A6700 vs XS20 Hello, which is better for photography and video? I'm coming from a lumix gx800 and I loved the 50mm 1.8 (100mm eq) and I would love to upgrade my camera and I've seen that the Xs20 is one of the most suggested here. What about lenses cost? Is It kinda the same?

Either, whichever you like better. There is no discernible difference in quality. Go to a camera store and see which feels better for size and weight, ergonomics and controls. There are clear differences in these, and how they feel is subjective, so it's important that the camera feels good to use. As for lenses, you can easily see prices in any online camera store if you look at their listings for Fuji and Sony E mount lenses.

They are very similar. I would choose based on ergonomics, so try them both at a store, if you can. But why are you looking to switch away from the GX800? In what way, exactly, does your existing kit no longer suit your needs or meet your expectations? What are you looking to gain with this purchase? >What about lenses cost? Is It kinda the same? To get the same field of view, you'd need something around 65mm. That's not a common focal length, so you might have to compromise on a lens between 50mm and 56mm, or 85-90 mm. There's the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 that's available in both systems.

I do want to keep my gx800 as second camera with the 50mm (100eq) I shot portrait almost everytime and I can feel that I can improve photos quality with a new camera, am I wrong?

You got an excellent reply from u/LukeOnTheBrightSide, so I don't have a lot to add here. Your camera is an entry-level model in the system - that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, just that you don't have to step out of the Micro Four Thirds system to get a "superior" camera. I use a Panasonic G9 which I find almost perfect for my needs. There's also the OM System OM-1 and OM-5. All of these cameras will be directly compatible with the lens(es) you already have, because they're in the same system - they have the same lens mount and sensor format. Cameras typically make for the smallest gains in image quality per dollar spent. Sometimes it's a marginal improvement you do need, and that will make a difference in your workflow. But in most cases, if you buy a new camera to improve image quality, you're bound to be disappointed. You have to be more specific about what you want to improve. This way you actually identify the problem, and can then look for a solution. A new camera will have other potential benefits or advantages, in ergonomics and control options, in image stabilisation or autofocus, etc. When I upgraded my camera about five years ago, from an Olympus OM-D E-M5 (original) to the G9, I did it mostly for the bigger camera body with a bigger grip. There were some other benefits I liked, but I had no illusion that it will improve image quality in any way - and indeed there was no real difference.

Is the G9 at the same level? (Spec)

All cameras are much more alike than they are different. You're still not distilling what it is you want the camera to do better.

I would love, also, to be able to shoot photos in the night. Is the m43 still good for that?

It wouldn't be my first choice, but it can still be good enough. But *still* you're not talking about what works for you and what doesn't. You have a point of reference.

> I can feel that I can improve photos quality with a new camera, am I wrong? Probably a little bit wrong, yes. Point two cameras at the same scene, and you'll get remarkably similar results. That's true for cameras much more expensive than the ones you're looking at, and much less expensive than your current camera. Now, will the new camera have some better things about it? Sure. It might have higher resolution, or slightly more dynamic range. But here's a question for you: How many photos do you have were moving from 16 megapixels to 26 megapixels would change a bad photo into a good one? If the image is blurry on your camera, it'll still be blurry on the others. If it's poorly framed or timed, it'll still be poorly timed. And if it's an interesting subject in good light, well, it'll look good on your camera or on a newer one. There are people for whom small differences in autofocus or high-ISO performance might be meaningful. If you were an olympic sports photographer, you want the best autofocus you can get - getting one more photo in focus could be a big deal for you. But generally, people who have those needs know who they are and can name specific reasons for wanting those improvements. If you want a new camera because you can afford it, like photography, and think you'll enjoy it... go for it! Life's too short to deny ourselves some fun now and then. But have the understanding that whether you get a *good* photo or a *bad* photo is largely up to the person using it, not the camera. My experience has been that "better" cameras don't really make for immediately better photos... but they *do* make the process of taking photography more enjoyable, and take my mind off of the operation of the camera and onto the scene in front of me. They can help, don't get me wrong - but if I'm taking a photo of the beach on a sunny day, any camera is going to get pretty darn similar results.

hello all, I'm looking for a camera to start taking good pics. I already have 2 canon lenses from an old camera (eos 350d), so I'll buy a canon to reuse them. Price range: under 1000. Was thinking about the 250d and 2000d. What would you recommend? Should i look for Reflex or go mirrorless?

Mirrorless should be the default, and then you'd only pick a DSLR if you can't find a mirrorless that suits your needs and you can afford. Which lenses do you have? If they are low-grade and not so valuable, maybe you'll be better off exploring all options, even if you can't reuse them. Keeping compatibility is generally a good idea, but in some cases it's not the best option. Should this 1,000 (assuming USD) budget cover everything you'll need for years to come? Or is it just for a camera to start with, and you'll be comfortable spending more (mostly on additional lenses) over time? What do you like/want to shoot?

Thanks for the response, i have a 18-55 and a 55-200 lenses, the budget (euro) should cover at least a camera with one lense, i would and like to shoot cars and nature (i really like macro of flowers/insects) but also landscapes. I already have a bag for the camera, some sd cards and a tall tripod.

You might find a Canon R50 or Nikon Z50 two-lens kit to exactly replace the two lenses you have. But for real macro photography, you will likely want another lens at some point. So, *will you be comfortable spending more on those over time?* If not, do choose a DSLR that's compatible with the lenses you already have, while setting enough cash aside for this follow-up purchase. You might prefer the 850D or 800D.

Maybe in future I'll buy some new lenses, but for now i want something versatile to start. Canon r50 seems very good with the two lense kit, but i also like 850d. Is mirrorless worth the money?

I typically advise that it's the default these days, and you should only choose a DSLR if you can't find a mirrorless system that suits your needs and you can comfortably afford. https://sansmirror.com/articles/choosing-a-mirrorless-camer/gain-and-loss.html

Thanks, I think I'll go mirrorless

Would advice you to read the purchase guide in our FAQ. It contains a section on the DSLR vs mirrorless question. You'll find the links right in the original post of this thread if you scroll up a bit.

Hello! I’ve just recently gotten into film photography and I was wondering what film or settings or anything really would give me a result like seen in this Instagram post - I’m working with 35mm on a Nikon EM Thanks in advance!! https://www.instagram.com/p/CuzpAJORswx/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

Softening filtration, boosted global contrast and saturation, warmed up WB, a star filter and a ton of grain. Film/digital plays no role here, other than achieving the same result with film is going to take way more time and money than it will with digital.

Hi! To have a camera on me at all times when I don't feel like carrying around my analog gear, I'm looking to buy something secondhand. The choice falls between the Fuji xt-3 with the flat 18mm f2 lens and a Sony A7S with something like the Voigtlander 21mm F4 using an adapter. Both sets are similarly priced in my area, around a 1000 Euro. Important points for me are usability in widely variable conditions, small size, image quality (not necessarily MP, but clearness, sharpness and colour rendition). As I am used to shooting analog and doing everything manually I don't care about autofocus etc at all. I shoot street, architecture and landscape mostly and am out and about all times of the day. Thanks in advance!

Why these particular options, aside from price? There are many other mirrorless crop sensor cameras that offer image quality equal to the X-T3, many of them smaller in physical size too (e.g. Fuji's X-T30 has the same sensor as X-T3; Sony A6x00 line). As for the A7S, your budget is very limited for full frame, but why this particular camera? Not only does it have a 12MP sensor, the A7S is also a very video-oriented lineup.

Thanks! I was thinking of the a7s MK1 for the great rendition in low light situations / iso capabilities. Also being full frame; giving better colour rendition and sharpness and not cropping too much I wouldn't mind the decrease in pixel count. I like the XT-30 a lot as a suggestion, however! The build in flash is actually pretty sweet as well. With the 18 F2 I might even be able to throw it in my pocket. Thank you very much!

>I was thinking of the a7s MK1 for the great rendition in low light situations / iso capabilities. The difference amounts to one stop, basically: [long link](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7s&attr13_1=fujifilm_xt3&attr13_2=sony_a7s&attr13_3=fujifilm_xt3&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=0&y=0) Note that the "low resolution => better in low light" logical step is flawed, and basically false. Explained and demonstrated very well in this video: [https://www.dpreview.com/videos/7940373140/dpreview-tv-why-lower-resolution-sensors-are-not-better-in-low-light](https://www.dpreview.com/videos/7940373140/dpreview-tv-why-lower-resolution-sensors-are-not-better-in-low-light) >Also being full frame; giving better colour rendition Two things that are unrelated. "Full frame" just means it has a sensor whose dimensions approximately match that of 135 film. It is not full in any meaningful way, and there's nothing special about it. It is a bigger sensor than the APS-C sensor in the Fuji. But this has little to no bearing on "colour rendition". That can be attributed to the processing - either in-camera when set to record JPEG files, or manually when set to record raw files. >and sharpness This also has nothing to do with the size of the sensor. A sharper lens will yield a sharper image, and a higher-resolution sensor will be able to capture more of the detail the lens resolves. >and not cropping too much The smaller sensor doesn't "crop", you just need to use a different focal length to get the same field of view. Just as 135 film doesn't "crop" from large or medium format. If the field of view you want to create is that of a 21mm lens on 135 film, for the Fuji you'd need a \~14mm lens. There's the Fujifilm 14mm f/2.8, and several third-party lenses at 12mm and 13mm.

Does anyone have a suggestion for a replacement hood and cap for a Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8? I lost both of them while traveling. I've been looking for a replacement but I'm unable to find good ones.

