This camera really shows that to survive, all camera brands need to start selling cameras to people who otherwise do not practice photography. It needs to be fashionable and fun, like a fidget spinner. Form over function is the way to go.

>>4294344
Call me crazy but could he be one of our resident tripfags? The sheer derision for street and fujifags is like something some of the resident spergs would come up with. I'm remembering cinefag's screenplay thread a while ago and can't help but wonder if he is a youtuber who was basically crowdsourcing his next script at that moment.

>>4294348
>This camera really shows that to survive, all camera brands need to start selling cameras to people who otherwise do not practice photography.
They don't though, they aren't on the verge of bankruptcy. They don't need to sell it at all, it's just a nice way to bolster their profits. I unironically think we need a collapse in the camera market, no one is making anything good or interesting now. Sigma is the only company that even tries, but it hasn't released a camera in 3 years.

Cameras are increasingly becoming either soulless 'pro camera' snoy clones or this "pocket-able" garbage. Nothing in being made for actual enthusiasts

>xt5 looks absolutely perfect for my uses
>think of getting it
>see how people treat fuji shooters
>see how big of faggots fuji shooters are
man

>>4294355
no one irl cares. if you actually use your camera even once you're better than anyone who complains about a brand lmao

>>4294351
You're exactly who I'm talking about. You're under the impression that hating street photography is some weird niche thing. But in reality it's the opposite, people who like street photography are a weird niche. Nobody likes you.

>>4294355
You should get it if you like it. I used to have an x-t3 and no one was weird about it irl. If anything people thought it was cool. But yes, you are being lumped in with those people.

>>4294358
I'm not a fan of street but a hateboner of that magnitude isn't common at all

>>4294363
It's not a hateboner, it's making fun of the (very real) people who huff their own farts over their photography who just so happen are highly concentrated in street photography because that is the result of growing as an over-educated ubranite. It's fun to point and laugh at them, not everything is serious lil bro

>>4294355
Xtrans sucks get a nikon and watch the fixie hipsters seethe about soul

Literally every fuji (fuck, most cameras period) is a copy or paraphrase of a prior nikon design btw. Even sony essentially copied nikon. So only nikon has any soul.

>>4294348
>all camera brands
not all camera brands are desperate enough to attract socially insecure consumers that need a fashion accessory for hipster larp purpose.

>>4294355
welcome to the internet. buy whatever camera you like and go outside and take pictures. don't give a fuck. easy

>>4294373
Doesn't nikon make you pay for firmware? I'm not a submissive Capcom paypiggy so I don't pay for shit that should be free.

>>4294406
Firmware updates should be illegal. Companies should release a complete and fully tested camera and if they have to release a firmware update to fix major issues, they should be subject to class action lawsuits and have to fix the cameras for free. Paid firmware updates are a path to micro transactions in cameras

>$2500 New full frame Canikony body
>oh you wanted autofocus? That'll be $200
>moveable autofocus? $150
>extra color profiles $19.99 each
>unlock the 120hz refresh rate on the evf? $600

Paying for firmware updates is just begging these companies to fuck you in the ass.

>>4294406
>Doesn't nikon make you pay for firmware?
The Z6/Z7 raw upgrade is the only paid one.
Probably because they don't want to pay Apple and Blackmagic licensing fees for a feature that 99% of shooters will never use.

>>4294344
>rolling shutter on this camera
ok which retard buys this overprized piece of nostalgio to do video (or action stills)? fucking youtuber subhumans

>>4294355
why do you care? you don't have to give a fuck about the """"community"""" (lol other users of a product). I drive an old jeep wrangler and ignore all the other jeep fags who try to give me the jeep greeting. I drive my shitbox wrangler because it's fun to drive through mud. not because of some community BS

>>4294366
imagine being so fucking brain washed that you prefer to shoot your urban hellscape and the wageslaves living in it over driving for 30 minutes to get out of the city and shoot nature
reminds me of that reddit post where nature makes him afraid and he wants back to his comfy concrete prison

>>4294438
when it comes to their own money manufactureres suddenly realize that no one wants to do video lol. but they keep that shit to have something for the spec-sheet-reviewing youtubers

Having owned and sold a x100v I can absolutely get the hype. You get stopped by random non photography people wanting to have a look at your camera. You get really solid performance for having done zero research beforehand. And you got a real experience in terms of switching between viewfinders and film simulation modes.

That this doesn't match my Nikon performance is a non-argument. What it is is a really really good camera, and that is enough for 90% of people.

>>4294409
>extra color profiles $19.99 each
haha photographers would squeal (while still trying to sell their own "preset packs")

>>4294344
kek, streetshiiting fujislugs on suicide watch
When he basically puts some random settings, snapshits without looking and even takes a pic with the cap on he really captured their essence

>>4294406
I’ve never paid for a single firmware update on my Z 6II

>>4294522
>solid performance
Xtrans looks like iphone photos especially with that soft as shit lens. A phone is enough for 90% of people (pic related) so you didnt really say anything in favor of fuji.

>>4294505
This thing doesnt actually sell. Fuji artificially limits supply and most of the sales are chinese scalpers. Fuji struggles to win market share from panasonic, ffs.

For what its worth the z8 and zf outsold all other cameras in japan but part of that was likely “nikon has autofocus again”

>>4294352
>They don't though, they aren't on the verge of bankruptcy.
Well definitely not Fuji, but they are carried by Instax and this x100 thing. This camera isn't popular because it's good. It's popular because it converts people to photography.

>>4294344
i never saw a pic made with fuji camera and said WOW THAT'S A NICE SHOT, fucking nikon d750 can wow me, sony a7iii can wow me, even OM-Systems wowed me couple of times, Leica can wow me with good lenses but never fuji, all their pictures look like they were made on iPhone.

File: IMG_7537.jpg (130 KB, 1125x1079)

130 KB JPG

Feels good not to be a poorfag

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Comment	Screenshot
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1125
Image Height	2436
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4294679
>payboo card savings
>spending less than $2000 on a camera
Poorfag poser. Post leica m11 monochrom.

>>4294679
>he got $160 stolen from him by the gov and the rest scammed from him by a scamera company
lel

>>4294693
>a tripnigger talking down to anyone at all

Oh wow a beautiful , attractively packaged camera with high-end performance.
A real mystery why it's popular.

> Just use a smartphone
I'm convinced none of you are this fucking retarded and are just playing it up out of brand loyalty.
The best camera is almost never the one with the highest megapixel count.

>>4294503
Most Jeep owners think it's fun to drive through "mud".

>>4294711
>Beautiful
Looks like a plastic leica knockoff from aliexpress
>With high end performance
Did you make the mistake of zooming in on the sample photos yet? Xtrans is objectively shit, like bayer blur but worse and the colors, especially reds/pinks, and totally fucking wrecked.

I just came here to push dirt in all of your gearfags faces. I hate all of you and hope you die. Gonna have fun with my x100vi when I get it and there is nothing you can do about it

>>4294720
>you're gearfags but i paid $1600 for a shitty "premium" camera fuji markets with unabridged gearfag nonsense like "xtrans is a random pattern that prevents moire and its totally not our chroma-obliterating post processing"

>>4294723
>let me zoom in 1000% because that’s what matters

No one cares homo

>>4294724
Then what's the point of a 40MP sensor?

>>4294724
I too pay a premium for a high resolution camera to never make anything bigger than an 8x10

Xtrans shittiness is visible even in 1080p because of how inaccurate it is with red things in particular. It is an objectively bad CFA. Fuji should have went foveon.

The x100vi lens is soft enough that you can see the sharpness falloff in small prints until you go over the diffraction limited aperture (f5.6) and beyond. Really pushing for the classic look all around… except most film lenses were super sharp period and diffraction didnt look bad until f16 because it wasnt digital. I have no idea why people buy fuji when even relatively budget leicas (even the minoleica with its minoleica lens) take photos that are obviously nicer. Fuji lens iq is like a dispo camera. But without the 3d pop rendering. Fuji sensor iq… they should have stuck to making film.

Oh wait can you guys not afford portra?

