Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk 
Thread started 18 Dec 2017 (Monday) 10:02
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

I'm ready for a new basketball body, still can't decide 7dII or 5dIII

 
heat00
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2016
     
Dec 18, 2017 10:02 |  #1

Hi All,
I've been away for a while as we had no basketball however our season is about to begin...
and so I'm still faced with the upgrade question.
I know many of you have commented already and I appreciate it however pricing has since changed a bit and so here is the dilema:

currently have a t3i, which can't keep up, with a 70-200 and 24-70 all 2.8, sigma and tamron.

my thoughts are to upgrade to either:

1. 7dMII as they now are around 1500$ and then perhaps add that 50-100 1.8 sig for another $1000...

or

2. get a 5dIII for about $2000 and there may not be a need then for another (3rd lens)?

money is about the same and not really a deciding factor either way for me in this instance.

I am NOT any type of professional and this is all for my son and his team. we are now 8th grade and still sometimes face poorly lit gyms, although it's getting better.
Last year I found mostly I shot at around 1/500 or so, 2.8, and let ISO select automatically. main reason for this is auto on the t3i allows any denomination whereas preselect only allows 1600/3200/6400. focus also struggles in the faster action so I'm convinced now is the time to get a better body that can handle low light and high speed focusing better.

one of the problems with the t3i/crop is that I find sometimes the 24-70 is just a bit too short and the 70-200 is sometimes just a bit to long... I find many shots need closer to 50-100, hence the thought of the 7dII with the 50-100 at 1.8....

but then I thought with a FF like the 5dIII, the focal length changes and at the same time low light/high ISO performance should be much better... more importantly since I can live with the results I'm getting now of reducing noise etc. is the focal length. It makes me think with the FF and a 70-200, it's a true 70-200 whereas I might not need the 24-70 as often or at all really?

1.6x of a 70-200 on a crop would really be 112-320... and that 112 is sometimes too close and I don't always have the ability to back up, especially under the basket area...

I'd like to hear your thoughts and advice as many of you shoot basketball and many of you as professionals.... what would be the better way to go here based on my needs?
I don't use the camera for really anything else at all ever lol but I don't mind one last round of upgrades here that should last me through 8th grade to the end of high school, say 5 years.

Thank you.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Nogo
I could have been worse....
6,691 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 462
Joined Dec 2013
Location: All Along the Natchez Trace (Clinton, MS)
Post edited 6 months ago by Nogo.
     
Dec 18, 2017 10:45 |  #2

Quality of the light at a middle school and high school basketball gym is usually bad. The 5d3 is much better in the low light but the 7d2 has an anti flicker function that is outstanding. I own both cameras and prefer the 5d3. But having said that, if your processing time is short the anti flicker function helps so much it is almost a necessity.

If there is just no way you can justify the newest 5d Mark IV, I personally would get the 7d2 but buy it refurbished. That way you can start saving for the 5d4 which is both full frame and has anti flicker. Eventually you are going to want a full frame with anti flicker.

Also check out canonpricewatch.com and greentoe for the best prices.


Philip
Does the TF actually know about the soda cans and PVC pipe from 30 years ago?

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,710 posts
Gallery: 1104 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8055
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 18, 2017 10:58 |  #3

You can also look at a 1D IV for about $1k and keep using your current lenses.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
heat00
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2016
     
Dec 18, 2017 11:05 as a reply to  @ Nogo's post |  #4

Thank you for this. Yea, I can't really justify the price of the 5d4....

that being said, many of the gyms now are better lit and not so many middle schools where the flicker is a problem. If that was not an issue, would you then suggest the 5d3 and just use the 70-200?
I was also concerned about the focal length and not having to switch to the 24-70 mid game would be a big bonus.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,284 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 6 months ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
Dec 18, 2017 11:23 |  #5

Not to put a crimp in your decisions, but if you are going to be very close to the action, ie. right on the sidelines, I have yet to find that Sigma and Tamron lenses can keep up with the action. Both cameras you are looking at will drive the lenses a bit faster and better, but there is still that strange gap in AF performance between the Sigma/Tamron and the Canon equivalent.

