If I never have a problem with rolling shutter? Seems like it only exponentially increases the probability of breaking? I just don't like the silent shooting, but if it's worth it...Picrel my a7 after 5 years finally. Looking to learn from my mistakes.
>be woman/retard>poke the shutter trying to clean it>guys i have no idea what happened. should i buy an x100vi???[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height811Scene Capture TypeStandard
Mirrorless was a mistakeWe need cameras that are mirrorless + shutterless
>>4395824no we need more cameras with more shit between the sensor and the lens, bring back pellicle mirrors, bring back separate IR filters put protective shutters over the mirror, give all cameras built in focal reducers
cute nails op
>>4395826Or maybe retards can stop poking their shuttersThe a7iii I get, sony legit should have done a recall (just like canon should have recalled a lot of r6mk1s for mainboard failure). But when its an a7iv or r6ii I just KNOW they used the shutter in dust cover mode and at some point, touched it or used a brush to try and clean it. And didnt think anything of it. They probably thought they were making it last longer.
e shutter is worse iq on most mirrorless, rolling shutter aside
>>4395833Canon forcibly drops all e shutter shooting to 12 bit raw (all canons are sports-centric cameras) and its worse on some shitty crop sensors and sony/nikon sports-centric cameras but that’s about itEshutter on a fuji or a z7ii or a7rv is going to have the same quality except maybe a small issue when pushing shadows 7 stops (who does this?)
>>4395834>Canon forcibly drops all e shutter shooting to 12 bit rawCitation?
>>4395839https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/infobank/electronic-vs-mechanical-shutter/
>>4395842Not on the r5mk2
>>4395845true, you should tell canon to update their website
>>4395845The r5mk2 has APS-C dynamic range at every ISO setting, it might as well be a 12 bit camera period. Same bad design with the same forced NR coverup as the r1 and r3. Same tell in image quality: shadow pushes look identical to APS-C.>inb4 there is no NR because detail!Good NR doesnt reduce detail at all unless you want to make ISO 800+ totally noiseless. Canon’s NR and on camera sharpening are THE BEST and the primary market for canon cameras (sports/press) shoots jpeg for instant delivery, not raws for contrasty landscapes and backlit weddings, so its safe to assume canon knows exactly how much NR to apply to raw data and how to do it without smudging detail any more than an AA filter. On the other hand, canons low DR trend and refusal to make small lenses might have something to do with sony snagging five major press contracts that used to belong to canon as soon as the a7iv and a9ii were out. Imatest actually recommends applying some NR to more accurately test lens sharpness! The more you know!
>>4395845have you seen the r5ii’s image quality? if e shutter made it worse it would be as bad as micro four thirds
>>4395829You missed the point entirely brah but that's ok, maybe someone else will get it.
>>4395794>Using a snoylol