>>4294736
there is no point beyond maybe spec sheet pumping.
>>4294740
why do you keep saying this like it's some kind of spectacular own? how many people do you think are printing bigger than 8x10? everyone agrees that it's overpriced, everyone interested in large prints already has a big iq-centric camera for that purpose. apsc is for taking into casual situations where u don't want to carry something so specialized. 100s were expensive before the high res. the premium isn't for resolution or even iq- the appeal is the portability and completeness of the package that has very few alternatives
>>4294743
here's your (You)

>>4294743
Does 40MP aps-c sensor really hits lens diffraction limit at f/5.6 because that sounds like way way too much resolving power?

>>4294366
u write like an asian incel lol

>>4294373
Nikon ZF completely bodied Fuji's entire larp offerings imo.

>>4294788
I am a white incel

>>4294758
>why do you keep saying this like it's some kind of spectacular own? how many people do you think are printing bigger than 8x10?
Anyone who owns an ILC because otherwise your phone is literally identical.

>Le casual situations
Either any camera between an instax and a gfx is acceptable or an instax is the fanciest acceptable camera. Sorry about your decision to be a "street photographer"

>>4294828
>Anyone who owns an ILC because otherwise your phone is literally identical.
muh toneh

So Fuji took its well established camera platform that is used by news publications and fashion magazines and packaged it in a small sexy body that non photographers might actually want to use. AND ITS SELLING???

> But zoom in to 900%
> But I need Hubble telescope quality
> But my Giant professional camera looks identical on Instagram.

>>4294699
Cope, former tripfag hiding in anonymity.

>>4294344
Somewhat of a misunderstanding (or manufactured contrarianism for views sake) of who this camera is for which is people not in the market for an ILC and people looking for something to complement their ILC and its pretty much exclusively meant for stills, so the entire rolling shutter section can be skipped. (are there any notable fixed lens cameras sold for video, are video bro's wanting anything like this?)

>>4294355
I like mine and recommend it.

>>4294409
To be fair what I've seen from fuji is fewer fixes than updates, e.g. new film sim which doesn't necessarily interest me but they were under no obligation to push it to the X-T5 based on advertising

I hope all the brands are successful in that they're able to continue making cameras in an increasingly dedicated cameraless world (the silliness of paying for raws notwithstanding) and if that means they have to sell a chinesium toy to the one time customer, who cares?

>>4294667
Have you ever been truly wowed by anything? Ah yes this beautiful painting, what paint did he use?

>>4294808
It did, but no one bought it
It should have been made illegal to make a camera this good for $2k ever since A7riii dropped
But no one bought it

>>4294965
A7iii not r

>>4294860
>its selling
They artificially restrict supply to make it look like it. In reality fuji struggles to gain market share over panasonic and olympus
>durrr quality bad
Sounds like someone broke their puny budget and found out 40mp xtrans is lower quality than 25mp micro four thirds

>>4294961
“What paint” IS a classic question, certain pigments are extremely sought after. In that analogy, fuji is like painting with poo.

File: IMG_9289.jpg (57 KB, 615x414)

57 KB JPG

>>4294965
>no one bought it
Lol. Nikon just doesnt restrict supply to play hypebeast swagdrop with their cameras.

>>4294828
Based, true, keyed

Fujislugs have a bit of an insecurity streak over thinking they look like they take photography seriously, which they fear will raise expectations for good photos. Fuji people simply don’t take em (so many fucking shitty jewish street nonphotographer wannabes!) so they seek cameras that make them look like they do photography ironically.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	615
Image Height	414
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4294972
Is this normally asked by the wowed or do they just say "what a striking blue" and continue their adoration

Perhaps a better example is "wow a cathedral of light, what model searchlights are used?"

gear obsession is a virus

>>4294976
From a painter to a painter, it is normal to ask how they get their striking blues and even be obsessed with acquiring a certain paint to recreate their vision

Sorry about your buyers remorse. I know you have over $2000 in fuji gear so this must be emotional for you, but its ok. You can always sell it later when you finally realize the camera is the one fucking red textures and skin color transitions and slightly smearing fine details by luck of where they land on that retarded grid. Also i really dont want to hear any anti-gearfag stuff from someone with over $2000 in mirrorless gear directed at me, a film shooter, kthxbai.

>>4294981
you ever notice that no one ever dunks on film unless its a digislug reeeeeing over no animal butthole af, no chimping, no iso 25600, 3 second shutter press costing $25, etc
or how film people dont have film stock wars
but everyone makes fun of digital cameras, even other digislugs?

i do. thats because film is good, and the closest digital can get to being good is imitating film. the less like film digital gets the worse it gets. unfortunately only some crazy technology like 100,000,000 pixel 35x24 foveon could come close. modern bayer and xtrans are like #9 and #10 on the film look list (my emulsion doesnt guess the pdaf grains).

>>4294344
Worth every penny.

We've entered the 'all cameras good' phase. It's all about the experience now and Fujifilm delivers. No one cares about MP or DR any more.

>>4295014
Hopeless poser. Sad.

>>4295016
You better get along.

>>4294985
>(my emulsion doesnt guess the pdaf grains)
Yet another one of the many joys of reflex.

>>4295074
phase detect and it's consequences have been a disaster for photographers and photography

>>4295077
Elaborate

>>4295079
It damages high ISO image quality due to interference with the noise, resulting in blurry and mushy looking images

But more importantly it began the current trend of hyper-fixation on auto-focus performance, which has come at the cost of actually useful developments which could have been made with those R&D resources, like moving away from Bayer filters. Now we have AI trained models to detect your cats asshole. Instead of something that actually matters for the quality of the image.

>>4295081
nosotros vivimos en un sociedad...

I've seen quite a few pros shooting Fuji so getting a compact, go anywhere, version of that sensor is probably quite a good deal.

I remember playing around with one of its predecessors and those cameras do feel really nifty. It's funny how Fuji absolutely dominates the aps-c and large format market.

>>4295109
except that "pro" photographers are often the worst photographers

being a pro necessarily means
>you value 'good enough' over great
>your focus is speed not art
>quality is a backseat concern to productivity
Being a pro photographer means shitting out the bare minimum that someone who knows literally nothing about photography (hence why they are paying someone else to do it) won't notice that it's bad.

If you care about the artistry of photography, you should be paying attention to what enthusiasts and artists are using, not professionals.

>>4295110
>If you care about the artistry of photography, you should be paying attention to what enthusiasts and artists are using, not professionals.
Really? Because artists really don't care about gear.

>>4295111
They do. But it's not about specs and charts, it's about the camera that provides the least path of resistance from vision to realization

Damn these things look really cool. The xt4 sensor was absolutely wonderful (and was for whatever reason adapted by the fashion world) looking on Flickr this really does seem like a higher resolution version of that.

And I'm not sure why people are surprised by its popularity. A beautiful camera is itself inspiring. Leica bases it's whole brand off of that.

>>4295119
bait me softly sempai

I'm not one for spec sheets but I've seen a lot of great photographs taken with these cameras.

For most photographers that's enough.

>>4295110
This is, by far, the highest level of autism ever to be witnessed in a Fuji hate thread.

brb Coffee

>>4295110
You make pro photographers sound like engineers in charge of a factory

File: 52573307-0-image-a-97_164(...).jpg (341 KB, 1908x1146)

341 KB JPG

>>4295119
They are really not good cameras, but they have a feature that is invaluable to certain kinds of people - feminine people.

Fujifilm cameras are narrow toed, high heeled shoes or tight pants with shallow pockets. They are inconvenient and not very useful but feminine leaning individuals irrationally adore them even if they're an asian ripoff of an italian designed original (alibaba is chic!)
>inb4 a dying /p/ cope - how can you be an artist if you don't care about aesthetics
There are masculine aesthetics and there are feminine aesthetics. Fujifilm leans hard into pairing with feminine aesthetics and lifestyle decisions.

It should work out for them, because that's a little over 50% of people, and way more than 50% of "photographers" (whether or not you'd call them photographers based on your own artistic standards...)

>>4295366
They essentially are. They run a business. Canon's #1 spot is entirely because they went to pro-friendly wholly electronic lenses in the 90s so every other pro, with a pro attitude...
>i will eat any cost now to get every shot later (so i dont get outdone or disappoint). more fps! more autofocus! culling? i charge extra.
...is now so heavily invested in Canon they can not leave while exercising good business sense even if canon is objectively overpriced overweight overkill dogshit for everyone who does not shoot events for a living.

