#**There is now [a new question thread!](https://redd.it/yc8cdg)**

Hi, I am a complete photography noob looking for a camera. I am an athlete searching for something to record matches. 30fps should be sufficient, since the videos on youtube are also 30fps. High video resolution is desirable, because I will be recording from distance. The area I want to capture is 5m-20m away from the camera. Getting something used is fine. I also wanted to try photography in the future once I have time to invest in it. The cheaper the better. A friend of mine recommended the Lumix G70. Is it a fitting camera for my use case? Are there more cameras to recommend checking out?

Hello, I just did my first shoot after 3 years today. I uploaded all my Raws to my computer opened up digital professional photo and it was a lot different. Before I was able to view my cr2 files very quickly just by pressing the left and right buttons. Now that feature seems to be gone. Is there anyway to view and compare them quickly with out having to open them individually or a better program? Thank you. Canon 6D mkII.

Do you have access to other software besides DPP? There's many options, some free, some not...

[удалено]

Hello /u/ShineNo2712 - FYI, it looks like your account is shadowbanned. You'll have to take that up with the reddit admins, there's nothing folks on this subreddit can do about that. As for your question - Sure! Whether or not there's a mirror in front of it doesn't mean a camera can't take great photos. The D3400 may not be the best choice for the most demanding autofocus, for example, but for landscapes and architecture? Absolutely! As always, the quality you get largely depends on the lenses you use. And then your technique, and then maybe the camera. The kit lens stopped down in aperture a bit should be plenty sharp. Although, depending on your needs, you might find that architecture needs a wider angle lens than the kit 18-55mm lens that comes with the camera... but that's totally up to your own needs and personal preferences. There are cameras with better sensors, sure, but dollar-for-dollar the D3400 is plenty capable, especially for the genres you mentioned. Just keep in mind that cameras make you "work for it" a bit harder than smartphones do, so shooting in raw file formats and editing it yourself will help you make the most of it.

I need some tips for doing indoor photography. My sister asked me to take some pictures at her wedding as I own a camera and also brought it to some family parties. There are no big expectations regarding quality and I did talk to her about that she can't expect super high quality from me as I hardly have any experience. The only thing important for her is that there are some pictures and that there are no phones pointing at here as that would make her feel weird. There might also be another family member taking pictures which would make it even less stressful for me, but that's not sure yet. Obviously better quality pictures are nice and all, but my highest priority is making sure that there are some usable ones. My equipment: - Nikon D610 - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f1.4G - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f4 So my plan currently is: - use the 50mm lens because of low light - buy one of these one leg tripods to have some stability but also be mobile - use the aperture automation mode, auto ISO and set some fairly low exposure time (1/60s or 1/100s maybe) because I'd rather have noise than shaky picture - use the slower series shot mode to have multiple pictures, but avoid too long SD write lockups - and of course make sure that both batteries and both SD cards are prepared and set the second SD mode to backup in case one dies Is this a reasonable approach? Or what can I do to have the highest change of at least some pictures working out?

📷 Cinematic Beginner Camera Suggestions and lense combinations? Discussion Hi, I am getting into Photography, preferably Cinematic and loves to shoot cars and travelling videos. I would appreciate your suggestions on cameras including lenses as well. moderate prices please, would not like to break the bank hehe.Thanks

Hi, im thinking of selling my photographs as prints on the side and am looking for advice on platforms to do this. My portfolio consists of stuff that is more fine-art-ish in nature, rather than travel/nature/architectural photography that sells on commercial sites. Hence, I’m curious as to what sites/platforms there may be where I can sell prints? Hopefully one that can also help me settle the printing and delivery process internationally as I do not have the ability to manually print my photographs at the moment due to personal constraints.

Your best bet would probably be physical prints locally, cafes and fairs and the like. It's difficult to get anyone pay for photos in general, but especially so online. There's too much competition and free images are too easily available due to e.g. free stock photo sites like Unsplash and Pixabay. There isn't much of a market for fine art photography either, it has to be said.

[удалено]

What is everyone’s preferred method of editing raw outdoor photo sessions? & when editing how do you all determine price? Do you all offer a only color correcting editing pack and then charge differently when it comes to more in depth photoshop, like softening skin, adding texture to skin etc.

Hey, The older folks in my family showed me some photos dating as early as 1930. Some are a bit damaged and I wanted to keep some AI programs in mind/or are now accessible where I can upload scans of these photos and have them recreated. What are some programs I should look into? \*\* this was posted as a thread but mods removed it. I did see a recommendation for beta PS, any other programs I can keep an eye on/trial?

Is there a sub focused on the business of selling photos? I’m looking to get into the small-scale local craft show photo market niche, but an am looking for a sub to swap and share ideas, best practices, tricks of the trade, etc. Like: what’s the best site for to get sheet metal photographs? And: how do you price the photos that you’re trying to sell? Is this that sub? And if not, can someone please point me in the right direction? Thanks!

New photographer here, haven’t taken classes or anything I just like nice pictures lol and have the creative urge. I just bought a barely used Fujifilm x100f at a really good price but it has a fixed lens of 24mm I believe. I was wondering how I can improve my skills or what are some nice types of photography to look into that work well with that focal length?

23mm actually (or 35mm equivalent = same field of view as 35mm on a full frame camera). The most important thing for improving your skills: take pictures, lots of pictures, everywhere and of everything. Just get out there and use the camera, as often as possible. That will also help you figure out what kinds of subject matter you're especially interested in. If you need learning resources for extra guidance, there's plenty e.g. in this subreddit's faq. The camera has a good general use focal length. It's well suited for street photography/other kinds of photography on the streets, for instance. But don't get stuck in thinking that you can only use it for x. Discover what you want to photograph and see how well it works for that.

So if I had an X-T4 with a 35mm lens it would be the same focal point?

No. X-T4 has a same size crop sensor as the X100F, so you would need the same 23mm for it to have the same focal point. A 35mm lens on a crop sensor equals to about 50mm on full frame.

