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

[QUOTE=dwt110;43166930]I am thinking its a good idea for when I shoot video but I don't do that often, only a few times a week when I bring my DSLR to school to use for film class since my $115,000,000/year school district can't afford new 720p handicams[/QUOTE] Amazing school budget

@Mooe94 This probably sounds like a shitty solution, but can't you just mount the camera upside down on a tripod? I know that on some tripods you can flip the center column, allowing you to do that. That way you don't have to rotate them in post. On a different note, I went and bought a m42 adapter for my 550d and an old carl zeiss jena tessar 50mm f/2.8. Kind of excited. Hope the lens arrives tomorrow, seller already sent it out.

[QUOTE=garychencool;43174039]Amazing school budget[/QUOTE] my old high school got a million dollars for being the most charter school friendly, and they bought an astro turf field :rolleyes:

after 4 months I finally realized how I could edit the picture control settings on my camera

Picture style?

pretty shitty "making of" video for pharrell happy [video=youtube;Pae7sCtAglM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pae7sCtAglM[/video]

Nice video work on the music video but the song sucks :(

I wanted to see more of the behind the Scenes, like go over camera, lens choice, challenges during production and it seems like they were using the same steadicam operator...?

I want to know how they got those really nice tones and colors in the video. Some serious quality video work.

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43191126]I want to know how they got those really nice tones and colors in the video. Some serious quality video work.[/QUOTE] Get a camera that has high dynamic range Get a lens that is sharp and provides accurate colour reproduction and with a wide aperture Shoot flat on said camera, or raw Colour grade and correct accordingly Since you're shooting flat and/or raw you have a lot more space to fix stuff and make the footage look the way you want it to.

[QUOTE=garychencool;43191689]Get a camera that has high dynamic range Get a lens that is sharp and provides accurate colour reproduction and with a wide aperture Shoot flat on said camera, or raw Colour grade and correct accordingly Since you're shooting flat and/or raw you have a lot more space to fix stuff and make the footage look the way you want it to.[/QUOTE] Yes I know. The "Colour grade and correct accordingly" step is the most complicated and what I was asking about. Basically you just said the photography equivalent of this: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/fhCON0v.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43191721]Yes I know. The "Colour grade and correct accordingly" step is the most complicated and what I was asking about. Basically you just said the photography equivalent of this: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/fhCON0v.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] I that case, I'd like to know too.

Color grading is kind of like prison except I'd rather be in prison

I heard color grading raw flat footage takes forever

flat/log footage makes colour grading so much more effective

now im thinking about getting one of these guys [img]http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1351/1485461613_0ba78ebf97.jpg[/img] or should i get something that shoots 6x6?

I bought a brick of FP3 from 1963, still cellophane wrapped. Yay, can't wait to use it.

[QUOTE=notlabbet;43193318]now im thinking about getting one of these guys [img]http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1351/1485461613_0ba78ebf97.jpg[/img] or should i get something that shoots 6x6?[/QUOTE] The slow aperture means that you won't get much of a blur advantage if any over 35mm. This camera would be good for landscape stuff where the extra detail would be very welcome (they can print much larger), but otherwise I would say go for a 645 cam with a faster lens. To me MF shines for the detail and shallower DoF, and a slower lens will take away the bokeh advantage. I'd look for a Mamiya 645 1000s and possibly an 80mm 1.9 if you can find one, the size is bigger but it should give a distinct advantage over a 35mm camera in both areas. Honestly I dislike square format, I would go 645 or 67.

