Previous: >>4460594
>>4462139Put it in the Freezer reetard
I honestly think that removing ALL video features from a stills camera is the single biggest improvement that can be made to any MILC on the market.One look at canon's oversized APS-C DR crap and snoy's increasingly noisy sensors should tell you why.Videocucks are actively ruining stills capability and portability.>NOOOO IT OVERHEATED SHOOTING 4k120 FOR AN HOUR STRAIGHT! AND ITS A 1.1X CROP! WORTHLESS!>The company 1 release later: make it a half inch thicker and speed the sensor up at the cost of having m43 DR on a full frame cameraAfter the a7iii, a7c, and a7riii, sony stopped making cameras with good sensors for stillsAfter the R6II and R5, canon stopped making cameras with good sensors for stillsAfter the Z6II and Z7II, nikon stopped making good cameras period (muh auto everything AF, sure, but they stopped using monobody construction)
>>4462151>and why did nikon stop making their cameras out of a single piece of metal?Heat piping for videofaggots, of course.
I have a 50mm 1.8 II, 18-135 and a 75-300.>hur they are shitYeah I know but the 300 was $20 and 50 $35 and the 135 was $45 with another camera.I am going to get a 55-250 STM to get a better telephoto so I have something decent while I die of old age waiting for a cheap L series telephoto.Is there anything other EF lenses I should look for or do I have most things under 150mm covered to a not garbage extent?Maybe the 40mm since it's a pancake, but does it have any positive qualities asides that since it's slower than the 50?
>>4462151Based.
>>4462151Dude the new z cameras are fine. Your autism about camera bodies is incredibly tiring
>>4462151real. leica m wins again
>>4462151spbp
>>4462139>6 gear threads nowI get that you like to sperg about Snoy but goddamn dude, go outside or some shit.
>>4462139They still havent solved the overheating problems?
>>4462200>he does it for free but umpromptedDespicable wannabe janny, I have more respect for jannies than I do for you.
>>4462200what is this a photography board now?
just use Canon
>>4462232This isn't a photography board — it's a gear board where users post snoy memes
Why are cameras so expensive?
>>4462238What if I like to buy old sub-$200 cameras and try them out for a week before deciding whether to keep or resell I swear I have the fun of this hobby to me is buying new stuff, I came from a way more expensive hobby so unless I'm buying lenses and bodies that cost in the thousands I'm saving money
>>4462151pentax k10d is the final redpill>aps-c>k-mount>CCD>no video, photo only>no live view, viewfinder onlyan ESSENTIAL PHOTO camera
>>4462232It was until clive came here. It's been non-stop spam ever since.Say his name: Clive. It proves you aren't him.>>4462243Japanese companies are predatory and actively hate their customers.
>>4462246>aps-cSmaller sensors get exponentially worse as size decreases from full frame (6x9).>K mountBaby mount.>CCDNot a meaningful difference. Digital is shit.>No videoOnly good point.>No live viewA downside. Mirror boxes are inferior. Mirrors, focusing screens, and prisms all lose light and resolution and make focusing off the same plane as the sensor impossible.Behold, an ESSENTIAL PHOTO camera.
>>4462248take that to a concert as an audience
>>4462245Sounds like you might be one or two anons on this whole board that actually enjoy doing shit instead of fagging on about brands
what has a better lens/body as a walkaround/travel camera?nikon z30 + 16-50mm kit lens?or snoy zve10 with 16-50mm oss kit lens? they both measure close with the z30 being 5mm thicker (65 vs 70mm) and 12mm wider (bigger grip on z30)sony has better autofocus but nikon supposedly has a way better lens optically.nikon is $440 shipped as a refurb, sony is $500 roughly on facebook marketplace (lots of failed youtubers who never took off) im very unlikely to go beyond the kit lens for either body btw because i have a ff dslr this is something i wanna stick in a hoodie pocket/cargo pants pocket or keep in my cars center console
>>4462245only camera I ever bought new is canon g5x for steath concert photography, all interchangeable optics cameras and gear I buy second hand and do the same
>>4462252>a camera for this and a camera for thatyou're just gearfaggingyou only need one good enough camera
>>4462255Stop being /p/ brained. /p/ brain = buy technically pixel peeping perfect camera /p/ won't criticize as "main", compromise and buy a camera a little worse than the one you actually need "for street and travel"Normal brained = stop caring what /p/ thinks, buy the camera you actually need for everything
>>4462255i love gearfagging though, it lets me have fun with cameras. im literally >>4462245 >>4462256its replacing a zv1 that i can still get $4-500 for so nbd, kinda just doing it before the resale for this thing plummets off a cliff from phones getting sensors that are the same size. i actually think the camera companies are selling these things cheapish knowing that they need to drive a hard argument to convince normies away from their smartphones for blogging/youtube. honestly wouldn't have even thought of it until i saw nikon selling z30s for $400 + adorama offering $400 for my zv1 don't think im gonna go for any primes desu https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2019/review-nikon-z50from reading this (halfway down) the nikon kit lens is way better than the sony one, iirc the sony one is a design from the nex line so its at least 5 years older. reviewer compares the z50 to his a6000.
>>4462262>i love gearfaggingAre you baldDo you wear glassesDo you have stubble
>>4462268>baldim a norwood 1 going on 2>glassesno>stubblei shaved last night my gf likes it when i have a 5 o'clock shadow but i cant grow a beard without looking like a neckbeard
>>4462151Tell'em sister
>>4462269ok, buy some glasses and carry on with the gearfaggingmaybe start a youtube channeldont forget your beanie
>>4462268>bald>wear glasses>have stubbleWtf are you me?
Fuck nikkorz
Pretty sick this thing is internal focusing
>>4462200Clive's been banned from every online photography community multiple times each. He's got nowhere else to go at this point since the jannies here don't give a damn.
>>4462200The more clive spergs the more I like sony>BTFOs blobtism by only being ergonomic with small primes>BTFOs sissies by only having normal lenses, no pancakes>BTFOs vlogslop by overheating when they try to use 4k60 to smooth out their walkie-talkie jitters>BTFOs uncreative plebs by making you change the default colors yourselfThe a7c is honestly starting to look like a really soulful camera.
Who the fuck is Clive?