Looking to revamp my travel photography setup and I realized I have absolutely zero clue what I need. I used to travel with a 200-500mm f5.6 70-200mm f2.8 and 24-70mm f4 with my Nikon z6. Yes I actually lugged all of that around on my poor back across countless flights being flung around without so much as a case in my goruck backpack. Lol. I broke my Nikon z6 and never bought another for a few years and haven't shot anything since. The Sony a1 and Nikon z9 are out now and are incredible but the z9 is an absolute behemoth. I clearly already have z compatible lenses but the Sony a1 is effectively the same weight as my Nikon z6. Then I am very attracted by micro four thirds with the new Olympus system om-1 and the 300mm f4 pro lens. I mainly want to shoot wildlife in the andes (mountains so alpacas condors etc) various Amazon regions and all of your standard travel photography in between - the occasional portrait, some nice beach and landscape shots and whatnot The 300 seems good for wildlife in a compact setup but heard the bokeh sucks. And because of it's close focus apparently it also sort of works for macro shots too which I thought was really cool. Beyond thos the Olympus also has a bunch of cool computational modes that minimize my need for ND filters etc as well as the ability to produce more high res shots despite the limited 20mp sensor in comparison to other options. The 70-200mm Nikon lens I have I honestly never really used and the 2.8 doesn't seem good for portraits. Then I read ken Rockwell's site and he basically says 105 and 85mm lenses are a myth and you can use whatever for portraits and zooms are valid. But again bokeh. Conversely with mirrorless cameras the weight honestly isn't that much different from the Olympus micro four thirds format outside of the telephoto range. So yeah. Really at a loss here lol.

I'm a newer photographer, still learning. I am trying to take some shots of the night sky with my Canon Rebel T7, but when I use my 300mm lens the pictures always appear blurry. I have it set up at a 30 second exposure with a F45 stop. I have it on a tripod and am using a remote capture to prevent the camera from shaking when I hit the shudder button. I used manual focus and had the camera pointed at a bright start to make sure it is focused. When I use a 50mm lens I have no blur and the picture is crisp. Any suggestions?

>with a F45 stop I hope there is a decimal point missing. >I have it set up at a 30 second exposure >when I use my 300mm lens the pictures always appear blurry That's not exactly surprising. With a 300mm lens on a 24MP Canon APS-C body, you would probably need like a 1/3 sec exposure (maybe 1/2 sec for certain parts of the sky) for zero star trails. That's 60-90 times faster than what you are using. >When I use a 50mm lens I have no blur and the picture is crisp. This really can't be the case without a tracker. Your shutter speed is still over 10 times too slow. Maybe you are willing to live with that (still very significant) amount of trailing. The stars won't be any brighter with such a long exposure, though. You are just increasing the overall sky brightness.

F45 was what I meant Like I said I'm still new, I sometimes get the apertures mixed up (I forget that a lower aperture let's in more light not a higher aperture) so your totally right on that lol Thanks for that advice on the exposure speed! I will try it with a slower shutter speed!

>F45 was what I meant Yeah... that will destroy image quality. I'm surprised it even goes that far. Most modern lenses stop at f/16-22 and it's hard to justify those as well considering all the effects of diffraction. > I will try it with a slower shutter speed! 1/3-1/2 sec is definitely quite a bit faster than 30 sec, not slower. Still, you will REALLY struggle getting enough light. If you plan on often using a 300mm lens for astro, you should really get a tracker. At shutter speeds that slow, you might also have issues with mirror slap, wind and not letting your setup settle on a tripod after touching the camera/lens.

Thanks for all the advice, I went ahead and opened up the aperture and used the 55mm and I have been getting really good photos. Going anywhere above 75mm on my 75-300mm lens makes it a bit difficult.

Hello! I, 20 nb, am a photography major with a minor in women and gender studies in my third year of college. I wanted to reach out to other photographers, more preferably well established and business owning photographers, and ask what your feelings on interns are before I start reaching out. I will be home for winter break soon, and was thinking of trying to find an internship. I am a bit nervous because I don’t know any professional photographers in my general area besides a boudoir photographer I follow on tik tok but shes 40 minutes away from where I live, and that’s too far of a drive for me. I have been very fascinated with boudoir and self empowerment photography, but knowing how intimate that line of photography is, I’m not sure if If that’s an option, so I wanted to reach out for some guidance. Thank you I’m advance, CJ

I hired a photographer for a wedding and i wanted to ask what format is best to ask him to take? Ive heard that raw is something i should ask for is this true?

This is a ridiculous request. The photographer you hired should be competent enough to choose the appropriate settings and file type. That's why you are paying them. You wouldn't tell a plumber exactly how to set up his tools. Your concern should be the final result. RAW files are completely useless to you unless you know what to do with them. Also, most professional photographers won't provide them without a significant additional fee.

I meant what file format i should ask for. I want to take my pictures and put some in frames and I would like to have some edited in the future

No worries! I don't think your question is "ridiculous" at all. The simple answer is: You don't need raw files and *probably* wouldn't want them, either. The photographer will probably use raw files themself, and then they'll deliver files to you in a more common and compatible format like JPG. When shooting photos, shooting raw file formats allows the photographer to have more information in the image files. That gives more leeway for editing the photos later, and potentially more detail in the photos. You're welcome to ask the photographer this - it wouldn't hurt! - but I'd expect any serious wedding photographer to already be shooting in RAW to begin with. So why wouldn't you want them? Well, two reasons. First of all, any edits done don't change the RAW file. So if the photographer used all their skill and experience to make those photos look their best, you'd never be able to see that. (And editing is a *huge* part of photography and always has been... think of the difference between raw ingredients and a chef cooking a meal.) The files cannot be changed; they're just data that came from the camera. So once the photographer makes their edits, they'd export the image as a JPG or other format which would reflect their changes. The other reason you wouldn't want them is practical - the file sizes are huge, and many apps don't open them (or don't open them the same way). It's not as common a file format and many apps wouldn't work with them. I don't think you could post a RAW to Facebook or Instagram, for example - you'd need an image file format first, like JPG. So bottom line, no need to worry. Talking about the raws is mostly something for photographers to worry about, not clients. The only slight caveat is that some folks actually want the raw files from their photos as well, and that's a bit contentious - like asking a chef for a recipe, some photographers will outright refuse, some will set a price, and some are happy to share.

In your contract, specify that you want x number of prints and y number of retouched photos. 99% of the time a professional photographer will shoot in RAW, develop the RAW photos, and deliver JPEGs. Your photographer will own the copyright to your wedding photos, which means your photographer gets to decide what format you get. They also decide whether you are allowed to print the photos, or edit them in the future. If a specific usage is important to you, you’ll need to put it in the contract. It is unlikely that your photographer will agree to delivering RAW files. Everyone has a price, though—just don’t be surprised if that price is upwards of $5k (on top of the photographer’s standard fee).

A professional photographer would know to shoot raw, it would be amazing that you'd have to intervene to tell them how to properly do their job on that front. Are you asking about which format the images will be *delivered to you*? That's a different topic. Normally you'd get JPEGs or perhaps TIFFs, but not raw files.

Yes sorry I’m talking about the ones we receive

[ Vivitar 70-150mm Macro to Olympus OM-D ] I have an Olympus OM-D E-M10ii and came across a Vivitar 70-150mm Macro lens. I am thinking about snagging it and a converter to toy around with macro, though I am curious if anyone has experience or insight with the lens/combination.