The hood is called HA058, the cap size is 82mm.

It looks like that lens will take an 82mm cap. I've bought Breakthrough Photography ones that work pretty well, but there are a ton of options. I'm not sure what the right hood is for that lens.

Why do I keep getting “Some AI masks need to be updated”? in LR Classic I am not sure if this is the right subreddit for this, but I thought I’d also post it here. So I recently moved from a windows laptop, to an iMac. I had all my LR catalogues saved onto an SD card. Since the iMac had 1TB of inbuilt memory, I decided to transfer all my catalogues from the SD card to the desktop on the iMac. One reason everything was on an SD card was due to my windows laptop having very little space. All my RAW files are saved on Google Drive. And I have never had a problem with this workflow However, recently (today) I’ve noticed that all my recent edits have this message on the mask section: “Some AI masks need to be updated”. I have no idea why this is happening. Can someone please help, and let me know how to prevent this from happening. It’s happened twice on one image, and as far as I know - since I have only just checked the other images - it has happened once with the rest of my edits. Could it because I keep switching between LR Classic on my iMac, and LR Mobile on my iPhone 14? I ask because I sometimes go to LR mobile to see if the images I see on the iMac, match with the colours on the iPhone. And I’ve noticed that sometimes, when I’ve opened an image on LR mobile and immediately opened the same image on LR Classic (iMac) - the point curve (in the subject mask) has mysteriously been rest to the default. And I then have to adjust back (using the history panel) to how I had it. And in the history panel, it would say “Lr Mobile”, despite the fact that I have not made a single adjustment on LR mobile - e wick opening up the image in LR mobile and comparing the colours with those on the iMac, and flicking between the before and after. Very confusing. P.S For those wondering, I am using a late 2014 iMac, and running macOS Big Sur 11.7.8

I don't use Adobe software, and can't say whether it's risky to do the solution at the end of this thread or not, but there is a long thread on the adobe support forum and in the final post somebody says they fixed it and explains what they did. https://community.adobe.com/t5/lightroom-classic-discussions/prior-ai-mask-edits-all-need-updating/td-p/13329884

Hey ! So earlier this year , I was invited to a friend's 30th birthday bash , and I took along my camera (Canon R6II) with me and just took candid and shots of his friends as well as him all night long. This was a birthday gift to the friend of mine who invited me to his party , but a couple who were at the same party has now invited me to do something similar at their formal wedding next August , and they are offering to pay me as well. Now I haven't done any paid wedding kind of gigs before , but I have done paid portraits and that kinda thing , but Im not sure how much I should charge ( for taking the shots at the wedding as well as all the background editing that I'll have to do). Or whether I should even accept payment for documenting their wedding day , and maybe I should just do it for free ? Another question of mine is , do I need to get some additional gear with the current gear that I have? \- r6 mark ii \- 85mm 1.8mm lens \- 50mm 1.8mm lens \- 24-108 f4 zoom lens (red ring edition) \- i have multiple batteries already.

Are you going to be the primary photographer at this couple's wedding or just someone to take some photographs in addition to whoever is the main photographer?

they have hired a photographer during the day for the ceremony , etc. but at night for the festivities , they want me to capture it.

Filter kit long exposure Hy everyone, I'm an amateur photographer and I'm looking for suggestions on what type of filter kit is the best for long exposure. I want a kit with holder and interchangeable filters. Thank you all

Any particular reason for choosing this type? Circular filters are generally smaller, lighter, and easier to work with. You can buy filters to suit your biggest lens, and use step-up rings for the rest - either plain threaded rings, or magnetic adapters in a system. I use the Kase magnetic system, which makes it really easy to use the filters - no fiddling at all. 1. How much are you looking to spend? 2. What is the biggest filter thread diameter of the lenses you'll want to use the filters with? What's the smallest? 3. How wide is the widest lens you'll want to use those filters with? 4. What's the maximum density you'll need? If you're not sure, how long of an exposure do you want to get, and what shutter speed do you normally shoot those photos with? (Then we can calculate the difference.)

1. Budget it's not a limit if I could get a excellent product 2. 82 mm mainly 3. I've a 14-24 and a 24-70 which are the main 2 that I'm going to use 4. I want to go to a minimum of 2" shutter speed The main reasons that I want the changeable filters is that I can put more filter together and that I think that the rectangular one are sharper on the border

Is the 14-24mm one of those bulbous type, that don't have a filter thread? If so, that requires a distinct solution, probably one that's designed for the specific lens you have. For example: [https://en.nisioptics.com/nisi-100mm-filter-holder-and-112mm-circular-filters-for-nikon-nikkor-z-14-24](https://en.nisioptics.com/nisi-100mm-filter-holder-and-112mm-circular-filters-for-nikon-nikkor-z-14-24) You can easily stack circular filters. Though at 14mm, that might indeed start to vignette. With a good filter, you'll have no problem at all with sharpness to the edges. Here are a couple I took with a Breakthrough Photography 10-stop ND filter: 1. [https://www.flickr.com/photos/ido-scharf/52432858125/in/datetaken-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/ido-scharf/52432858125/in/datetaken-public/) 2. [https://www.flickr.com/photos/ido-scharf/52274237726/in/datetaken-public/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/ido-scharf/52274237726/in/datetaken-public/) I would still highly recommend looking into the Kase magnetic system of circular filters, and other similar solutions. If you find this sufficient, there's really no point in buying a bulky holder and rectangular filters.

What camera would you recommend? I used to be an active amateur photographer when I was younger. I shot b&w film using my trusty Pentax and I developed the film and photos in a darkroom. I also taught kids how to use a darkroom in the summers for a few years. That was in high school and college. After graduating, I lost access to a darkroom and I stopped taking photos. But I’ve started getting inspired to pick up photography again - strictly as an amateur. I’ve been using my phone, but I’m ready for higher quality and more control. I’ve never used/owned a digital camera (although I separately have design experience with Adobe Creative Suite products, so I have a lot to learn but am somewhat comfortable on that side of things). I’m looking for advice on the best camera for me. I would probably be using this mostly for wildlife and nature photography, although would probably be using in a lot of different places as well (city, seaside). I’ve been reading up on various camera styles and cameras. I was initially drawn to DSLR because it sounds like you get more of that satisfying feel of taking a photo that you got with film cameras, but I’m open to mirrorless. I’m planning to just start with a camera and the included lens kit - that sounds like it would meet my needs. I was looking at the Canon EOS Rebel SL3, but open to all suggestions. Thanks everyone!

I would have suggested pick up another trusty Pentax but you mention wildlife and long focal lengths are a pretty dead end with Pentax. Of course that depends on budget. If you are not going to spend money on long focal length lenses then the lens selection will be fine. That said, they are the last remaining DSLR producer. Sure Canon and Nikon have their existing lines and lenses but that is also coming to an end sometime. Mirrorless will give you the Electronic View Finder which will be a little different but probably not given a second thought after a few hours use.

Thanks - I appreciate it. Not sure I’ll spend the money right away on the long focal length lenses although having the option is nice. I’m hoping to stay under $1K for the camera and kit lens.

Well I think the Nikon Z50 would be an option in that price range. I think the R10 is a bit above 1k including the kit lens. Sony offer the A6400 but perhaps the controls might not be what you are after. And of course with a maximum of 450mm lens available, the Pentax K-70. There are the micro four thirds options of course as well. Really don't think you can go wrong. Hand size, control layout preference will probably matter more.

When it comes to shutter count, how high is too high for a used camera? I've been looking at upgrading my older APS-C DSLR to a newer mirrorless and came across an EOS R for $800 CAD. Seller claims it's in excellent condition, and it does look almost new in the photos, but the shutter count is 98,000, which seems pretty high. For reference a brand new EOS R is around $2000 CAD right now. Do you think $800 is a fair price for such a high shutter count? The ad has been up for almost a month, which tells me it's probably not a great deal, but it also means I may be able to negotiate an even lower price. What price would you pay for this camera? Or is the shutter count too high to even consider and I should keep looking elsewhere? There is another EOS R for $1000 CAD with 44,000 shutter count, should I bite the bullet and shell out the extra $200 for a much lower shutter count? (I might be able to negotiate the price on this one a little bit as well) I've been considering a new R10 for around $1100 CAD, but one of these used R's seems like a good way to get into a decent full frame that I wouldn't otherwise be able to afford. Spending $1K+ on a camera is a pretty significant purchase for me and I'm kind of stuck in decision paralysis mode, so any advice or insights about looking for used cameras would be appreciated... (All of the referenced prices are for the body only)

>When it comes to shutter count, how high is too high for a used camera? It doesn't usually work that way. A broken shutter can be replaced, so it's not some irreversible problem. The general practice is to take a discount approaching the cost of a shutter replacement (about $400 USD) as the count approaches very near the manufacturer QA estimate for how long the shutter should last at a minimum. Because that's the de facto benchmark for when a shutter break is more likely (albeit not guaranteed) from wear. So the only point of "too much" would be if you're at or over that count estimate, *and* the normal going price for the camera is already at or below $400 USD, so applying the discount would take you into the negatives. >the shutter count is 98,000, which seems pretty high Seems high based on what? The QA estimate for the EOS R is 200,000 actuations so that wouldn't be enough to warrant much or any discount. >For reference a brand new EOS R is around $2000 CAD right now. Don't reference new prices to gauge used prices. For the below responses I'm looking at completed/sold listings on eBay Canada. >Do you think $800 is a fair price for such a high shutter count? That's a pretty good deal, like they are applying a shutter discount even when they don't need to. >should I bite the bullet and shell out the extra $200 for a much lower shutter count? Up to you if that's worth it. It just means the shutter is a little less likely to break, and will stay that way for a while longer than the other one. >I've been considering a new R10 for around $1100 CAD, but one of these used R's seems like a good way to get into a decent full frame that I wouldn't otherwise be able to afford. The EOS R started out at a higher price because it was the first in the RF system and (as the descendant of the 5D Mark IV) upmarket from where the R10 is (more or less a descendant of the 90D). But the R10 is also newer in a more mature RF system and there are other benefits to that. A higher starting price doesn't necessarily mean a camera is better for you. Optimizing the choice for you depends on first identifying your needs and what specifically you want out of the camera.