>>4295307
lol every time i look at /fag/ i regret ever considering buying a fuji

/fgt/ is by far the best thread on /p/ and film photographers are consistently better than digital photographers

>>4295366
They basically are. They are a factory of mediocre photos. Designed to minimize cost and keep flaws to an acceptable level. They literally can't care about artistry 95% of the time because it doesn't do anything for the bottom line. If you spend the extra time to make a shot great instead of acceptable, the client is not going to notice, because the client doesn't know anything about photography. So you're not getting paid more and nobody notices, it's makes far more sense as a pro to spend that time getting more shots, which does increase your profit or give you insurance on the number of deliverable shots you need.

>>4295312
You haven't seen nothin' yet.

>>4295405
>i regret ever considering buying a fuji
Which one did you buy?

>>4295403
Who are the nerdchads of cameras? Pentax, Olympus and panny I'd say

>>4295592
what the fuck's a Pentax. Oh you mean Ricoh

>>4295592
What the fuck's an Olympus? Oh you mean a Jip

I don’t know why /pee/ has such a hateboner for working photographers. Without them driving the market and buying the latest and greatest to show off to their bridezilla clients, you’d all still be shooting aps-c on a shitty Pentax with ancient sensors or something kek

>>4295610
>you’d all still be shooting aps-c on a shitty Pentax with ancient sensors
>implying I'm not
Fuck pro "photographers"

File: IMG_8762.jpg (257 KB, 817x426)

257 KB JPG

Why is the 24mp entry level (discontinued) Canon out-resolving the 26mp Fuji?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	817
Image Height	426

>>4295625
because the xtranny array means it's really just an 8mpx sensor

>>4295405
which pictures are yours?

>>4295625
Probably the lens on the fuji

>>4294679
That tax....oooh what a saving! Thanks payboo! Kek

>>4294344
>my favorite Jewtuber is absolutely DUNKING on Fuji onions by beating the strawman I made up in my mind!
>that oughta show 'em!
kek never get tired of console warring /v/edditors on /p/ seething over fuji

Allright so I have a confession to make. Almost every positive comment in this thread is me shitposting after work.
Since I'm convinced all the Fuji hate is written by the same dude I just wait for another irrationally angry reply and then post another positive comment.

Congrats to (>>4295122) for finally catching on to me. The rest of you are all pathetic man children.

>>4294344
Serious question.

I bought an xpro2 last month, does this make me a pretentious cunt? My last digital camera was a Canon T1i. I own a Leica M3 and IIIf. Roast away.

Quit arguing about performance. All flagship modern cameras are more then good enough

>>4295675
Lol.
/P has only two posters.

>>4295689
It's a fine camera and quite a delight to use.

>>4295673
It's so obvious they're using tax deductions to give you a "discount" lol

>>4295709
Fuji digital actually looks worse than real fuji film. Anyone who settles for a camera that looks worse than a 100 year old medium is a retard.

Also see: SNOY color science.

>>4295625
You can see lightroom left some of the xtrans false colors in so it looks like it has digital color noise at base ISO. Try any fuji camera, even the ones they tested with new sharp lenses, closer to the center 1/3 of the chart and even 40mp xtrans looks like a digital mess compared to a panasonic gh6.

>>4295610
No, we’d still be shooting superior film. Digital was invented for high volume “professionals” (journalists, not artists) as a cost/aesthetic compromise. The film camera market would have progressed so far that 120 would be an affordable format and the digital camera would be a little known piece of military equipment few people have just like IR and UV imaging.

>>4295725
>even 40mp xtrans looks like a digital mess compared to a panasonic gh6.
And it's literally the same Sony sensor underneath the filter just smaller on the GH6. X-tranny is a disgrace.

>>4295729
The real disgrace is the countless amazing slide film stocks fuji discontinued because they’d rather sell instax and this blurry, worm ridden digital corpse skin crap to zoomzooms

Welcome to kodak planet, home of ilford.

>>4295738
Outside of Velvia, I say good riddance. Always hated those Fuji greens and skin tones.

>>4294355
stop being terminally online
Outside of weird internet autists noone gives a fuck

>>4294355
You will always have it in the back of your head and the day you hold a nikon z6 with a 26mm f2.8 (or a 40mm f2 since fuji lenses are aoft and their weather sealing doesnt work anyways) you’ll realize you fucked up bigtime

>>4295740
>he thinks slide film colors are set in stone
Read “film in a digital age”

>>4295746
The information that is lost, is lost.
I don't need to bother reading anything about the digital age when Hollywood has been grading colors for decades now. It's not news unless you're completely unaware of things.

>>4295751
I only recommended you a tutorial with good examples because you’re not that smart

>>4295756
I'd rather shoot Kodak and not cope in post with garbage Fuji colors like someone trying to emulate Aerochrome from regular color print film

>>4295689
it's the opposite. it means 5 of the 10 posters on /p/ will make up a guy to pretend is you and circlejerk about being better than him

File: img_2076-2.jpg (160 KB, 1000x750)

160 KB JPG

>>4295689
No, you were already a pretentious cunt for owning an anusfinder instead of embracing the Joy of Reflex™

>>4295787
Apparently these are not just the same size as a leica, but lighter.

Hey guys I just came home from a renaissance fair shooting my XT3 all day. Such a joy to use!Saw one 5D MkIII Tamron 70-200 (guy was drunk), one edgy fairy girl with Sony APSC kit lens and one wannabe R3 24-70 2.0 posh bloke (thing is huge), no Nikons around. We all had a beer, good times.

Now what's the matter with Fuji again?

>>4295812
>renaissance fair
Kek. Typical fuji users. Also see...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alexfvance/33677947542

Whenever I go to a sports game it's all canon nikon sony iphone even in the crowd.

File: actual p poster.jpg (369 KB, 2048x1381)

369 KB JPG

>>4295816
hey, fuji just has nerd appeal because of their perpetual love affair with "steampunk" and inability to afford film after blowing thousands on costumes they totally don't have sex in and plane tickets to conventions that have exactly 0 orgies.

except this guy. he can afford film.

why do you think it's such a rare brand to see in real life but as soon as you log onto 4chan it seems like half the people have a fuji?

>b-b-but fuji is girly! retro chic! twee!
a lot of nerd things, like skirted trenchcoats, fedoras, eyeliner, roleplay, and being attracted to men, are girly.

>>4295816
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alexfvance/33010312113/in/album-72157678812657734/

Whenever I go to a furry event it's all canon pentax even in the crowd.

File: 1702917082194364.jpg (2.25 MB, 1972x1910)

2.25 MB JPG

>>4295817
WHAT KIND OF HERESY IS THIS

>>4295823
Yeah but Pentaxians are just snapping for their cringe compilation

>>4295823
Especially Pentax, I mean they basically are the furry of cameras

File: IMG_9294.jpg (159 KB, 900x1200)

159 KB JPG

>>4295826
Pentax and olympus film shooters are probably 80% furries

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	900
Image Height	1200
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4295817
how did you get this picture of me without the dog hair on it?

>>4295824
Most 40k fans are furries. When i played magic with my sister (she needed an escort so she wouldnt get molested) the nerds called it warhammer furry-kay.

>>4295756
You're talking to a tripfag that has literally never posted a single photo in his 100 years of posting here

>>4294355
Get both.
I got fuji first. now I have fuji and sony.

I canceled my preorder and bought a gfx 50r. Now I get to call people with small cameras fags

>>4298005
based, what len(ses) did you get?

>>4294344
I was thinking about getting one of these because I'm rich and am able to afford it. Knew it was overhyped a bit and saw that its lens is kinda doo-doo. Still, I wanted one.

Went to Disneyland yesterday and saw some zoomer hipster Mexican clutching his close to his chest. He clearly had no photographic experience and bought one based on the hype.

Totally sucked my motivation to get one. Gotta be overhyped crap. I bought an old Pentax MX-1 instead.

>>4294373
>Literally every car (fuck, most cars period) is a copy or paraphrase of a prior Ford model T design btw. Even Mercedes essentially copied Ford. So only Ford has any soul.
What a faggot kys

File: Screenshot 2024-03-25 at (...).png (135 KB, 618x597)

135 KB PNG

>>4294409

>>4298018
the 32 - 70 for landscapes and environmental. Then a voigtlander 58 for portraits.

