If you cannot find a suitable topic for your question, add it to this section.
Perhaps a site search will help you:
Just enter your search query in the specified field:
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Please note that for some questions I do not know the answers, or the answer requires 10 pages of text. When asking questions, try to formulate them correctly and in a detailed manner, honestly, neither I nor other readers of Radozhiva have telepathy and can not understand and even more so answer short, meaningless questions.
If you are completely stuck, then consult with me on my contacts (preferably through any messenger and / or social network).
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Hello everybody. I have a question. I decided to buy myself a used DSLR on Avito. I found a suitable Canon 600D with a 75-300 USM lens for 13000 rubles. But the seller said they only used it once. He expressed himself in the words: “- We went to Altai”. As it turned out later, the camera had a mileage of 117000 frames. Should I be so worried now, and how soon will the shutter die if the resource is 100000 frames?
Of course, it was better to demand rav or jpg by mail before buying, well, and not to buy from recently registered sellers who do not have positive reviews ...
..but now it's too late.
The seller cynically took advantage of your inexperience, but it happens to everyone.
Replacing the shutter will not cost much - contact the Canon S / C.
As the first DSLR for a beginner, the 600D will do just fine. If the repair cost seems high, “shoot” it and buy a fresher one, such as 70D or 80D.
Experience, even if negative, is also good.
"Of course, it was better to ask for a rav or last jpg by mail before buying"
In the case of the 600d, this would have given absolutely nothing.
You can only now try to talk to him, but most likely he will send you.
Well then, it remains to put him 1-ku, write in the comments - I do not recommend the seller - he is a fraud and explain the situation that he deceived you.
The shutter should have already died after such a “trip to Altai”. How long it will last, no one will tell you, maybe you got a tenacious one.
It is better to buy such cameras as 600d after a personal inspection, after all, a lot of them were put out, not such a rarity.
The mileage is certainly solid, and the price is not to say that the penny was for such a device. Anyway, now it will be a paid lesson. Use it while the camera is working, it can run under a hundred more if you're lucky :-)
good afternoon
Help me to understand
camera canon 800D, will the Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT flash be compatible with it?
The native flash will of course be compatible.
"Replacing the shutter will not be expensive"
Indeed, it is completely inexpensive, just the cost of another, serviceable carcass 600d :-)
That is, not compatible?
Compatible.
Hello, tell me from where can stains appear?
camera nikon 610
From dust / other debris on the matrix. Clean.
Blow with a 'pear' to begin with, if it does not help - 'wet' cleaning (better in the SC)
Found on Avito an ad for the sale of kit 18-55 is lens. I went to look and found that autofocusing sometimes does not work, but something like scrolling gears. As if they are scrolling, and this screeching screeching is heard. But if you move the focusing ring a little, then autofocus starts working again without failures normally. Then it doesn't seem to go astray ... The stabilizer works fine too.
It costs all 1900 rubles, tried to bargain at least 100 rubles, the Lady does not bargain in any, says: - I'm saving up for Pentax. =)
I don’t know, can I take a lens, or is it essentially faulty and it doesn’t last long for it to work properly?
PS The city where I live is small, it is very difficult to find the required lens on sale.
The lens is essentially defective, and it doesn't have long to work.
Well, the decision is yours, of course. The money is not crazy, you can always use it in a manual or use it as a visual teaching aid on the internal structure of the lens.
Arkady, hello. I want to buy Nikon D 610
The photographic warehouse offers at a price of almost 67000. He writes that the guarantee of the store, not the manufacturer. I don't quite understand what this might mean for me)), is it worth taking? thanks
This may mean that in the event of a breakdown, if you are lucky, your warehouse will repair the camera on its own (it is not clear who and where), and if you are not lucky, no one will repair it, under warranty, in the sense.
Thank you
"I want to buy Nikon D610"
D610 is out of production. Warehouse stocks are being sold now.
“Writes that the guarantee of the store, not the manufacturer. "
This is a “gray” delivery - i.e. the camera does not have a PCT certificate and the camera can be brought either from Hong Kong or China, for example, as an option - a refurbished camera.
