- mini smoke machine - need to figure which oneIn what plots will you need it?
Mostly for product shoots that i do on the side. But i can imagine it being useful for stock also- mini smoke machine - need to figure which oneIn what plots will you need it?
Mostly for product shoots that i do on the side. But i can imagine it being useful for stock also- mini smoke machine - need to figure which oneIn what plots will you need it?
This is a nice camera for slow motion, something like 1 million+ frames a second a bit out of my budget at the moment:
https://petapixel.com/2021/07/20/the-entry-level-phantom-tmx-5010-can-shoot-1-16-million-fps/
This is a nice camera for slow motion, something like 1 million+ frames a second a bit out of my budget at the moment:
https://petapixel.com/2021/07/20/the-entry-level-phantom-tmx-5010-can-shoot-1-16-million-fps/
Stock agencies do not accept videos with such low resolution.
I think the one I want is actually more like $150-$200k USD.What is the video resolution and fps there? :)
The sloMo would be nice, but way beyond any money I have. Here's something entertaining: Canon FL 1200mm f/11 Super Telephoto FL/FD Mount. Probably can be found for $1,000 to $1,500. Would have been cheaper a couple years ago, but the mirrorless cameras and use the FD lenses. Mostly manual, but the exposure can work.
The sloMo would be nice, but way beyond any money I have. Here's something entertaining: Canon FL 1200mm f/11 Super Telephoto FL/FD Mount. Probably can be found for $1,000 to $1,500. Would have been cheaper a couple years ago, but the mirrorless cameras and use the FD lenses. Mostly manual, but the exposure can work.
hehe, that looks like a 'fun' camera to lug around :P
I personally like the bridged lens in the P900. (Tried out the P1000, didn't like it - while it advertises 120x "zoom", it's not really - or at least doesn't seem to be. It seems to simply do digital enhancement which I can do post processing). The p900 & p1000 - while 'cool' - really lose quality/detail when you say go beyond 20-30x zoom. It has a teensy tiny 1/2.3 inch sensor. It would be cool to get a full frame camera that could do that in a compact bridged camera format :P
I did see a guy one time though I think his set up was about $15k for a camera. Apparently not a professional - just a hobbyist that happened to have lots of money and liked bird watching... :P
Lol, no - the sony rx5 is not necessarily "better" than the p900. The are a different class of camera. It's like saying apples are better than shoes. Makes no sense - they are different. Both are good.Sony's quality is definitely better than Nikon's. It's strange that you don't see it when you have two cameras. Although why would you need two cameras of roughly the same style?
The RX5 is good for night shots, slow motion (1000 fps), and has a 1" sensor. Unfortunately, the zoom is very poor.
The P900 is very good for 'general' zoom shots. It's not great on quality though.
And lol - yes, I have both - so I know what I am talking about :)
With the $15k camera - I don't recall. I was just going through some brush (I think I was doing some bird shots) and ran into him - and was like 'what what kind of camera is that?' (Because he had the super supppppppppppppppppper long lens). I think it was a DSLR with a 1200 mm lens, but don't recall. But it was huge/massive. Kind of like the picture pete posted, except I think it was white. Don't recall which brand, just that it was a big massive setup.
Lol, no - the sony rx5 is not necessarily "better" than the p900. The are a different class of camera. It's like saying apples are better than shoes. Makes no sense - they are different. Both are good.
The RX5 is good for night shots, slow motion (1000 fps), and has a 1" sensor. Unfortunately, the zoom is very poor.
The P900 is very good for 'general' zoom shots. It's not great on quality though.
And lol - yes, I have both - so I know what I am talking about :)
With the $15k camera - I don't recall. I was just going through some brush (I think I was doing some bird shots) and ran into him - and was like 'what what kind of camera is that?' (Because he had the super supppppppppppppppppper long lens). I think it was a DSLR with a 1200 mm lens, but don't recall. But it was huge/massive. Kind of like the picture pete posted, except I think it was white. Don't recall which brand, just that it was a big massive setup.
Uncle Pete, only dinosaurs walk around with such heavy lenses. ;D ;D ;D
Smart people buy micro 4/3 optics and put all the telephoto lenses in their pockets. 8)
Stabilization in Panasonic cameras allows you to shoot with any lens without a tripod. ;D
Uncle Pete, You are not confused, at focus 200 you have aperture 6.3 or 1.8 ? ???
I understand that you want to keep the heavy lens with aperture 1.8. The only thing that is not clear is what to shoot at 1.8....