>>4298080
If you want new features, buy a new camera. I don't really know why I care so much. I have the best bodies I can buy for the kind of photography I do without going to something really spendy like medium format. So unless camera R&D goes into something besides video, autofocus speed and continuous burst rates this is a non-issue for me.

>>4298024
How do you like it? I keep seeing one for sale locally here (atrocious asking price) and it does pique my interest

>>4298024
>some zoomer hipster Mexican clutching his close to his chest
?

>>4298358
In other words, your typical fujislop purchaser with minimal photography experience who bought a fashion accessory. He was afraid of the camera actually picking up any signs of real use and held it closely and securely, meekly, afraid to use it as the tool it’s supposed to be. Well, just guessing anyway.

>>4298389
Everyone who buys “small” cameras is insecure or female. They are not actually small and everyone still notices.

DSLRchads win again.

>>4298024
>Pentax MX-1

Awful camera. Better off with a coolpix A or Olympus Stylus 1.

File: dpreviewfags.png (535 KB, 738x810)

535 KB PNG

>>4295625
because you retards should look less at dpreview who dont know how to process fuji raw files properly.
my x100v is extremely sharp.

>>4298482
Shouldnt have to process it to get it sharp broo.

>>4298482
Nice worms.

They dont enhance the raws because of what happens at high ISOs. More worms. Also most people have better things to do or else we’d all shoot superior m43+topaz AI.

>>4298492
the fuck are you talking about you delusional retard. Theres no worms in my processed files.

>>4298484
but this IS processing, be it my way, be it dpreview way as in the previous anons post. If you want to leave processing out you should stick to jpegs.

File: DSCF16002.jpg (3.9 MB, 6240x4160)

3.9 MB JPG

here you go pixelpeepers, full sized x100v sample. Albeit compressed to 4chan limits.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X100V
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:26 20:57:46
Exposure Time	1/300 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	7.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	23.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Soft
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: crop.png (1.04 MB, 829x608)

1.04 MB PNG

Here's a crop. Extremely sharp. But yeah, this will be forgotten until the next thread until one of you will start shitting on x-trans.

>>4298510
Looks like a dslr kit lens and the colors are all slightly washed out

>>4298510
>>4298507
looks like a 12 megapixel m43 with a kit lens
l m a o

>>4298528
Yeah it actually kind of does look like m43 but oly colors are way more vibrant and lifelike. Fujis always have that silvered out ultramax 400 lab scans look going on. Probably intentional because thats what zoomers think film looked like.

>>4298510
Im sure that building had texture but unfortunately its xtrans so it looks more solid grey. I notice this flatness in xtrans photos and photos with lots of noise reduction. Curious.

File: fujiworms.jpg (4.29 MB, 4672x3115)

4.29 MB JPG

found some serious fujiworms infestation

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T3
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T3 Ver4.50
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	120 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:01:28 09:52:19
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	640
Lens Aperture	f/7.2
Brightness	8.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	80.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4672
Image Height	3115
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Unknown
White Balance	Unknown
Chroma Saturation	Unknown
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

>>4298510
>>4298507
> one of you will start shitting on x-trans.
Keep posting your snapshits lad, and we won’t have to, xtranny does a fantastic job of shitting on itself lmao

>>4298316
It's great. I like that it kind of feels like having a disposable camera that I don't need to have developed.
>>4298471
Plebeian take but thank you for your input.

>>4298482
>specialist processing required to get the same sharpness as an obsolete entry level canon.

File: Screenshot 2024-03-27 090750.png (1.95 MB, 1618x1255)

1.95 MB PNG

>>4298528
absolute cope and denial.
>>4298536
it doesnt, see pic. Shitting on fuji has become such a meme on /p/ that likes of you will just come up with bullshit on the go.
>>4298553
at least i post something. You will stay nophoto forever. All you have is gear threads on /p/.

>>4298625
it's still processing even on canon, though, isn't it? Or are you just shooting jpegs like an amateur?

File: Canon_EOS_10D_with_lens.jpg (1.14 MB, 3000x2007)

1.14 MB JPG

>>4294344
It's crazy how you can get an ASP-C DSLR from canikon or whomever for like a 1/20th the price of a fuji mirrorless and they'll still take better pictures as they're not x-worms. If you wanna splurge you could just get a 5D or something for 200 bucks and take pictures that are objectively better than any aps-c x-trans garbage, past, present or future. Probably better pics than a GFX too as MF x-trans is equivalent to APS-H cmos. Even their build quality is absolutely mogged by olympus retro larp bodies. Truly a shocking purchase for an advanced species of cretin.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	FinePix S5Pro
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	105 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:11:07 13:36:53
Exposure Time	3 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Brightness	-1/2 EV
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2007
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4298671
I have that lens on my T1i from 10 years ago.

Nice bit of kit. I had to buy 2 because some dipshit smashed the AF lever off of mine, though.

>>4298672
They're alright, but they're pretty soft wide open and still not great stopped down. They're also notoriously fragile because of ultrasonic motor and external zoom. When the lens is stored and not set to focus to infinity, impacts push it in and can break the motor. They really should have done an internal zoom version at some point as the lens was like 30 years old when they retired it.

>/p/: lol don't buy Leica that's just overpriced Fuji-shit.
>/p/: lol don't buy Fujifilm that's just a bootleg Leica-shit.

so do i just buy nikon?

>>4298675
It's not secret that Leicas are overpriced, but at least once you have overpaid you've got a camera that will always take good photos. Fujis business scheme is more of a sell then run sort of thing.

If you already have Nikon lenses, yeah buy Nikon. Ditto for Canon or whatever non-xworms brand. If you don't have any lenses just look for whatever you can get a good deal on. If you're not worried about the cost, look at samples from different cameras, specs are a meme. The only important things about a camera are:
>can I use it?
>does it take nice pictures?

File: dr.png (85 KB, 2043x958)

85 KB PNG

>>4298671
it's crazy how you can be a retard and still make a post on /p/. Imagine holding on to your relic of the past and thinking that it has a chance against a modern sensor. Lmao.
Btw, price of camera is not relative to the sensor performance. What, you think Leica M11 is 10 times better than, lets say Canon R8 ?

>>4294344
I dont like that its fixed lens

>>4298692
>using this retards charts
Lol

Todd from Brooklyn wants to take a picture of his latte then apply a film filter on it before he uploads it to his BlueSky
Its a niche, its not changing photography for anyone with multiple good cameras

>>4298692
Now add the om-5 do it

AND Remember this is labeled ISO and fuji cheats their labels the hardest, therefore you must mentally shift the graph left to equalize for real sensitivity
Fuji: 1 stop under
Oly/pana: 2/3 stop under
Canikony: 1/3 stop under

>>4298715
>Now add the om-5 do it
it's not in the list
>therefore you must mentally shift the graph left
i dont have to shift anything because the image is still there with the output that i get. It could say ISO 30 or iso 3000, its irrelevant as long as it produces the required quality, which is there.

>>4298692
>retard posts image that doesn’t actually really show his argument in a good light
Considering it’s a current camera vs one that’s 19 years old, 1-2 ev difference is actually a pretty good showing. Am I being trolled here?

File: Thumbnail-2_Panasonic-G9-(...).jpg (1.35 MB, 1920x1080)

1.35 MB JPG

>>4298716
>I dont have to shift anything
You actually do. If ISO is mislabeled you cant compare DR between cameras using a chart against LABELED ISO. YOU ARE MAKING A FALSE COMPARISON
>actually I'm taller than you because i count starting from 2! - P2P Chartfag "logic"
So if you compare the chart as is, you are being told your fuji has 10.4 stops of dynamic range at "ISO 126", but if you exposed an actual photo instead of looking at the chart, using settings from a standards following camera or a film camera instead of fuji's on-camera meter (which suggests the extra exposure for the REAL ISO, not the labeled one), IT WOULD BE ONE STOP TOO DARK. You have 10.4 stops of dynamic range at ISO 63. NOT ISO 126.

The Panasonic Lumix G9M2 is reported to have 10.18 stops of dynamic range at "ISO 100", labeled, the REAL ISO is closer to ISO 64.