Alright, I'm not a /p/hag but maybe you guys will be helpful to someone genuinely in need.I came across an epic travel deal and now am going on a 3 week trip overseas in less than 3 weeks. I don't have a camera other than an old FZ28 whos batteries probably last 30mins by now. I was thinking about just taking my iPhone, but then started looking into older DSLRs and some of these are pretty cheap. Did some searching in the archives, people recommend the D3300/D5300/D7200. Everyone says D7200 or bust, but the size and weight look burdensome. Basically, if I have a limit of $300-350, is it worth taking a D3300 or D5300 kit along? Something like this https://www.ebay.com/itm/146718348555or this https://www.ebay.com/itm/167739606250I'm leaning towards the D5300 since it's all the same prices and the swivel screen might come in handy. I saw some say the D5500 is gimped, but can't see how.Any advice?
>>4462246Truly my favourite camera. I want an upgrade from this though with better AF and better low-light IQ so I’m eyeballing the K-3 III.
>>4462344If you plan to leave it on auto mode and just point & shoot, not worth itIf you plan to learn what the settings do and how to adjust them, and possibly learn editing afterwards, could be worth itD5xxx are very comfy, D7xxx offers more features but they may not be of any interest or use to you
>>4462248>behold an essential photo cameradoes that thing have IBIS
>>4462185Ackshually for three years I shoot video on my M240 and then pull stills from the videos in post then apply Fro presets and post them here claiming they’re Nikon Z and you chuckle fucks lap it up and updoot my posts
>>4462139Anyone used these Prism lens filters? Thinkan about getting some and experimenting. I like the starburst one, the dream filter seems to have a nice softening effect ‘n there’s a bunch of others that could be cool, like the halo one. If you’ve used filters from another company and found them decent, lmk.
>>4462351Thanks for responding. If it was for long term, I'd look at the D7100, but again weight. The thing with all of these is basically I can just hock them afterwards and get my money back.It is a bit of a family trip so that's why I don't want to rely on the phone. Anyone have any idea what difference there is between the D5300 and D5500?
>>4462359Dont buy any of this crap. You'll get blurry photos out the ass. DSLR zoom lenses are all super soft and aps-c DSLRs have shit sensors that are much noisier than modern mirrorless. Also they cant do stabilization very well.Olympus OM-D E-M5 II: $300Lumix 12-60 f3.5-5.6: $150Enjoy!
>>4462364>DSLR zoom lenses are all super softSomeone's been buying shit quality lenses
>>4462359You can get a Nikon Z30 for $400 before tax off Nikons refurbished site. It's a better camera than anything short of a D500
>>4462344why are you interested in the older variants of the 3500, 5600, and 7500the quality of life improvements on each are nice and the 7500 has the same sensor as the D500 in the 7200's body. also the older you go the higher the shutter counts are and the more redundant it is to purchase
>>4462366He’s right thoughever. SLR zooms were only crisp and fringe free on film. Digital sensors require more correction than a mirror box can allow unless you wanna spend mirrorless money on those oversized blobsA d5200 with its kit zoom is the size of a gfx100sii - medium format. Shameful.
>>4462377It's smaller than the EM-1X despite the latter being mirrorless with a smaller sensor, your point isn't valid.
>>4462364>>4462367Both of those blow the budget out of the water. Again, I'm not looking for a camera to grow old with, more of a reliable performer I can part ways with afterwards. If I weren't spending considerable money on the trip, obviously I'd have a lot more to splurge on a Z6 or whatever.>>4462370Money. Also I hear everything after the D3300/D5300/D7200 is gimped, though I don't know how.
>>4462383Based, ignore the mirrorless goblin who wants you to buy overpriced scameras. Once you taste the Joy of Reflex™ you won't want a Z6 but a K-1 II or D850 if anything.
>>4462383They removed some features and some lens compatibility if I recall correctly after those, also the D7500 lowered the resolution and removed the ability to meter with old lenses that the D7200 had. Also one less SD slot. All aggressive market segmentation measures to drive D500 sales.
>>4462383You spend a extra $50 and get a better lens than any DSLR Nikon Kit Lens, better form factor, and a brand new camera with a warranty as opposed to dealing with retarded eBay sellers. It also has the same sensor as the D500 and D7500. IMO it's your best bet if you want a pocketable camera in that budget...only thing that might be better would be like a OM5 for $600https://www.nikonusa.com/p/z-30-refurbished/1749Q>>4462386I'm unironically considering buying one alongside my K1ii. Gonna finger fuck a ZVE10 at a Best Buy before I decide. I hate how the ZV1 takes 2 business days to zoom to max focal length while I know the Z30 is a quick snap (or leave it already extended out). It's actually kinda annoying because you don't just have to wait for it to start and extend the lens out you then have to wait for the lens to go from 24mm to 70mm.It seems like it would fit in my cargo pants/sweatpants pocket fine desu.
>>4462390I still remember when having no viewfinder was reserved for poverty spec point and shoots. Also that sensor has subpar reach.
It's very smart to simply ignore everything cANON says.
>>4462395You sound like a midwit. You're not as intelligent as you think you are.
>Doug, the type of guy to spend hundreds of dollars to get the 2005 digishit experience mated to a phone tier touchscreen
>>4462392I've gotten some really great photos out of this ZV1 without a viewfinder and a 1 inch sensor though. A apsc sized sensor and bigger brighter screen is definitely an upgrade.
>>4462398Might as well get a 250D
>>4462390Ok, that Z30 does seem like an option, mainly because I see it sells quick on ebay for basically the same price. Lack of viewfinder does seem really annoying though, since I'll basically be outside most of the time.I'll consider it. But I also see a D5300 with 18-140 kit zoom for $280 on ebay.>>4462392What does subpar reach mean?
>>4462397You care about the larp because you cant produce the result>>4462405cANON is a shitty photographer so he crops every photo. By reach he means more, smaller pixels so he can crop more while still having "sharpness"But smaller pixels lose color fidelity in low light and cropping looks like crap unless you have a z7ii/gfx100 tier camera. Better to zoom optically instead of using digital zoom like a phone.
>>4462383If you are only shooting real camera shit just this once, consider film. Film does have a cost per photo but buying, devving, and scanning 108 frame of fujifilm 400 is $50-75. The cost of a perfectly functional auto exposure, autofocus film SLR is $50. With your budget you could even buy better film, more film, and high res scans.Film was the standard for photographers knowledgeable or clueless for years because unlike digital, it has crazy exposure latitude where it will retain details even if the user totally fucks up.Also, film gear is typically smaller, way smaller than aps-c DSLRs. like a minolta maxxum 5 with its 35-70 f4 kit lens is smaller than full frame mirrorless.