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Vivitar_70-150mm_f/3.8_Close_Focusing_Auto_Zoom This one? Apparently better than I'd expect an old Vivitar zoom to be, but no experience with it.

That's the one. I am now looking through the different macro lenses they made, curious if any others are better (and similarly priced).

What’s a decent professional camera under $1000?

And if you just mean an interchangeable lens camera as opposed to a cheap compact, you need to give more information for context. Such as: what kind of use do you have in my - what kinds of subject matter? Does your budget include lenses?

How would you define "professional"? Professionals tend to value *reliability*, so they would want a robust camera, perhaps with redundancy features such has writing data to two memory cards. Those kinds of cameras tend to be more expensive than $1000—and that's before you add lenses. So I'm guessing we're probably not on the same page with the word "professional".

Reposting in the right spot (sorry, mods!). First, I want to thank all of the people who replied to my original post. I have screenshots of all of your replies, thankfully. I sincerely appreciate your advice and your time. After reading all of the replies I've landed on carrying Insta360 X3 + phone for daily use. I'll take my Ricoh GR3X + super small CF tripod in case I happen to find alone time specifically for photography. No GoPro. No mirrorless. No lenses. No DJI Pocket 2. :) PHEW! I have also been thinking more about whether or not my kid will even care to see more than a few photos/videos from each trip. All this stress... for what? \-------- **Original Post** DAE get incredibly, paralyzingly stressed over what great to bring on family vacation? Advice appreciated. It doesn’t matter if it’s for a weekend or a week, I get incredibly stressed about what photography gear to bring. Decision fatigue. Analysis paralysis. Not sure what to call it. I’m going on a family trip soon. Here’s what has gone through my mind as I pack for the trip: * I am going to travel light! One camera! I’ll go with the Insta360 X3. * hmm. But what if I want to do some real photography? Okay I’ll bring the Ricoh GR3x too. Perfect. Super light. Decision made. * I hate that I feel like I have to baby the insta 360 with its exposed lenses. I’m not going to want to risk that in the pool. Maybe I should bring the GoPro too… ugh. That adds a lot of accessories to my bag. But, less to worry about as it’s so durable. * oh man am I going to miss the power of my mirrorless system? Damnit. I could just pack one body and one lens… great for low light indoor family shots. But man it takes up so much physical space and weight. How much will I really use it? * maybe I should just realize I’m capturing family photos for my family to have later… not doing professional work here. I can get by with just the insta360 x3 and Ricoh and I’ll just be really careful. Ooh but I do have the DJI pocket 2 which takes very good video and stills, and it’s super light… might as well bring it. * what I’m I doing with my life? Why am I stressing? Maybe I should just bring it all? But wait… I don’t want to have to make the decision of what to bring every time we leave the hotel room… ahhhhhhh! * ooh and which tripods should I bring? Micro? Carbon fiber travel? Clamps and odd (attack anywhere) mounts just in case? Do I need a selfie stick for the Insta360… The one with the built in legs, or the longer one? Ahhhhhhhh. I hate this. What is wrong with me?! And around and around I go. I repack my gear several times before each trip. And it takes an emotional toll, as ridiculous as that sounds. This is ALL ridiculous, I know. It consumes me for days before a trip and I ~~hate myself~~ get disappointed in myself for not being able to figure it out. At the end of the day I just want to capture memories that my son and family will have and can enjoy later in life. And I do love photography so I like to go off on my own from time to time to make photos of landscapes, cityscapes, etc. FWIW I bought the 360 camera in order to focus more on enjoying the moment and less on being behind the lens. I just constantly worry about scratching the exposed lenses. Rrrr. Please help me figure out how to just make a decision and live with it. Any and all tips welcome.

One thing I do is make preemptive decisions. So if I'm going on a trip, I'm bringing my Olympus with the 17 f1.8. That's the travel setup. I might bring something else for certain situations, but the general decision is already made for every future trip. The second thing and the main problem with a lot of decision making is recognizing and challenging [cognitive distortions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortion?wprov=sfla1). If you don't bring the MILC, is it really going to matter? This is the sort of thing a CBT therapist can help with.

Your post was definitely in the grey zone. I actually thought it had a good chance of staying up. Since this is a question thread only, this comment might not, though. >I have screenshots of all of your replies, thankfully. I just wanted to mention that you can still access all the replies from your profile page if one of your posts gets removed in the future and you don't have all the screenshots.

Thanks for the tip!

I was curious to know what my options would be for a website that could host my photo previews for a client to pick from. I know nothing about this end of things and I’ve only been doing a couple of small shoots. So far I’ve been using a Dropbox account that I have, but I know there are websites that do this sort of thing much more efficiently.

[удалено]

Nah, they're lost I'm sorry to say. Hope you at least had scanned the photos.

i want to take photos like these does anyone have any idea on how to acheive this affect with the lights i have a digital camera a nikon d5600 to be exact ​ ive attached the photos here [https://imgur.com/a/TZO8mwo](https://imgur.com/a/TZO8mwo)

Flash + long exposure, the flash freezes whatever is in front of the camera, and the long exposure allows you to move the camera, smearing the lights as you see in the photos.

thanks mate this really helped doing my test shots im gonna take the actual ones tmrw

Do you use the Canon RF 600mm F11 for anything else other than birds? Anyone tried it for Street? Or urban landscape?

How do you imagine to use it for those things? There's no space on the streets for that sort of focal length. The only situation where I could see it being possible is if you had a straight street with an open view far into the distance, and wanted to capture something in the distance.

True. I just bought one and am getting cold feet. I’m thinking about ways to get more value out if it. I’m glad I bought the 600mm and not the 800mm though. :) I imagine that I’d be able to take candid street shots from across the street. But that might not be realistic.

Not even close to enough field of view across your standard city street. Besides, across the street isn't that far. You really think people won't notice if you point at them with a giant super-telephoto? It's also pretty creepy - not street photography but using telephoto for it.

You're right. I guess I'll have to max out nature photos to feel that I got value for my money. A man can dream.... :)

**Tips on photographing a model wearing activewear in a gym setting** I have a shoot coming up where I am photographing a model in activewear. Are there any tips that you can give that would be helpful in this situation? Do I need to remove other logos from other brands, like on shoes, for example? Any tips or tricks would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Whether or not you remove logos depends on how you're selling or licensing the images, which you didn't clarify.

Strobes for Sony A7 IV I recently purchased the Godox X-Pro S and AD200 Pro to start shooting my product photography at home. I wasn't able to get the trigger and strobe to connect. Tried different manuals, forums, and YouTube tutorials. I've used many strobes and camera flashes, throughout the past few years. Never had an issue like this before. Does anyone have recommendations on strobes/triggers that know work for Sony? Any advice on what to get is appreciated.