Thank you)
Apparently it's better to see enough of a used camera option)
If you find it from the first neat owner, and not a wedding bombila, it may not be worse.
In any case, the difference in cost can easily be spent on unforeseen repairs (which, if you're lucky, may not be there)
Thank you)
You can look at the new D750 - they are not much more expensive than the money you specified.
Used in good condition, they just start from 60-65 thousand.
Thanks. I'll see)
Arkady, hello!
I am looking for an opportunity to make with my own hands an adapter for installing any lenses on a smartphone, like ULANZI, but I cannot find the optical scheme. Can you tell me how to do this?
We have turned to the wrong address.
certainly not to you. Didn't know that the question would be in the general feed.
All questions are in the general feed. Would write to Arkady by mail on such intimate questions. True, I don't think they would have received an answer.
I don't understand why this might be necessary (considering the size of the matrix ...)
What does the matrix have to do with it? It's about optics. I'm not chasing megapixels, the DSLR has 24 megapixels, it suits. But I like to experiment, and sometimes it's just more convenient to shoot with a smartphone, especially for a blog, with real-time monitoring, but the quality of the lens is not satisfactory.
You are not satisfied with the quality of the lens on your smartphone and want to ... degrade it even further? o_O
And here megapixels? Have you heard about the crop factor? Arkady has an article, read it.
Well, if you think that a smartphone does not have a photosensitive matrix, then yes, it has absolutely nothing to do with it. And if on a smartphone it was possible to 'bypass' or remove the built-in optics, then there would be little sense in installing the 'large' optics, but modular smartphones did not go to the masses
The meaning would be present solely for cognitive purposes - what is it like 300mm (say) on a 1/2 sensor. True, the picture quality would be absolutely none, because the difference in the resolution of a smartphone lens and a similar parameter in a photo lens is enormous.
And what prevents you from shooting with a regular multi-pixel crop, calculate the ratio of the sizes of the existing matrix to the desired one, crop the picture to the desired size. If desired, enlarge with interpolation for 'clarity'. Voila, it's business for five minutes (along with the time to search for a calculator and search for information about the real physical size of the sensor of the device of interest).
Eugene, you can invest in this crowdfunding campaign:
https://photowebexpo.ru/news/Kamera-Alice-dlya-smartfona-budet-stoit-1000-dollarov
for such experiments I advise to buy optics Canon Zoom Lens CL 8-120mm 1: 1.4-2.1
For the sharpest landscape photos on Helios 44-2, what is the best time to close the aperture? On f16, f11, or still not to use extreme values (as they say), but set f8?
On good terms, it is better to forget about shooting the landscape on Helios.
I have on the 44M-7 something that is acceptable for a full frame at f / 9-f / 10.
f / 8, in general, is also nothing and depends on the instance.
On Helios it is good to shoot portraits or there an object like flowers.
Under the other, he is not very.
And if you set f16 to Helios 44-2, will there be diffraction?
So it seems to depend on the megapixel matrix. Why don't you experiment yourself?
Okay. I'll try to figure it out. I have a Canon 600D 18MP.
DLA for 18MP crop is about 7.1-8.0, so shta ...
I didn't shoot the landscape on Helios, I shot it for half a month. At f / 4 there is already more than detail, and depth of field when focusing on distant shots with a margin.
Try it. If the detail of Helios is enough, then more than f / 4- 5.6 it makes no sense to hide behind.
Hello Arkady, look at examples of 3 photos, I close the diaphragm and get a powerful light, I can't figure it out.
Judging by the 0.13s exposure from EXIF, the problem is still in the metering.
aaaa
aaa
10 minutes earlier
aa
а
Shot with Nikon D3300 + nikon 17-55 2.8 With fixes the same story - a couple of frames of norms, then the light
Perhaps the diaphragm drummer on the camera itself is not quite working.
So I also think, maybe the exposure meter is so buggy?
It is not difficult to exclude the influence of the exposure meter.
Switch to manual mode, disabling any autoiso, and take several frames, simultaneously changing the shutter speed by 1 stop along with the aperture. For example, 1/1000 f / 2.8, 1/500 f / 4, 1/250 f / 5.6, etc. If the frames are lit all the same - the exposure meter is most likely to blame, otherwise - the diaphragm drive.