THE FUJI X100VI, WITH A SENSOR 1.5 TIMES LARGER, HAS LESS THAN A HALF STOP OF EXTRA DYNAMIC RANGE OVER MICRO FOUR THIRDS (BEFORE PANASONIC'S DR BOOST FEATURE IS ENABLED WHICH ADDS ONE AND A FUCKING HALF EXTRA STOPS OF DYNAMIC RANGE IF YOUR SHUTTER SPEED IS 1/60 OR LOWER)

FOOL-JIFILM: 10.4 STOPS DR AT REAL ISO 63
10.18 + 1.5 = 11.68 STOPS OF DR AT REAL ISO 64 ON G9II
NIGGON ZF = 11.12 STOPS OF DR AT REAL ISO 80

Even if you CANT afford a G9II, the DR difference between FOOLjiFAILm x-tranny and micro for THADS is STILL less than half a stop AKA UNNOTICEABLE. What IS noticeable?

Fuji worms and general xtranny shittiness
Paying more for less reach and more weight
Paying more for worse video specs and worse FPS
Paying more for shitty larp dial ergos when the entire world uses normal DSLR style bodies for a reason (you are a dumb hipster)

FUJI = SCAM.
MICRO FOUR THIRDS IS SHARPER, DOES BETTER VIDEO, HAS MORE REACH, HAS MORE PORTABILITY, AND HAS MORE DYNAMIC RANGE THAN FOOLJI-FAIL XTRANNY. CONFIRMED. MICRO FOUR THIRDS VICTORY.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7M4
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 23.5 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	57 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	7008
Image Height	4672
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	150 dpi
Vertical Resolution	150 dpi
Image Created	2023:09:08 12:00:07
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Brightness	6.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	57.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4298722
>if you spend ff money on an m43 body and ff money on lenses sharp enough for tiny pixels and never go over 1/60 micro four thirds looks almost as good as a z6 sometimes (no comparison to r5/z7)
Lumixgods won

Oh yeah fuji. They never had a chance. Micro four thirds has always been better than fuji.

>>4298756
Nikon z6ii+35mm f1.8
Canon r6+ef-rf+tamron ef 35mm f1.4

>>4298722
The irrational Fuji hate grows stronger every day.

>>4298722
can you post some photos you've taken where you felt limited by dynamic range?

>>4298766
Seems rational to me
Real ISO = same raw brightness on any camera with the same ss and aperture using the same lens
Fake ISO = irrelevant marketing trick for skewing camera reviews, exposure settings match the real ISO anyways, only changes dr charts and dxo scores by moving the line so it looks like brand a’s iso 100 is less noisy than brand b’s (because its actually a lower iso)

>>4298767
Wouldnt a lack of those be an argument against the 0.3 stop difference mattering which he already said? Im not seeing any convincing arguments for spending $2000 on an xt5/xh2/x100vi vs $900 on an om-5 or $1399 on a g9ii (panasonics sale+rebate)

Fuji just doesnt make practical or financial sense. It seems that a pro or serious hobbyist should use full frame (preferably a dslr for profit margins, battery life, lens availability, and overall reliability) and everyone else should use micro four thirds.

>>4298770
Sorry 0.22 stop dynamic range difference

Thats literally nothing isnt it? I can imagine being limited by one whole stop (i’ve shot iso 200 when it could have been 100 and lost a little highlight detail) but not 0.22 stops

>>4298722
jesus christ dude you are seriously ill. Get help.

>>4298770
Why micro four thirds? Whats the benefit of it?

I don't get the fuji hate either. I only read about it here. Yet I like the haptics and the renderings of the xt-3. And I highly doubt that anybody here could point out which system is behind a photo, if it was well made.

>>4298770
I agree that Fuji bodies have become pricy since the X-T4. Also the X-H2 gave away the size benefits of APSC. Yet 'fake ISO' and a third of a stop of dr are not a problem.

When you really 'like' a camera, you take it with you. This is were Fuji shines for me.

>1600 for a pocket fixed lens
Crosley record player of cameras
Even makes your photos as ugly as a Crosley

File: om-5vsom-d.jpg (55 KB, 590x393)

55 KB JPG

>>4298780
>essentially the same performance
>but you can choose your own lens - or lenses
>superior weather sealing (every x100 and x-t camera to date has given up when push came to shove at unprecedented rates never seen on canon, nikon, olympus, or pentax - but seen on sony)
>IBIS on steroids
>handheld pixel shift
>live compositing
>in camera focus stacking
idk seems like a better take-with-you camera to me but i'm male bodied and male brained and have never considered matching my camera, purse, shoes, and blouse down to the smallest nigglings of the retro-chic aesthetic

>>4298777
being cheaper and lighter, for performance that ranges from the same to better, with better weather sealing, and more features on the camera, certainly make up part of a long list of micro four third's benefits

you could point out that a photo came from m43 because they got an impressive shot like a focus stacked landscape in a difficult situation while fujislugs were all busy playing with dials and tripods and trying to work their cameras under their rain condoms

the other anons are right, aps-c makes 0 sense, full frame is for serious IQ nuts and micro four thirds is for everyone else

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 80D
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual

>>4298784
You can make your photography world as you want it to be. And others can too.

>>4298784
You just don't get it. Algorithm showed me this big phototuber guy and he was head over heels about how his fuji gets compliments from people that it looks like a film camera. That's the whole point for them. Not about performance, not about imaging, only the very hope of getting noticed by strangers about the appearance of their camera. But hey, good for them if that makes them go out and take more photos, though the whole point is never about photos.

XS 20 is more fun to shoot with. This is a dumb hypebeast camera

>>4298784
There is no logical argument against this
Micro for thads > foolji

My apologies to anyone that already spent thousands on fuji

File: sonne.jpg (1.63 MB, 3000x2000)

1.63 MB JPG

>>4298787
I got the strong feeling he just wishes to make our photography world a better place.

>>4298784
I looked at the https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m10-mark-iv-review/1#CC

and

https://camerasize.com/compare/#800,856

The olympus is not much smaller and whatever these worms and dynamic and cheating fuckups you guys think fuji is doing - why should it matter if the camera does everything I want from it?

It's just a hobby and you asslickin gearfaggin faggots should finaly let it go and take some pictures instead of ranting all the time

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T3
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T3 Ver4.50
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	120 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2023:08:12 19:33:26
Exposure Time	1/110 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/9.8
Brightness	3.0 EV
Exposure Bias	-1.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	80.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Manual
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: 172432.jpg (833 KB, 1710x1283)

833 KB JPG

alright /p/ lets play a game.
a while ago i've made two nearly identical shots, two different cameras.
crop camera > X-T2 + 23 1.4
full frame camera > Nikon D750 + 35 1.8
both shot at f/6.3, 1/100s

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: camA-camB.jpg (1.28 MB, 1518x2000)

1.28 MB JPG

can you guess which is which?
can you spot the dynamic range difference?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: camA-camB-22.jpg (994 KB, 1518x2000)

994 KB JPG

heres 100% crops. Can you spot the fuji worms?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: toyotillac.jpg (589 KB, 3820x1771)

589 KB JPG

>>4294503
saaaame, i have a 2001 shitbox yaris, a new audi s6 avant and a 2016 bmw x1 and the car i drive the most, enjoy driving the most and have fun driving the most is the fucking shitbox yaris. in the 23 years of it being with my family, that little shitcan NEVER, EVER broke and was NEVER in the shop for any reason. 730,XXX km on the clock and still going strong.

>pic related taken approx. 1,700m above sea level, in the middle of literal fucking nowhere, on some hills near austrian alps, there wasnt even a hiking trail anywhere or any sign of humans even walking there, i just went straigh up through a light forest, branches, big rocks and heavy gravel and kept going and going and going until i reached this spot. i didnt give a single shit if i get lost, get stuck or stranded and toyota didnt give a shit, she just kept going and going along with me, TOYOTA POWER!

>>4298800
>>4298801
Top one is Nikon.
It's got a warmer colour balance, less saturation and less aggressive shadow boosting/more native contrast.
You haven't focused at the same distance for both photos which makes the detail comparison moot, nikon's focused further back.
Could you please share more info about the jpg settings on both, or the raw adjustment settings if that's what you used?
Thankyou for contributing to our general knowledge.