If the lenses are fine with the T3i now for the shots you want to capture, then they will be fine with either of the 2 you are looking to migrate too, and perhaps just a tad better, but for really locking in on the action and keep focus where you want it instead of it veering off to other areas in the scene, or just not keeping up with the action during a burst, you may decide later to move to the Canon series.

As to "too close or too far", it will depend on your position to the action. If you are near the goal, you are going to have the widest gamut of focal lengths, but the better perspective, shooting from mid court will net you a smaller set of focal lengths needed, but the worst perspective of the game (from the backs of the players).

The 5D3 will yield cleaner results and its AF is very good, the 7D2 might trump it by a small margin and you have 10fps vs 6. You have some things to juggle in this decision. :)


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Craign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,188 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 43
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Kentucky
     
Dec 18, 2017 12:47 |  #6

Nogo wrote in post #18520863 (external link)
Quality of the light at a middle school and high school basketball gym is usually bad. The 5d3 is much better in the low light but the 7d2 has an anti flicker function that is outstanding. I own both cameras and prefer the 5d3. But having said that, if your processing time is short the anti flicker function helps so much it is almost a necessity.

If there is just no way you can justify the newest 5d Mark IV, I personally would get the 7d2 but buy it refurbished. That way you can start saving for the 5d4 which is both full frame and has anti flicker. Eventually you are going to want a full frame with anti flicker.

Also check out canonpricewatch.com and greentoe for the best prices.

Canon Direct for refurbished 7dMarkII is a great deal: https://shop.usa.canon​.com …urbished?WT.mc_​id=C126149 (external link)


Canon 7D Mark II w/Canon BG-E16 Battery Grip; Canon EOS 50D w/Canon Battery Grip; Canon SL1; Tokina 12mm - 24mm f/4 PRO DX II; Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS; Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS; Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS; Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM; Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS; Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM; Canon Extender EF 1.4x II; Canon Extender EF 2x II; Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Image Editing Okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
heat00
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2016
     
Dec 18, 2017 13:20 |  #7

Thanks, yes these are not easy to figure out lol.... at least without spending a fortune lol.

I do find what you (Teamspeed) are saying as many of my shots end up focusing on the wrong subject or not keeping up.... I always suspected the sig and tamron to be the issue lol.... although I will say between the 2 I find the tamron does a better job of focusing in my opinion..

Is there a market to sell my 70-200 and 24-70 to at least get a few bucks back towards a canon 70-200? I suppose then I could just get a canon 70-200 and either the 7dII or 5dIII and be in good shape? Problem is the 70-200 on a crop is not really enough by itself as I think the 70-200 with a FF would almost eliminate the need for a 2nd 24-70 lens all together because the focal length would then be much better?

man taking to you guys just keeps the dollars going up LOL... JK, I appreciate the honesty....

if I can grab a canon 70-200, is it feasible to get the one without OS for what I'm shooting? If I recall there is a model without OS that was a lot less expensive?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,284 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Dec 18, 2017 13:32 |  #8

In the Mark I camp of the 70-200 (f2.8 and f4), there were OS and non OS versions.

In the Mark II f2.8, there is only OS. This is the one I use for basketball currently.

There is a market for the used lenses, you just have to list them here on POTN and on FredMiranda.com, another good site to sell, but you have to pay a small fee there.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
heat00
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2016
     
Dec 18, 2017 13:50 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #9

yes I just went to the canon site, I see two, one is 1249$ and one is $1899 and it said II. Are there other differences, let me guess, If I'm going to get one I should get the II for whatever reasons LOL....

maybe I can find refurbished or used, or is that a bad idea when it comes to these lenses?

so, in this route I would go with a canon 70-200 for $1899

and either:

7dII which refurb could be $999
or 5dIII I see refurb as well for $1499

is it at all a bad idea to buy one of these bodies refurb? I guess it will come with warranty from Canon? is it a new sensor, what if it already has 10000 clicks on it? maybe not worth the savings?

would be out $3400 or $2900, hopefully with the ability to re capture something?? I guess I would just keep the tamron 24-70 and sell the Sigma, any idea what that would get back? maybe half $500 or so? that would help lol....

this is all so confusing and expensive, wish I had both on my shoulder at a game to actually test... hard to determine these things:

1. focal range of the 70-200 on the Crop vs FF at a basketball venue
2. difference in AF of the Sigma to the Canon

I know no one can answer this for me, will just have to bite the bullet and make a decision...

the biggest question that seems hard to answer is that FF vs crop... I know for sure most of the time I try to shoot standing (or sitting) under the basket with the players coming at me. These are not NBA or college games so there is usually no one there and no one really cares that I'm there however many times I cannot backup very far and that's when I find myself switching to the 24-70... no matter what I find many of my shots on the 24-70, using about 50-70 and the 70-200 using about 70-100 so it just feels like the perfect range is that 50-100 (crop value) LOL.... .. so, a FF with a 70-200 seems like it might be ideal, and not require switching to the 24-70 as it would be too wide most of the time? I guess the 70-200 on the FF is really equivalent of about 43-125 on crop so a 70-200 on FF should cover most of the range I use most? I think?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,284 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Dec 18, 2017 21:19 |  #10

I rarely like suggesting renting equipment, but perhaps in this case, it might be warranted so you can try out both combinations over a weekend? It would probably tell you pretty quickly which combination works, and you can try out your lenses too.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,710 posts
Gallery: 1104 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8055
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 18, 2017 21:31 |  #11

heat00 wrote in post #18521016 (external link)
yes I just went to the canon site, I see two, one is 1249$ and one is $1899 and it said II. Are there other differences, let me guess, If I'm going to get one I should get the II for whatever reasons LOL....

maybe I can find refurbished or used, or is that a bad idea when it comes to these lenses?

so, in this route I would go with a canon 70-200 for $1899

and either:

7dII which refurb could be $999
or 5dIII I see refurb as well for $1499

is it at all a bad idea to buy one of these bodies refurb? I guess it will come with warranty from Canon? is it a new sensor, what if it already has 10000 clicks on it? maybe not worth the savings?

would be out $3400 or $2900, hopefully with the ability to re capture something?? I guess I would just keep the tamron 24-70 and sell the Sigma, any idea what that would get back? maybe half $500 or so? that would help lol....

this is all so confusing and expensive, wish I had both on my shoulder at a game to actually test... hard to determine these things:

1. focal range of the 70-200 on the Crop vs FF at a basketball venue
2. difference in AF of the Sigma to the Canon

I know no one can answer this for me, will just have to bite the bullet and make a decision...

the biggest question that seems hard to answer is that FF vs crop... I know for sure most of the time I try to shoot standing (or sitting) under the basket with the players coming at me. These are not NBA or college games so there is usually no one there and no one really cares that I'm there however many times I cannot backup very far and that's when I find myself switching to the 24-70... no matter what I find many of my shots on the 24-70, using about 50-70 and the 70-200 using about 70-100 so it just feels like the perfect range is that 50-100 (crop value) LOL.... .. so, a FF with a 70-200 seems like it might be ideal, and not require switching to the 24-70 as it would be too wide most of the time? I guess the 70-200 on the FF is really equivalent of about 43-125 on crop so a 70-200 on FF should cover most of the range I use most? I think?

Both bodies have strengths & weaknesses. It's all about compromising for what you value & need the most. The shots won't matter if they're not focused on your subject. So I would really consider a priority list. Both cameras can do this at different levels. Good glass does matter. And the marriage of AF system of the body to the AF of the lens matters too. I think you will find significant differences in the AF accuracy between the Sigma & Canon lens on either Canon body. I would put a little thought into the combination.

I really think its basically splitting hairs between different priorities that are personal to each person, when it comes to shooting sports with a 1D IV, 7D2 or 5D3. The differences will be easily made via the lens combination and overall appearance at the maximum ISO of the body (assuming worst case scenario venue). After that, it's all about processing.

If your AF system is doing its job, and you're getting consistent in-focus shots, then FPS is something to pay attention to , because over the course of a game, several hundred or several thousand shots, can result in the one shot that matters because of having more FPS and getting the aesthetically pleasing shot with the combination of position, eyes, etc, things you cannot control, but can only gamble capturing. Capturing more is more odds to get it. If you're having more issues with getting consistent shots in focus, then pay more attention to the AF system of the body & lens combination (this is where its possible to consider changing from Sigma to Canon, every % bump in your favor from the gear helps). If all of that is already happening, then it's about top ISO performance (because none of this matters if it's not in focus in the first place).