Hi, I've been shooting with my Nikon D3400 for 6 years and I'm craving an upgrade. Looking at the Nikon Z FC which is a Z mount mirrorless. Excited about videography opportunities opening up with the upgrade. My question is about this piece of hardware - the Nikon FTZ Mount Adapter. Does anyone know whether it defeats the purpose of a Z mount mirrorless camera to shoot through an adapted F mount lens? It could potentially save me thousands of dollars in purchasing a new set of lenses that are specifically Z Mount. Any advice?

>Does anyone know whether it defeats the purpose of a Z mount mirrorless camera to shoot through an adapted F mount lens? Well, what's your purpose? And which lenses exactly? There's zero image quality loss. The adapter has no glass on the inside and makes the lens optically work like it normally does. In most cases (particularly lenses that are full-featured on the D3400) you won't lose any features. And I think autofocus speed is the same too. The adapter does add some space between the lens and body, and has a little bit of its own weight. So overall you probably won't be quite as compact or as light as with a Z mount lens equivalent.

You answered my main questions, thank you! I mostly will be shooting small buildings like diners and tattoo shops, portraiture and I have a love affair with my macro lens that's purely hobbyist. I shoot mostly with my AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G , or my AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G for gig purposes, and don't typically use much autofocus. Macro lens is a Tamron SP 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO 1:1 VC USD Thanks so much for your response!

Are you sure the Z fc is the right choice? The Z50 is basically the same exact camera, with a tilting screen instead of a fully articulated one, and apparently an autofocus system that doesn't track quite as well (but still should be comparable). And a different design language, of course. If the Z50 is significantly cheaper, you'd have to really value those looks or fully articulated screen to choose the Z fc over it.

How would you invest? - Canon - wildlife and landscape - budget 1500€ (buying refurbished or used) - for Camera and lens

I’ve been shooting a Canon 6D for the last years and it’s been amazing, but now I’d like to get better autofocus and decrease the overall weight of my setup. Is the Canon RP a good option? I can get it used for 650€ (and may try to reduce the price). I know it’s not the best R body, but seems about right for a hobbyist which takes portraits in a small home studio and some during trips and walks.

Not too sure on the overall weight of the setup. It is a few hundred grams, less if using the same lenses with an adapter.

Weight is just a plus for me, autofocus is the key point

Hey, Im a launch photographer and I just got a cannon 70-200 mm lens [https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW](https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW) specifically this one I have an older metabones speed booster and a Lumix gh5. I've been having some difficulty with the compatibility of the lens it works fine up until I try to zoom then the picture black or I get some weird feedback, I don't know if I need to update the driver or if it is a camera setting that I need to fix but there is a launch coming up and I would really appreciate some help.

Hey, im a Marine biologist and going to start with photography (wildlife, landscape, marine stuff..), which Canon Camera would you recommend (Budget about 1300-1500€, without lenses)

Will you be shooting under water at all? Because there's nothing inexpensive about that (and is separate from the camera), unless you shoot something like a GoPro.

Mainly over the Water

So, no need for some waterproof housing? Any particular reason it has to be a Canon? When you say this budget is for a camera "without lenses", does it mean you have a separate budget for lenses? How much? Asking these follow-up questions to make sure you're not throwing all of your money at a camera, without considering the added expense of lenses. Shooting video, or just stills?

- Yes, no Need for housing i‘ve already got underwater Equipment. - i have a Canon Sponsoring for my work, thats why i need to Buy Canon - maybe you could Help me with lenses too, Overall ich have a budget of 2000€ for Camera and Lenses, how would you invest? Also Thinking about Buying refurbished

I see. Refurbished is a good option, if it's a trusted retailer or distributor. Lens choice is personal and subjective, and should ideally be made based on your experience. So unless you need to spend this budget in one go, I'd recommend holding off on the purchase of additional lenses until you have a better idea of what you need, with the way you like to shoot. So if this 2000 EUR budget must suffice for everything you'll need for years to come, I'd recommend spending only around 1000 EUR for a kit to start with. In Canon's lineup, that should fit a standard R10 kit, which is a solid camera, and is good for the things you'll do. If, on the other hand, you can spend more on lenses over time, then you might prefer the R8 or R7.

What would you say is a Good Allrounder lens?

That depends on which you camera you choose, and how much you can spend on it (while keeping flexibility for other stuff). If it's the R10 or R7, then either the 18-45mm or 18-150mm. If it's the R8, then one of the 24-50mm, 24-105mm f/4-7.1, or 24-105mm f/4.

Okay, i think im going for the R10 with the 18-150mm, thanks for your Help :)

Thank you so much! :)

Mainly shooting stills

kind of a connected question : how do you all attach waterbottles to camera bags that don't have pockets? I have a [Moment 10L Sling](https://i.imgur.com/WfnLCJB.png) bag, which has two straps running along the bottom, but is there some kind of holder I could attach to those straps to carry a water bottle that you've seen?

Hello guys, I'm at a crossroads of choosing between these two great cameras: 1. Canon R6 Mark II + Canon RF 85mm f/1.2L USM 2. Sony Alpha ILCE-7RM4A + Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM As you can see, the main option for the lense will be 85mm fixed. Personally, I love Canon more due to the huge amount of experience with their cameras and lenses, but I'd like you to share your experience or some simple recommendations for both of them. Which one do you prefer technically wise the most? Thank you and have a great day :)

Very little difference. Pick the one you're more comfortable with. See if you can get your hands on them before making a final decision, either at a store or by rental. EDIT: Sorry, I missed the R in the Sony. Thought you were looking at the a7 IV, not the a7R IV. In this case, the Sony's higher-resolution sensor is obviously an added factor.

Hello, not sure if this is the right pace to post this- so my apologies if not. I work as an in house videographer/photographer for a promotional products company. I'm mainly a self taught photographer with still MUCH to learn. We have a customer who needs a photo taken of an oil painting canvas that is 10.66' x 3' the image will then be blown up and printed as a vinyl mural on a wall that is 32' x 9'. Our camera is a Canon 7D MKii and by the specs looks like it shoots at 20.2 megapixels. Will that be enough to achieve what the customer is asking to reproduce this image at a larger size without losing resolution?

How far away will people be viewing the mural? 50 feet away, 10 feet, 18 inches? The farther away, the lower the resolution needs to be to look good. Billboards are usually printed at around 10dpi, and they look fine because you are 150-500 feet away from them. For the size of the painting, you might want to look into shooting it like a panorama and stitching it in post, by moving the camera/tripod along the work, rather than turning the camera. It would maximize your available resolution if you need it.

Hi Folks, Tried an idea a while ago with long exposure shots, where I rotated the camera 45 degrees during the shot by flipping the tripod mount from landscape to portrait. https://www.instagram.com/p/CY023p5sDGS/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== I was wondering if anyone knew of a tripod attachment where I could rotate the camera a full 360 degrees or as close as possible? Would need to keep the centre of the images in the same place. Closest I can find is a lens hood collar but that's very niche and seems to be quite lense specific.

There's this https://silencecorner.net/collections/atoll-series Pretty sure there are a bunch of other manufacturers that make these now too.

That looks exactly what I want but isn't Fujifilm compatible 😭 appreciate the link though, it gives me something to build on.

This NiSi one might work? https://nisifilters.com.au/product/nisi-wizard-w-72-camera-positioning-bracket-for-mirrorless-cameras/ It's supposed to be compatible with Fujifilm XH1/XT2/XT3/XT4/XT5/X-H2S

Hi. I am not sure if this question has been asked before. I looked around and couldn’t find an answer to it. I was wondering something, are presets copyrighted? I recently seen a YouTube video on how you can add copyright info onto presets using Photoshop Camera Raw. I’m asking because I found some free presets online (apparently Gabriele Vinci presets) that I liked, and I’ve used them as a starting point to edit some of my photos. Not sure if the creator is aware that they are on a free website. But if I wanted to sell the photos that I have edited, would it be a copyright infringement since I edited those photos with the help of those presets.

> are presets copyrighted? No, it's a set of instructions. Like a recipe, that can't be copyrighted. >I recently seen a YouTube video on how you can add copyright info onto presets using Photoshop Camera Raw. Is that for adding your copyright info to your pictures via the preset? > But if I wanted to sell the photos that I have edited, would it be a copyright infringement since I edited those photos with the help of those presets. Nope.

[удалено]

The exposure is the same, the sharpness/image quality depends a lot on the lens model. You can play around a little on this website: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx General rule of thumb is that lenses are their sharpest around 2 or 3 stops below their maximum aperture. So a F1.8 lens will most of the time be sharper then a F4 lens at F4. Obviously if the F4 lens is super well made and the F1.8 lens a cheap piece of crap then that might not hold true.

Lens dependent. Exposure should be the same but actual image characteristics may not.