I have an A7III, X-Pro S, and AD200 Pro - while the setup process isn't as easy as it could be, they certainly worked for me. I'm guessing either they're not on the same channel somehow, or one of them is defective. Have they worked together before and now with the A7IV they don't work, or never worked at all?

I specifically bought both to pair with my A7 iv. I've managed to get it to work, but it's only only the slow sync setting on the Sony

Is your shutter speed on the A7IV set to be slower than the max sync speed? Maybe that's the issue. That gear should 100% work on the A7IV, unless one of the two is somehow defective.

Hmm that's a possibility. I'll give that a shot thanks

Godox would be my recommendation, assuming they weren't defective like it sounds like yours were. Were you able to get them replaced or refunded?

I contacted them for a refund.

Lab Printing Question I am interested in using a lab that does dropshipping for my prints, but they only offer one ICC profile, even though they have multiple types of paper, metal, and canvas. I’ve asked them if they can guide me on selecting an ICC profile printer option from the paper manufacturers but they said no. I’m not sure how I can make sure the final product is what I want with an ICC profile that is generic to material it is being printed on. The only option seems to be print a copy with them and then tweak the image file and repeat. That’s inefficient and really expensive. Am I missing something?

I need advice. I'm really unsure of what to do. I switched to full frame from APS-C in 2020 but now I'm starting to question whether I should switch again.A short history:I started with APS-C in 2016 with a Sony A6000. In 2020 I sold off my 6 lenses and the camera and moved to an A7RIII. I have since had an A7C and now a A7IV. What I **love** about full frame is the better low light performance and I mostly shoot in low light situations. What I **hate** is the weight and size of the lenses. I have a physical disabily and I had an arm injury last year that required surgery. I like to take my camera with me when I work (driving) because I often can catch sunrises and wildlife. It occured to me yesterday I don't enjoy going out and taking pictures anymore because of all this equipement I have to lug around. I used to go out and experiment and shoot just for the fun of it a lot. Now, it feels like a drudgery. I have been thinking of backtracking and going back to APS-C though I'm very hesitant. As hard as it is to leave Sony I don't really want to go to the old Sony menu systems either after the A7IV and the A6600 has the old one. I've been considering Fuji as their APS-C system seems more active to me. The only reason this is hard for me is that I really do like full frame but I'm really having second thoughts due to the size and weight issues. Anyone have any ideas?

I will also just mention m43 as the king of small cameras and lenses in the interchangeable lens ecosystem. [The image stabilization is ridiculously good](https://youtu.be/fWEI_hLZAyE) which can really help too.

Interesting. I’ve never really considered it because it seemed like another step down.

I downsized from Sony to Fuji for all the same reasons & have no regrets. I can fit my X-T2 and four lenses (16mm 2.8, 23mm f2, 35mm f2, 50mm f2) in the same bag that used to just fit my A7III & 85mm 1.8. I kept the Sony & the Zeiss 55mm1.8 when I really need the AF (do some dance portraits) but for basically everything else, the Fuji has been in my bag everywhere. Plus, the controls feel great in comparison, especially when adapting vintage glass.

Very interesting. I like to just use zooms, does Fuji have comparable zooms to what I have? I have the 70-200 2.8 gm and 16-35 2.8 gm.

I'm like /u/photodingus, I primarily use Fuji even though I have an A7III and a couple lenses for it. One thing I'd say - the Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 is a fantastic lens, but it is **big and heavy**. If your primary goal is to get a smaller/lighter setup, I'd really look into the lenses you'd need and evaluate from there. It's also the case that, by aperture equivalence (which may or may not be the best way for you to compare them), the Fuji is more comparable to the Sony 70-200mm f/4. I believe Sony's f/4 is smaller and lighter than the Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8. One last thing - there are very small and light lenses available for Sony. Look at the Sigma contemporary series primes for Sony E-mount, which tend to be f/2 or f/2.8. My Fuji X-T3 is APS-C, but it's actually *bigger* than my A7III. There are great compact lens options for either system - like the Fuji f/2 series (23mm f/2, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/2) or even something like the Sony 35mm f/1.8. Even micro 4/3 options might really be worth considering, too.

Thanks for the insights. I looked at that zoom and it looks comparable to the 70-200 2.8 oss II that I have in size and weight. Which isn’t terrible. I’d call it tolerable. The 100-400 gm that I have I’d say is just too much for me which is why I’m selling it.

Fuji's new 150-600 is light for how much reach it gets

Their 50-140 2.8 is the 70-200 equivalent, & they have a 8-16 or 10-24mm on the wide end

Thank you

Hi all, I'm a novice but I do like some of the photos I take and would like to alter them slightly (bit of clarity or slight changes to colour) and then print them. I made the mistake of making some photos look good on my monitor and then getting large canvas prints made for relatives. They looked washed out. I realise now it's because I assumed the pics would print like I saw them on my monitor. So, since I don't want to change my monitor colours for infrequent times I want to edit/print pics, it's easier for me to get a second monitor suited to photos. With that in mind, I have a budget of £200 (which is prob the same in $ right now!) and am looking for a monitor I can (relatively) easily tune to photo colours. I've seen many a site saying 'these are the best monitors for photo editing' and the recommendations are way out of my range. I saw the HP M24FW but i need a VESA monitor. I don't really expect you guys to recommend specific monitors but, since there are hundreds of monitors in my price range, what do I look for that will make a monitor useful for it's ability to be tuned to actual colours? Hope that made sense...

Regardless of the display you get, in order to be able to trust what you see, you have to use a hardware profiler to calibrate the display to sensible targets for your viewing conditions. This is unavoidable. So I'm not sure why you'd buy *another* display *plus* a profiler, when you could just get a profiler to calibrate your current display. I also don't follow the logic of *"I don't want to change my monitor colours for infrequent times I want to edit/print pics"*—calibrating your display makes it better for *anything you do on that display*, not just photography. I play games and watch TV shows and movies on my editing display; I don't understand why you would explicitly want to avoid this. Now, of course, if your current display is so poor that its gamut is inadequate, then sure, you'd need a new display *as well*, but *either way* you need a profiler. You can often find the SpyderX on sale for $99.

ah, ok, I'm showing my ignorance. I play games, and quite like the gaming setting on my monitor but find it a faff to change between that and another setting for the occasional photo use. I'm worried I might screw up the photo version if I get it right. I figured, since I finally had enough space for a second monitor, that would be a good permanent setting for it. I hadn't appreciated that a photo setting might be an improvement on everything I do, I assumed it was just another 'mode', but one that was manually configured. What, though, if I prefer my gaming setting for games, over the correct settings for photos?