Thanks, I will try
If I start shooting with a Canon 600D in 8MP “M” mode, will it result in an overall improvement in photo quality?
Or if the matrix is sharpened at 18 megapixels, then nothing can be fixed?
What exactly would you like to fix?
Shooting in a reduced raw resolution can only lead to a deterioration in photo quality, but not vice versa.
It is said that some older cameras with fewer megapixels produce better picture quality than “stretched megapixel” cameras. Such as: Canon 10d, 20d, 30d.
In short, I'm most likely not catching up with something, but I'm sorry, such a question. :)
It is not of higher quality, but "warm, lamp", yes, it may well be)
But for the sake of this, it is advisable to buy just such a camera, a simple change in the file at the output will not give the same.
This is what some witnesses of the large pixel say, but in fact you will not find anything remarkable there. Those matrices are simply older, and this different technological level means worse DD, more read noise - drawing shadows in RAWs from such cameras is still a “pleasure”. At the same time, technological progress made it possible to arrange the strapping more compactly, and as a result, it may turn out that the useful (light-sensitive) pixel area in the newer 18MP matrix is the same as in those 8-12MP matrices.
It is very good to compare yourself so as not to rely on “witnesses”.
You've probably had both types of cameras (with "fat" and "very skinny", but modern pixels), to create your own opinion on this issue, right?
I have an impression of the 18MP Canon 550D and 24MP Canon M50 II. I’m not just studying individual pixels or comparing 100% of the frame. I am worried about practice, but in practice a picture of any resolution just fits when viewed on a monitor, and either I don't see the difference, or I still get a little cleaner and more detailed photos in the case of a new camera. At low ISOs, I can afford to frame the frame more, at high ISOs, I just added a margin of acceptable quality somewhere else.
These are not the matrices, when comparing which you can get an "impression", to be honest)) Now, if you had at least something like 30, 40 (300, 400) d in use, but compared it with the same m50, this would make sense to discuss.
What I personally observe when switching from a less megapixel camera to a more megapixel one is that the color becomes more “liquid”, but at the same time the detail and working ISO grows, of course. Which is better or worse, everyone decides for himself.
Separately, I will say that I do not dwell on the parameters of the matrix and when I upgraded 550D => M50, the matrix did not play the most important role. I also continue to shoot with pleasure on an old camera, when it's convenient to take two at once so as not to change lenses. I just don't see the point in embellishing the situation with old matrices, and even more so in pursuit of old cameras, unless the goal is to test your skills, a kind of sports collection interest.
>> Now, if you had at least something like 30, 40 (300, 400) d in use, and compared it with the same m50, it would make sense to discuss it. <
I had a short time 50D and really liked its body and ergonomics. So maybe someday I'll buy a 40D (fortunately, the body is identical), if there is a favorable offer, and I'll try to understand this camera.
If you wish, I recommend not to delay the purchase). The price tag for these cameras is already frivolous, but over time, the number of copies in decent condition will steadily fall.
On an 18MP crop camera, the pixel size is very small (4.7 microns), which forces the manufacturer to install a rather dense AA filter, which significantly reduces the resolution. it is impossible to obtain from such a matrix the same sharp picture as from cameras with a lower pixel density and a large size of each pixel. (when shooting on the same glass, of course)
In fact, on the contrary, the more megapixels were received, the less need for an AA filter (less risk of moiré, etc.), so Nikon gradually began to abandon it in many cameras, and Canon, for example, in 5DSR ...
No, on the contrary, with a smaller pixel size, the probability of moiré (interference) is higher. another thing is that now the manufacturer is no longer so afraid of moire, believing that the user himself will cope with it in post-processing, or will not allow it when shooting.
in reality, a small pixel size is bad for another - a decrease in DLA, and nothing can be done about this.
2Aleksey - you are somewhat wrong about the moire.
For example, moiré perfectly pops up on a fat-pixel D70 with six megapixels, and it is almost impossible to see it on 24-megapixel sensors without an anti-alasing filter. It's all about the resolution of the optics. The smaller the pixel, the less likely it is to catch moire, this is a fact in general.