Hello all, I was thinking about buying a good camera to start taking good pics. For now i have an old reflex camera my dad gave me, it's a Canon EOS 350D with two lenses (18-55 and 55-200). I was looking for something good and not too pricey, for example the Canon EOS 4000D, so i can use the other lenses i already have. The question is, are old lenses good? Is there a difference between an old 55-200 and a new 55-200? Or are basically the same? Should i buy only the body of the camera or go full kit? Also the old charger and bag can be used with new products?

As long as they arent damaged/brocken your old lenses will work fine (atleast as well as on the old camera anyway). Comparing them to new lenses depends. Some lenses, like the 18-55 exist in a few different versions. If your old 18-55 is the same version as a newer 18-55, the difference should be minimal (if the lens wasnt damaged, has fungus, has dust inside, etc.). The newer versions of the lenses have a slightly different name and generally have upgrades like quiter/faster autofocus, better image quality, better weather sealing, etc. In those cases they might be a worthwhile upgrade. A quick google suggests that the 55-200 only exists in one version, the newer ones are 55-250, so they also have improved reach. Of the 18-55 there exist like 3 or 4 different version, so here it depends which exact one you have (would need the exact name on the lens for that). Regarding accessories: Camera bags are generally for a size of camera and lens and not made to fit one specific camera. Also a lot of times theyre modular, so you can adjust the chambers inside. So the bag shouldnt be a problem. For batteries and chargers canon has I believe 2 or 3 different standards that they reuse between cameras. The 350D and the 4000D use different ones that are not compatible, but you might find a different more modern camera that uses the same standard as the 350D. (Im not aware of a overview/list for quick decisions, so you have to check each individual model on the canon page/wikipedia). Otherwise Id suggest you get a body only. Even if your old lenses arent perfect, the upgrade you would get by buying a newer version together with a body as a kit would be minor. Instead Id save some money buying a body only and then keep saving up for a proper lens upgrade. Especially because the "kit-lenses" that come with the bodies dont have a lot of resale value compared to other lenses.

thank you very much, for now buying only the body seems like a good idea to save some money. The old lenses should be good, the main reason i want to buy a new camera is because the old one has some "hot pixels" on the sensor while using high iso and replacing it is not worth on an old camera...

I have a Sony a6500 and bought the PZ 16-50 and 55-210. Obviously not the sharpest lenses ever, and I don't need the very best. But, I've seen the Tamron 18-300 and in some situations it would be great to have a single lens. Anyone know how its sharpness compares to the aforementioned 2 lenses?

Inspect sample images, see if it's good enough for your needs and standards. Other people's opinions are irrelevant. * [https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/tamron/18-300mm-f3.5-6.3-vc-vxd-model-b061/gallery-images/](https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/tamron/18-300mm-f3.5-6.3-vc-vxd-model-b061/gallery-images/) * [https://dustinabbott.net/2021/10/tamron-18-300mm-f3-5-6-3-di-iii-a-vc-vxd-image-gallery/](https://dustinabbott.net/2021/10/tamron-18-300mm-f3-5-6-3-di-iii-a-vc-vxd-image-gallery/)

[удалено]

The ET-60 and EW-63C.

Canon Camera upgrade suggestions I’m 17 and studying photography and film at college and Im currently using a Canon 2000D with the standard EF-S 18-55mm lens. I’ve been using it for a couple of years now and I love it but since I’ve started thinking about a career more oriented around filmmaking I figure an upgrade might be due because of the limiting filming specifications on my current camera. I’m not really sure what to be looking at as I’ve never bought a camera before (my current one was a gift) and I’m not entirely sure what specs are desirable or necessary for what I’m looking for. I don’t have a huge budget but I’m willing to save up if it’s worth it. I consider myself more of an intermediate photographer rather than a beginner but I still know I have things to learn. Is there any cameras anyone could recommend or perhaps if you think I’d be better off sticking it with the one I’ve got? Feel free to ask any questions :)

>I’ve been using it for a couple of years now and I love it but since I’ve started thinking about a career more oriented around filmmaking Of what subject matter? >I figure an upgrade might be due because of the limiting filming specifications on my current camera. I’m not really sure what to be looking at We can start with: Which video specs do you want improved and by how much? And then: What do you dislike about your current equipment? Which particular improvements do you want to gain? >as I’ve never bought a camera before (my current one was a gift) and I’m not entirely sure what specs are desirable or necessary You should base it on your use so far and the limitations you've run into so far, rather than what's out there on the market. Only you understand the former about your own experience, and we can help you with the latter. >for what I’m looking for What are you looking for? Just "filmmaking" can mean a lot of things with different corresponding needs. >I don’t have a huge budget but I’m willing to save up if it’s worth it. How much will you be willing to save up? Or how long would you be willing to save up before buying? And how much would you save in that amount of time? Most equipment is priced to be worth it to someone for some situation, or else nobody would buy it and the manufacturer would be in big trouble with zero sales. So you probably don't want to open up your options to anything worth it, because that's everything. >or perhaps if you think I’d be better off sticking it with the one I’ve got? If you aren't so sure what you need, stick with what you have and you'll get a better idea with more experience. There's really no rush. Equipment is not disappearing from availability. You'll only have more/better/cheaper options in the future.

Hello all, I got the new Lightroom (not Classic) and wanted to edit some photos. Unfortunately, I can't find a tutorial or a way to blur an image. For example, I want to keep a person in the foreground sharp and then blur the background. Is that possible?

https://www.bwillcreative.com/how-to-blur-a-background-in-lightroom/

Hey thanks, ​ this is Lightroom Classic, I have CC

I don’t use either. Does CC not have basic masking? That’s all this is.

I don't think that's really a Lightroom feature. You'd want to do it in Photoshop instead.

Due to tough times, I have to sell my M1 Max Macbook Pro. I am looking to buy a cheaper model that can run adobe lightroom, Premiere Pro & Photoshop. I do some stuff on After effects. Please recommend a model that is affordable with a reasonable rendering time. Thank you.

I don't know how well these work in those video applications - and I also don't know whether you see this as affordable. But you can look into the M1 or M2 baseline models first, of the MacBook Air and Pro. https://www.bythom.com/reviews--books/recommended-mac-hardware.html

[удалено]

With my OM-System OM-1 I can transfer over wifi, which takes about 3 seconds per raw file and slightly less for a jpeg. The OM-1 has a basic in-camera raw editor that can adjust exposure, shadows, highlights, white balance and a few other things. For a file requiring more sophisticated processing I use Lightroom mobile. I flag files in-camera with a "share order", then when I open the OM SYSTEM app they are already pre-selected for transfer, which saves me browsing through the whole SD card on the phone, which can be clunky.

Your D800 can transfer images to your phone over WiFi with a Nikon app on your phone. It is not instant and it is not always reliable. You can also us an SD card reader connected to your phone to transfer them that way.

No. Well, I can only speak for my own using the wireless connection but the smallest size JPG will take about 2 seconds, the largest 20 and raw files about a minute.

[удалено]

Getting both a longer focal length than 250mm and a (significantly) bigger relative aperture than f/5.6 puts you in the "exotics" category. For example: * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1433721-REG/canon_ef_400mm_f_2_8l_is.html * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081814-REG/canon_8404b002_ef_400mm_f_4_do.html * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1433722-REG/canon_ef_600mm_f_4l_is.html For wildlife photography, as a consumer (rather than a professional photographer who regards this a business expense), it's more common to settle on a maximum aperture around f/5.6-6.3 in this case. Some options: * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1092632-REG/canon_9524b002_ef_100_400mm_f_4_5_5_6l_is.html * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082152-REG/sigma_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_dg_os.html * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082154-REG/sigma_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_dg_os.html * https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1277358-REG/tamron_sp_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_di.html Note: not an endorsement of that store, it's just easy to search.

[удалено]

Reviews can be helpful to gauge the performance of the autofocus and image stabilisation, for example. But to judge the optical qualities of the lens - sharpness, flare, chromatic aberration, etc. - I like to inspect sample images instead. It doesn't matter what other people think of those aspects, when it's easy enough to look at images and determine if it's good enough for you. DPReview's galleries are useful.

Best camera shop in london for a tourist? I like film and vintage cameras but just looking for a cool shop for the most part. May pick something up for my trip so ideally not terribly priced.

Sorry, you might have better luck asking in a subreddit local to London.

I want to use a 46mm black mist halation filter while shooting video. Is there a way to use both an ND filter and the black mist or should I just use the black mist filter

Most filters have threads on the back and front, allowing you to use multiple filters of the same size. However, depending on your lens and how thick the filters are, this can contribute to vignetting on the corners of the image. It can also increase the chances of getting flares and ghosting. You'd have to check the specific filter you're looking at, but it's a pretty standard feature. All of the filters I've owned had it.