File: d750.jpg (1.19 MB, 2308x1540)

1.19 MB JPG

>>4298801
one:
you cant shoot both cameras at the same fstop, different sensor size (and even if they were both ff or apsc, you still cant shoot same fstop, you will get different results with different cameras at the same fstop, even with the same camera make/model) without a light meter and greyscale, these camera comparisons are pointless, especially so ones that were shot outdoors.

and two:
ive had a d750 and a d850 and what i have to say here is that youre either 1.lying, 2.have a crappy lens or 3. use shitty settings. why do i say this? because none of these images look like something a d750 would pop out.

look at pic related for example, image even has blown out highlights and yet look at the night and day difference in color graduation and tonality within shadows and highlights in your images compared to this... its a night and day difference. thats why i say youre either lying, have a crappy lens or just use crappy settings

>>4298800
The d750 is quite shit and so are most dslr lenses. ESPECIALLY the lenses. Your average dslr prime is soft as fuck so the fx sharpness advantage is fake between f mount and x mount - a good lens under 85mm simply can not be accommodated by f mount without removing the mirror. Go again with a z6ii and S primes or even an a7iii with a generic tamron lens so its not a 2023 miata vs a 70s mustang. It can be hard to tell xtrans from just using a shit lens - the effect is essentially the same until you try sharpening the raws.

I dont humor 4chan tests ever since huskyfag admitted to faking his exif with random ISO settings and swapping camera models. People like photons to photos, dxomark, cined, and dpreview do fair and balanced tests on objective targets with constant/documented settings, 4chan doctors exif, botches ISO settings and hides lens choices to try and troll you into thinking their favorite camera is good.
>shoot d750 with super shit lens at iso 3200
>shoot fuji at iso 800
>sharpening to 0 for both
>CAN U TELL?
>did not actually use d750 or fuji, is exif faked edits of two different photos from an om-5

>>4298818
this pic honestly looks worse than either of >>4298800

>>4298822
Yeah because its f mount. There are <15 truly sharp lenses for it, all telephotos/zooms, which is why the stereotypical professional uses canon (even tamron and sigma primes get zeiss-sharp on canon).

Basically f mount is so bad that the z mount kit zooms (24-50, 24-70, 24-120) are significantly sharper than the vast majority of lenses you could put on a d750.

>>4298818
>lying
I have no interest in lying. And by the looks you just have vastly different light, thats all. Yours looks to be evening light with less obstruction from foliage.
My test is to show that with digital i can make the same image whatever the camera unless you are strictly going to extremes.
>>4298819
didnt people here just say that every other dslr especially full frame be like ten times better than fuji?

>>4298825
They must have been canon or minolta shooters. Fucking nikon doesnt have any good lenses until the teles. Its wildlife photography: the brand for a reason. People only ever went for it because it had less high ISO noise than canon and wasnt sony.

If you want sharp shit it’s EF or mirrorless

>>4298826
AKA why nikon crashed to the #4 brand as soon as sony released a MILC without an SLT or light leaks

Z mount is great! Too little too late. And its just canon for people that cant afford canon.

what i'm getting from this thread is that the fuji haters are great at typing nophoto posts, and fuji users are great at posting photos

>>4298839
thats because its actually fun to use a Fuji

>>4298800
>>4298801
I'm not here to play your game and don't care about your brand wars.

I am here to ask why no one of /p/ knows how to focus. Can't find a single point on your pictures, nor most on /p/, that are pleasantly sharp.

>>4298842
post some sharp, focused photos

>>4298847
No.

File: file.png (3.27 MB, 1800x1188)

3.27 MB PNG

1600 dollars to look like a retard from 2007 just so you can get dust in your sensor and never get it out

I'm a Snoy full frame user but I'm thinking of selling my 35mm prime lens and buy the X100VI instead. Good idea?

>>4298692
>20 years of progress
ahahahahahahah omfg

>>4298692
> What, you think Leica M11 is 10 times better than, lets say Canon R8 ?
>https://www.dxomark.com/leica-m11-sensor-test/

No. But it does literally have the best sensor on the market right now (except for 2 medium format cameras).

>>4298948
No

File: test chaaaarts.png (2.87 MB, 2343x1179)

2.87 MB PNG

>>4298692
>20 years of progress
>fucking BILL CLAFF CHART
Oooh lines SCARY
1: Bill claff generates these charts based on the signal to noise ratio of a downscaled image. Therefore, is he really testing "dynamic range"? No. He is charting the signal to noise ratio of a compressed image, and the DR cutoff is a line in the sand with regards to SNR, even though you may be able to recover usable detail past that in the original raw (not a squashed jpeg). Didnt you ever think its weird that every other source assigns FF cameras 14 stops, not fucking 11 point fuck? Claff's a fucking retard and so are you for using this idiots charts. He arbitrarily declares that a well known and well used 3 extra stops of DR isn't there.
2: Bill claff generates these charts based on labeled ISO, which has up to a full stop of variance between brands because ISO is based on jpeg engines, not raw exposure, and there are two separate standards neither of which actually need to be followed. Therefore, can you compare cameras based on this chart? No. Not even within the same brand sometimes.
3: Bill claff inconsistently detects forced NR. He loves to spot it on canon, but has ignored sony cameras that are known by everyone who's attempted to seriously use them to have "brittle raws" due to sony's forced post processing - baked in NR and vignetting correction. Raw histogram analysis actually shows almost every camera has forced noise reduction at most ISOs (except for some MF cameras, ie: fuji gfx50r)

Now, what does that "DR" difference look like in a real photo under test conditions? Just fucking noise. Grain. Who cares. The vast majority of the detail is still there.

Under normal use, like rough ETTR+shoot raw, not trying to save an image thats 5 stops underexposed, with NR in post, the 5d classic would perform 99% as well as contemporary cameras in 99% of photos and just be a little grainier. Eyeball test, it's maybe missing one stop or less of recoverable info.
DO NOT USE CLAFF CHARTS.

>>4298994
Also dpreview test protocol is ISOless, the cameras are shot with the same EV and if the ISO is mislabeled brightness is normalized so as long as they don't leap a gain stage and the camera is mostly ISO invariant, it looks the same as if the ISOs were labeled properly.

The 5d classic is not ISO invariant, so it's actually getting stiffed here. If you were using it in real life and getting it right in camera, not acting like dpreview, it would have much less noise

File: dyna dick rangay.png (1.4 MB, 1140x1204)

1.4 MB PNG

>>4298994
muh dynadick rangaaaay
>download all these raws
>open raws in lr/c1 (c1 especially, their rendering is very good)
>they all look basically the fucking same above 200% zoom, 5d classic might look better actually (dem colors)
you have been taken for absolute fools

>>4299003
>>4298994
As a Real Photographer, I have never had to push shadows more than 2.5 stops, and never wanted to push them more because even the best FF ever is still too noisy and soft after that. Under these conditions in dpreview’s exposure latitude tool, every camera is the same, or close enough for a standard raw converter to make them all the same.

Fuji cameras are just unfun and miserable to use and cant be sharpened. You need to upgrade your computer to run lightrooms enhance on 100+ raws without falling asleep (and i am not a dirty computer nerd or may allah forgive me, a g*mer) just like you have to for all cameras over iso 6400 or with 3+ stop shadow pushes. Waste of time waste of money. Just dont fuck up your photos that badly and dont shoot fujis with their miserable automatic tranny with a fake manual shift gate layout tier experience.

>>4298994
Based and fuck that stupid website pilled

Those charts apply 0% to actual photography. They’re made by some retard that stares at photos of lens caps.

>>4299012
when dpreview said they were going bust last year i was excited for a minute because it does nothing but breed gearfags.
It's literally a cancer of a website.

>>4299016
Dpreviews tests are actually legit, probably the only somewhat scientific albeit still flawed camera tests on the internet and a good source of test raws, but the scaling feature cant be used to demonstrate what you can actually do with scaling, and the reviews themselves are garbage and encourage caring too much about features very few people need. And the sample galleries are ultra garbage sometimes. But they dont make shit up.

I would be happier if photons to photos and the last word dropped off the internet. Those two border on full blown disinfo sometimes. Like posting a desaturated magenta square next to a red square and insisting they are the same picture, or claiming FF has only 11 stops of dynamic range and the lumix g9 outperforms the xh2s. Disinfo.