>>4462426I considered that briefly. Frankly it would be devastating if it all turned out crap weeks after the fact. So I'd much rather take that risk on my own instead of on the go.
>>4462386Lmao die already boomer so your kids can finally buy a house
>>4462396Nah he's intelligent enough to point out your a crayon eater. Get a job so you can buy real cameras instead of your ewaste Walmart cameras
>>4462168I tend to prefer taking out the 40 over the 50, but it doesn't really differ much other than the size/weight difference. They're about the same sharpness. If you like wider angles the 24 pancake and 10-18 are both inexpensive used or new and perform quite well.
>>4462395He's right about some things ie it's the jews but usually wrong about anything to do with taking photos.
>>4462248if everyone were as retarded as you, no action shot would have ever been taken>wait wait do that again i was setting up my piece of shit timber camera and also adjusting my fedora
Currently selling a Voigtlander lens for Leica M. Perfect pictures, everything disclosed in the listing. Potential buyer reaches out, wants to know how much the lens "sticks out of the camera with and without the hood".
Seeing how exotic glass has gone down in price I decided to scout ebay for a piece I have set my sights on.>Mint>Click on listing>[Condition]Apperance Mint. Thin Haze,Dirt,Wipe Mark in Lens.No, mister Takahashi, that does not fall into the definition of mint.
>>4462448>hello im 12 this is my first time on ebay
>>4462448It's the gacha game ranking system. A rank is actual garbage, what you really want is SSSR rank.>LIKE NEW++++: Actually in great condition, expects 90% of new price>TOP MINT+++: In good condition maybe with a few marks from being you know, used. Expects 80-85% of new price>MINT++: In good to okay condition, might have something affecting the elements like dust or a scuff. Expects 75-80% of new price>NEAR MINT+: In passable condition. Going to have some form of damage or optical impact. Expects 70% of new price.>EXCELLENT: Acutally garbage by anyone sane's standards. Obvious optical issues and/or damage to the unit. Still expects 60-70% of new price>VERY GOOD: Completely trashed. Last rank before AS-IS and FOR PARTS. Technically functions still, so still wants over 50% of new price
>>4462448Ok, but is the appearance mint?
>>4462248>full frame (6x9)What a weirdo thing to have an opinion on. small-frame being named full-frame comes from the video world where using the full 35mm film is bigger than even smaller film formats
>>4462139I'm thinking about switching from DSLR to Fuji GFX as a lot of people here seem to like the system.However, I noticed there doesn't seem to be any of good lenses. How do the GF80 or the GF110 compare to the Sigma Art f1.4 50mm or 85mm? Especially in terms of sharpness and CA?
>>4462481It's a few underpaid Indians, not a lot of people.
>>4462479No, it comes from 35mm being the photography standard for nearly a century. When digitals were introduced to the public, they were "cropped frame" and couldn't use the full image area that film cameras could. What comes from video are the deceptive inch sensor sizes (the best known being 1/2.3", 1" and 4/3"). The sensors themselves don't measure the nominal size in any direction because they simply match the sensor size of a vidicon tube of that size, the tube being much bigger than the actual sensing area.
>>4462481The lenses aren't a problem as you can just use EF glass, as EF has an image circle larger than full frame. A few of the zooms vignette on the wide end, but the primes are fine. They're also much cheaper, sharper and faster than fuji glass, and have obviously superior build quality, despite what fujislugs protest. The bigger problem is the cameras themselves. As far as the used market goes they do at first seem like a good deal, considering historically how expensive digital medium format is, but I can tell you they're just average. The picture quality is good, better detail than something like a 5Dsr or r5, but not that much better. The build quality is also unfortunately typical fuji. Plastic everywhere, even on dial stems, ill fitted grips, creaky in the hand. Worse even than a 6D, probably about the same as a 5D classic. They do however have really good battery life for a mirrorless camera as the battery is huge. Probably get about 60% of what you'd get from a DSLR.
>>4462494>The lenses aren't a problem as you can just use EF glass, as EF has an image circle larger than full frame.That's an insane cope, its image is bigger than needed to illuminate the sensor but as big as it needs to be to produce the quality they're known for. The IQ outside of the full frame area is meh.
>>4462495I literally use both native fuji glass and EF glass on this system professionally. You are just talking out of your ass. The edge sharpness if perfectly fine.
>>4462496How's falloff? I imagine it can be intense depending on the specific lens, but GFX has good shadow recovery right?
>>4462496I'm more concerned with distortions and aberrations but I'm sure "fine" doesn't mean as sharp as the center because even in full frame the edges are less sharp.
>>4462481There are good lenses but not if you just want to bokeh whore, FF is still better for thatJust make sure you go for the 100mp models, otherwise FF is just better overallI don't miss my GFX at allIgnore anything cANON says, full of dishonesty
>>4462502Oh and cinefag too, worst commenters on the board, be confident in your ability to ignore them entirely
>>4462502Reminder that according to cANON the thing in the Patterson Gimlin film isn't a real hominid but when pressed he just couldn't prove it. >>4462503>why yes, I'm a dickwad from Bristol how could you tell?
>>4462503Let's see where the lie is, poop. I posted >>4462493 and even wiki agrees with what I said, see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_camera_tube#SizeFull frame 35mm comes from stills, not video. As opposed to half frame cameras like the Pen-F or recent crop digitals.
>>4462499Depends which model, I've only used the 50's not the 100's. The shadow recovery is better than full frame yeah, it's the main reason we use them.
>>4462506>>4462505>dogfucker lost his trip
>>4462514>poop confessing he fucks dogs
>>4462521you are literally a dogfuckerhttps://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4442111/#4452396https://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4442111//#4452494"How can they rape when they're the ones being fucked? They're merely offering themselves as flesh toys for their furry companions." - cinefag's actual response to "bestiality is rape"Cinefag unironically believes that bestiality is morally right and that dogs can consent to sex with people.This is what cinefag actually believes. Cinefag ACTUALLY believes that a dog can consent to sex as long as it isn't physically held down and forced to have it.We can only wonder what he thinks about sex with horses>how is it rape if they can just kick my chest in? -cinefag in the future
>>4462531I guess sex between dogs is rape too since they can't consent either.
