>>4449036Why?
>>4449036then you are on the right boardevery picture posted here is low qualitybad framingbad compositionusually of dog dicks
>>4449039And you're still here because...?
>>4449043posting my dog's dick with my m43 camera broi'm avant garde
>>4449044m43 is the best system for bad pictures, the second would be a phone.
>>4449045WrongM43 is worse than a phone because at least the phone uses AI hackery, HDR, focus stacking, etc. to improve the image quality
>>4449047That's what I said mate
Tried in B&W. Looked way better
>>4449074Use higher f/ stop to make stars.
Any time someone posts about m43 bad or snoy colors I know I can safely ignore them. No clue if they're right or wrong (I only shoot film) but the fact that someone wants to come here to shitfling about brands instead of discussing anything related to the work product tells me everything I need to know about their pea-sized brain.
>>4449090sure thing rajeesh
>>4449090This
>>4449124Did you soup your film?
>>4449036>in every other art form, "low quality" means the art itself is shitty>in photography it refers to resolution, noise, and other irrelevant shitgearfag: the hobby
>>4449160yes, "sovl" and "magic" fucks literally credit photography to the camerait passes because digital made it true. digital is fucking shit. film on the other hand is basically like shooting a fuji gfx100s with a fresh sensor every day.
>>4449134Yup, and then rubbed the negative with my fingers
I've been getting into digicams for this. I curse smart media
>>4449047phone still lose
>>4449047>AI hackery, HDR, focus stackingall bad things
>>4449391Both of them look beyond terrible. M43 cameras should just cram a sim card in their and let you make calls with them. It would be such a huge improvement.
>M43 and phones are low qualityCasuals
>>4449401m43 is clearly much better. Is it really that hard to admit?
>>4449403They look the sameTry posting the actual photos instead of these super pixellated crops
>>4449405>They look the samelol ok
>>4449402This absolutely mogs soulless and deranged m43. No recovery possible.
>>4449408You missed focus. 0/10
yea i got u op
another one
>>4449408>i missed focusdid you? The softness is probably diffraction because nothing is sharp anywhere. I assume you shot at f/gorillion to get a lower shutter speed. Try an ND filter or shoot in the evening next time.
>>4449391>Redminah dude, chink phones cannot into photos
>>4449708cinefaaaaag
>>4449036what is lq?
>>4449036Taken on my crappy phone a few years ago
Taken on a 30 year old digishit (Epson PhotoPC)It sucks.
>>4459155
>>4459157
>>4459158
>>4459159
>>4459160Occasionally photos are glitched like this. Happens in low light and direct sun.
>>4459161My theory is that the shitty CPU does this if it's having trouble encoding a jpg. Or maybe the CCD or the flash memory is going bad.
>>4459163
>>4459164Nothing else I took is worth posting, so have a photo of a dog that was on the camera when I got it. Either this digicam can't timestamp photos or the software it came with just ignores them and sets the date/time to when you download the photo. This picture could have been on there for decades.
