I've been out of the gear game for a long time (last camera i bought was in 2014), are they really so out of ideas now that "it looks retro and vintage" is a major selling point?
It's not a major selling point because they're out of ideas, but because it works well
yes. the camera tech has basically plateaued. Even if a company came out with an tech breaktrhough, they'll just piecemeal it and release improvements once every few years so they don't have to innovate as fast.
>>4373132>works wellhow? its just a cosmetic appearance. it doesn't do anything functionally
>>4373134It works well as a marketing trick. People gobble that shit up. See the x100 and zf
>>4373134>how? its just a cosmetic appearanceThe cattle see something cool, they buy itIf they bought the good stuff there wouldn't be many cameras, and to be fair pros buy the same 2 or 3 bodies depending on their choice and lens system.
>>4373133Photography tech plateaud at the Nikon F6 and canon 1v. Fine grained 35mm film has up to 500MP if you have the SKILL to get that much out of it, and there are NO digi-cams that get even remotely close.
>>4373131>>4373134Cope and seethe. Fuji and Nikon won.
>>4373140>tips fedora Woah, look at mr blackrock wannabe over here. Get over yourself lmao
>>4373131>I've been out of the gear game for a long timewait until you find out it's all mirrorless...
>>4373134>how? its just a cosmetic appearance.After the design tragedy that was DSLRs, people will gladly take that.For a while it was like big camera did not want your money if you were not a soulless paid snapshtiter for the NFLAnd after the latest round of increasingly large, low DR, high speed cameras i'm beginning to think they want to go back to that because whenever they do something nice for actual human beings, all the gearfags and sports snapshitters go "I NEED A BIGGER GRIP, WHERES MY 200-800 F4 STOP WASTING R&D MONEY ON SMALL PRIMES"
>>4373170what design tragedy? do people stare at their camera more than actually taking photos? I've never once looked at my D7100 and said "wow this is ugly as sin I wish they would make a prettier camera so my photos would look better"
>>4373172>What design tragedy?The part where 35mm cameras became uglier than 645 SLRs and about the same size, becoming horridly inconvenient to just carry, and horrid to be seen holding.The majority of people bought small sensor compacts instead. Big camera's position was you didn't "need" anything more unless you were le NFL wedding news man so their better cameras would be built exclusively for the wants and needs of le sports wedding news segment.This is the part where a scrawny nerd or a gross fat fuck claims he is heckin manly for carrying a slightly uglier, heavier camera as if it is an achievement and people who have more sex aren't passing it up just because it's ugly and annoying to tote around.
>>4373172>do people stare at their camera more than actually taking photosno, they care about how they appear to other people while taking photos. They're delusional thinking that some mysterious onlookers or even peers will highly regard them for using a retro camera when in reality no one gives a fuck.
>>4373177It's mostly about just holding something ugly. Voluntarily. That says something about you. Your degree of self care and self esteem. It's an ugly device, no one wants to carry something ugly around and hold something ugly in front of their face. People who are not ugly probably don't understand it. It calls up the image of the nerd, or add 20 years and call them a birdwatcher. Very uncool.Just make the camera not so fucking ugly, and about 35mm to half frame again, like they were for almost a whole lifetime, and suddenly people buy. Who knew?
>>4373177god you reminded me of my college photo club where a faggot would always share photos in the online gallery with a caption on how he shot xyz with a fuji x100v. Like no one asked, no one cares, we just wanted to see photos, even a leicafag wasn't in your face like that.
>>4373181the leica guy was too busy having sex to caption his photosthe fuji guy was getting tired of being asked if toy cameras were in now
>>4373149Hit a nerve didn't i, Fujiworm?
>>4373189Nah I don't use Fuji. You're embarrassing, man
>>4373181>projecting
>DSLRs were fine bro>>>literally so ugly they created fuji and m43 as the free market pushing back, which forced the big 3 to promptly kill DSLRs and switch to mirrorless, resulting in sony stabbing nikon 20 times in the chest with the piece of the original a7 lens mount that was supposed to keep the light leaks out
>>4373201>the free market always chooses the superior productretard alert
>WOW! some people care about THING? everyone look at me and notice how special and authentic i am for not caring about THING5/10, got me to reply
dials are fun[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 25.12 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:10:13 13:39:17Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width793Image Height1000
>>4373540where bokeh dial?
>>4373195Yeah check yourself, the fucking fag picking a camera for looking cool and not for making things look cool
>>4373658every camera takes photos as well as the other. looks is all that sets them apart.>inb4 gearbabbleskill issue.
Personally don't get it but you can't deny it's its not working
>>4373658I don't even use a retro camera. I'm just making fun of you because you seem like the kinda guy to wank to V for Vendetta. Get over yourself LMAO, some bullying will be good for you
>>4373131get an om-5 bro
>>4373142>hurr durr use film>then digitalize it>muh megapickels>muh film>muh grainmental illness
>>4373172tradesmen love their tools. stop being an autistic abo you petrol huffing slob
>>4373227it chooses the popular product. one can argue what superior means in that context. is something that performs better on charts and tech sheets "superior" to something people want to actually buy, use and enjoy?
>>4373540based fuji weather sealing
>>4373718true, use them all the time in the rain, snow, sand and dustalways held up just fine
>>4373227Yes. DSLRs were inferior to both film slrs and mirrorless.
>>4373131>majorNoBut hipsters are still a thing, yes. Just look at the retards buying old Leicas.
>>4373712>I'm just making fun of youYou need to be funny first, bud>ProjectionTake your meds
>>4373904>cringe + nophotoOpinion discarded
>>4373916>Photos in a nophoto threadRetard alert!