Gearfagging is appropriate but being wrong and a gearfag is unforgivable. Also see: people who think their 8x10 prints would benefit from upgrading to an a7rv.

>>4299019
Well sure, the problem is not with dpreview. Problem is with everyone overusing the comparisons to death.

>>4294355
No one actually cares what camera you have. They will think you're a weirdo for taking their pictures anyway.

>>4294679
How come you didn't get the whole 159.90 off?

File: zuiko 24mm f2.8.jpg (2.1 MB, 2000x3000)

2.1 MB JPG

>>4298841
I doubt that, i've never seen so many people doing boring A:B gear tests and they just argue with snoys and mft shills all day. turning those dials placed randomly all over the camera must be tiring.

the real funpill is a nikon with a zoom and adapted manual lenses. im sorry. its just objectively the funnest way to do photography.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 7_2
Camera Software	Capture One Windows
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2000
Image Height	3000
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/45 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Image Width	3000
Image Height	4500
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4298994
>>4299003
dpreview test shots are useless to assess almost anything other than reach, too many confounding settings at play

>>4299332
>confounding settings
I miss when you were banned

if dpreview shoots every camera at say, f/5.6, 1/1000, ISO 400, then every camera receives the same amount of light. And this is what they do. The only thing that varies is the labeled ISO/real sensitivity discrepancy and each cameras unique tone curve. The tone curve can't be normalized so some cameras will have different contrast than others but when dpreview normalizes brightness and white balance, ISO labeling discrepancies are gone because every camera should be able to handle a stop or less of pushing/pulling except for some ancient shitty canons. It's actually a pretty good test for everything BUT reach/sharpness and color. Shooting at f5.6 means every lens should have the same t stop (under 1/3 stop transmission difference) but they dont always pick the best lenses for sharpness and lightroom (ACR) has shit support for some raw formats.

>>4299335
tripfag is dumb and thinks cropping photos makes them darker

>>4294348
>Form over function
Have you even used one of these things? Literally everything is physically controlled. There are maybe one or two settings that are obscured in a menu that you can easily bind to a function key if you really need it. Are you just mad because you can't afford it? Because literally all of Fuji's retro-inspired design language is as functional as it gets with the added benefit of being pretty.

>>4298800
>>4298801
So are you going to post the answer, or are you just buttblasted the very first post was right and had reasons?

>>4299727
if it was functional every camera would retain the shitty dial layout of early japanese slrs but its really not

>>4299729
It's literally superior functionality. You would rather stare slackjawed at a bunch of menus wasting valuable instead of moving a dial and not thinking twice about it?

>>4298673
>They really should have done an internal zoom version at some point
If only the 40mm STM was internal or rear focus.

>>4294344
they ask 2600$ where is live for this

>>4299736
No its fucking not. Has your poor ass ever used a real camera or just a snoy?

File: IMG_7566.jpg (2.63 MB, 4032x3024)

2.63 MB JPG

Came to my senses and canceled my order. Bought this instead. Fuck small cameras, just use your phone.

>>4301429
>buys the mf equivalent of a 5d classic
Except for a minor sharpness boost with your lens stopped down a nikon z7ii is superior or equal in every other way. Maybe a canon r5, if you dont mind shadow NR already being applied and adapting EF for half your lenses.

Gfx100 minimum and even then the native lenses are all a bit shit wide open.

>>4301429
Are you the same faggot that made the thread a few days ago trying to brag about his gfx 50 and shit talk smaller sensors, only to get so unbelievably btfo that he deleted the thread? I mean, how many of you mongs with a gfx and braindead “use your phone” takes could there be?
Still not medium format btw.

>>4301445
Gear flex attempts on /p/ are funny af.
>i spent TWO THOUSAND DOLLA!
>average poster: thats it? *holds up $5000 lens*

File: 2024-04-01 15.06.13.jpg (890 KB, 1000x1333)

890 KB JPG

>>4301429
Can you really say your camera is big if it's not at least chihuahua sized?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone SE (3rd generation)
Camera Software	17.3.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1333
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:04:01 15:06:13
Exposure Time	1/34 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Brightness	0.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	3.99 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4301459
>acra swiss c1 gp
are you the dog-fucker that other anons here have talked about?

@4301555
this is a bot

>>4301445
Mods deleted it bc I said nigger I think. I still hold my stance. I’ll post photos in a month and will btfo any gay charts you post.

>>4299729
>if white people wrote superior software every software company would keep hiring them instead of the poos but they really don't

>>4304597
>false equivalence
Must be a neo-nazi

White people demand a livable wage for a white country, to white standards. That's why capitalism hates them.
Dials don't ask for a paycheck no matter how they're laid out. They just make it bop-it game to use your camera, or they don't.

>>4304599
Dials do ask for a paycheck essentially as it takes resources and engineers to make them, meanwhile just slamming spasm garbage requires no engineering whatsoever which is why the jews at Limpus, Niggon and Canon't jumped on them so eagerly and which is why Fujis are the only at least remotely usable cameras still left on the market for people with functioning fingers.

>>4304606
It's five cents either way

larp dials are objectively inferior, ergonomically and functionally. the only people who use them are insecure little bitches who have a fainting spell when they see a camera that reminds them of their dad, marriage, and starting a family and want to live in hipster manchild land forever as if twink death isn't brewing under their beanie.

>>4304606
Uh, usually, larger controls that can be pinch gripped, with clear labels and more simplicity (ie: full stops only) are there for children and the disabled because they lack the motor control or strength to use something smaller with finer adjustments.

So it's more like you don't have functioning fingers but you put up with playing bop-it with your camera because you find shifting the thing around and pinching a dial to move it two clicks a lot easier for your soi sausages than rotating a wheel 4 smaller clicks.

>>4304609
>rotating a wheel 4 smaller clicks
The funniest thing is that's also much better realized in fuji cameras because the wheels are positioned closer to the center of mass. Most modern cameras still can't get ergonomics with their retarded PSAM shit right.

>>4304611
So you're saying your wrist strength is so minimal you can actually feel strain because the dials aren't closer to the shitty soft fujinon't lens?

I'm beginning to see the light. DSLRs, and DSLR styled cameras, are for people with strong hands and non-creaky joints. Fujis are for cripples.

>>4304612
I'm saying that Fuji cameras are ergonomically superior for everyone (especially if you have strong hands) because they are designed by people, not monkeys.

>>4304616
They are ergonomically inferior to make them easier to use for people with shitty joints and weak hands. The market share speaks volumes. A normal white person in good health will actually have an easier time using a DSLR because the weight is not noticeable to a person with normal musculature and joints, but the need to shift the camera around to pinch at dials and fuck around with full stops is always noticeable.

In other words, they were designed by and for the japanese, a country that is on average, short, thin, and elderly. I can understand, that if you have arthritis, that maybe loosening your grip to do a roll and drag motion with a finger or thumb will hurt, and the inconvenience of completely changing your grip to support the camera another way while pinching a dial (enabling rotation to involve the larger, more durable parts of the arm) might be preferable. However, most people can handhold a d850+24-70 f2.8 and adjust the dials while holding buttons. It's not arthritis friendly by a mile but most people don't have fucking arthritis.

And arthritis-first design is not "for everyone", it's for a dramatically weakened condition that is so far from the norm that things that support it become inconvenient.

>>4304619
this tracks. 8/10 of the fuji users i see irl, when i do see them, have gray hair. 2/10 are women or really skinny asian guys. obviously doing a last 3 fingers and palm grip while your index finger and thumb fly around the button array, joystick, and dual control wheels is not gonna work if just rolling your index finger hurts or you're not very strong in the first place.

but it's like anything else involving strength - you don't even notice it unless you're in poor health. a normal guy using a DSLR next to a "fujislug" is like a bodybuilder juggling 20lb dumbells next to a small child trying to curl one, but it's a natural strength level, not a trained one. just be 5'10" minimum, eat actual food (meat), and have testosterone and you're automatically strong enough for normal cameras superior, faster to use design.