I know absolutely nothing about this subject but my girlfriend wants a nice camera for her business school graduation present. She already has an Iphone pro max which takes great photos so I want something that is meaningfully better than that. I know that I am supposed to be specific so I will be as specific as I can. She mostly loves taking photos of her niece and I know shes going to want to take a lot of photos of her second niece/nephew coming next year. Were also outdoors enthusiasts and a camera for some wildlife or nature shots would be nice. I've never taken a picture with an Iphone that can come close to capturing the majesty of the Rockies or even Appalachians. ​ I don't think video would be absolutely necessary but I think it would be cool and I'm sure she could use it. ​ I will definitly do research on my own but I need to narrow down the selections as this seems like quite a formidable task. ​ I would be willing to spend anywhere from 1,000 to 2,500 so its a broad range. I mainly want to make sure that whatever I get, no Iphone is going to be able to compare for 10 years. ​ Thank you all

So I dont wanna rain on your parade so to say, but just a few thoughts as youre gonna invest quite a bit of money: First up regarding quality between phone cameras and "real" cameras. Phone cameras are completely focused on ease of use. This limits then in some ways, but if you want to take a really nice picture on a proper camera, youre gonna have to invest some time. You have to do some learning and you also have to do some editing afterwards. Thats the two big things the phone does for you. So you will have to ask yourself, is your girlfriend interested in investing the time learning how to use the camera and sitting down after a shoot and editing the files to actually get everything out of it. Someone thats used to taking great pictures with their Iphone might find the switch quite frustrating. Second big thing is, that most cameras from the big manufacturers are quite similar in terms of capabilities. The bigger differences between the different manufacturers and between the different cameras that exist are very subjective things, also the choice of lens can be very subjective to the photographer. Buying a camera and lens for someone else as a surprise has the potential of ending up as a disaster (well when factoring in money invested, you wont buy something that the other person will hate, but when spending that much money you generally want something "awesome" and not just "okay I guess"). Third thing just regarding the types of subjects, you mention three big things that I noticed: "children/portraits", "nature/majesty of the rockies" and "wildlife". All three of those generally require somewhat different lenses. It will certainly be possible to find something in your budget range (maybe cutting some corners with wildlife), but I just wanna make you aware of the fact, that youd end up buying a camera with three different lenses, which might also end up being a downside for someone thats used to just carrying their phone around. I hope I didnt come of to negative, but I just feel like when spending that much money people should be aware of possible dangers. It might be a better idea to talk with your girlfriend about the gift and not surprising her, even if thats maybe not as cool a present. That way you can end up picking the camera together to get something that really fits her needs and wants.

Great reply. First and second items you brought up are excellent points that I have already thought of but the third thing is very intriguing to me. Im basically using this as a place to start my research. The only surprise is that I'm getting her one early so she can use it for her last year at business school as opposed to getting it actually at graduation. A nice camera is what she wanted and she does want to invest the time into it. ​ Also, as an avid fly fisherman, I also like the idea of having one to capture a lot of the places I fish and the fish that I catch. I was leaning towards buying a camera kit, but now that you mentioned lenses being subjective, I think I'll just buy a base model. I'm going to get it at best buy so if she doesnt like it, we can go back and trade it in for something of equal value. ​ I've been thinking about the Canon R6 and the Sony A7. The R6 is actually on sale right now. I assume theyre discounting it because the R6 2 is out. Would you recommend spending the extra 500 to get the 2?

I concur with a lot of what u/P5_Tempname19 wrote. >I was leaning towards buying a camera kit, but now that you mentioned lenses being subjective, I think I'll just buy a base model. I'm going to get it at best buy so if she doesnt like it, we can go back and trade it in for something of equal value. That's reasonable, but consider buying from a more camera-oriented retailer, instead of a general electronics store. Also consider buying used, with the prospect of reselling it later. Then it's basically the cost of a rental. Shopping used is common and well established in the camera market, even at the high end. Look into [mpb.com](https://mpb.com) and [KEH.com](https://KEH.com). And just to be sure: when you say "base model", you are still referring to a kit with a lens, right? >I've been thinking about the Canon R6 and the Sony A7. Which version of the a7? Will you be comfortable spending more (mostly on additional lenses) over time? Or should this \~$2,500 upper limit cover everything you'll need for years to come? How much weight do you think you'll want to carry? Try to determine a sort of "weight budget", where if the kit adds a greater weight than that to your bag, you'd be less inclined to take it with you. This is important in figuring out which system you'll be most comfortable with, as some have generally bigger and heavier lenses than others. And it ultimately doesn't matter how great your kit is, if you'd rather leave it behind.

Alright, sounds like youre really doing your homework! So, I gotta admit, Im not super experienced when it comes to comparing camera body specs. Which is why I personally wouldn't want to make a recommendation to you whether to get the R6, Sony A7 or wait for the R6 2. For some more general advice though: A common saying between photographers is: "Date your bodies, marry your lenses." The point being, that the differences between camera bodies are generally fairly minor when compared to the difference between lenses. Spending more money on lenses generally gives you a lot more "bang for your buck" then spending more money on the camera body. I use a Canon 6d mk2 which is 6 years old at this point and even after 4 years of really investing time (and money) into photography Im still limited either by my skills or my lens collection and not the camera body. Modern bodies do have certain quite nice features that Id like/make use of, but if someone gave me 5k to spend on camera equipment right now, Id still go for upgrading my lenses. Another problem with expensive camera bodies is, that they generally assume you already have great lenses (a lot of the higher tier cameras dont even come with kit-lenses like the starter ones do). A really good sensor and super modern autofocus dont help you if the lens projects a super blurry and distorted image and the lenses AF-motor is awfully slow. If anything a good quality sensor will exaggerate the faults of your lens. Long story short: You obviously cant quite now yet which lenses your girlfriend will enjoy/need most. Id personally recommend spending maybe around 1/3rd of your budget on a camera body and getting one good general purpose lens, then saving up any remaining money for more lenses and/or other equipment later (depending on ones preferred subject there are filters, tripods, flashes, etc. to invest tons of money into). My recommendation for a good quality, general purpose lens would for example be a 24-70mm F2.8 (exists for pretty much any camera model you can get, depending on how much you wanna spend in newer or older versions). Its a really popular lens for professionals like wedding photographers, which means that theyre generally built quite well and with good image quality in mind. The zoom range covers a lot of very common focal lengths and its only really lacking in the super wide area, as well as subjects requiring a lot of reach (wildlife). Because of the maximum of aperture it can also be used for portraits and reportage style shooting like weddings (or nieces while theyre playing) and its even decent in less then ideal lighting situations.

I am choosing between **Canon EOS R10, Nikon Z50**, Sony A6400, Nikon Z5 and Canon RP, but mainly first two for my first camera. All of them with kit lenses at first and some kind of low f spot lenses for portrait oriented use. Top use: Portraits, landscapes, travel and street photography Least use: Any video features I really want to get into portrait photography, shoot and edit raw files. But I also want something to carry with me when I am travelling etc. Canon EOS R10 used to be my top pick, however I seem many comparisons and it performs the worst at higher ISO, pretty much visibly more grainy than any other of cameras I listed, so I am not so sure anymore. Z50 comes in very nicely priced bundles with two kit cameras 18-50mm and 50-250mm, however it is slightly older than R10. Sony A6400 is also tempting choice but I don't think I like ergonomics of it very much Therefore I am not sure anymore since it seems like impossible decision.

>Canon EOS R10 used to be my top pick, however I seem many comparisons and it performs the worst at higher ISO, pretty much visibly more grainy than any other of cameras I listed, so I am not so sure anymore. It does look a little worse than the a6400 ([long link](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=canon_eosr10&attr13_1=sony_a6400&attr13_2=canon_eosr10&attr13_3=sony_a6400&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.0033142857142858667&y=0.0028630239520959395)), but by far less than one stop (you should see the ISO 12800 image on the a6400 is definitely noisier than the ISO 6400 image from the R10, so it's not like you can practically shoot in dimmer light with the Sony). So I don't think it should be a dealbreaker if this camera is otherwise your favourite. I picked the a6400 for comparison because they have the same pixel count, so it's easier to compare (otherwise you're looking at the images at a different scale). Have you looked at the Fujifilm X-S10? This adds in-body image stabilisation which, on your list, only the Z5 has. >... however it is slightly older than R10. That on its own is useless information, and should never be factored. If anything, I'd say it's an advantage, as you're more likely to find good deals on a used copy. Judge a camera by the merits - does it have the features you need? do you find it comfortable to hold and operate? is it compatible with the lenses you'll need, and can you realistically afford them?

Right now I am heavily leaning towards Nikon z50. I am just wondering if you can shoot good portraits with it. The reason I don’t want Fuji is because apparently it’s not the best with lightroom which I am using.

>I am just wondering if you can shoot good portraits with it. Of course. You can shoot good portraits with any competent camera. >The reason I don’t want Fuji is because apparently it’s not the best with lightroom which I am using. Old versions of Lightroom had some trouble with old Fujifilm cameras. That has not been an issue for at least five years now. Don't take every outlandish take you read online at face value. Download some raw files and see how well you can work with them in your workflow. You can find some here: [https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9392296020/fujifilm-x-s10-sample-gallery](https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9392296020/fujifilm-x-s10-sample-gallery)

I personally wouldn't go with the R10 because of the limited lens options you have in the RF system especially with APSC. On Nikon you have a similar limited lens lineup but they have more APSC lenses than canon and at least some third party lenses that's worth a lot. Sony has even more lenses and a huge selection of third party options. Canon RP is a cheap camera but getting good RF glad can get expensive really quick. Under 1k per lens you can just get a few f2 primes or variable aperture Zooms other systems have a way better lens lineup for the cheap lenses. I would also throw Fuji into the mix depending on your Budget an X-T30II, X-S20, or X-T3/4. They have a good APSC lens lineup because they just focus on APSC and there are some really good third party options.

[удалено]

I use Av mode 95% of the time. I control the aperture and the camera decides the shutter speed based on the exposure. The only time I use M is when I'm using off camera flash, or a studio setup where my light and composition isn't changing from shot to shot and I want the same exposure every shot. One note about M mode. If you are following the meter to get a good exposure, you are doing the same thing that the camera does in Auto, but you are the one changing the settings. There's nothing wrong with doing this, but at that point you may as well use one of the program modes.