Ergonomics and comfort of shooting matters too. Don't discount a monopod and tilt head. Fatigue reduction between bursts by having a monopod can help a lot.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
heat00
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2016
     
Dec 19, 2017 11:36 as a reply to  @ MalVeauX's post |  #12

Thank you for these details.

This is part of the problem, I'm not experienced enough to know or see what is causing my poor quality of pictures.

I don't know if I can really justify buying a new body and new lenses..... If you had to tell me what is most important if I can only upgrade one, what would you suggest?

I can keep my t3i body and swap my sigma 70-200 for a canon 70-200 or I could keep the sig and swap my t3i for either a 7dII or 5dIII (Which itself is a hard decision too lol).

I know many of my photos are grainy and many are not in focus. I "feel" like it's the sigma not being able to focus on the subject fast moving etc. however it could also be operator error?

I also know that it struggles with high ISO hence the thought to get the 5dIII... or possible a 7dII.

I also "feel" like a FF with the 70-200 will give me the perfect range without having to switch to the 24-70 back and forth mid game as many of my shots seem to be in that 50-100 range (on crop) which would all fall into the 70-200 range on FF?

maybe if one of you ever have a few minutes you can glance at some of my recent albums as you might quickly be able to determine what upgrade would yield me the best results? just a thought and thank you in advance if any of you have a few to do it.

my most recent albums are here: https://www.flickr.com​/photos/djnkatt/albums (external link)
some of those gyms had decent lighting...

remember this is just for my son and his teammates and I don't sell them nor do I claim to be anything more than dad trying to get clear pictures lol :)

Thanks in advance for any help.
Joey




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Craign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,188 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 43
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Kentucky
     
Dec 19, 2017 17:17 |  #13

heat00 wrote in post #18521752 (external link)
Thank you for these details.

This is part of the problem, I'm not experienced enough to know or see what is causing my poor quality of pictures.

I don't know if I can really justify buying a new body and new lenses..... If you had to tell me what is most important if I can only upgrade one, what would you suggest?

I can keep my t3i body and swap my sigma 70-200 for a canon 70-200 or I could keep the sig and swap my t3i for either a 7dII or 5dIII (Which itself is a hard decision too lol).

I know many of my photos are grainy and many are not in focus. I "feel" like it's the sigma not being able to focus on the subject fast moving etc. however it could also be operator error?

I also know that it struggles with high ISO hence the thought to get the 5dIII... or possible a 7dII.

I also "feel" like a FF with the 70-200 will give me the perfect range without having to switch to the 24-70 back and forth mid game as many of my shots seem to be in that 50-100 range (on crop) which would all fall into the 70-200 range on FF?

maybe if one of you ever have a few minutes you can glance at some of my recent albums as you might quickly be able to determine what upgrade would yield me the best results? just a thought and thank you in advance if any of you have a few to do it.

my most recent albums are here: https://www.flickr.com​/photos/djnkatt/albums (external link)
some of those gyms had decent lighting...

remember this is just for my son and his teammates and I don't sell them nor do I claim to be anything more than dad trying to get clear pictures lol :)

Thanks in advance for any help.
Joey

I looked at several photos in one of your albums shot with the 24-70mm lens, all photos I saw indicated f/2.8 and 1/500 sec. I try to keep my SS above 1/500 sec IF possible. Shutter speeds 1/800 sec. and higher yield sharper images (for me.) I don't think shutter speed is your biggest problem. The background was much sharper than the foreground players in several photos. That is the opposite of what I see in my photos when shooting at f/2.8 or any other wide open setting.

In an album shot with both the 70-200mm and 24-70mm lenses, the images from your 70-200mm lens were better. This could be due to the difference in lenses or the images shot with the 24-70mm lens had been cropped much more than those shot with the 70-200mm lens.

Your 24-70mm lens could be back focusing severely. The lens might not be able to focus fast enough. The camera could be focusing on the wrong subject due to focal point setting. Are you using single point focus and AI Servo?

