>>4325032
I think it's better than nikon mirrorless.

t. niggon slr shooter

>>4325032
The best soulless auto everything pro tool there is. Crutches out the ass. Priced to be rented. Great tech support. Basically meant for delivering jpegs via ftp as fast as possible for the news.
Not the best camera there is.

>>4325038
Nikon went canon mode with the zf/z6iii/z8-9 so they’re equal now

>>4325042
>Nikon went canon mode
not sure what you mean, canon at least still makes their high-tier shit in jewpan

There's always that one anon mentioning hard-coded noise reduction in RAWs of the newer Canon models, but I can't find any info online. Is there anything at all?

I bought an R6 Mark 2 after 25 years of shooting Nikon and can confirm, Canon knows what the fuck they're doing.

Nikon still produces better overall image quality, but Canon's rendering just looks.. better. Nicer greens. Nicer skintones without any of the signature Nikon orange cast.

Still probably gonna pick up a used D850 to use all of my DSLR nikkor's, but Canon makes a fucking phenomenal camera that just gets out of your way and lets you shoot.

>>4325051
You're a literal child.

>>4325093
ok boomer
#fujigang

>>4325043
>caring about country of origin
Sigma has that MIJ quarity amirite

>>4325048
That's mostly raw developer profiles.

"Soulless auto everything pro tool" is an apt description down to their excess size and ass backwards control layout that only makes sense if you have a long lens that weighs over a pound. Their lack of decent quality middling aperture lenses on RF also telegraphs who their cameras are actually for. The news and weddings.

Love my little rp like you wouldn't believe

>>4325051
Did you get bullied today or something? It's alright

I've had my R7 for 2 years and it is the best and most fun camera I've owned yet. It was nice to bring all me EF lenses over using the adapter and they make better than ever photos on the R7.

I bought an R because I was trying to adapt some old Contax/Yashica lenses to my 5D4 and the mirror kept getting blocked by the rear elements. I like the layout (touch bar not withstanding) even though it's smaller, but after a year or so I'm still not sure that the image quality is better. I don't know if I've changed my outlook or if it's a change in the sensor.

>>4325112
>RP
My man. That -touch to drag the focus point- feature has been a game changer for me.

>>4325042
blatant seething sonygger

>>4325097
I've been fujigang longer than you, and I still know you're a literal child. kys.

>>4325099
Nah, the control scheme's fine. It took a little getting used to coming from Nikon, but if you use it for a full day of shooting, it'll be second nature.

>>4325099
>Their lack of decent quality middling aperture lenses on RF also telegraphs who their cameras are actually for. The news and weddings.

Also a weird take. News and weddings are some of the most demanding things you can use a camera for, so saying that Canon is very good at that and that's a bad thing is.. confusing, at the very least.

they are also the most expensive and anti-artistic things

>>4325338
I think his point wasn't that they're the best at it but rather that's mostly what they cater to

>>4325354
They cater to capability and performance? Responsiveness? Ease of use? Oh no! Horrible things for a camera to have in 2024.

>>4325360
and the result is an enormous $2500 blob but at least the f1.0 lens has the fastest autofocus

>>4325363
Oh no, a blob! Because that's what matters when someone is looking at your photo.

>>4325043
>jewpan

>>4325364
Not that guy, but let's be real

They are amazing in a professional context, like compared to the piece of worthless fucking garbage shit z7ii that DID NOT WORK IN FACE DETECT FOR AN ENTIRE EVENT I JUST SHOT, but for the other 90% of your life they do suck balls to have with you unless you are an unapologetic fanny pack and cargo shorts sort of person.

Thats probably why everyone likes sony (that, and they buy new snoys often enough to avoid breakage)

>>4325370
full frame is for professionals
if you expect more quality than insta needs while hobby shooting thats an autism problem not a camera problem
snr does not get likes/follows/exposure. oh wait you do have insta right?

>>4325373
>insta
Lol.
No I have real friends.

File: naked pepefrog.png (232 KB, 655x599)

232 KB PNG

Should I get an instagram to post my photos if I have no one to really give them to that actually care?