>>4304619
>A normal white person in good health will actually have an easier time using a DSLR
A normal white person in good health will have an even easier time using a Fuji. A normal white person in good mental health will also have a better time using a Fuji because they are not busy with playing pretend like they are Schwarzenegger for being able to hold a d850 grams of shitty plastic in their 'strong' hands.
>but the need to shift the camera around to pinch at dials and fuck around with full stops is always noticeable
And the need to shift the camera around to pinch at the PASM dial and fuck around with priority modes is not?)
On fuji you don't even need to use the larpy dials, just set the exposure dial to T and aperture ring to Auto and you can control the entire exposure triangle with the two wheels without holding any buttons whatsoever.

File: im01521-1-honda-civic.jpg (39 KB, 800x450)

39 KB JPG

>>4304622
I even lift with my XH2s. Such a good grip without the looks of a streamlined DSLR sex toy.

Don't get me wrong: I still love DSLRs and they are OVF-superior but they are plain ugly, especially the Nikon ones. Pic related.

>>4304631
>A normal white person in good health will have an even easier time using a Fuji
Your premise starts and fails here. It's a minor strength issue so it's imperceptible, and the fuji makes compromises to reduce the use of strength - you need to shift your grip to pinch the dials like someone who has arthritis in their hands.

You're talking "pretend shwarzenagga" but I am talking about a normal, healthy level of strength for someone who is 5'10" minimum, male, and not malnourished.

Let me repeat this again because apparently your premature geriatric condition has gone to your brain as well:
And arthritis-first design is not "for everyone", it's for a dramatically weakened condition that is so far from the norm that things that support it become inconvenient.

>And the need to shift the camera around to pinch at the PASM dial and fuck around with priority modes is not?
You never leave A unless you attach a flash. P and S are for pretenders and spastics. Auto is for handing it to your girlfriend. Hey, it's a democracy, they have to sell a camera to everyone, even ken rockwell, as for the premature geriatrics they're so out of the mainstream you can have special disability support equipment that's easier than the norm in the way rolling around in a wheelchair is easier than walking lol.

>>4304631
>on fuji you can put your camera in shutter priority with extra steps
lol
next to no market share, even with the aid of tiktok memes, for a reason

99% of fuji buyers see the larp dials as just a larp. that's it. then there's the rheumatism squad who can't even handle a tiny snoy.

>>4304651
>Your premise starts and fails here.
No it doesn't and you STILL haven't provided a good rebuttal for this, and no saying "duuuh fuji for weak hands me strong hurr" is not good enough.
>you need to shift your grip to pinch the dials like someone who has arthritis in their hands
Just like on any dlsr-like.
>You're talking "pretend shwarzenagga" but I am talking about a normal, healthy level of strength for someone who is 5'10" minimum, male, and not malnourished.
So am I.
>Let me repeat this again
You can repeat your weak name-calling attempts as many times as you want, not gonna make your dumb bodybuilder larp less of a joke.
>You never leave A
Same shit as Auto.

>>4304656
>next to no market share
Still more than niggon ;)

>>4298024
shocking!
well at least you realized you'd be a fool before committing to it. anyone into photography would be better off with anything not-fuji, fuji cameras are as much of a fashion accessory as swiss watches and female handbags

File: Screenshot_20240416_07420(...).jpg (492 KB, 2559x1440)

492 KB JPG

>>4304659
Picrel, case in point
>have to shift the grip to control ISO like a clown even in MANUAL
Such a retarded fucking concept. If you don't already have arthritis this shit will give you one. What do we call this? An arthritis-guaranteed design?

inb4
>w-what are you, w-weak? gaining arthritis is da white man's way!!!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Android UP1A.231005.007.S918BXXS3CXD2
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3088
Image Height	1440
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:04:16 07:42:07
Unique Image ID	9f8bbb0b-4541-4025-9ab6-d497471e2e6a
Light Source	Unknown

daily reminder that top dials vs control dials makes no fucking difference because camera settings changing is not in fact an olympic sport and also if you find a 300g difference in camera body weight to be a deal breaker then you are a weakling

>>4304785
True, but I like using old fashioned top dials a lot more.

>>4304765
What the fuck is the soi doing? You use the bottom 3 fingers to grip and the index finger for shutter/record/iso and turn on easy exposure comp for EC, but in manual+auto ISO you still use the index finger for EC. It's piss easy unless your hands are tiny or you have legitimate range of motion issues.

>"arthritis guaranteed"
If doing it that retarded way is hurting you already got the rheumatism.

>>4304785
If you haven't missed shots because of dial fiddling, you don't shoot film.
>inb4 I do
building corners don't count. The greats like winogrand started using fixed settings and stand dev for street because the controls were un-ergonomic.

>>4304826
>If you haven't missed shots because of dial fiddling, you don't shoot film

I have. I have also missed shots because I got distracted, viewfinder blackout, looking the wrong way, because I was driving or any other of a million reasons unrelated to exactly where the spinny metals things are on my camera.

Unless you're out in the Amazon rainforest trying to get a photo of the critically endangered lesser-spotted dingledongle a second or two ain't gonna make much difference

>>4304838
Right, but if you were in the amazon rainforest, no one would be around to see you with le retro silver rectangle, so you'd have given up on being a fashion victim and started using a better camera.

>>4304840
way to miss the fucking point you retard

why are you so ass pained about some fucking dials anyway?

>>4304844
>nigga paid $2000 to miss shots like its 1969 and goes "well ur not a professional snowy owl photographer so you dont NEED a good camera"
fujuslugs lol
who ever said such things about needing
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" - Karl Marx

Oh, right.
I will be buying more camera than I "need" despite not being glorious state photographer employed by party and enjoy it taking photos slightly better. Kthxbai.

>>4304846
nigga I shoot a nikon

I have gone through a D5200, D610, Olympus EM1, and now a Nikon Zf which is simply better than a Z6ii. You know what I didn't give a fuck about after using each camera for about a month? How to change the aperture/shutter speed because it makes no fucking difference to my photography.

If we are talking ergo equipment then it makes more sense for you to buy a ergonomic keyboard to reduce RSI from typing out incoherent rants about marxism on a photo forum

>>4304848
It may say Nikon, but you're still a larping fujislug trying to spin a flat out larp as ergonomically superior because your premature rheumatoid arthritis makes scroll wheels hurt to use.

>>4304849
Can you not fucking read you dipshit? Where have I ever said that the retro dial layout is superior?

Don't project your own insecurities about your body onto me

>>4304853
read the thread
>>4304765
>arthritis guaranteed design
>>4304631
>A normal white person in good health will have an even easier time using a Fuji. A normal white person in good mental health will also have a better time using a Fuji
>>4304616
>I'm saying that Fuji cameras are ergonomically superior for everyone
you're in the fujislug delusion zone where they think a failing paper company that relies on tiktok memes to survive ever had the right idea

>>4304840
Could you show us some of that amazon rainforest beauty that you captured on that ergonomically perfect Canikon blob? Surely you don't use it just to photograph weddings.

>>4304893
What's wrong with photographing weddings? Beats the underexposed bald spot snoozefest in /fag/.

>>4294355
>see work taken with a Fuji that looks great
>see “work” taken with a Fuji that looks like ass
>get a snoy instead

>>4299772
The 40 isn't f1.4

Apparently this camera has the AF speed of an olympus epl-1 and makes a whirr noise so you cant shoot video without an external mic.

Near-$2k camera and they call actual good ones “fool frame” because they dont look girly and fit in purses… cant even shoot video with autofocus. Techs behind a $500 canon dslr.

>>4304902
Fujislugs hate wedding photography because its essentially creepy street snapping with a paycheck (and their mortal enemy, quality standards)

>>4307749
The X100s, like most faux-retro shit, have always been scameras that only have real appeal to professional photographers that already have 50 wunderboxes and are developing PTSD and antisocial tendencies after dealing with too many clients. The more conscious they are of gear, the more they like it. If they are very anti-gear as a spiritual/moral principle they will have no interest in fuji, or leica, etc and just put a pancake lens on their usual camera when going out to f/8 and be there.

This is not a camera a normal person who is also a photographer would love. This is a camera only an experienced photographer with issues would love.

Fuji is missing out on massive profits from bringing back and selling film stocks. If they released a simple film version of this camera and priced it below 500$ it would sell like peanuts, and just like their instax cameras the money would come from the film sales.