend took











https://www.instagram.com/p/BZe8G7dDFHk/

https://www.instagram.com/p/BX32U36j9ix/

https://www.instagram.com/p/BVVkld0D70A/

https://www.instagram.com/p/BNheiAgBNG9/

https://www.instagram.com/p/BG_EOWhjIRm/

https://www.instagram.com/p/BuhNJe9lpYl/

He has plenty more if you click on his instagram.

 

[Gandulf]

I started of with a Sony Nex 3N, which was a piece of shit but I did enjoy it. I spent most of my "career" using mirrorless but found myself buying a couple of dslrs recently. The reason? I shoot sports, and besides the Sony A9 there is nothing that can focus like a mid range dslr (the new sony a6400/a6500 are getting there, but the buffer sucks). Fuji is getting there but not yet, and the built quality is shit.

I love mirrorless as it has so much good stuff, my Canon 7d autofocus is better than my Panasonic G9 (which is marketed at sports etc) and it's ten years older. Everything else is totally inferior on the 7d though.

The moment you'll be able to pick up an A9 (spec wise) for around a grand, dslrs will vanish.

 

[rj144]

One my friends does photography/video for a living. He's the one who got me interested it but I just usually do it for fun when I'm on vacation or going somewhere cool around where I live.

The obligatory Tunnel View in Yosemite at sunrise

Vernall falls (i believe) in Yosemite

The Bay Bridge

Akaka Falls on the Big Island

Sunset in Kona at Magic Sands Beach

Waikiki looking towards Diamond Head

Palace of fine arts

Canyon Bridge in Zion National Park

Looking the other way on that bridge at night

The Narrows hike in Zion

Some more of the bay bridge and golden gate

This was just pulled over on the side of the highway by bodega bay

I have plenty more but I don't want to flood more than I have. I'll post some pics my buddy takes. He takes way better pictures than I do.

Those are sweet!

What are you using?