>>4462481Buy a 50mp hasselblad if you're not buying a 100mp fuji. Fuji and hasselblad each did something different with the same core sony IMX sensor so fuji gfx50 models are less sensitive to light than hasselblad x1d/cfv50 models that use the same sensor. Fuji also has significantly worse color rendition because fuji and hasselblad each use totally different color filters and lens coatings.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDE706vozjkSpeed is irrelevant for what these cameras are for but if you insist the GFX100SII is the only way forward. So again, buy a 50mp hasselblad if you're not buying a 100mp fuji.>no good lensesIt's like every other medium format system. It has a lot of good lenses (for photographers, not reviewers), mostly compact, with only a few being fast because medium format targets more mature photographers who don't rely on the bokeh crutch.If you can, and prefer to work with f2.8 primes and f4 zoom on full frame, and wish companies would >stop targeting wedding/event faggots, make 35-85s, make slow short teles and macros etc>stop targeting low tier "sharpness chart" gear reviewers and focus on color rendition, DOF falloff characteristics, and "glow" moreYou should shoot medium format.If you would think "well medium format isn't as good in low light because equivalence" over the relative lack of max-bokeh autofocus lenses like 35mm f1.2, 50mm f0.9, medium format is wrong for you, and you're probably not a very good photographer, both for lacking skill, and being confused about how cameras and real life photography actually work.Fuji medium format also has one major disadvantage. A 1/125th flash sync. And no native leaf shutter lenses. It must adapt hasselblad H system glass instead. Why not just use a hasselblad H camera then? The sensors are even better for anything where flash sync matters.>>4462532Kill yourself animal fucker trash
>>4462535>with only a few being fast because medium format targets more mature photographers who don't rely on the bokeh crutch.I stop my Sigma Art f1.4 lenses down to f2.8 always. It seems GFX lenses start at f4. Stopping them down too would mean I start at f5.6 - that's too dark imo. > low tier "sharpness chart" gear reviewersDisagree. I can tell sharpness immediately without a chart. The difference between an f1.8 entry level and a G-master is obvious. The fact that you dismiss this makes me think you're an inexperienced newbie. Either that or a degenerate 4chan autist.> buy a 50mp hasselblad if you're not buying a 100mp fuji.I don't understand this recommendation. Why wouldn't you recommend the X2D with 100mp (or X2D ii in case it comes out this week)?
>>4462554the medium format target audience does not believe sharper lens = better or that more megapixels = better and of those who are creatives, 90% are professional portrait photographers who dgaf about wide open edge contrast fyi. those who are not creatives are using MFDBs as scanners and constitute the majority of MF users. they only need a flat field and a sharp lens at f16-f22 and dgaf wide open edge contrast either.>The difference between an f1.8 entry level and a G-master is obvious.yes, the G master renders a less pleasing photograph.if you are coming at buying these cameras from an available light hobby snapshitter standpoint and have a boomer "if i paid ___ i better get ____ (aka everything)" attitude you will hate medium format and call it a scamhasselblad/phaseone really try hard to tell people like you to stay away by omitting video period and sports autofocusfuji on the other hand will gladly take your money, and then, so will ebay's 15% fee
>>4462557I disregard your opinion, you're clearly an inexperienced newbie with lots of opinions you should be ashamed of having for lack of expertiseAnyone else here who actually has tried the system?
>Snoyfag gets told medium format is specific to high end professional photography and he will be disappointed and broke if he expected iso 12800 g master snapshitting with auto everything autofocus>BULLSHIT G MASTERS ARE THE BEST LENSES EVER. YOU'RE SHITTING ME. ONLY AN AMATEUR COULD THINK THAT. ANY REAL PHOTOGRAPHERS WANT TO PIPE UP?Yeah. G masters are shit lenses and if you buy medium format you will bitch endlessly about the high ISO, lack of f1.2 hypersharp trash, etc etc etc. People will pay 10x more for a rodenstock 90mm f5.6 than they will for a sony 50mm f1.4. Despite the rodenstock being softer wide open at f5.6 than the sony is at f5.6. Wonder why? The answer is better rendering - achieving sharpness through a high sampling rate/lower enlargement factor instead of optical corrections that distort and reflect light (and color), and then end up requiring digital corrections to fix their mess.Every single medium format camera on the market is either a digital continuation of the v system/sheet film ethos or a shitty cope version of full frame that isn't very good at anything except taking pixel peepers and print-nosers money and leaving them disappointed and thinking they got scammed (aka fuji)Medium format digital is squarely in "if you have to ask, the answer is no" territory. It's all about subtle technical qualities (at least they are subtle on test targets) that take actual photographic and editing skill to transform into obvious differences. If you think a G master is a good lens, you probably don't have that skill. Stick to your a7rv.Also see: The german shepherd guy who get into MFDBs and LF film and actually took worse photos than he ever did with his canon 5d.
>>4462560too long didnt readI already said i use Sigma Art stopped down to 2.8, Gmaster was just an example for sharpnessYou're clearly inferior as a human. The planet would be better without you, kys
>>4462561the high end commercial and fine art photographers that hassie and p1 market to dont even touch sigma art lenses anon. they think they are garbage. sigma is best known for being used to film asian b movies and top gun maverick (which looked like shit). five and six figure portrait shoots are more likely to involve aging canon gear than sigma art lenses.amateur 35mm users think they are some of the best lenses ever made.considering this, you should stay away from medium format.
>>4462560based take. The chuds here will reject it because it's the truth
>>4462560My egg pictures are best in class. It's more like I don't take the pictures people want me to take and are endlessly salty about it. You are correct about mfdb even if your taste in photography is sorely lacking any egg appreciation. They would be considered scamera ripoff cameras if anyone less based than me ever got their hands on one.
>>4462557>>4462560The truth about medium format that consumerists dont want to hear. Not every higher pricetag is an upgrade. Its industrial lathe vs hand drill.
>>4462574Most good photographs are taken with at least one of these: a tripod, at base iso or using film, utilize artifical lighting and/or some other form of light modification. That's why most of p would not enjoy slower cameras that sacrifice ease of use for their vastly improved image quality. You almost need all 3 of them to even make an mfdb perform at a level where it does better than a normal prosumer mirrorless type camera.
>>4462139Sonysters... I don't feel so good...