Does it make sense to sometimes shoot with lower exposure - 1 ev in order to be able to keep a lower iso in the dark? Naturally, take a picture in RAW, and then rearrange the exposure to + 1 ev in Lightroom
Or is it better to have an increased iso than to lower the exposure by -1 ev and then increase it. That is, will it spoil the image quality?
ISO should always be kept as low as possible. If you can shoot with a long exposure, this should be used. Pulling the devils out of the shadows at the post is not the best investment of your time)) But in any case, the camera will give more noise with increasing ISO than LR / PH with increasing exposure. More precisely, the latter will be able to suppress noise more accurately.
Better elevated ISO.
Extending the exposure in lr / acr with insufficient light gives the result noticeably worse than simply raising the iso on most cameras.
then it is necessary to clarify what kind of raising the ISO we are talking about - hardware or software.
wrote a note on this subject, including on this site.
And how to distinguish between "hardware" / "software" iso? For example, 800 iso which is this? And 3200?
I need to ask Arkady, let him finally nail my messages about ISO in some separate topic. to write again - long and long.
In general, if you are guided by the dpreview test scene, the picture when pulling out + 5ev is depressing for many cameras, and quite modern ones, much worse than with a simple increase in iso from 100 to 3200.
Alexey, can you find your post, copy the text and paste it here?
A little bit about how the camera changes the ISO value.
I think many people know that to change the ISO value, the camera processor changes the gain of the amplifiers located between the matrix and the ADC. This is the so-called analogue ISO change.
In addition, in some cases, the processor changes the ISO value by multiplying or dividing the data received from the ADC by some factors. This is the so-called digital ISO change.
However, there is very little accurate data in general printing for which particular ISO values a particular method of changing it is used. All this is in numerous patents, but their low availability to wide circles of the photographic public does not allow shedding light on this information.
However, its importance cannot be underestimated. Since when ISO is increased in an analogous way, the noise contained in the signal from the matrix is amplified (increased) to a lesser extent than when directly multiplying data from the ADC, and therefore the ISO values obtained in this way are better to be avoided, while the ISO values obtained by dividing data from the ADC, have a lower noise level.
Below is the table obtained using the ML firmware for the Canon 60D camera, for other cameras this information will be either similar or very similar, and anyone can conduct this research on their own.
The first column is the ISO value set by the user in the camera.
The second column is the “honest” ISO value obtained by analog gain.
The third column is the multiplication factor, if there is “+” or the division factor, if it is “-“, which the camera processor applies to the data received from the ADC. In other words, this is “digital” ISO change.
If we analyze the data, we can draw some conclusions.
1. The maximum "fair" ISO value for this camera is 3200 (for others, especially for FF, check it yourself), values above this value are obtained by software and have an overestimated noise level. In other words, if for any purpose you need an ISO value higher than 3200, it makes sense not to raise it in the camera, but to shoot with a value of 3200, and, with further processing on a computer, raise the brightness to the required value, which can be done more accurately and with lower noises.
2. It is also advisable to avoid ISO values with “+” in the third column so as not to have an increased level of noise, if they are needed, shoot a frame with a slightly lower, previous ISO value and bring the exposure to the required one during processing. For example, it is better to choose 200, not 250.
3. ISO values c “-” in the third column have a lower noise level, and they can be used when you need a higher ISO value, but there is a fear of increased noise. For example, if you need ISO 400, you can set 320, which is not much less than 400, but there will be less noise. Similarly, it is better to prefer 640 over 800. Well, it is better to choose 2500 as the ISO limit value, rather than 3200.