>>4325375
No, you should find another hobby because you seem to be doing it for external validation (there are cheaper and easier ways to validate yourself)

>>4325373
Or maybe, manufacturers really fucked up with the switch to mirrorless because japanese salarymen are severely out of touch with the rest of the world. Just a guess. Maybe canon will respond to the x100vi and zf hype with a ql17 or ae1-alike and do a better job with the controls than nikon?

>>4325377
Right now I do it for myself, but I also like to share my work for others to enjoy. I used to have a friend who liked looking at my trips, but they have since moved on.

>>4325209
I got my wife one for her birthday with the f4 24-105. Amazingly good, the auto focus, even if it's one of the worst out of the R series is fucking amazing. I picked up a R6MKii and the f4 70 -200 and have all my EF gear on marketplace since it's all just taking up space on the shelf in the office.

>>4325379
Instagram has annoying aspect ratio limitations you need to work around, but it's nice to connect with friends

>>4325370
why would canon make a nice looking, small camera? they dont want pleb “artists” tarnishing their image as the pros and dads brand

>>4325398
I thought canon was the milf brand?

>>4325032
I have an R8 and I like it, but I might switch to sony soon since I've started getting paid for work. Compromising on IBIS, dual mem card slots, hybrid shooting AND not being able to get decent third party lenses is horseshit and canon knows it.

should I get an RP, bros?
or save a bit more for the r8

>>4325416
How exactly are third party lenses canon’s fault? Everything else you listed is addressed in the r6 mk2 and presumably the new r5.

>>4325418
for how much?
They were selling for $600 refurb from canon not too long ago
Can't imagine paying more for one

>>4325418
RP is fine for stills as long as you don't need insane dynamic range or pro level sports tracking AF. Good high ISO despite the poor base ISO DR (it's a variant sensor so e-noise drops with ISO). Good 1080p video with decent video AF. Poor cropped 4k with no AF.

>>4325416
If you wanted IBIS/dual slots you should have gotten the R6 or R6ii.

>>4325458
>no dual pixel af for 4k
so this is the legendary Canon gimping I've heard so much about

>>4325364
We care about the photos, gearfag. Go stick your snoy in a display cabinet if you're after asthetics

>>4325416
You are absolutely correct, but looks like an R6 MkII or R5 would have suited you better. Still, the 3rd party lens situation shits me.

>>4325418
RP would be a good budget buy at this point if you'd rather save some bennys. I recommend R8 if you'd rather something with a bit more features / new.

>>4325468
We're fucking famous for it. Fuck I hate canon somtimes

>>4325460
>Canon cripple hammer: buy the more expensive model if you want a basic feature that's standard on 10 year old micro four thirds
Due to equivalence, a 10 year old micro four thirds would actually perform better than a canon RP in most still life photos...

>>4325621
>We care about the photos
The blob is so oversized that you must not take many unless someone is paying you to hold that thing, or else you'd have posted one alreayd

>>4325653
Did a canon user fuck your gf or something?

>>4325659
My gf cums whenever someone posts photo so no they did not

File: IMG_9802_v1.jpg (73 KB, 640x427)

73 KB JPG

>>4325653
You're right. Here's a photo just for you.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS R50
Camera Software	digiKam-8.3.0
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.1.0
Lens Name	EF-S24mm f/2.8 STM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	640
Image Height	427
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:17 02:06:47
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	8000
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Image Width	640
Image Height	427
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
GPS Status	Unknown
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Medium
Focus Mode	Unknown
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
Subject Distance	0.250 m
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	364
Color Matrix	33

>>4325621
>We care about the photos, gearfag. Go stick your snoy in a display cabinet if you're after asthetics

That's literally my point, sub-literate.

>>4325621
artists typically care about their own aesthetics. even if they say they don’t - that’s part of their personal aesthetics.

cannots go with a certain preppy black bomber jacket, audi crossover aesthetic but little else

>>4325745
replied to the wrong post, reee. Apologies good sir

>>4325753
No problem, homie. Just wanted to make sure we're on the same page. We are. Keep fighting the good fight against these morons.

>>4325441
There were a couple of third party lenses made by Rokinon and Smegma, Canon sent them a cease and desist for using the AF system without paying for the patent.