>>4462579It takes a monumentally stupid series of decisions to arrive at this comparison>buy a sony camera>buy a leica lens>shoot a tilted landscape at f2>crank sharpening>zoom in on the corner by 300%And these retards still cant afford a real editor like capture one
>>4462580>he doesn't knowSome veteran Sony shooters like to adapt M mount glass since the times that Sony, having the only mirrorless FF digital bodies on the market at the time, was the only real option. M mount of course having a great flange distance for adapting, with very non-intrusive adapters compared to adapting SLR glass.Such comparisons interest these users because it helps them make an informed decision about whether a lens will perform reasonably on their Sony camera (or if they ought to get a Kolari mod or some other cope, or not bother at all). It's induced field curvature caused by Sony's extremely thick sensor cover glass. Most people think it only affects extremely fast wide-angle lenses, but here is a case of it affecting a 90mm f/2 lens, neither wide nor particularly fast. I hope this has been educational.
>>4462581Its old news. Sony’s mount is only barely sufficient and lenses need to be designed just for it. Some third party lenses originally designed for E have hard vignettes on nikon Z because the optical designs factored in the sensor glass bending light!Nikon is the new M mount meta especially since they brought back trap focus for the ZF
>>4462582How do M lenses perform on RF?
I'm looking for a full frame camera to shoot along with my Ricoh GR. I reduced it to two options, which one would you suggest more?Leica M10>qt design>great shooting experience, I love manual>would buy used.. afraid of reliability though>would only buy one 35mm lens first, later 50mmNikon Zf>cool retro design but bulky>autofocus if needed>much cheaper and can buy new>can buy 2-3 good lenses right away>probably end up lusting for a Leica in few years again
>>4462588I really don't understand non-canon people. I don't get it, why does the camera need to look good? It's the only thing not in the photo.
>>4462590>why does the camera need to look good?Because that's how you land some pussy
>>4462591>Because that's how you land some pussy
>>4462590Canon has the highest failure rate of any brand (which is saying something when sony exists), and the most anti-consumer practices with basic shit like IBIS and rudimentary weather sealing paywalled behind pro bodies and L lenses. Which are degrading to better meet the needs of news agencies rather than photographers (the r3, r1, and r5ii are full frame aps-DR c cameras lol, gotta have that FPS+readout for your interns and their negligible timing skills and to save $$$ on video cameras)Didn't canon sell a $1300 f1.4 prime that was huge and didnt tecnically cover full frame before literal color stretching distortion correction? Oh yes they did. They sold several.For a while they were just worse internals/comfier grip sony and then sony released an m43 full frame camera (a9iii) to reclaim their title as worst brand for photographers, and bricked the a1 and a7rv just to be sure.Err 20 ya mudda.>>4462587As badly as they do on sony. Similar sensor glass thickness. RF mount is not significantly larger than E either. Canon and sony are the same shit. They don't sell to people like you and me, they sell crates of cameras to corporations along with service contracts. It does not matter that they break. Anyone paying those companies a significant amount of money either has backups in the van or is clueless and will never use it often enough to break it.If you are a hobbyist instead of a prosumer/wedding gigger do yourself a favor and stick to film, fuji and nikon. Honestly even medium format is probably better for pure hobbyists than prosumers. Even the z8/z5ii's auto everything AF is worse than an a7ivs but it doens't matter if you don't try to make charging emotionally unstable retards $5k per wedding into a sustainable pattern of behavior (or can exercise a little skill rather than raiding the booze when no one is looking like most wedding photographers do)
>>4462593Not reading all that. Canon is the best thats why they sell the most cameras. Professionals aren't thinking about their gear, we buy our Canons, then we think about the photos. Meanwhile you guys are dawdling around with these joke systems, thinking about which 'gotcha' anecdote you're gunna unleash on the next Canon professional you see. We're not thinking about you, like ever, sorry. I'm sorry that essays like this is what it takes to justify your own choices to yourself. Maybe next time you'll listen to the pros like me and just get a Canon so you can stop fucking around. Hope this helps.
I know we don't like to mention the L word round these parts, but why shouldn't I just get a used M-10 in fair condition and pair it with decent (good condition) summicron
>>4462587RF is also known for ray angle issues. As far as I'm aware, for adapting rangefinder lenses (primarily, but apparently also SLR lenses), to mirrorless cameras, from best to worst:>Leica M>Leica SL=Nikon Z>Sigma/Panasonic L>Sony E=Canon RFI'm not counting Fujifilm since they don't do full frame and APS-C generally crops out some of the problematic region anyway. GFX on the other hand is reported to have ~3.1mm sensor cover glass, which is comparable to Sony/Canon. Hasselblad supposedly has thin sensor cover glass which would put it up there with SL and Z but I can't find an exact figure.
>>4462595It's not that you shouldn't it's just that for that product at that price point you're not really getting anywhere near the best performing product per dollar. That would mean you're paying for something ethereal that will probably entertain you for a couple weeks before you get bored of its shortcomings, then either shelf it or sell it. Ever wondered why almost all of these things on the used market are sold with ridiculously low shutter counts?
>>4462595>rangefinder often needs realignment if knocked out of position>lenses may not be perfectly coupled to the rangefinder, leading to focus shift that would require the lens to be entirely replaced or serviced (long hunts for a "good copy" of an otherwise perfectly built lens are commonplace among serious rangefinder enthusiasts)>close focusing any lens with a rangefinder is a pain in the ass and inaccurate>focusing a lens longer than 90mm with a rangefinder is a pain in the ass and inaccurate>functionally limited to lenses of focal lengths 28mm to 135mm unless you want to wing it without framelines or, as mentioned, accurate focusNone of the above matter if you use Visoflex, but then you could just get any used SL and have the same (or better) shooting experience with that Summicron and any other native or adaptable lens under the sun, for a better price too.
>>4462594>im a profeshenulNo you’re a loser who bought a disposable $2000 blobCanon: uglier sony
>>4462595M10-M is my daily carry, it's been dope but does have the obvious limitations>>4462588Zf is practical answer, best MF aids for M-mount lenses outside actual rangefinders, also use one for daily carry
>>4462342From what I understand, a turbo sperg in the photography community that is constantly banned on normal forums (i.e where you make an account to post) and can only post here now.Sorta reminds me of the music spergs on the SteveHoffman forums where they go nuts about certain pressings and what audio equipment is best, never relenting and always having to rage at something.