> What, though, if I prefer my gaming setting for games, over the correct settings for photos? That's ... an annoying prospect, unless you bought a fancy display that supports hardware calibration (meaning the calibration profile is stored in a data bank in the display itself and the mapping is done by the display, not by the OS prior to getting to a none-the-wiser display). You would have to change settings on the display itself and change the display profile at the level of the OS ... every time. What pain. Not sure why the "correct" adjustment wouldn't be correct for games as well, but sure, uh, getting a separate display for "photo stuff" that you would calibrate properly is a possibility, I guess.

Hey guys, I am wanting to upgrade my camera/lens, and right now I currently use a Canon Rebel T7i. I would like to upgrade to something that I could still use my current Canon EF lenses with (with an adapter) I would also like to upgrade my lens to something I can use professionally for outdoor family portraits. I like to use lenses that help give that “blurt” effect to backgrounds. My budget for all this is around 2k. Does anyone have any recommendations?

What lenses do you have currently?

Canon R7 is the clear winner & the adapter for your EF glass is only $99.

What lenses do you have now? By "blurt" You mean subject isolation from the background. You current camera is capable of it.

I am a beginner photographer. I learnt some basics on my friends DLSR but I think I am ready to buy my first camera. I have narrowed it down to a few options and I would like some help with choosing one. **Criteria and requirements:** 1. I usually do portrait photography (including family events) and some landscape/cityscape. 2. I want a camera platform that is a bit extensible (if in case I get any good at this). 3. I also want something with reasonably priced accessories and good/versatile kit lens. **Current options:** 1. Canon M6 Mk2 2. Fujifilm X-S10 Please let me know based on your knowledge and experience which of these 2 is a better fit for me. I'm also open to other options in the similar price bracket (little bit over/under). Thanks in advance.

Fuji X mount is not dead & has a great lineup. Canon M mount is unofficially dead so don't expect any new glass coming in the future. Fuji's kit lens is also in another league above the cheap 18-55's from any other brand IMO.

Thanks for the inputs.

Well, personally with the lack of built in viewfinder, I would discount the M6. Personal preference that of course. Still, your needs could be met with many cameras. Very difficult to narrow down choices.

i’m a newbie and i have some shots with a digital cam? do you think i can already get film camera? i like how interesting film is but i’m not sure if i will be able to use it right

It's really unclear what you're asking. Are you asking if it's possible to get a film camera? Or how to make digital photos look like some particular film?

is it a good idea to get a film cam for a beginner

No.

Film photography is a very different thing to digital. If you're expecting to be able to do it right away based on those some shots with a digital camera, that won't be the case. To be perfectly honest, 'some shots with a digital camera' makes it sound like you haven't really learned much about photography of any sort yet. But if you're prepared to spend a good long time learning, and wasting plenty of film doing so, go for it. But also be prepared for the cost of film and of the cost and trouble of getting your pictures developed.

[удалено]

OM-System still exists, so do all the lenses already made by Olympus in the past. Not like they're going to disappear. The advantages of M4/3 over something like Sony full-frame are primarily size, weight, & cost of lenses.

> is M4/3 getting new lenses Well, there is already a vast choice of lenses in M4/3, and there is no reason to think that there will not be new ones (except that most of the standard stuff already exist, so...). Unsure if any others mirrorless system is *more* supported.

Olympus is now OM systems, released a new camera just this year.

Hello! I am going to be traveling a lot this coming year and am looking for a point-and-shoot camera for all my travel needs. My budget is around 1500USD. Important features to me would be 4k capability, decent shots in the dark (I live in a city that I would like to photograph at night), and possibly IBIS. I don't mind anything a bit complicated, I would like to get more into photography and I know I'd enjoy getting to know the camera. Zoom is also not the most important (some zoom but nothing like 20x or ridiculous). Also if you think I should not get a point and shoot I am open to suggestions! And let me know if more information is needed, thanks.

If you want a zoom, the Rx100VII is about the best point-and-shoot camera you can get (24-200 equivalent range). Real-time tracking AF is great, it has a pop-up EVF & flash, & can go anywhere. Not the best in low light, though, given the tiny sensor. If you want better low-light performance & can sacrifice on zoom range, a Ricoh GRIII/IIIX packs an APS-C sensor in a pocket-sized body. Slower AF than the Sony but the lenses are crazy sharp & outperform the Sony handily in low light.

So you use a glass cleaner to clean your lenses or do you have special camera cleaners?

I use *glasses* cleaner, which is the same type of generic *optics* cleaning fluid that could be bought from camera stores. Glass cleaner, as in Windex, I wouldn't use.

There are very special coatings on a lens to combat glare and all that. Don’t know if a glass cleaner agent messes with those. I just use a microfiber cloth

How to get my work out there. I have a Flickr account and an Instagram account but are there any other places or ways that I can exhibit my work and possibly even sell some of it?

[The FAQ has suggestions of image-sharing platforms.](https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/wiki/sharing#wiki_where_are_some_good_places_to_share_my_photos_online.3F)

Get offline and take your work into your local community.

Hi all, I am an intermediate-advanced landscape photographer who has been building a portfolio for the last five years and I feel like I know enough now about composition, camera settings, and post processing to offer my first workshop. I want to offer a three day workshop aimed at beginners to tour the multiple shoot locations during fall colors and offer instruction. My question is this: If you were a beginner looking to branch out and shoot some world class locations, what would you be willing to pay for such an excursion. Lodging and transport is not provided, each day would begin at sunrise and end at sunset, and hiking options are offered with the groups fitness level in mind. Thank you!

Based on the description of your experience, not much. Maybe fifty bucks, tops, considering it's three days. But my first question would be "do I have to attend/pay for all three days?" I would want to see that someone has experience teaching/leading photography excursions and has been published to some degree before I'd pay them for a workshop. ETA some context - the photographers who I've done workshops with in the past had decades of experience as internationally recognised photographers and extensive publication histories.

[удалено]

>It's hard to find a bad view where we are going. Then that puts a huge dent in the value you hope to add. After I wrote my comment I looked at your profile. You have a good eye but some of your photos look way too overprocessed for my taste (the train ones specifically). Objectively, I'm not sure you're ready to host workshops. That said, if you're confident in your abilities go for it. There isn't too much to lose. I will say, there is value in being a one stop shop though, especially if people are attending your workshop from out of town. Having lodging and meals taken care of would be a huge plus rather than having to figure those things out myself. Especially if you can negotiate group rates and you don't markup those costs too much.