Since then Canon has allowed some to put out some but only for the crop sensor Rs.

>>4325759
Interesting. pretty scummy if true.

>>4325032
the lens control ring thingy is pretty cool tbqh

>>4325348
>i'm poor

>>4325209
For whatever reason, the AF performance requires some initial tuning. I think it's a downside of the high-MP sensor.

>>4325653
I know this is a troll, but as a recovering m43 shooter, 99% of what M43 claims to be, the Canon R7 actually is. The 100-500 is better than the Olympus 150-400.

If you're an R7 shooter, you can replace the entire m43 'range' with two adapted EF-S lenses (10-22 and 17-55 f/2.8) and a 100-500. If you really want, you can drop the 10-22 and use the RF-S 10-18 which is pocket sized.

>>4325367
kikepan

>>4325044
Who knows, rumor goes RAW really hasn't been RAW for 10 years now.

>>4330453
>Doesnt use expieed .exp
Ngmi

>>4330444
I find M43 still has its use when I absolutely need the lightest smallest kit. Yes, I'm a cuck, but there are occasions that warrant it. I also don't own an R7, but an R10, so no IBIS.

>>4330476
Tell us what this “lightest smallest” actually consists of, and not just about the theory of it. Then we can see if it’s actually the lightest and smallest.

>>4330487
Are you... functionally retarded? Is the concept of small something that escapes you and your room temperature IQ?

>>4330488
The Classic m4turds cope is “muh small and light” and then when they post what they’re talking about, it’s as big as apsc mirrorless lol. Judging by your response, i see this is more m4turder cope. Or say which camera and lens specifically you were referring to.

>>4325032
>no weather sealing
>very expensive
>rf mount is a smoll hole
>canon wedding colors
>boring canon cameras
yeah nah thanks

>>4325373
>insta is the only use case for photos
wow anon, you're an incel arent you? you have no kids? no wife? no family? not even a doggo? you don't have anyone you care enough about to take high quality photos of? or do you just not give a shit and take your kid's photos with a google pixel?

>>4325375
nah print em out and hang them on your walls

>>4330503
You can't look up what an average M43 camera looks like? Did daddy only whitelist 4chan so you can post him topping you on /b/? Nah, faggot here would rather bitch and moan and start an argument for no good reason.

>inb4 still haven't posted what camera
Olympus E-PL2 with a LUMIX G 14mm/F2.5
faggot

File: Olympus-PEN-E-PL2-vs-Cano(...).jpg (39 KB, 720x339)

39 KB JPG

>>4330510
>the smaller sensor with worse images is the ONLY way to make things smaller, CHUD.
kek, mfoolturds enthusiasts, everyone.

File: file.png (448 KB, 1577x851)

448 KB PNG

>>4330510
An average good m43 camera that doesn't provide the UX of a 2012 digishit is the size of aps-c, sometimes larger (lmfao, om1, g9ii. "but the fps bro" but the autofocus is subnikon trash, bro). Ditto for lenses, if you approach the actual equivalent speed of glass for larger sensors, the lenses paradoxically... get larger than they would be on the superior format.

>x-t5: 40mp, 24-120 f5.6 equiv
>om-5: 20mp, 24-120 f5.6-8 equiv

Some soi will say "but the GRAMS, bro" but in what fucking case does 100g, 200g matter, if you're strapped to the limit why even bring some m43 shitter when 1" pns are lighter still and provide similar image quality

A fuji x-t5 is just better, period, than everything micro four thirds related. If it's a money issue for you, I dont know what to tell you, put in a few extra shifts and buy yourself something nice for once, or don't be underage, or a welfare leech.

>>4330510
Wow a 28mm f5 equivalent on a thumbnail sized sensor huh. Those must be some amazing photos that dont look like a phones at all.

>>4330519
>Uses dead mounting system on a failed canon product line to win argument
When the fuck did I say everyone needs to buy M43 because it's small? I spoke of my use case, and my equipment. I said M43s are small. They generally are. I don't own a Canon-M. I own a D850, an R10 and an E-PL2. R10 is pretty small, but my lenses for it aren't. If you want to be really specific, I don't really want to take my expensive shit places it could get damaged or lost unncessesarily. I don't need to lug my D850 and telescopics around for going to the movies, and the Olympus is such a metal brick and inexpensive that I'm not concerned about dropping or losing it at this point.