>>4462342Some retard who is desperate to hate sonySome say he is actually a snoy user based on his general attitude (ie: refuses to use a lens that isnt sharp enough on the charts, general spec sperging) and all his BS is a futile attempt to get sony’s attention so they’ll make the changes he wants. He even made product mockups and sent them to sonyalpharumors.
>>4462618I'm not so sure on that one, otherwise it would mean /g/ is the biggest Apple fanbase on the internet.
>>4462620Do people who hate apple desperately send steve jobs their product ideas
>>4462622Has it been shown this guy does? So far he just bitches about stuff that isn't even an issue and makes up scenarios.
>>4462624Yes. The pancake rumors on SAR were him. He emailed them to sony supposedly. Multiple times. His entire thing is he owns a sony but is a weak and kindad dumb allegedly asian kid who thinks pancake availability is all that makes him leave his sony at home. He also sucks at photography and is a default settings auto mode sort of person.
>>4462627Why doesn't he just get Fuji or something then? Is it just autism that keeps him on Sony?
>>4462630Mental illness re: gear is shockingly common among photogtaphersThere is someone here who fervently defends shitty camerasThere is another person here who REEEEEs at the price to animal eye detect hit rate ratioKen rockwell wrote a seething article about the z8 lacking cloud detect and automatic snow compensation for jpeg shootersAnd buddy, just read fredmiranda and mu-43
I regret going for ergonomics bros I should've gotten a coo looking retro style camera
>>4462535>using "fast" to talk about DoF when comparing formatsplease stop
>>4462535>If you would think "well medium format isn't as good in low light because equivalenceIt's true though lmao
>>4462664>Gearcuck: Y-YOU HAVE TO USE THE SAME DOF AND THE SAME SHUTTER SPEED AND THE SAME FOV AND SHOOT FROM THE SAME DISTANCE AND EXPOSE FOR THE SAME BRIGHTNESS AND YOU CANT USE FLASH OKAY AND AND->Real photographer: I use 50 and 100mp cameras. Even if I did all of that it would still curbstomp your shitty micro four thirds/90d just by shrinking the image a little with some clever raw processing. But step back, and ask yourself why would I take the exact same dogshit photo as you when I am perfectly capable of taking a better one? *turns on flash*>Gearcuck: B-B-BUT IF... IN THEORY.... ITS NOT A FAIRSCIENTIFICCOMPARISON REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWhere's huskyfags equivalence btfo test where the Z7II at the equivalent settings got shadow detail the micro four thirds totally missed despite the noise (aka what DR charts are based off) being the same?
>>4462666Who knows, probably ISO mislabeling or some other form of mirrorless cuckoldry. I don't shoot mirrorless so those woes don't affect me. Equivalence has proven true in every experiment I've done so far, to the point that when I gave /p/ some samples they couldn't tell if it was APS-C or full frame.
>>4462668Then again /p/ can't even tell film from digital but that's a question for another time.
>>4462668That's the power of using up to date sensor technology instead of whatever ewaste you stole from tourists, boris.The answer to the problem is pretty simple to anyone who understands cameras1: Sensors are not 100% sensitive. There are always gaps between pixels. Sensors with larger pixels have less wasted, non-sensitive space.2: Difference in sensor technology. An ISO 64 camera is unsurprisingly a better light gathering device than an ISO 200 camera.3: Difference in lens transmittance. Larger sensors typically either use simpler lenses or higher end lenses which transmit more light than cheap overcorrected m43 shit made in china and vietnam.A lot of things can throw equivalence off by half a stop or more. Like having double or quadruple the resolution, or massive pixels, or lens transmittance, or less light lost from a baby mount and thick sensor stack.And then reality bites. Why would a photographer smart enough to use a better camera hamper it by taking the same crappy photos as you with your PNS? Better cameras often actually have slightly worse high ISO noise because they're optimized for low ISO capture and competent users that can keep it under 3200.> to the point that when I gave /p/ some samples they couldn't tell if it was APS-C or full frame.Your 200px examples that, predictably, downsampled the noise out? And every camera you used was shit anyways? Those ones?
>>4462670Neat cope, but full frame is still better for low light.lmao.An ISO 64 camera is nice when light is plenty but you were arguing low light. Enjoy your blurry long exposures I guess.
>fool framers: its naht the same picture you need to shoot wide with an f1.2 prime or f2.8 zoom to open the DOF to lower the eyesoh! you are breaking the rule of equifalence you cant do that its not fair you cant do that its not fair it is NAHT>medium format chads: hehehe iso 50 f8 in the dark go POP squeeeeeeee
>>4462683>in the dark>uses a flashYou're basically admitting they suck for low light, lmao. Perhaps the crop MF lenses would make sense if it wasn't crop MF, but at the time with those lenses and those pathetic sensors it's just worse than FF.
>>4462685your bokeh blasted f1.2 snapshits suck for low light>>4462683based
>>4462683Based and real photographer pilled>>4462685Cringe coward
>>4462686>remorseful buyer samefagging to copeI'm not even against bigger sensors but defending them as some low light marvel is just such a weird hill to die on. It's like saying that a FF with an f/2.8 lens will be better in low light than an APS-C with a f/1.4 lens. It's just untrue. The reason why FF is superior is because it has lenses as fast as APS-C's so it can actually collect more light, boosting SNR. Crop MF doesn't have that advantage, you're stuck with slow lenses.
>>4462689>nooo stop using different settings you cant take better photos than meSir this is not /k/. We are talking about photography not NODS. Your f1.2 snapshits suck. You are a loser. Weegee shot f8 at midnight and made history.
>>4462683>uses flash on FFYour move.
>>4462688>more samefaggingGood luck capturing the pulse of the night with your flash, dipshit.>>4462690You're not making history with your fuji kek, while your mirrorlesscuck camera shuts down when the push comes to shove the mighty DSLR keeps going.Ultra fast lenses can be used to work with unusual light sources. See Kubrick and NASA for an easy, low hanging fruit example))
>>4462692base iso medium format wins bb>>4462693coping for 3 years cuz someone forgot to charge his battery lmao skill issue
>>4462698No anon, they didn't "forget to charge". The camera shut down due to low temps.