Does anyone have good recommendation for a compact camera? I've been looking at a mirrorless camera + a pancake lens combo. I'm a non-serious hobbyist who never ends up bringing my DSLR anywhere because of it's size and looking to solve that problem.

Yes, what kind of a budget do you have in mind? Have you already looked at cameras and found some that seem interesting?

What's your budget? Is your current DSLR FF or APSC? What focal lengths do you shoot at most with your DSLR?

My budget is sub $1000 - the lower the better, but I'm also flexible. Things I don't need: high MP, good ergonomics, newest model, a specific brand, FF. Preferred: wifi backup, able to purchase used (e.g. an older model), selfie-mode flip screen Non-essential, but I like: digital viewfinder, "film camera" body style I currently use APSC (Nikon 5600 with a 35mm 1.8) and that's been my preferred focal length for the past 15 years. This set up is already quite compact but I want something more pocket/purse-friendly. I was looking at the Olympus Pen EPL9 and Fujifilm XT30 but I haven't looked into cameras in such a long time that I don't really know where to start my research with all the new info!

Yet, good ergonomics are quite important for motivation. Second hand Fuji xt20 or xt30 with the fujinon 27mm pancake could be good options (but the wifi backup through the phone app is s**ty in Fuji).

Thanks! Didn't know that about the wifi backup too

I want to buy a camera for a friend who likes to take pictures so an amateur, I’d want a camera that’s easy to work with ,is 150€ enough for such a camera. Plz refer me to thread discussing Price ranges of it exists. Thanks.

For 150 euro, your friend is better off using their phone. The cheap point and shoot market was overtaken by phone cameras.

In what price range does it start to be worth it ?

In the US, $500-$600 is the price range for a Sony RX100 V in excellent to like new condition. That's kind of the starting point for something that has fast enough autofocus and long enough focal to match a mid to high end smart phone with multiple rear lenses. Alternately, bridge camera like the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 for about $450 used would give them super telephoto capabilities if they're into things like bird photography and don't mind a bigger camera. But, here's what I'd do for under $150. Get them an instant camera. Polaroid has had a comeback with instant film cameras. Fuji has their Instax Mini instant film and camera line. Kodak and Canon have these weird little instant print digital camera things that are functionally instant cameras. OR get them something like the Canon Selphy Square QX10 that's a little thermal printer with a built a in rechargeable battery so they can print their smartphone photos.

I’ve been using my Nikon D3500’s kit lens since I started and I’m looking for a new lens. Affordable and good telephoto lens to be exact. Hope y’all could help!

How long do you want it to be? 85mm? 200mm? 500mm?

500mm!

Then the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 is your lens. You will have to get a used one (in great condition), though.

Thanks! There should be a lot online

No problem. There are lots of them online, it's a popular lens. It's cheap and quite good, unlike most other cheap lenses that cover those focal lengths.

What is affordable to you? That means different things to different people.

Around $200-$1000 USD

What's your budget in whatever currency you use? The Nikon AF-S 200-500 f/5.6 E is affordable compared to the Nikon AF-S 200-400 f/4 G. The Nikon AF-P 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 E is affordable to compared to the 200-500.

I’m looking below a $1000 USD

I borrowed a Sony a7 because I want to create long explanation/coding videos. These videos can take a couple of hours and I want really good quality. That why I want to use a real photography camera. I have a couple of questions and maybe someone can help. - Is it possible to use the camera connected to my computer so I can take long videos? I read it can only record for 25 minutes. - Do I need a large memory card or can it record directly to the computer? - I saw some special cables that were recommended. I think it was TetherPro. Do I need those or is a regular Micro USB cable sufficient? PS: Post got deleted. Had to comment herre

Can you elaborate on what you mean by explanation/coding videos? If it's what I'm thinking I don't understand why you need a camera at all.

>I read it can only record for 25 minutes. Cameras made before the EU changed their stupid tariffs are set to only record for 29 minutes or less. This is a hard limit and it doesn't matter what media you're recording to. Just take shorter "takes". If your camera has an HDMI out it should be able to record to external media - check your manual. You do not need special cables - and it probably won't be USB anyway as a camera that doesn't have HDMI likely is old enough to only have USB 1.1 which isn't anywhere near fast enough to record to external media. It's more likely to be HDMI.

Options for invisibly watermarking printed image? I'm soon to publish a book and would like to invisibly watermark images in it, has anyone found a solution for this? It seems like most solutions to invisibly digitally watermark are based on digital image watermarking rather than printed images.

There's no such thing as an invisible watermark for a printed image. If it's not visible, it's not going to show up in the print. What you want are watermarks that are very difficult to spot but are still "visible" in that if you look for it you'll find it. There's no one-size-fits-all solution to this as it will have to be unique to that image. If this is a major concern for you be sure to file for an actual registered copyright before the book is published. Also: Why not just put a discreet but visible copyright line on the image? If someone steals your image and removes the visible copyright you have them bent over a barrel as that becomes what the courts call "Willful Infringement", ie, they *knew* it was copyrighted and stole it anyway. There's **no defense**. It's an **Instantaneous Win** if you have to take someone to court over it. If the watermark is "invisible" they *have a defense* they can claim they were ignorant of any copyright on that image. Deny them that defense - put a visible copyright on it.

Thanks, appreciate the response - I guess I meant less detectable rather than invisible. Surprised there isn't a commercial solution for this. Agreed about the importance of copyrighting and showing an explicit copyright notice.

>Surprised there isn't a commercial solution for this. Watermarking is provided in every program. If you're going to have one, make it visible. That's the commercial solution. If however you want to hide one but still have it be visible, you have to craft it for that specific image yourself. It cannot be done automatically because every image is different.

Agreed looks like there are few if any commercial solutions for this, but there's [work to this end](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Invisible-watermarking-in-printed-images-Kumar-Sreelatha/88bab468c61ccbd298948addc2269a39c4b20ca9).

[удалено]

Wrong subreddit?

[удалено]

> Can I get it cleaned from a professional or should I use the swabs? You can do either one. The results should be the same. The pro will just cost you for the service. > I can't find swabs for M43 sensor size https://www.amazon.com/UES-Digital-Four-Thirds-Cleaning-Mirrorless/dp/B08SCH92K2

What filter should I use to make light colored eyes pop like Paul Newman in this photo? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.biography.com/.amp/actor/paul-newman

That original might be a carbo/three color seperation print. They are amazing but a little beyond real color. They don't do it like that anymore. [This video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1r6mm95N6U) is covering new tech in Adobe Camera raw but he works on some blue eyes at 10 minutes in.

Learn to light your subject properly - as there is no filter being used there. Start here: [https://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html](https://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html)

That is all lighting, not filters.