>Durrrr just buy smaller lenses for the R10 then retard
No. The PL2 I've had for close to a decade, and have all the equipment for it. And if you deign to make that argument, you're not only a faggot, you're a gearfaggot.

>smaller sensor with worse images
Ah, so you must own a medium format huh, since pure IQ is the single thing you care about? Spent $20,000 on your setup to go shoot photos of people in the park from across the street?

>>4330534
>No, that doesn't count because the mount is dead!
So is m43. The only lenses to come out for it lately are rebranded FF telescopes and other overpriced, oversized trash that defeats the point. The point has been defeated for quite a long time now hence m43 is just budget camcorders and retarded/retired arthritic birdwatchers buying shitty cameras and shittier lenses to see who can take the most wikipedia ID photo of all time.

>Ah, so you must own a medium format huh, since pure IQ is the single thing you care about? Spent $20,000 on your setup to go shoot photos of people in the park from across the street?
m43 is shit but no you cant have a better camera because your camera is never better enuff see now we're both dumb poorfags heheheheh

>>4330523
>argues sensor size is important
>says m43 and 1/2.5" sensors are the same

nigga what. at least be consistent

>>4330536
>now we're both dumb poorfags

Alright, you know what, something we can agree on. Now we move foward like rational adults kek

>>4330534
>gearfag bad
garry winogrand, the greatest photographer of all time, was not above bluntly telling people that their camera sucked and to buy a leica. objectively speaking the majority of good photographers were gearfags. just have a gander at the list of gear any of them have used, if you like reading lists of dozens of high end cameras. gear does influence aesthetics in photography. even people who seemed not to care like daido moriyama cared a lot and wouldn't pack a dslr when a gr digital took the photo they actually wanted.

they weren't above admitting that they didnt have a good camera either, lots of great photographers have tried one thing and switched to another. why wouldn't a photographer care about using a better camera?

so, let's see the amazing output of the epl2 and 28mm f5. surely you must be a mini moriyama to use something so low quality and digishitty, when a canon eos m is technically better and smaller.

>>4330541
No. That was a joke. In literal terms, you are being an actual idiot. Meme fool turds is in the same size and price range as better cameras. Unless you are specifically pursuing a specific brand of awful image quality, they are pointless. "BUY MEDIUM FORMAT THEN" is not a response to how shit fool turds is. What's next, you're not poor, because the millionaire pointing it out isn't a billionaire? No, you're below the poverty line. That's a fact.

>>4330476
>>4330487
>>4330488
>>4330503
>>4330510
>>4330519
>>4330521
>>4330523
>>4330534
>>4330536
>>4330537
>>4330541
>>4330542
>>4330544
You're all just as retarded as each other. Maybe slightly less the ones arguing that FF or APS-C can still be small & light and provide better IQ.

Different strokes for different blokes. If anon bought a shitty M43 ten years ago and it still works for what he wants, why do the rest of you need to tell him to consoooom? He literally said he has a D850 which is objectively the best camera ever made and no you can't tell me I'm wrong because I won't revist this thread

>>4330549
The d850 is the most geearfag camera of all time
>i need gps and voice memos and i cant use a z7 because uhhh pdaf does something in theory maybe that will be $1700 for one with 150k on the shutter i know what i got no tire kickers

>>4330542
so what I'm hearing is that you're also a garry winogrand jr. yeah? Otherwise why even bother owning a camera?
>Defending canon in any way, shape or form
gonna have to stop you there friend. everyone here has leicas and shoots exclusively film

>>4325038
I like my R8. Kind of wish I just shelled out for an R5, but fuck me I guess. Had lots of EF glass around so I just picked up the adapter that gives you a control ring as well and hey fuckin' presto I actually think I made a wise choice for once in my life. I'm not a huge fan of the lack of physical AF/MF or IS switches on the RF lenses (iirc the L tier have them?), and honestly I think it was a good choice to pivot in this direction if only for the move to mirrorless bodies. Compared to my older 5D mkII it's a similar feeling but from what I can tell nothing but improvements. Actually fuck that, the battery life could be better because ofc canon gave the R8 the same battery as the R10/50/100 which lasts for what feels like 100 shots, and you can't buy a battery grip. As I said, fuck me for not just buying the R5. In fact, fuck canon for artifically restricting what should be mid-tier features to their most expensive models. Why exactly is a second SD card slot going to cost me another $1500?