>>4462595no reason not to get an m10 as long as you either are ready to commit to rangefinder shooting or know how to take care of stuff well enough to get max resale value. as far as the summicron, i've heard that third party lenses are very comparable in practice. so unless you really want the leica name, might as well save a stack and get a voigt or zeiss.
Is there a good alternative to a capture clip for bags with larger straps? I have a backpacking bag with big ol straps that will never work, and my day pack is a major stretch for the clip. Makes me wonder what kind of backpacks people even use with this thing. I may go back to the camera strap + backpack strap lifestyle, just feels antiquated in this day and age.
Is this a common issue with lenses?
>>4462637The schizo snoy defender that samefags conversations with himself is the worst.
>>4462724I haven't seen anything like that, but I do see the question of what's going on and why one schizo is going off on Snoy and wonder at why someone is like that. This is honestly my first time seeing a name put to him (Clive) but that sounds like a weird name for an Asian guy, so I don't know if that's his actual name.
>>4462723If it's sealed like shit, yes for the mold (though only if you use it in the rain a lot or in really humid conditions). Literally never heard about spiders in a lens though.
>>4462726Ive never seen anyone actually go off on Sony. Its usually the guy writing multiple paragraphs defending Sony.
>>4462728You haven't seen the last 6 gearfag threads that are still up right now?
>>4462711When I go backcountry camping I have a camera pod that hang across the chest with 2 carabiners that attach like a sternum strap, with a wrist strap for the camera. I find it best for trekking long distances, having the camera weight equally distributed is nice, it offers a bit of protection and good accessibility. But it is cumbersome when putting the pack on and off.If off-centered weight isn't an issue and you're ok having the camera hang out in the open, then I think Cotton strap holster can accommodate pretty much most of the thicker shoulder straps on backpacking packs.
>>4462730Where's the going off part?
>>4462727>Literally never heard about spiders in a lens thoughmaybe it's just the japs, I've seen a couple of their listings specify no spiders.
>>4462735Weird, maybe Japs just leave the mounting cap off and spiders make nests inside.
>>4462590The girlfriend you don’t have is the only thing not in the photo
>>4462593>most anti-consumer practicesI am still extremely annoyed Canon doesn't allow third party lenses on the full frame mirrorless cameras. Why? Why the fuck do we have to use their lenses all the time?
>>4462744>Why the fuck do we have to use their lenses all the time?It’s all about the money money money money monayyy
>>4462744>Why the fuck do we have to use their lenses all the time?The best part about using third party lenses is knowing that Canon shooters can't have them. And it’s important to use third party lenses so that you can remind Canon shooters that they aren't allowed to have anything good in life. They’re allowed to have overcorrected 15 element primes and all-plastic kit zooms. And that's, you know, pretty much it. Hey, that's a pretty good third party lens... Not that a Canon shooter would know. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>4462342>says sony sucks>doesnt elaborate>leavesSomehow he mindbroke /p/
>>4462770>leavesWell, no, he seems to be here perpetually (as seen by him making posts daily).
>>4462593>Canon has the highest failure rate of any brandDo they? I have used their cameras up to 5x their rated number of exposures and FD lenses from 30y ago still working flawlessly
>>4462772Which trip is his?
>>4462735>>4462736the mold looks like spider webs so they call it spidersthey also like to call them chilies
>>4462723>>4462727>>4462735>>4462776most jap listings are reposted from other sitesit's probably exactly one person who says no spiders and all the relisters just copy-paste without checking
>>4462764Sorry to burst your bubble but of my lens collection only 22% is Canon brand.
>>4462677I want that lens.
>>4462779You understand the joke was about RF, right?
>>4462789I have many problems but being a mirrorlessuck ain't one
>>4462744>be me>nikon chad>could use 3rd party>dont because even if they’re sharper the color rendition is always worse and tamron zooms jack the highlights and unironically render flatWhat exactly do canon people think they’re missing? Are canons lenses really that bad? I knew the specs looked bad, but guess so
>>4462744Why dont you get a full sized battery and ibis for less than $2199? >>4462818>are canon lenses that badYes. Even some of the L lenses suck. Huge, expensive, aperture ringd only work on the ff sized aps-c r5ii and r1, and… SNOY!This is the 35mmThe 24mm f1.4 doesnt even cover full frame lolThat will be $1379 plus tip
>>4462809Nikon and Sony chads so not have this problem
>>4462818>Are canons lenses really that bad?Nah, they are great. Just overpriced compared to third parties.
>adds lidar AF>drops 10 stop IBIS into a medium format camera>lowers the price by almost a grand>refuses to explain furtherhttps://www.dpreview.com/reviews/hasselblad-x2d-ii-100c-initial-reviewfull frame is the new APS-Cfuji is going the way of the pentax
Well I broke down and preordered a Ricoh GR IV. The lack of modern compacts is incredibly annoying. Especially with none being weather sealed against even dust.
Holy fuck all these retarded youtubers shilling the new hasselblad are so annoying. this consumerist shitty culture is so depressing man
>>4462849>Someone finally actually improved their camera instead of adding another video codec and more megapixels>And they lowered the price>NOOOOO CONSUMERISTS!Consumerist is shit like the x100vi. No real improvements just more megapixels on the same poorly built trash with a price hike. Or the GRIV. Still generations and generations behind, cant even keep dust out of the lens, that will be $1600. Or sony just adding video modes and calling it a new camera (they do this twice for each sensor). Or nikon lowering build quality, raising prices, and saying "the autofocus doe" when pentax proved that even chip limitations can solved with upgrades instead of replacements.
>>4462849improving technology is not consumerism anon. thinking everything is consumerism is a commie psyop. hatred for wealth and the exchange of goods and services is communism.consumerism is shopping for an identity and meaning in your life and is ironically, pushed by the same people who invented communism, and has been accepted by them as a possible avenue for making the majority of the populace comply with a system that is actually communism (you vill own nothing, just rent ze newest one and give it back so other people can use it). a modern communist system would combine consumerist culture, a lease based economy, and use fake social-credits money instead of anything of real value (capital) to manage the distribution of wealth. and like any communist system would naturally result in most people living in poverty even if they got to play with some shitty toys, and most things being poorly made and held to zero standards.