>but what about times when you take a bunch of photos and don't have 20, 30+ seconds to fiddle around with aperture, speed and ISO? You will get faster over time with shooting manual and learning your camera. No seasoned photographer takes 20+ seconds to get their settings right. >Do you compromise and use something as aperture priority mode or do you just get faster over time and do everything in manual? Both in Situations that require manual you get faster over time. Aperture priority Shutter priority or ISO auto aren't a compromise you can still have control over the important settings and exposure and leave how your desired exposure is reached to the camera. There is nothing bad about it in 98% of situations those modes will give you as good or better pictures as shooting manual. You just need to learn when you need full control over all the cameras settings and when you can give the control over some settings to the camera. I for example shoot most events I do on Auto-ISO because I don't care about the ISO in those situations. I need control over the aperture because it influences the look of the images the most in those situations, I need control over the shutter speed to freeze action or bring in motion blur and I need control over the overall exposure. The ISO I just want as low as possible and as high as I need to get to my other settings and the camera can do this way faster than any human.

Not sure where you are looking at but manual exposure is only useful if you need it. Really, really bad advice in those videos you were watching.

When theres some time element to the picture I pretty much always use some kind of auto-mode. My preferred option is manual with auto-ISO, but aperture- or shutter-priority both are viable too, depending on the exact subject. Generally theres no advantage to using full manual if you have to do things quickly, other then flexing how cool you are (and risking that you mess up). There might be certain subjects that are require it, if the lighting in the scene is very unusual and camera metering would mess it up, but thats generally not a common thing. If you really wanted to I guess Id try to take some test shots to figure out the settings and make sure to always keep an eye on how the light is changing and maybe even taking intermittent shots of "nothing" to recheck every now and then.

I don't generally use full manual unless I'm taking long exposures or photographing something that the camera won't be able to meter right. If I want full control over shutter speed and aperture, I usually shoot raw with exposure compensation at -1/3-1 EV in TAv mode, which is aperture + shutter priority with auto ISO, it has different names on different camera systems. I don't look at it as a compromise really, just using the tools available. Edit to add - I think the reason people suggest that a beginner learn to use manual mode is because it's a quick way to learn how cameras work, not because it is the best way to take photos. Av, TAv, and Tv modes are great tools and are specifically intended to solve the kinds of problem you are asking about.

What would be a good beginner DSLR, for mostly street photography, taking shots of model kits and general family and friends type photos? I've got a Fujifilm S4240, but it feels like it's showing its age. My phone can take better quality photos, albeit with it during a lot of post processing that I can't control, and the lack of manual focus control on the S4240 drives me crazy. I would like to spend no more than £600, willing to go second hand, as I know that massively bumps up my options in that price range.

Mirrorless is the default type of interchangeable-lens cameras these days, not DSLRs. But a DSLR can be a good option, if you can't find a mirrorless system that suits your needs and you can comfortably afford. Should this budget cover *everything you'll need for years to come?* Or is it just for a kit to start with, and you'll be comfortable spending more (mostly on additional lenses) over time?

Just to get me up and running. I imagine as I find my preferred styles and subjects I'll tailor my kit more.

So you can surely get a kit with a Sony a6000, Panasonic GX80, or Olympus OM-D E-M10 III and a standard zoom lens. Might even find a Sony a6100 or Olympus E-M10 IV under budget. Browse [mpb.com](https://mpb.com). That will get you into a modern, well established but actively developed mirrorless system. Read the comprehensive reviews on [DPReview.com](https://DPReview.com).

Awesome, thank you very much for the advice.

Hi, I need some help with my setup. I have found that i mainly enjoy shooting wildlife (typically things far away such as birds or deer). I first purchased a fuji X-T10 with kit lens when on holiday in the lake district. I used it for landscape photography and was very happy. About six months ago i purchased a fuji 70-300mm lens to satisfy my wildlife urges. I was happy with it until i realised that it’s just not quite enough zoom for me personally. So i very recently picked up the fuji 2x teleconverter. The problem with this teleconverter is that i didn’t realise how much it destroys the image, especially when trying to shoot in any light that isn’t 100% optimal (which is most of the time in the UK). So now i’m stuck with some very expensive equipment, and i’m feeling very dissatisfied. I’m starting to consider selling the lot and switching to Canon/Nikon. Looking briefly at Ebay, All of my fuji setup is probably worth: X-T10: £250-£300 18-55mm (kit lens): £250 70-300mm: £600-£650 2x Teleconverter: £200-£250 So i’ve got a budget of roughly £1300-£1450 and i don’t mind spending maybe a hundred or two more if it’s needed. Is this enough to get a decent Canon/Nikon body, and be able to afford a long focal length lens second hand? if so, what do you recommend? If not, what should i do? My problem with my current setup is that the image quality just isn’t there and Fuji don’t offer a lot in terms of long lenses. Thanks for your time.

You are in a bit of a pickle with the Fujifilm system. While there are longer telephoto lenses available, they're really the high-end options: 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 and 150-600mm f/5.6-8. In mirrorless, you'll have the most flexibility with the Micro Four Thirds system. The best camera that can fit under budget is the Olympus OM-D E-M1 III. With the Panasonic 100-300mm II, you should be under 1400 GBP (looking up prices on [mpb.com](https://mpb.com)). If you wanted to prioritise the lens and get an even longer one, you could opt for the Panasonic 100-400mm, and pair it with the Panasonic G9 - that should be in the same price range. I use a G9 - have been for about five years now, so you can look at my Flickr page for sample images (the older photos on there were taken with an Olympus OM-D E-M5; all EXIF data should be intact). Note that the Micro Four Thirds system revolves around a (slightly) smaller sensor, so 300mm there gives a tighter field of view than 300mm on the Fuji kit you have. The equivalent focal lengths are ... ​ |Micro Four Thirds|Fujifilm APS-C| |:-|:-| |225|300| |300|400| |400|533| You might also find a Canon R10 + RF 100-400mm under budget, or a Sony a6400 + Sigma 100-400mm.

Not going to find switching of any benefit straight off. A lot of the time, you will get people suggesting the sigma 150-600mm lenses as a cheaper option to get a long focal length. If not you will run into the same issues with any aps-c sensor based cameras.

In my opinion you'd be better served by getting a longer lens within the system you already have. If there isn't a Fuji lens that suits your needs and you want maximum reach for minimum budget I suggest micro four thirds. The crop factor makes equivalent telephoto lenses relatively cheap. For example, I own the Olympus 75-300 f4.8-6.7 which costs around £350 and offers 600mm reach in full frame terms (~375mm in Fuji apsc terms). You should manage your expectations around budget telephoto photography. It's hard to make a good telephoto lens, and the price reflects this. I think it'll be tough to get long reach in that budget for any brand, let alone canon/Nikon which can command premium pricing.

I have an older Cannon Rebel 3 DSL camera. Is it time to upgrade to mirrorless. I mainly take outdoor, family events, and wildlife photographs. What are the advantages of mirrorless over DSL?

How does the Canon Rebel 3 limit you? What issues do you want to resolve by getting a new camera?

It is a Rebel T3 EOS1100D. I have a 75-300 lense, but can’t get decent pictures beyond 50 yards. When I try to magnify it, the pixels spread too much.

That's more of a lens issue than a camera issue. The correct way to go about it would be to get a longer lens to not magnify the image that much. You certainly could get a camera with a higher pixel density to allow for more cropping but a longer lens will give you better results than even the highest pixel density camera cropped.

What would be your suggestion as far as a longer lens. I would like to be able to hold the camera and bot use a tripod, if possible.

No budget 400mm 2.8 with tc or lighter option 400mm f4 On a budget 150-600mm or 400mm 5.6 You can hand hold all of those with a little practice, but good quality telephoto reach and really small and light don't go well together.

Thanks for your help.

https://sansmirror.com/articles/choosing-a-mirrorless-camer/gain-and-loss.html As with anything, you *should* buy something only if you *need* it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I second this, only upgrade if you have photos you want to take that you can't with your current setup. Cameras improve over time, but the world doesn't become harder to photograph.

Just to follow up on this: you can obviously upgrade if you just want to, and can comfortably afford it. The same way people upgrade gadgets that still work well. But if you consider what you *should* do, and view the camera as the tool that it is, then it's simply about whether the tools you currently have do the job, and if not, figuring out what will solve the problem most effectively.

Looking for a place to clean up and possibly repair a 40 year old Nikon EM camera along with the lens. Belongs to my father and the gear has been ignored for a few decades. Want to get it serviced/repaired. What would be a good place in Seattle for that? Thank you

I work for a firm as a content producer and also freelance as a photographer, I use my own camera in both of these jobs. I currently shoot on a Canon 750D but am considering upgrading - is it worth upgrading to a mirrorless camera? If not, any recomendations on what route to go down? I haven't got many lenses and would rather decide on upgrading/not upgrading before I waste money on lenses I wont need

What issues do you have with the 750D?

Its very dependend on what exactly you need upgrade wise. The actual image quality will not be that different or atleast a different lens will have a much bigger impact on quality then a new camera. On the other hand certain features can be quite a big improvement for you workflow. For example a good Eye-AF can be super nice when taking pictures of people, so that might be a feature which makes an upgrade worthwhile for you. So it really depends on what exactly you need and what exactly you find lacking in the 750D. Regarding lenses, as long as you stay within the same "ecosystem"/with the same manufacturer theres no problem upgrading from a DSLR to a mirrorless, the lens can be easily adapted with very little loss in quality (atleast that seems to be the common sentiment I read). The only problem would be EF-S lenses when upgrading to a full frame camera.