>>4330563
if R8 was the spec level you were aiming for, you coulda just got an RP or the OG R and been just as well off desu. and saved money. I bought my R when they first launched here and i don't find myself wanting with its image quality. Probably gonna ride it out til it dies. I don't do video so the new cameras all don't really appeal to me much, since much of the improvement over the past few years seems to really be video/hybrid centric. nothing that improves what i do.

>>4330567
Idk, I think I just wanted what came out that year. Didn't really get the itch until then, and yeah, again, fuck me.

To be fair I don't shoot as much as I did before so maybe I could do fine with a lower tier camera, or even an R7, but I can't justify buying any more shit for a while. I'll use what I've got and bitch about it like any other healthy, rational adult here on 4chan would

Not relevant to the thread but since a bunch of you were chimping about it anyway, is m43 actually that shit? Honest question. I can see the appeal as a "middle ground" between a phone and a FF.

Figured I'd buy one as a fuck around / to use manual lenses on, but seeing as we have some experts in the thread, anyone care to convince me?

>M43 is outclassed by canon m
Yeah I guess so. Still gotta be some points in favor of m43 no?

>>4330614
m43 is an anachronism from a time in digital camera technology when it lead in some features we now consider standard and the majority of aps-c, full frame, and medium format cameras were DSLRs. cheap used top tier gear was not a thing and if you were just posting on the internet you'd be targeting VGA sizes not 4k.

it made perfect sense when it was new but it's just not that anymore except for a minority of people who care a lot about video codecs and compare 300% crops of their footage after # generations and zoom in looking for all-i vs. longgop difference, not because of an inherent trait of m43 but because panasonic is just like that

>>4330614
>Still gotta be some points in favor of m43 no?
An em5ii+30mm macro is the single cheapest high res, high speed film digitization setup

>>4330614
MFT is great or rather was great
Seems like in recent years the prices of bodies have gone up to Full Frame levels
The bodies themselves have grown to full frame size as well

Meanwhile Panasonic has discontinued fun affordable models like the gx85/gx9

OM 5 / EM10mkiv seem to hit the sweet spot in terms of price/performance for new MFT cameras atm

>>4330623
a7c and a6 series already mogged those unless you would rather have pixel shift for film scanning than 2x-4x less noise at every ISO. they were a great idea when larger sensors just meant DSLRs.

>>4330620
This is pretty much it. In the late 2010's, it had unique advantage because Canikon were still DSLR centric, and Sony was expensive and the A7III isn't very tough. Sony's corrected the latter issue, Canikon have good MILCs at cheaper prices, and most systems are fleshed out with a lot more lens variety.

Still miss it though.

Review of the new 35mm f1.4L:
https://youtu.be/_a0A1R_xikU

Tldr: It's horrible trash.

File: OIrMNue.jpg (39 KB, 460x480)

39 KB JPG

>>4330725
Imagine carrying a kilogram of glass with you not even being happy with the results.

On that note, I just bought the 28mm f2.8 pancake

>>4330816
>I just bought the 28mm f2.8 pancake
Now thats a great lens. Maybe even the GOAT, to be honest.

While Ive sold all my Canon cameras, I still have this and a few other RF lenses. In case Canon ever comes out with a small full frame camera (M50 style) with IBIS, I will buy one and use it with the 28.

>>4330831
It's a meme lens

>>4330831
I adapt my older EF 24mm 2.8, and honestly, please sell me on the RF 28. Give me hope that theres a reason to upgrade.

>>4330850
It's super sharp even into the very edges of the frame and it also has really nice bokeh and rendering. Really good for the size and price.

https://opticallimits.com/canon/canon-rf-28mm-f-2-8-stm/#MTF_resolution_at_45_megapixels