The Photography thread!

[rj144]

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.

The a7iii is good for sports too.

Are you saying cheap mirrorless that's good for sports?

 

[esant707]

Those are sweet!

What are you using?

Thanks. They were all shot with my Tamron 28-75. It's really the only lens I have besides a really cheap wide angle samyang. I want a really long telephoto lens for wildlife and different things but I can't justify the money.

They are all shot on the Sony A7III. I gotta s really good deal because my friend upgraded to the A7RIII

 

[rj144]

Thanks. They were all shot with my Tamron 28-75. It's really the only lens I have besides a really cheap wide angle samyang. I want a really long telephoto lens for wildlife and different things but I can't justify the money.

They are all shot on the Sony A7III. I gotta s really good deal because my friend upgraded to the A7RIII

Nice. I have an a7iii. I'll have to check out the Tamron lens. It looks pretty sharp for a zoom.

You should check out the Sony 85mm 1.8. It's pretty affordable and amazingly sharp.

 

[rj144]

Simple stuff, but I love shadows and cool lighting:

 

[Deleted member 110072]

A bit more editing on a few taken in the spring on Madeira for a prints.

 

[Gandulf]

The a7iii is good for sports too.

Are you saying cheap mirrorless that's good for sports?

I forgot the a7iii (but that's another 2k option), in that ballpark you have the nikon d500 that crushes anything on it's path (except videowise)
The only mirrorless that can shoot some sports is the sony a6xxx series (shit build and buffer), the fuji xt30 and xt3 (but shit build quality).

All the other mirrorless have problems focusing on fast moving subjects.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Some decent weather this afternoon.

 

[fdswer]

Some grizzly dog pics.

 

[90 50]

This a good video for the pros of mirrorless. I agree completely:

I didn’t watch this but I’ve seen enough of his videos to already know what’s gonna be said <45>

During the “I shoot raw” fiasco I almost made an “I shoot jpeg” shirt and was gonna make a video explaining why <45>

 

[rj144]

I didn’t watch this but I’ve seen enough of his videos to already know what’s gonna be said <45>

During the “I shoot raw” fiasco I almost made an “I shoot jpeg” shirt and was gonna make a video explaining why <45>

I used to think he was kind of annoying, but I think he's alright now.

I do agree with him... I've shot RAW for about 10 years. Only the first few years did I shoot jpeg.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I would say actually the advantages of RAW have lessened over that period as sesnsors and camera processing have improved, when I was shooting with my old 550D pretty much everything was done in RAW, with the D800 and D850 mostly I end up using the Jpeg's and only bother with the RAWs when I'm doing some more extreme editing of shadows or colour temp shifts.

 

[90 50]

I used to think he was kind of annoying, but I think he's alright now.

I do agree with him... I've shot RAW for about 10 years. Only the first few years did I shoot jpeg.

Yeah I like most of his videos, I shot raw for a long time, started shooting raw+JPEG and then just shot JPEG for a long time.

If I’m shooting shit I know I want to do something meaningful with I’ll still shoot raw , but a lot of my photography for a long time now the pics just get posted on social by the woman so there isn’t any need for huge files.

Also at races a lot, I’ll shoot jpeg and even medium or sometimes small jpeg so she can just post them from her phone on site at the race.

It’s a convenience thing, not a “jpeg is better than raw” thing.

Many reasons why I shoot 99% jpeg now and have for a long ass time.

I still prefer, if shooting B+W portraits , to shoot film with physical filters.

 

[rj144]

Yeah I like most of his videos, I shot raw for a long time, started shooting raw+JPEG and then just shot JPEG for a long time.

If I’m shooting shit I know I want to do something meaningful with I’ll still shoot raw , but a lot of my photography for a long time now the pics just get posted on social by the woman so there isn’t any need for huge files.

Also at races a lot, I’ll shoot jpeg and even medium or sometimes small jpeg so she can just post them from her phone on site at the race.