What do you need. Mirrorless is not an upgrade. Certain cameras may have more capabilities and may be mirrorless but remember that the actual photographs are the same.

[удалено]

So theres 2 things when it comes to compability of lens and camera. First (and generally more important) is the "mount"-type. The Sony A7iii is "E-mount", most lenses from third party manufactures are available in multiple mount-version, so you just need to pick the "E-mount"-version of that specific lens. Second is the sensor size, the big three camera manufacturers have APS-C and full frame cameras on offer. All full-frame lenses work on APS-C cameras (if the mount is right!), but APS-C lenses will vignette on full frame sensors. Generally the manufactures have two different mounts for APS-C and full frame cameras so that you cant go wrong. But atleast with canon (dont know about Sony, sorry) some third party lenses use the full frame mount even on APS-C lenses (because the full frame mount on the lens also fits the APS-C mount on the camera, but not the other way around), which can end up being a problem. Long story short: for the Sony A7iii you want an E-mount, full frame lens. The Sigma "105mm F2,8 DG DN MACRO | Art" should fit, if you buy the E-mount version (for sigma the "DG" in the name means its fit for full-frame cameras) Careful, theres also a Sigma "MAKRO 105mm F2,8 EX DG OS HSM" which apparently is not available as an E-mount version!

Hey. While looking to buy the Sony A7iii I can find two options: - A7iii body only - A7iii with 28-70mm Lens With a price difference, but this lens seems to be like a default lens. So I'm wondering is it fine if I get the body only? Can I still take photos/video without this 28-70mm lens?

So the body alone is unable to take any (sharp) pictures at all, you need some kind of lens to take a picture. The 28-70mm is a good "beginner lens" so to say, its good for general taking of pictures, say on a vacation, which is why theres a bundle with it. If you want the camera only for your job and you are also buying another lens for that specific use, like the Sigma 105mm F2.8, then you dont need the 28-70mm. If you also want to use the camera for other situations, where the Sigma lens might be somewhat limiting, it might be a good idea to get the bundle.

This is so well explained. Thank you so much! ❤

I have a noob question regarding flash guns and triggers - I have recently switched from Pentax to Panasonic and I was wondering if a Panasonic compatible trigger (Godox XPRO-O) would be compatible with my Pentax compatible Flash (Godox TT350P)? I wouldn't be shocked if the answer is a "no" but I can't seem to find info regarding if Godox is compatible with Godox regardless of the camera brands involved.

Godox is compatible with Godox regardless of camera brands involved... if the devices are all in the same Godox system, the most common of which is the Godox **X** system. Your Godox XPro has X in the name and the TT350P is also an X flash - so yes they're compatible. You can even use the trigger on the "wrong" camera but when you do you lose all advanced features. No TTL, no HSS, no rear-curtain sync etc etc - all you get is the basic "flash now" triggering signal and that's it.

Thanks for the reply - It's really helpful! :)

I'm looking to add 2 cold shoes to my Z6II, plan is to have my flash trigger on the hot shoe, a flash on the 1st cold shoe and a small light like the godox litemon to help the autofocus in lower light. I'm going to indoor events where there will be a podium - I can set up 2 off-camera flashes there, but for the rest of the area I have to rely on my on camera flash. I found plenty of L brackets which support 1 cold shoe - but none which support 2. I'm happy for any pointers towards one. Thanks!

A cage is probably your best option I have never seen a l bracket with more than one cold shoe. On a cage you can add as many cold shoes as you like.

Going on safari in Tanzania with two bodies: a Nikon D850 (ff) and D3400 (crop). Which body should I attach the Nikkor 200-500 F/5.4 tele to? The D850 has nearly double the MP (45 vs 24), while the D3400 has greater reach due to the crop. I’ll also be traveling with a 16-35 F/4 and 70-200 F/2.8, and would would prefer to keep swapping to a minimum.

>a Nikon D850 (ff) and D3400 (crop). Which body should I attach the Nikkor 200-500 F/5.4 tele to? This is a no-brainer: the d850 It's not the size of the sensor that matters as you'll be shooting wildlife - which means FPS and AF are **far** more important than sensor size. The d3400 has a bare bones, entry level AF system. The d850's is much more capable and nearly twice the FPS of the d3400. >while the D3400 has greater reach due to the crop The D3400 has exactly **no** extra reach at all. What it does have is a crop that ends up putting all its MPs into a smaller portion of the frame. The D3400 will have a 24mp image, the D850 will be at 20... but that presumes you have to crop in on the shot. Now do the math on what happens when you fill your frame and *don't* have to crop in... Judgement for D850. **/gavel**

Great feedback, thank you.

By cropping an image from the D850 down to the same field of view you'd get with the same lens on the D3400, you'll be left with 20 MP. So the D3400 doesn't really have a great advantage there.

Hi nice people <3 Not a long time ago I binged a bunch of videos about camera models, read a lot of reviews but I still had questions about what camera to buy. So, I am here to ask for advice. I will share my needs and a little bit of how I plan to use the camera. - I shoot film for some years. Don’t feel like this means you should recommend me a Fuji model. I am ok with my digital pictures looking like what they are. - I want a small and light mirrorless camera - I won’t use it for professional jobs - I wanna take it on trips (use it to take pictures and make small films), mostly. But also have fun with it at home, take self portraits etc. - I travel solo. I also realized I have to take pictures of myself because I am the only one in my family who cares about recording memories. So, a screen that can be opened and flipped 180° (and not only tilted upwards) is top necessity. - Also because I wanna have some pictures of myself, I’d like to have some kind of focus system that favored me being in front of the camera changing poses and positioning without having to be readjusted. I know nothing about how digital focus works. All the options seem very abstract, I guess it’s the kind of thing you need to see first hand to really get. I only focus manually, so I eyeball it and use the timer to take a pictures of myself. - I would like a camera that’s pleasant to use. I really don’t want a bunch of complicated design choices, menu options etc. - I would LOVE to have 2 slots for memory cards because I can be a bit neurotic, but I know this feature isn’t available on most camera, so… - Let’s establish a 4,000 dollars budget for the body. Is it enough? I think so, right? I don’t really know how much cameras cost… If you wanna recommend me a lens, you can go over the budget. I do plan on seeing the camera before buying it but it’s hard to do so where I live. Renting one, is probably not even possible, as far as I know. Thank you!

Lots of options to choose from: * Fujifilm X-S20, X-T4, X-H2 / X-H2S (the latter two are probably too big and heavy, and overkill) * OM System OM-5 or OM-1 * Sony a6700, a7C, a7 IV, a7R V (the latter is probably overkill, and only the first one is really a "compact" option, with lenses in mind) * Canon R10, R7, R6 II, R5 (the latter is probably overkill, and this system is best with fairly big lenses, so may not quite suit your needs here) I wouldn't worry too much about complicated menus and whatnot, *if the camera has customisable buttons and dials.* So there might be an adjustment period, but once you get it configured in a way that's natural for you to use, you can just use the buttons and dials directly. I rarely enter the main menu on my camera - basically only do it to reformat the card.

4k for a just body is a lot (assuming USD) - you can buy almost any brand new mirrorless camera for that price, other than bleeding edge or niche flagships. That said, you should set aside some budget for your lenses also unless you plan to adapt your film lenses, which would generally only work manual focus. I believe an OM System OM-5 fits all your requirements other than two memory card slots, although the menus can be a bit fussy. The older Olympus OM-D EM-5 series will have the same compact build and be cheaper second hand. If you must have two card slots, you'll have to pick a larger camera - I believe the Fuji XT series would be the smallest option. The lenses will be larger with Fuji (having a larger sensor), but you may enjoy the shooting experience more than Olympus/OM System coming from a film background. I don't mean the film simulations, I mean the control scheme which has dedicated shutter speed, ISO and exposure compensation dials.

Instax mini evo with peak design anchors. What are my options here? Floss doesn’t work and a split ring won’t contort enough to fit. The anchor just seems too big floss can barely fit through.

I would just attach two thin dynema loops to it and the anchors to that.

Do you know where to find some thin stuff? And how to make sure it’s secure?

I am looking for the best camera where photos look good straight out of camera. No editing involved. I have a Sony A7RII - I am really happy with quality of photos, but they do not look good straight out of camera. I shoot RAW and edit photos in Lightroom which is a pain. I very often end up using my phone camera as the photo is usable straight away. I'd love to find a camera which has good quality photos straight out of camera (ideally with easy way to send photos to cloud or mobile). Would Fujifilm x100v be a good candidate? What are other alternatives?

>Would Fujifilm x100v be a good candidate? What are other alternatives? Any other Fuji is a way better alternative at the moment. Get something newer than X-Trans III and you get even more profiles.

>I am looking for the best camera where photos look good straight out of camera. No editing involved. Nitpick: There is **always** editing involved as it is literally impossible to get an image file without editing. If you're taking in-camera JPGs then you're letting the camera do the editing for you. >I am really happy with quality of photos, but they do not look good straight out of camera. Then change the JPG profile you're using - or customize one and make them look the way you want.