100 100 0
125 100 + 0.3EV
160 200 -0.3EV
200 200 0
250 200 + 0.3EV
320 400 -0.3EV
400 400 0
500 400 + 0.3EV
640 800 -0.3EV
800 800 0
1000 800 + 0.3EV
1250 1600 -0.3EV
1600 1600 0
2000 1600 + 0.3EV
2500 3200 -0.3EV
3200 3200 0
4000 3200 + 0.3EV
5000 3200 + 0.6EV
6400 3200 + 1EV
12800 3200 + 2EV
Much depends on the camera. The old ones usually have strong readout noises - this means that if you take an underexposed photo by several steps, and then increase the exposure by these same steps in the RAW editor, you will get a much noisier picture than if the camera was initially set to ISO corresponding as a result of the exposure. But modern matrices are much more resistant to such manipulations and there will not be much difference. But in any case, it will not get better. It makes sense to underexpose only to protect the light (for this, almost all cameras have corresponding modes like Canon's Highlight tones priority). And in order to save a very noisy image, I recommend the Topaz Denoise application - due to machine learning, it works wonders, neatly removing noise and not touching the details (and not like Lightroom, which simply blurs everything). Of course, everything is not always perfect, there may be strange artifacts occasionally, but very often it helps.
Here's my comparison:
1. No noise reduction.
2. Topaz Denoise.
3. Lightroom.
“A la Canon's Highlight tones priority” and this should never be included, I wrote many times why.
I'm not a regular here, and the activities of people without an avatar / specific nickname would be difficult to track. So why is that?
if in one word, patamushta there programmatically increases the ISO, with all the accompanying charms.
Everything is relative. HTP gives a nice roll off in highlights. And if you still shoot in a light key, then the noise does not really matter.
Here is an explanation - in the attached picture.
I don't remember from whom I stole it, but after reading it, I thought about it.
I have this option disabled.
Here it would be more correct to say that at the level of the RAW file, this is still just a stop underexposed or something like that. It's just that the camera, when developing jpg, and RAW converters, when rendering the image, understand what is what and apply a specific tonal curve to get a normally exposed image. That is, of course, this function should not be kept on all the time, but according to the situation, you can decide for yourself “so, my ISO is now low, the additional noise in the shadows is not so critical here, but I would like to reduce the risk of clipping in highlights”.
that's what I wrote. there is still the first part.
above again wrote the first part, if interested.
Many matrices also have an electrically controlled transparency layer. Thus, for example, they expand the ISO range to 50, and some manufacturers call tricks with this film Dual Native ISO, on the noise graphs it looks like a step.
Hello. I have d7000 on my hands. Good fotik but af not happy. I want to change to d7100 or d750. I shoot landscapes of birds and sometimes portraits. In general, just a little bit. Which choice would be preferable. Prices for 750 bite, but if the thing is good, I would buy it.
D300s \ D3s
The D750 isn't just a good thing. D750 - THING.
Just a budget camera.
In some ways it is good, in other ways it is not very good.
Hello. My vision got hooked and I already lack + 750 on Nikon D2, because in fact it's already 2,5. What can be done in my case. If there has already been such a topic somewhere, just poke it, or it))
Please.
https://www.nikon.ru/ru_RU/product/accessories/slr/slr-viewing/dk-20c-dioptre-correction-eyepiece2-0-dptr
Hello. On the occasion I got two Triopo TR-586EX flashes (without indexes). In flashes, channels and groups are configured. Will they work with the Triopo G1 synchronizer without additional devices, or do they need additional TR-800 radio synchronizers? According to the residual information on the network, there are receivers in the flashes, but in two stores where the G1 is sold they did not answer anything. Thank.
Good day. Please tell me. Is 24 megapixels or more in full frame too much for Soviet lenses? And they won't pull such permission anymore? I can't find such information anywhere. I want to buy a couple, three Soviet lenses. Maybe you already have an article about it?
—
Submitted from Mail.ru for Android
A full frame digital camera can have a bold pixel and very low noise (eg Sony a7s - 12,2MP).
Almost all Soviet lenses will be very comfortable for this camera.
If you have 25 megapixels, that's not bad either, although some lenses will already wash out at large aperture openings.
Soviet lenses are very different in resolution. For example, the plastic Zenitar-M2s 50mm / 2, according to the factory specifications, has a resolution of at least 63 lines / mm in the center. It can pull even 40 megapixels well.
But old lenses from the 50s like Jupiter-8, Jupiter-9, etc. better to use on a bold pixel like 12 megapixels.