It’s a convenience thing, not a “jpeg is better than raw” thing.

Many reasons why I shoot 99% jpeg now and have for a long ass time.

I still prefer, if shooting B+W portraits , to shoot film with physical filters.

I usually shot both. Jpeg for quick edits, but RAW when I really want to edit something.

RAW is much better for editing... especially with the modern sensors. There's so much in the RAW file that's missed in jpeg.

 

[90 50]

I would say actually the advantages of RAW have lessened over that period as sesnsors and camera processing have improved, when I was shooting with my old 550D pretty much everything was done in RAW, with the D800 and D850 mostly I end up using the Jpeg's and only bother with the RAWs when I'm doing some more extreme editing of shadows or colour temp shifts.

Jared has a good video where he took Raws he shot from and old shoot and reprocessed them today with current software and techniques from a D1, that came out crazy good.

He also did a video where he went out and got a used D1, and did a shoot with it in raw and used today’s editing and they came out awesome too.

I miss the hell out of my d2xs sometimes and have also thought about getting a d2 just for race shooting for social posting.

Good light, and the small files make them easy to work.

 

[90 50]

I usually shot both. Jpeg for quick edits, but RAW when I really want to edit something.

RAW is much better for editing... especially with the modern sensors. There's so much in the RAW file that's missed in jpeg.

For sure, but 99% of my shooting these days gets ZERO editing. It’s a keeper straight out of the camera or it’s not.

No time to go fuck about on a computer and work on them for 99% of my shooting.

 

[rj144]

Yeah I like most of his videos, I shot raw for a long time, started shooting raw+JPEG and then just shot JPEG for a long time.

If I’m shooting shit I know I want to do something meaningful with I’ll still shoot raw , but a lot of my photography for a long time now the pics just get posted on social by the woman so there isn’t any need for huge files.

Also at races a lot, I’ll shoot jpeg and even medium or sometimes small jpeg so she can just post them from her phone on site at the race.

It’s a convenience thing, not a “jpeg is better than raw” thing.

Many reasons why I shoot 99% jpeg now and have for a long ass time.

I still prefer, if shooting B+W portraits , to shoot film with physical filters.

Thought this video of his a few months was pretty damn funny. It's timestamped:

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Jared has a good video where he took Raws he shot from and old shoot and reprocessed them today with current software and techniques from a D1, that came out crazy good.

He also did a video where he went out and got a used D1, and did a shoot with it in raw and used today’s editing and they came out awesome too.

I miss the hell out of my d2xs sometimes and have also thought about getting a d2 just for race shooting for social posting.

Good light, and the small files make them easy to work.

Honestly I never looked into the technical details too closely but to me when sensors have quite limited dynamic range RAW's seemed to have a more obvious advantage, these days it tends to be only when your talking really deep shadow lifting that RAW offers you something more.

I know I'v engaged a in plenty of it here but I have to say that generally theres too much talk about gear on the next not enough about art, watch fewer "fro" videos(although to be fair Polin isnt a bad photographer unlike Rockwell but seems to talk little about it) and more Andrei Tarkovsky films would be my advice.

 

[TheLinguist]

Each to their own, but imo Jared is a talentless douche.

I shoot raw because:

1. It’s more versatile

2. Jpeg just damages the files too much

 

[Plutoburn]

Each to their own, but imo Jared is a talentless douche.

I've watched a bunch of photography related videos on youtube and have come across Jared's content. While he does offer some helpful advice for beginners, a lot of his content make him look like the Jake/Logan Paul of photography; style over substance sensationalism.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

He's got Eddie Bravo "looking into" EVF dynamic range as we speak.

Sherdog seems to love mountain photography and in that respect I'd recommend Shiro Shirahata's work, Japanese mountaineer photographer(with a large format camera no less) active in the 70's and 80's mostly and his books on the Himalaya(can be picked up whatin the background but photography of mountains.