I know it's stupid to bitch about something as silly as this in the expensive world of photography, but I find it incredibly annoying how expensive batteries are. $50-$60 for a battery that doesn't even last a full day of shooting is ridiculous, and they (Nikon) have been raising the price steadily over the past year or two. And it's even more stupid because they are trying so hard to kill 3rd party battery support, as is evident in the C 1.01 update that supposedly increases battery life with Nikon batteries but basically is there to make sure no 3rd party batteries work. [editline]15th December 2013[/editline] If someone made a battery grip that could take the batteries for other cameras that would be cool.

pretty reasonable to complain about it, the third party thing was just a total wank move tbh

[QUOTE=Trogdon;43194154]The slow aperture means that you won't get much of a blur advantage if any over 35mm. This camera would be good for landscape stuff where the extra detail would be very welcome (they can print much larger), but otherwise I would say go for a 645 cam with a faster lens. To me MF shines for the detail and shallower DoF, and a slower lens will take away the bokeh advantage. I'd look for a Mamiya 645 1000s and possibly an 80mm 1.9 if you can find one, the size is bigger but it should give a distinct advantage over a 35mm camera in both areas. Honestly I dislike square format, I would go 645 or 67.[/QUOTE] Good info to know. What does it mean when its says "mask" or "without mask"?

[QUOTE=dwt110;43194604]I know it's stupid to bitch about something as silly as this in the expensive world of photography, but I find it incredibly annoying how expensive batteries are. $50-$60 for a battery that doesn't even last a full day of shooting is ridiculous, and they (Nikon) have been raising the price steadily over the past year or two. And it's even more stupid because they are trying so hard to kill 3rd party battery support, as is evident in the C 1.01 update that supposedly increases battery life with Nikon batteries but basically is there to make sure no 3rd party batteries work. [editline]15th December 2013[/editline] If someone made a battery grip that could take the batteries for other cameras that would be cool.[/QUOTE] If you can't make a battery last a whole day you really should spray less and think more. I've been using the same battery in my D60 since 2009 and I've never gone through a whole charge, never given it a full cycle. I shot a party which was 400+ photos from 2/3 charged and didn't run into any problems.

[QUOTE=The Salmon;43195216]If you can't make a battery last a whole day you really should spray less and think more. I've been using the same battery in my D60 since 2009 and I've never gone through a whole charge, never given it a full cycle. I shot a party which was 400+ photos from 2/3 charged and didn't run into any problems.[/QUOTE] that could be due to the fact that a d60 battery is the same size as mine but being used in a camera that probably requires less power

[QUOTE=notlabbet;43194969]Good info to know. What does it mean when its says "mask" or "without mask"?[/QUOTE] Honestly I've got no idea

[QUOTE=Trogdon;43194154] To me MF shines for the detail and shallower DoF, and a slower lens will take away the bokeh advantage.[/QUOTE] depends on what you're shooting for really. I have no issues with a f/4 limitation [editline]15th December 2013[/editline] still just a matter of onion

[QUOTE=FlippR;43195909]depends on what you're shooting for really. I have no issues with a f/4 limitation [editline]15th December 2013[/editline] still just a matter of onion[/QUOTE] portraits n stuff

[QUOTE=FlippR;43195909]depends on what you're shooting for really. I have no issues with a f/4 limitation [editline]15th December 2013[/editline] still just a matter of onion[/QUOTE] F4 is nice, mostly I was referring to the f6.9 on the long end. For landscapes it's probably great, but general portrait oriented stuff you wouldn't gain much if at all over a 35mm camera for web viewing sizes in terms of detail or DoF, which is why I would recommend something faster.

so I didnt sell the main item that I was selling to fund a new camera lens so no camera stuff as of yet im thinking about getting a D7100 body now and then like a 35mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8d (or maybe g) in march for my birthday but when I told my mom about my plans she started yelling at me that I dont need a new camera body (which I figure I really dont), but I would love a d7100 just going off the features it has over my d5200.

[QUOTE=dwt110;43203743]so I didnt sell the main item that I was selling to fund a new camera lens so no camera stuff as of yet im thinking about getting a D7100 body now and then like a 35mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8d (or maybe g) in march for my birthday but when I told my mom about my plans she started yelling at me that I dont need a new camera body (which I figure I really dont), but I would love a d7100 just going off the features it has over my d5200.[/QUOTE] i used my 50mm 1.8d on my mates d7000 and it was sexy. i imagine its only better on the 7100, so i say save yourself the extra hundred if you go for the new body.

don't bother with a 1.8g unless your camera doesn't have an internal motor tbh. from what i've read, whatever advantages the G has are thrown out the window with the price, weight and extra distortion at the corners