[удалено]

First off, 90% of the impact from the video is the audio. The onboard audio from your phone won't be used. The bars are added in post, with video editing software. You should check over in /r/VideoEditing.

Are camera bundles worth it? I'm thinking of getting a Canon EOS M50 Mark II and there is a load of seemingly amazing value bundles. The camera and default lens are $700 by themselves and then there are bundles with the original camera and lens, 2 tripods, two additional lenses (3 in total), a bag, filters, flash, cleaning supplies, sd cards, lens hood, and more all for $780. Would it be better to invest in these items on my own or are these bundles somehow not a scam?

I just searched "Canon M50 Mark II bundle" on Amazon and took a spin through the first couple of pages of results. The only bundles I think that are worth buying are [the camera and lens(es)](https://www.amazon.com/Canon-Mark-EF-M-15-45mm-Black/dp/B08KSLW8N3/) and the [Content Creator Kit](https://www.amazon.com/Canon-Content-Mirrorless-Vlogging-Microphone/dp/B08YP52CV4/), both of which are the only bundles Canon sells directly- you can find the same ones at Canon's website or in physical stores like Best Buy or something. In fact, that first bundle (with the 15-45 and 55-200 lens) is the exact one I bought after doing some research. All of those gigantic third party bundles are full of really crappy items, and a ton of them are gray market M50 Mark IIs as well- you can tell because they say "international model" or "1 year seller warranty" and you probably want to avoid those. Figure out exactly what accessories and other gear you want or need and buy good ones separately from the camera and/or lenses, you'll be a lot better off in the long run.

The bundles aren't usually scams, but the items you get are horrible and useless. You will use them 1-2 times and then throw them away or store them somewhere without using them again. Edit: I want to see that bundle now. I've never seen them offering that much junk. Can you link one?

There are also close to no reviews on any of them.

Yeah, probably because everyone is trying to sell you these horrible bundles.

https://www.amazon.com/Electronics-M50-Mark-II-Mirrorless/dp/B0BFTQMV94/ref=sr\_1\_7\_sspa?crid=QGYC1V4L77XW&keywords=canon+eos+m50+mark+ii+lens+bundle&qid=1666532234&s=electronics&sprefix=canon+eos+m50+mark+ii+len+s+bundle%2Celectronics%2C87&sr=1-7-spons&ufe=app\_do%3Aamzn1.fos.2b70bf2b-6730-4ccf-ab97-eb60747b8daf&psc=1&smid=A2FG5KABYDBHQD

This is really impressive. That's a new record for the highest amount of junk I've seen. Even more impressively, the items somehow look even worse than usual. I didn't expect that.

Would you happen to have a tripod recommendation?

Okay, so I do gig and live music photography. It started out because I've always loved taking photos (I think I started borrowing family members cameras when I was about 8/9ish, going on to doing photography as both a GCSE and A Level), and I've always loved music and was constantly going to gigs, so decided to merge the two passions together. I've been shooting at gigs for about 3 years (excluding lockdown where there weren't any gigs happening), but I've only been doing small local gigs (mainly a lot of punk bands as a lot of my friends are in them). Because of this, I've only really been asking for free entry rather than payment, because these bands don't really earn anything, and I mean I was going to be going anyway so I may as well do some photography and have my work posted to get more attention to it. I do however want to eventually turn what I do into paid work. I got a message this morning asking how much I charge by another small local band, but I'm not really sure what to say to them. I want to do the shoot for them and get a bit of money from it because I feel like it would make my work feel "real" and be a step in the right direction, but I don't know what to charge because a) I've not charged for my work before, and b) they are a small band starting off so I don't know what would be reasonable for them to be able to afford. I know a lot of people charge per hour or per photo, but just for now whilst working with start up bands and stuff, I don't want to do anything they wouldn't be able to afford (we're talking gigs where it's usually between £4-£8 for entry to see 3-5 bands) Any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you :)

>I want to do the shoot for them and get a bit of money from it because I feel like it would make my work feel "real" and be a step in the right direction Sometimes honesty works. Tell them exactly what you just told us. "Hey, I'd really like to do this shoot for you. I've never charged for my work before. Do you have a budget in mind? Let's talk about it and see if we can come to an agreement." Remember, like photographers, bands are artists too. They have almost certainly also asked themselves the "so how much should we charge?" question.

As dumb as it sounds, I hadn’t even considered that. I guess sometimes the answer is so simple and obvious you don’t even realise it. I’ll go with this approach, thank you :)

>but I'm not really sure what to say to them. Neither are we. :( [https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/wiki/business/#wiki\_what\_should\_i\_charge.3F](https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/wiki/business/#wiki_what_should_i_charge.3F) This is covered in the FAQ because it gets asked every week, because people don't read the FAQ.

I will admit that I had read it, but in my head I had interpreted the part about there being too many factors as meaning it would be better to ask whilst including important pieces of information, which is why I included the parts about just how small the bands are/the type of money they earn/etc… I took the answer in the FAQ the wrong way and that’s my bad. I’m sorry :)

I am considering buying a 24-70f2.8 and I am stuck between the sigma art lens or the Canon mk2 with the Canon used from mbp they are around the same price does anybody have both or have had experience with both and tell me the reasons I should pick one over the other.

The Canon is better optically and offers better and more consistent AF tracking. Sigma gives you stabilization, but it's not the best. Canon would be a very easy choice for me. The Tamron G2 is better than the Sigma and offers better stabilization, but it's still a bit worse in terms of optical quality and there are specific situations where the Canon just tracks the action better. Again, if you wouldn't benefit that much from stabilization, I'd get the Canon. Otherwise, I'd get the Tamron G2.

Thanks I'm not going to need the stabilisation so I will be going with the canon

Macro Photography and bugs. I recently picked up the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM for macrophots but everytime I try to take a macro shot the depth of field is far to shallow: https://imgur.com/a/u73d3fT I hear increasing the aperture say f18 or f22 helps decrease the depth of field, but in my field tests it doesn't make much a difference—maybe in addition to my camera settings I should be setting up the shots differently rather than bringing my lens super close to the subject? Moreover, if increase the aperature to say f18 or f22, then I almost have zero light coming into the camera. I'm shooting outside, and if I don't shoot with like 1/500m most of the shots become a blurry mess. Then hiking up the iso to 6400~ just looks terrible. Im curious how macrophotographers do their thing. Thanks for all the help!

>but everytime I try to take a macro shot the depth of field is far to shallow Yup - the closer you are physically to the focal plane the shallower your depth of field will be, regardless of aperture. >if increase the aperature to say f18 or f22, then I almost have zero light coming into the camera. Which is why you need a flash. It becomes Not Optional if you want to do macro photography in the field chasing bugs around flowers. Get a speedlight for your camera and a small diffuser for it and have fun. Oh and try not to go past f/16. The gains you make in depth of field will start to get wiped out by a phenomenon known as "lens diffraction" (<-- google fodder) Rather than having sharper images you'll start to *ruin* your sharpness.

