Gear discussion thread v. "I got some new gear and I got to post it here" - General

I bought a new camera guys [thumb]http://i.imgur.com/F4VO2ey.jpg[/thumb] Pardon my bathroom selfie and PJs

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43114996]With the dynamic range setting.[/QUOTE] Why would one ever want to limit it? These settings most likely just apply to jpeg and change the processing. Just shoot raw and then it doesn't really matter which settings you choose (besides aperture/shutter speed/iso of course.

[QUOTE=coolrider102;43115306]I bought a new camera guys [thumb]http://i.imgur.com/F4VO2ey.jpg[/thumb] Pardon my bathroom selfie and PJs[/QUOTE] How's the video recording quality and such?

[QUOTE=Desuh;43115348]Why would one ever want to limit it? These settings most likely just apply to jpeg and change the processing. Just shoot raw and then it doesn't really matter which settings you choose (besides aperture/shutter speed/iso of course.[/QUOTE] The in-camera setting is for jpeg, but if you try and adjust the dynamic range of a raw file in post, there's more DR at ISO 800 than 200 still.

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43115666]The in-camera setting is for jpeg, but if you try and adjust the dynamic range of a raw file in post, there's more DR at ISO 800 than 200 still.[/QUOTE] Yeah that's really weird. Check the exposures and see if they are really 2 stops apart. The dynamic range options only apply to jpg photos, your Lightroom might accidentally be importing the JPG files and not the RAWs, and so the higher ISO files can be pushed more because they were made flatter in camera

[img]http://puu.sh/5yMm5[/img] Just noticed this on my flickr account. :v:

is a 600D to 5D2 a good jump?

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;43122945]is a 600D to 5D2 a good jump?[/QUOTE] yes

[QUOTE=Dr. Flame;43122978]yes[/QUOTE] is it worth the investment?

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;43123001]is it worth the investment?[/QUOTE] It all depends on what you want to do. The 5Ds are more video oriented to my understanding

[QUOTE=Dr. Flame;43123017]It all depends on what you want to do. The 5Ds are more video oriented to my understanding[/QUOTE] i make films and take photos. i'm studying film.

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;43123062]i make films and take photos. i'm studying film.[/QUOTE] Then it should work, if you're looking for something high profile and you like DSLR video a fair amount, wasn't the House MD finale filmed on a 5D camera?

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;43122945]is a 600D to 5D2 a good jump?[/QUOTE] Not a bad jump, but keep in mind it is a 5 year old camera, so it will feel dated pretty quickly and it will lose quite a bit of value after the mk 4 comes out.

[QUOTE=Dr. Flame;43123067]Then it should work, if you're looking for something high profile and you like DSLR video a fair amount, wasn't the House MD finale filmed on a 5D camera?[/QUOTE] it was. it's more to do with the technology being old, but the price i've got one at is pretty damn good and the ability to hack it to do raw video is pretty damn good. [editline]9th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Trogdon;43123219]Not a bad jump, but keep in mind it is a 5 year old camera, so it will feel dated pretty quickly and it will lose quite a bit of value after the mk 4 comes out.[/QUOTE] that's pretty much my thought, 5 years is a long time but the ISO handling, field of view, video abilities & FF and shit doesn't get any worse just because it's aged.

For photos it's a decent investment, but in the video world things change rather quickly and the image quality isn't going to hold up for much longer compared to other cameras (like the black magic cine stuff). 1080p won't be the standard forever, and the raw video hack is even lower resolution. Also check this article out, BMCC's could be an even better buy because of this [url]http://nofilmschool.com/2013/12/blackmagic-cinema-pocket-camera-super-35mm-new-metabones-speed-booster/[/url]

[QUOTE=Trogdon;43123380]For photos it's a decent investment, but in the video world things change rather quickly and the image quality isn't going to hold up for much longer compared to other cameras (like the black magic cine stuff). 1080p won't be the standard forever, and the raw video hack is even lower resolution. Also check this article out, BMCC's could be an even better buy because of this [url]http://nofilmschool.com/2013/12/blackmagic-cinema-pocket-camera-super-35mm-new-metabones-speed-booster/[/url][/QUOTE] good points, pita the BMPCC won't take photos :P

[QUOTE=Dr. Flame;43123017]It all depends on what you want to do. The 5Ds are more video oriented to my understanding[/QUOTE] Ummmm

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;43123586]good points, pita the BMPCC won't take photos :P[/QUOTE] Yeah it's a bit of a bummer haha :P I think it's still a good purchase if you are interested as a photo device primarily, but in the video world I would recommend something a bit newer.

You guys do any stuff with drones? [url]http://www.helipal.com/storm-drone-6-gps-flying-platform.html?gclid=CIXr07_ZhbsCFYEDOgodzRwA1A[/url]

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;43123586]good points, pita the BMPCC won't take photos :P[/QUOTE] Yes it does, it's just at 24fps and not that high resolution!

[QUOTE=Glitchman;43124068]You guys do any stuff with drones? [url]http://www.helipal.com/storm-drone-6-gps-flying-platform.html?gclid=CIXr07_ZhbsCFYEDOgodzRwA1A[/url][/QUOTE] man they should really proofread their stuff [editline]9th December 2013[/editline] or just fire the marketing person that wrote all the text

Got my adapter for the type r11... (phone pic) [img]http://i.imgur.com/FNdAGjl.jpg[/img] just took a quick picture [img]http://i.imgur.com/YNxuDZ3.jpg[/img] took some video also. The lens gives a sort of "glowwy" effect to light sources, is this normal for a lens this old? The glass is almost perfect.

Glowyness is normal for old glass. Has to do with coatings or just lack of any coating at all. Other thing to keep in mind is that not every old lens has such stellar performance, especially on M4/3rds.

Should I go from a Point and Shoot to a Bridge to DSLR or just Point and Shoot to DLSR?

If you have the money for it then you can go to a DSLR if you like the body, lenses, etc.

[QUOTE=garychencool;43126488]If you have the money for it then you can go to a DSLR if you like the body, lenses, etc.[/QUOTE] Are bridges future proof? Seems like it'd be a good fit to get that extra quality while not having to worry about lenses or exuberant cost, then I could go for an SLR once I'm old enough to work/get a freelance thing off the ground

[QUOTE=Dr. Flame;43126528]Are bridges future proof? Seems like it'd be a good fit to get that extra quality while not having to worry about lenses or exuberant cost, then I could go for an SLR once I'm old enough to work/get a freelance thing off the ground[/QUOTE] camera bodies are never future proof for more than a few years, invest in quality glass more than camera bodies

I'd say most DLSRs above entry level are future proofed. Sensor tech hasn't changed much for a long time, at base to moderate ISO, most DSLRs have very similar image quality. The build quality, ergonomics and image quality of my old D90 were still really good, I just changed camera because of the size of SLRs in general.

buy a cheap entry level dslr and it'll be fine for ages esp if you're not shooting at iso 2^100 or trying to pop-pop-pop some dudes at 100 fps

It depends, but I'd say a DSLR is more future proofed than a bridge or p&s.