I don't use IS:o :o :o
1. How many kg does your lens that shoots at 1.8 weigh?
2. You think in terms of the capabilities of the past millennium.
3. Only the lens that is always with you and installed on the camera is effective. And only light-weight lenses can provide this. In this case, the photographer is always ready to meet a good shot.
4. Probably old heavy lenses give better quality if they can pull out the number of megapixels that modern cameras give out. But only dinosaurs or bodybuilders walk with huge lenses.
5. Your 1200 lens is cringe! As I already wrote, Panasonic 100-400 + teleconverter = 1600. And such a lens is not heavy, weighs 1 kg and is small in size. ;D ;D ;DI don't use IS:o :o :o
I see, you also carry a 6 kg tripod with you!
;D ;D ;D
I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter?400mm on a micro 4/3 system is equal to 800mm on a full frame. If you add a 1.4 converter, you get about 1200 mm, if you add a 2.0 converter, you get 1600 mm.
I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter?400mm on a micro 4/3 system is equal to 800mm on a full frame. If you add a 1.4 converter, you get about 1200 mm, if you add a 2.0 converter, you get 1600 mm.
Yes, the aperture is proportionally compressed, but at such focuses you need a large depth of field.
Look at the price on eBay for used ones, $1000 is a normal price for good condition.
I'm talking about optics for a micro 4/3 system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system)
So, micro 4/3 allows you to shoot an object at 400mm as effectively as a heavy full-frame lens with 1200 focus. At the same time, the depth of field at 400 focus will be greater than at 1200 focus
Uncle Pete, you don't surprise me. I wrote at the very beginning that you are a dinosaur! ;D ;D ;D
There are many videos on YouTube where people like you compare all these huge lenses with micro 4/3 and talk about why they sold all these heavy lenses. They also compare the quality of micro 4/3 with these lenses and cameras of yours. I watched these videos, the quality of micro 4/3 is very good. Now I can't share the links, i.e. I didn't save them.
I am not a photographer and I do not take portraits of people. For video shooting, I think the micro 4/3 system is ideal. I also think that it is better to buy telephoto lenses of the micro 4/3 system because they are smaller in size and lighter in weight than lenses of other systems. I don’t know what’s in Canon, but the stabilization in Panasonic lenses and cameras is so good that you don’t need to carry a tripod or monopod with you. High-aperture lenses are also produced for the micro 4/3 system.
Considering that an ordinary person cannot have two systems at once (it is expensive), it is better to sell all cameras and lenses of other systems and buy only a micro 4/3 system !!!
;D ;D ;D
I am not a photographer and I do not take portraits of people. For video shooting, I think the micro 4/3 system is ideal. I also think that it is better to buy telephoto lenses of the micro 4/3 system because they are smaller in size and lighter in weight than lenses of other systems. I don’t know what’s in Canon, but the stabilization in Panasonic lenses and cameras is so good that you don’t need to carry a tripod or monopod with you. High-aperture lenses are also produced for the micro 4/3 system.
Considering that an ordinary person cannot have two systems at once (it is expensive), it is better to sell all cameras and lenses of other systems and buy only a micro 4/3 system !!!
;D ;D ;D
I tend to agree. I already switched to a mirrorless APS-C camera, and I couldn't be happier with the reduction in the size and weight of my gear.
With the improvment in software capabilities from Topaz, Abobe, I get similar quality, if not better.
I already sold my full-frame camera and some L lenses and I am in the process of selling everything else.
I don't have a purchasing wish, but a selling wish 😁
SuperPhoto, you didn't understand what I was writing about. The equipment I was writing about is not cheap. And this equipment is 100% suitable for the stock business, which is what this forum is about.
if you are doing microstockThe forum name is microstockgroup. What other questions can there be on this forum? ;D ;D ;D
Zero Talent, You lost! And you know what I mean.
My condolences. ;D ;D ;D
Yes, I lost.+100. And this is the main thing.
Zero Talent, Are you the one deleting the topics I write in on the forum? >:(
The fight against democracy leads to defeat, which is what we see. ;D
The forum name is microstockgroup. What other questions can there be on this forum?
Brightin Star has launched a new 50mm f/0.95 lens, with fluorescent, glow-in-the-dark focus and aperture scale markings.
Brightin Star has launched a new 50mm f/0.95 lens, with fluorescent, glow-in-the-dark focus and aperture scale markings.
Most manufacturers know our weak points, they've all been pushing new launches in the last few months. From 7 Artisans to Sigma. Better glass, cheaper glass. Hopefully the new Sony body gives us some more to talk about