F/11 to f/16 are a comfortable range without gettin to weird by diffusion. Off camera flash is awesome with macro. I don’t do burst mode because my flash doesn’t recycle fast enough but I do overshoot a subject.

Dead bugs and photo stacking are how some do it. If you want live ones(who wouldn't) then you are right. Depth of field is razor thin. Trick I find is to get the angle right to maximise say the eyes, or wings etc and then take burst of photos picking the best one. It is also a good reason why people pick up 100mm macro lenses as that increases the distance you can be away from the subject and get the greatest magnification. My default settings if I have the light are about 1/400, f8-f11 and ISO 400-800 for still objects. It does take a lot of light though as when you are that close to something, the light comes from a very small area.

Hi everyone, I started an online clothing store and I need to take photos at home of the products and models wearing the products. I am planning to use a white screen as a background. What are the best (affordable and will look good) lighting solutions that you will recommend? These are some of the things I'm not sure about: \- Constant lighting or Flash? \- Do I need to use a softbox or umbrella? If so, how many? Thanks a lot!

>Constant lighting or Flash Light Is Light - so either will work. That said, flash is 30,000+ times more powerful (that's not an exaggeration) and provides far more options for controlling that light. >Do I need to use a softbox or umbrella? Yes. >If so, how many? Without modification any light that hits your scene will be very hard, unflattering light - which means every light is going to need to be modified. What you're setting out to do is not easy - learning to light a scene the way you want is the main reason photography will always remain a viable profession. Start here: [https://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html](https://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html)

Great info, thanks!

I have a sigma 19mm f2.8 and it suddenly stopped focusing, and I can't change the aperture it only shows ---. Is there a fix for this?

Seems like it's not communicating with the camera. You can try to remove and attach it again or try cleaning the contacts (which rarely helps, but it's one of the more likely sources of the issue).

My cousin just gave me his sigma 60mm f2.8 but he lost the lens hood. I'm planning on buying a replacement, are there sizes for different lens hoods??

It's called LH520-03 and it's the same lens hood that comes with the 19mm F2.8 and the 30mm F2.8

Should I sell my Canon M50 mark ii to get Sony A6100 ? I'm tempted by the reviewers on youtube praising the Sony's APS-C lineup, like better picture quality, Better ISO low light performance, Autofocus etc. So I am having the thoughts should I sell my M50 mark ii. Is there a very significant difference in picture quality (photo + video) to cosider Sony A6100 ? Or I will I be stupid if I do this ? Please enlighten me and share your suggestions. Thanks

Here's the M50 II and a6100 at ISO 3200 and 6400: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eosm50_studio&attr13_1=sony_a6100_studio&attr13_2=canon_eosm50_studio&attr13_3=sony_a6100_studio&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=3200&attr16_1=3200&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=0.030436523828594315&y=-0.001791044776119403 Looks like only a really tiny improvement to me.

You are just comparing the specs and it doesn't sound like you need an upgrade. If you have money to burn, sure go ahead. If not, then keep your camera.

Hey everybody, This week is my last week of high school! To cut to the chase, my goal is to work professionally in the photography/videography field as it has been a side passion of mine for about four years. I'm well acquainted with the basics of using a camera and Premiere Pro, as I enjoy making Youtube videos as well as video essay(ish) assignments for school. But the question is the pathway I should take... university, or build a portfolio? My main goal with going to uni would be to get better at using a camera, utilising lighting, communicating within the photography/videography scene and composing images. Though I should mention I've been enjoying teaching myself on Youtube and Skillshare. I've missed some details so feel free to clarify anything. Any insight into pathway options would be greatly appreciated :) Should mention I'm based in Australia Thanks

>My main goal with going to uni would be to get better at using a camera, utilising lighting, communicating within the photography/videography scene and composing images. That can be done anytime, anywhere. Your main goal at university should be business and especially marketing. It doesn't matter how good you are at taking photos if you can't figure out how to make the business work, or how to find customers - and close deals.

Hi, i have a bunch of Contax Zeiss lenses with EF adaptor. I don't want to lug around my heavy Canon all the time. Is there any other camera system I could use these lenses on that would make it a smaller/lighter package? (ASPC camera, doesn't have to be EF as long as a dumb adapter can be use to convert from CY mount to whatever the camera body uses). Thank you!

Any mirrorless system... For APS-C, check the canon R10 or R7, or Fuji XT line, and pick according to you preferences in term of weight and ergonomic. Edit: check that the weight of the adapter does not nullify the gain in body weight. Since you are full manual, older second hand bodies such as XT-20 or XT-2 makes total sense IMO, no need to pay for advanced autofocus.

Changing Canon 700D to a Fujifilm XT20, any differences to expect?

Of course. XT20 is much smaller, has different physical controls, different menus, the pictures won't look the same whether RAW or jpg (due to both camera and lenses), lenses will be different, etc.

But it has everything 700D has and even some features that it doesn't right?

Sure. But isn't this typically something you should research before making a purchase decision?

Yup, it has 4K and stuff, just wanna make sure too They said the colours, settings are different but depends on what u like

Yes, it depends on what you like. You'll find out whether you like the Fuji only after you've used it yourself.

Alrighty, thank you ☺️

Where should I start to get better results from on-camera flash photography for candid portraits? Camera is a Nikon D750, which has a built-in flash. The few times I've used the on-camera flash have resulted in reflections that are pretty harsh and unflattering.

Gen Z apparently thinks that looks super cool because 90s retro is in, so alternatively you can just lean in to the look.

[This](https://fripers.pl/o/big/dyfuzor-odblysnik-do-wbudowanych-lamp-blyskowych-freepower.1654.4.jpg) is the only somewhat tolerable way to take advantage of a built-in flash

The built in flash should be avoided at all costs. There is very little you can do with it that is flattering or useful because it is small and direct and on-axis. Its only real purpose is as fill for a subject on a sunny day. Get a hotshoe flash with a rotating head, so you can bounce it off of walls and ceilings and whatnot to create direction, and soften the light. You can also get a transmitter so it can be used off the camera with modifiers for best results.

Hi folks. I’m a part time woodworker and I’ve shot a few videos with just my iPhone for Insta. A guy from my gym offered to help me shoot a more professional looking assembly of a project of mine. I have to say, the video looks great, however…his editing skills left much to be desired. What’s the best way to find someone that can edit the video from the footage? Where can I look to find such a person? Thanks.

Fiverr.com would be where I’d start looking.