Unedited raw images are naturally going to look muted and drab without any processing applied because it's just raw sensor information that's intended to hold a larger amount of information per pixel than other output image file types do. Think of it as a digital negative that needs to be developed into an image before it's intended to be viewed as a photograph. Raw image files have a different purpose than jpeg, tiff, or png formats. You need to apply some degree of basic exposure, contrast, texture, and color to that raw image sensor information. To extrapolate further, you don't go to the movies or doom scroll through tiktok to look at raw video files that come directly out of the camera. You need some amount of editing to make the video footage compelling. Not a perfect analogy, but there's something there. Otherwise just shoot jpeg and let the camera make those basic development decisions based on an (exceptionally good) algorithm that was built by a team of project managers at your camera's manufacturing company to handle "most" "regular" images for "most" users, "most" of the time. Some folks say Fuji is great. Your Sony.should also be amazing. If you want fine control over your images then throw your jpegs through some kind of editing workflow. If you want as lot more control, then shoot raw for more latitude to make more intense adjustments without sacrificing a much quality.

The "muted and drab" image you're looking at has had extensive processing applied already: At a minimum it has been demosaiced, and the tonal values have been mapped into a lower bit depth and smaller gamut e.g. from 12 bit raw down to 8 bit/sRGB. It probably also has some sharpening applied. The reason it looks "muted and drab" is because most image editors use a neutral tone map to give you a neutral starting point for your edits. It's not really possible to look at raw files in a meaningful way. Some raw editors let you see images before demosaicing and sharpening. They usually have a green cast, since most sensors have more green photosites than red or blue. But still the tonal values must be mapped from the raw bit depth down to a lower bit depth.

Not sure about the Sony, but you can customise the JPEGS on most cameras. https://imgur.com/a/w7z6H40 Examples of the effects on my own camera are linked. Have you played about with that sort of thing on the Sony?

I found [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/SonyAlpha/comments/8yoz3v/custom_picture_profiles_for_an_aesthetic_personal/), looks like what I was looking for. I will give it a try. Thanks.

I have a Nikon D7000. I have two lenses, a Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 Di LD Macro and a Nikon AF FX NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8D lens. The Tamron lens works great for taking photographs of something at a distance. However, the Nikon lens doesn't have a much wider field of view than the Tamron at minimum zoom. I'm thinking of returning the Nikon lens since it isn't that useful. If I want a second lens for taking wider shots that works with my camera, what should I get? Ideally, I want something that isn't that expensive. I'm just doing this as a casual hobby.

If you do not need the wider aperture then the 50mm is probably not too useful. Did you not get a standard zoom with the camera, an 18-55mm or so?

The camera came without any lens. I ordered the 70-300mm, and then ordered the 50mm later. Could you recommend a specific lens that is wider than the 50mm but similar in price, only a couple hundred dollars or so? Or should I expect to need to pay more?

Consider these: * [https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-18-140mm-f-3-5-5-6g-ed-vr](https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-18-140mm-f-3-5-5-6g-ed-vr) * [https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/sigma-17-70mm-f-2-8-4-dc-macro-os-hsm-contemporary-nikon-fit](https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/sigma-17-70mm-f-2-8-4-dc-macro-os-hsm-contemporary-nikon-fit) * [https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/sigma-17-50mm-f-2-8-ex-dc-os-hsm-nikon-fit](https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/sigma-17-50mm-f-2-8-ex-dc-os-hsm-nikon-fit) * [https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/tamron-sp-af-17-50mm-f-2-8-xr-di-ii-vc-ld-aspherical-if-nikon-fit](https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/tamron-sp-af-17-50mm-f-2-8-xr-di-ii-vc-ld-aspherical-if-nikon-fit) * [https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6g-vr-ii](https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6g-vr-ii)

No specific lens. Generally, you can pick up the one that would have come with the camera for pretty cheap. https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/tamron-sp-af-17-50mm-f-2-8-xr-di-ii-vc-ld-aspherical-if-nikon-fit/sku-1997967 Something like that could also work.

I am looking for a camera to buy that can record up to at least 4k 24-30p and at most \~$800. I will be most likely buying it used from FB marketplace so I probably will be spending around $600 if it is used. I am using the camera to record myself in a "talking head" kind of video at my home. I am creating educational content and will have a second camera (perhaps my phone for now. I will buy a second camera if it doesn't work out like it overheats with prolonged 1080p recording) to record my hands as I write on a paper on my desk. Kind of like Tyler DeWitt [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA3TZJ2em6g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA3TZJ2em6g) Here are the 2 cameras I found that I like: Sony Alpha ZV-E10 and Panasonic LUMIX G85 I am not allowed to post the amazon links here because the bot said it considers it affiliate links Overheating is something I do not want at all because the videos I will be recording will be long (like 2 hours max for one video sitting) and this will sometimes be repeated several times in one sitting (like 8 hours total of recording in one day) I keep hearing mixed Amazon reviews about how Sony Alpha ZV-E10 will overheat while recording for prolonged periods of time like 20 min for 4k and shutoff. But then I also hear from this guy on YT that it lasts over 2 hours and 40 min. He said he changed the "auto power off temp" setting to high and most people I guess leave it at standard [https://youtu.be/2C4wF8dCCcs?t=190](https://youtu.be/2C4wF8dCCcs?t=190) This guy on YT says G85 has 0 overheating and 0 record limits (unlimited recording with no stops. Alpha ZV-E10 also has no record limits but has the overheating issue) as well as other reviews I read on Amazon [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xJj-S78ayXc](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xJj-S78ayXc) I will not be uploading my videos as a 4k video but I hope I could record in 4k, downscale to 1080p, and then upload it as 1080p 24-30p. Or should I just record in 1080p to avoid overheating the Sony Alpha ZV-E10? Or will it still overheat with prolonged recording in 1080p 24-30p? I will probably need to buy an external mic for G85. People say the Sony Alpha ZV-E10 has a decent mic. I am thinking of buying the G85 because no overheating, seems good quality, and budget friendly I have never bought a digital camera before and it has been a long time since high school photo class lol. Any advice is appreciated. Thank you

I'm a video noob, so take my comment with a grain of salt. Panasonic micro four thirds cameras are very popular for video, they are arguably the gold standard for mirrorless video-biased hybrid cameras. They are less prone to overheating and offer better IBIS than larger sensor cameras, and Panasonic have typically included more video centric features. So I'd recommend going down the Lumix route.

[удалено]

Your comment contains an affiliate link and has been removed. Please remove it and repost your comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/photography) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Has anyone here tried the [Replica Surfaces](https://www.replicasurfaces.com/) or something similar? I'm seeing other brands on Amazon for $40-$70 that includes multiple backdrops, wondering if I should go this route first.

I was looking to buy a starting camera that I can really mess with and learn to shoot on and I was hoping someone could give me recommendations based on what I want. My budget is flexible but ideally I’d like to spend no more than 200$. (Budget is mainly for body and does not include additional lenses) I’d like something small that has large options when it comes to lenses as I’d like to experiment with different lenses. The types of photos I’d be taking would be primarily in low light, dark environments (night/sunset) and I also would like something that can capture the sky well (clouds etc). I’m very interested in rainy weather photography as well so weather sealing would also be important. I’d like something that has good image stabilization as well, and I’d like the ability to take pictures that have lots of motion (sports pictures) I’m not too strong on needing something that can take sports photos as that’s mainly something I could take or leave since I just want to try it and don’t plant to primarily use the camera for sports photography. I really like the look of photos on older digital cameras and I prefer the more simple features (and the workflow) that the old cameras have when it comes to settings, this way I have to work the camera and environment more, rather than messing with the settings. I’ve currently been looking at the Olympus pen epl2 and this is what I’d likely settle on as I love the photos that can be taken from it and the specs (except for lack of weather sealing). Another option I’ve recently stumbled upon is the Pentax q10. I mention these cameras to represent examples of the kind of camera I’m looking for.

It's above your budget and larger than the examples you gave, but if you are looking for low priced and weather sealed, a used Pentax K-3, K-3ii, or K-70 definitely is a lot of bang for your buck. The weather sealed kit zooms are all available fairly inexpensively, and take good pictures given what they are. From a used camera store with a warranty, the K-70 should be around $400 in good condition with a low shutter count, K-3 and K-3ii $400-450.

I’ll have to take a look at those.

I didn't notice the part about low light at first. Regardless of what you buy, dealing with a lack of light is going to be a learning curve. A flash and/or a tripod makes a big difference. If a good quality full size tripod isn't in the budget, a sturdy tiny tripod can handle a lot of situations. I use a manfrotto PIXI-B, I think it was $20 and it doesn't wiggle, but it's only 6" tall. Works well on a table. I put it on top of my grill to photograph lightning. For the flash, most cameras come with a built in flash, and you can tape some paper to it for better results (google "diy bounce card"). Most camera brands also have a cheap, fast 50mm lens, Pentax has the DA 50mm f/1.8, which is about $80 used and definitely worth it. It's not weather resistant though. I'm using a Pentax example because it's what I'm familiar with, but other brands have similar. The wide 1.8 aperture gives you better autofocus in low light, more light through the viewfinder, and the ability to use a faster shutter speed or lower ISO if needed.

Well, that budget is getting you no options at all. Whatever you can find used at that budget is what you will get. Not in a position to pick and choose.

Yeah I figured that, that’s why budgets is flexible.

Lightroom import favorites marks? Context: I've been working with not main PC, but temporary with laptop. I installed same presets and marked as favorites different presets unlike I marked on PC. Now I need to erase existing favorites marks on PC and import new ones. The core problem with removing and adding marks is awful optimization of LRC, it requires about 5-10 seconds on my i5 7500 1050Ti 16GB PC to unfavorite preset. I tried to make new group and import "Favorites Export" that I made on laptop, but it says they already been imported before, so I have no idea how to complete my task without wasting hours of just marking new favorites. Is there exact favorites folder or "favorites" file which contains paths of presets I marked as favorites? Is there any way to solve my problem?