Gut feeling: something is wrong that can be fixed without spending $3,000 for a new camera and a lens. You would be blown away at the results from a 5DIII or 7D2 with their better high ISO. The 10 fps from the 7D2 is really nice for sports.


Canon 7D Mark II w/Canon BG-E16 Battery Grip; Canon EOS 50D w/Canon Battery Grip; Canon SL1; Tokina 12mm - 24mm f/4 PRO DX II; Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS; Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS; Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS; Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM; Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS; Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM; Canon Extender EF 1.4x II; Canon Extender EF 2x II; Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Image Editing Okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
heat00
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2016
     
Dec 19, 2017 21:53 as a reply to  @ Craign's post |  #14

Thank you very much...
Yes I think I use single point and al servo.
I thought reverse that the 24-70 shots were better however you may be right.
so... this is operator error lol?
I do think something is having trouble focusing on my subject, unless it's me.
I also thought that the 5diii or 7dii would help with staying in focus on fast subject in darker conditions.. 7dII is not expensive now, maybe I'll try that with the current lenses and see what happens.. so hard to figure out but I guess at the end of the day, focus on the subject is priority is it not?
the only reason I don't go to high on SS is that then other problems are created with exposure and ISO etc so I try to keep it as high as I can go without ruining everything else...
again this is where I thought the advantage would go to 5dIII as it should go much higher ISO while producing better results.. I know a lot of this can be fixed PP but I'm not that skilled at PP nor do I have so much time to spend on that....
I don't mind making one upgrade of body, would you think that is money better spent than on swapping my lens... for now? and if so, how do you decide between 7dii and 5dIII?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Craign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,188 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 43
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Kentucky
Post edited 6 months ago by Craign.
     
Dec 19, 2017 23:19 |  #15

heat00 wrote in post #18522259 (external link)
Thank you very much...
Yes I think I use single point and al servo.
I thought reverse that the 24-70 shots were better however you may be right.
so... this is operator error lol?
I do think something is having trouble focusing on my subject, unless it's me.
I also thought that the 5diii or 7dii would help with staying in focus on fast subject in darker conditions.. 7dII is not expensive now, maybe I'll try that with the current lenses and see what happens.. so hard to figure out but I guess at the end of the day, focus on the subject is priority is it not?
the only reason I don't go to high on SS is that then other problems are created with exposure and ISO etc so I try to keep it as high as I can go without ruining everything else...
again this is where I thought the advantage would go to 5dIII as it should go much higher ISO while producing better results.. I know a lot of this can be fixed PP but I'm not that skilled at PP nor do I have so much time to spend on that....
I don't mind making one upgrade of body, would you think that is money better spent than on swapping my lens... for now? and if so, how do you decide between 7dii and 5dIII?

Single point focus does require the operator to stay on the subject or risk focusing on the background. I have a lot of bad experience by allowing the focal point to get slightly off the subject.

I have a 7D Mark II and love it. Real benefits of the 7DM2 are 10 fps (really valuable in sports photography), good high ISO, 65 focal points (I seldom use more than the center nine) anti-flicker and auto ISO with variable exposure compensation when in M mode. Getting the focus tracking dialed in right sometimes requires a lot of trial and error.

My camera is set so ISO does not go higher than 16000 unless I manually set it higher. I have been amazed at the quality of photos shot at ISO 12800 - 16000 and processed in Lightroom. I assume a good full frame camera would be even better.

My photos are much sharper since I learned to process high ISO and have increased the shutter speed from 1/640 sec. to 1/1000 sec. They improved some more when I went from f/2.8 to f/3.2 in the best lighted gyms where I shoot.

Renting some cameras for comparison would be great IF, IF, IF, they were set-up properly for your needs. The wrong settings would be a nightmare and you would not have time to get everything set right in a few days. Tough call and I have been through your situation.


Canon 7D Mark II w/Canon BG-E16 Battery Grip; Canon EOS 50D w/Canon Battery Grip; Canon SL1; Tokina 12mm - 24mm f/4 PRO DX II; Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS; Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS; Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS; Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM; Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS; Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM; Canon Extender EF 1.4x II; Canon Extender EF 2x II; Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Image Editing Okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

10,285 views & 19 likes for this thread
I'm ready for a new basketball body, still can't decide 7dII or 5dIII
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jeroe
863 guests, 371 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.