In my opinion, this is all nonsense. My "Helios-44M" feels great on the "small-pixel" d7100 (see example). Again, you can take some test shots before purchasing.
And the only lens that frankly washed away with me is the Tamron 28-200.
Hello. Help with advice. There are 17-55 / 2.8, recently a sore of Nikon's glasses has appeared, the elastic band on the zoom ring began to slip. Visually, it did not seem to be swollen, but it does not hold well. To change the focal length, you need to squeeze with two fingers, otherwise the rubber band slips and the zoom is in place.
The first thing that comes to mind is to remove the gum and at several points, or maybe over the entire length, smear it with some kind of glue (moment for shoes or just superglue) and glue it to the lens.
How can this option threaten and how is it worse / better than the option with soaking in gasoline?
The screws for fastening the ring are usually hidden under the elastic band. If nothing of the kind is there, then nothing threatens. And then it will not be easy to disassemble.
Thank you, Mikhail. Now I specially removed the rubber band, there are no screws under it. Bare metal. It's just that soaking in a pot is recommended everywhere, and the option with glue or thin double-sided tape is not offered. Can the gum deteriorate over time from the glue? It will be a pity.
Cool glass in excellent condition, except for this gum.
It worked on the D7000 for me, now it works fine on the D500 too, but I rarely wear it now. Since I took the second / first D750 camera and bought 24-70 / 2.8 to my fleet of full-frame optics (there are 35 / 1.8, 50 / 1.8, 85 / 1.4 and 70-200 / 2.8). Now I have this only super-sized cropped lens. I want to sell it, since I stopped using it, but I don’t want to give it away with a slipping rubber, and I don’t want the jambs to come out of the new owner in the future.
Soak is advised, tk. the gum becomes larger and will not fit on the fotik)) The glue will not spoil it
3M double-sided tape will help.
Glue or tape, of course, will fix the gum, but it itself will not become smaller and will go with ugly bumps. I once soaked a gum on Tamron 28-75, it worked with a bang. Used gasoline for Zippo.
Detailed instructions are complete.
Yes, I thought about that too. Now the gum is in the initial stage of swelling, practically in size, only slips, does not sag, and is removed with difficulty. But over time, the process will still go on, and in places where there is no glue or tape, it will begin to bulge and bulge.
I looked on the net for recommendations on how to do everything correctly, I'll go tomorrow to look for gasoline in household goods. Thank.
I have a Canon 600D.
Please help me choose a lens for shooting birds. I'm already completely confused about these telephoto cameras🤯
Look at focal points. Conditionally from 70mm (80, 100, 150) to 400mm (500, 600). If the birds are not particularly wild, maybe up to 300mm will be enough. Or even a native 55-250.
I myself have a 75-300 III USM telephoto lens. For birds, taking pictures is just the thing. Focusing is very fast and accurate despite the size of the lens. =)
You can also buy a regular 75-300 III without a USM motor. He is also normal, in principle, no worse than mine.
I really like the Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM - it's inexpensive, lightweight, quiet focusing and there is a stabilizer. In theory, the non-STM version will be just as good, just there will be a noticeable sound from the autofocus.
I advise you NOT to take a telephoto lens without a stabilizer, as at such focal lengths without it there will be frequent smears in weather other than sunny.
what was the crow shot with (camera and lens) and with or without a tripod?
Not sure, but I would venture to suggest: Canon EOS 550D, Canon EF-S 55-250mm f / 4-5.6 IS STM, Shot at 250 mm, Aperture-priority AE, 1/320 sec, f / 5.6, ISO 3200
And (I'm not sure, but I'll also risk it) 99,999% of the tripod was not used here.
it seems :)
It's like that)
Well, yes, without a tripod.
I used Topaz Denoise for noise reduction, since everything was bad there at ISO 3200.
Damn, the sharpness of your photo pleases the eye. For some reason I have a problem with this.
Well .. I ask you to criticize what is wrong, (experience is not enough) to advise, to offer .. I followed this “bird of happiness” for a long time. Still, I managed to catch something .. a big inconvenience, it flies too fast…. :-)
the size was big ... squeezed ..
Great crow!