>>4462850consumerism is being a hobby photographer and worrying 100x times more about the gear than about developing an eye/vision whatever you want to call it. 99% of leica and hasselblade customers don't have the skill to match a quarter of the camera's possibilities. all they can do at best is take boring "pretty" pictures. it's just status
>>4462856>source: i made it upleica consumers, i think you're right, those cameras are pure status symbols.hasselblads, however, actually do bring something to the table and "you dont deserve a nicer camera than me because i dont like your photos" statements like your diarrhea tier post are sad and pathetic copes. big deal, someone spent $8000 on a camera that renders higher quality images and can sync with flash up to 1/4000s. and for each time that happened, 50,000 people overspent by $8000 or more on their car or motorcycle just for it to be slightly more comfortable. and you didn't even notice or care.i think the real status obsessed person is you.there are two ways to be status obsessed:trying to buy prestige to claim other people are worse than youcrying about anything you perceive as prestige and accusing people of being worse than you for having it
>>4462856>i dont like their photos enough for them to have a camera that nice. they don't need it.what a coincidence, karl marx agrees. you would make a great komissar of photographie. every good soviet republic needs someone to decide who needs what.
>>4462859Ok, let's make it simpler for your intellect: Hasselblad is for sure making incredible cameras. They could price it at 8 or 10k, 15k, that's not my thing and I don't care. I'm talking about the customers. Don't kid yourself they're any different from Leica boys. They buy it because Hasselblad, not for any technical spec. I wouldn't have any problem with it if not for the fact that they're proudly convinced their photography is positively influenced and bettered by the new shiny toy. It's not, a photo is either interesting or not no matter the gear.
>>4462864>source: i made it upyou’re just mad at people wanting better image quality than yougrow up>their photos have to interest me to be good they cant just like that because i dont like it. they cant just buy nicer cameras than me and just like them!grow the fuck up child
>>4462139What do we think gear thread?Same sensor, same image quality. Lidar sounds nice but since lidar can't see what e.g. an eye is, idk how often i'd use that. 10 stops over previous 7 stops of built-in stabilization might be the only useful upgrade to me. Overall I'll probably stick with with my X2Di, right?
>>4462870Every upgrade is massive for people who shoot more than rocks, leaves, and posed portraits
>>4462864>cries on repeatI said you'd make a great komissar, not that you are one, or that being a great komissar means you're good at anything but being narcissistic, controlling, and bitter.You are not a supremely important person. You are not a supremely intelligent person. You are neither a god, nor a demigod, nor privvy to objective divine truths. You do not have the right nor the power to be the arbitrary of what makes a photograph good, or interesting, or what justifies owning a camera above an arbitrary price point that somehow emotionally impacts you.You can fuck off and enjoy your cheap little snapshitter or be a miserable obnoxious manchild for your entire life, trapped on a hell world where everyone infuriates you by doing things you wouldn't and liking things you don't. Choose wisely.
>>4462864Idk what discussion you two are having but as a X2D owner, let me tell you: Hassy owners are very different from Leica ownersThe average Hassy owner is a 40yo dad who tries to document their kids childhood and have vacation photos to show to coworkers. He thinks the most boring sunset at the beach was the peak of art and has to print it at 60''The average Leica owner lives in Berlin is 25 and spends his entire life lounging in hip cafés and invitation-only parties. All of his friends have 5k instagram followers, knows a confusing number of Hollywood A-listers personally. And takes DOGSHIT pics as "art".
>>4462873The gear you're using doesn't make your photo good or bad. It's baffling to me that such a statement could inspire you and the other guy to play Freud on the 4chans. Did you even see one of the review titles and photos featured in them I initially "cried" about?
>>4462875the difference comes from the fact that one is another kind of tool (hasselblad), and one is the same shit as other tools but with a different name, a price hike, and more fragility (leica)hasselblad people sharpen their mid-priced kitchen knives on a wicked edge rigleica people buy boutique japanese chefs knives and pay someone to grind them by hand on traditional stones - if they ever use them (if they do they chip almost immediately)both spend about $500 on a fucking kitchen knife but only one is getting shit done because of it and extracting additional value as well. one purchase only makes sense if you're always cooking, the other purchase is only good for telling other people you bought it.
>>4462876It doesn't. In fact, there's no hard and fast definition of a good photo or a bad photo for that matter. Aesthetics are relative to the configuration of your brain in particular.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3F_o8gzbTETony finally upgraded from his cheating latina home that left himGood on ya Tony, I hope you win the house in court.
>>4462880>homeHoe*
>>4462877Sinar people buy really expensive japanese knives and sharpen them on their equally expensive japanese whetstones and then use them to make really tasty food. No chipping unless he lets his normie friend use their knife.
>>4462886That clunky, ugly, soulless germanic equipment is more like buying a wusthof and a sharpening jig than anything else out there. It's expensive but you're not signaling status to anyone but other people who know and use their tools. To everyone else it's just some weird ugly stuff.
>>4462887They're swiss made, but yeah ugly af. I sort of like the purely utilitarian look of them. The sinar norma is one of prettiest non-wooden monorails/view cameras IMO.
>>4462778I was looking at a japanese website too see if they had better deals than ebay and it was multiple dealers that had it listed>>4462776If true that makes sense
>>4462906yeah just be aware your bigger issue is haze. some of those japanese lenses have horrible environmental damage where the lens optics are shot from the middle lens having bad haze. maybe from smoking? right is a lens i had that had horrible haze (pentax-fa smc 70-200mm f4-5.6) and the same lens but in pentax-f takumar form (relatively clear) on the right
>>4462911*left anyways haze is worse for image quality than mold imo. its a active argument whether the mold can spread to other lenses
>>4462911>your bigger issue is hazeThanks I'll try look out for that. The japs seem to have a lot better deals on lenses, at least compared to where I am, which is weird. When I was over there the lenses full price seemed a fair bit more expensive.
>>4462850>No real improvements just more megapixels on the same poorly built trash with a price hike.Didn't they add IBIS?
>>4462863He shall get new Helios lens from commissariat and thank you letter from comrade stalin.
>>446294412 years after olympus did. its a joke at this point.
>>4462944They added somewhat shit ibis when even sony has 7 stop stabilization, and olympus 5 stop was essentially 8 stop. $1700 camera btw. The entire setup is less capable than an om-5.
>>4462956Sony has the worst IBIS system of any camera. >7 stoplol. Its more like 1-2 stops max.
>>4462967How much are you paid to lie
>>4462778Big kek if true
Sony has the best IBIS system of any camera.
>>4462912>>4462934Here's a great example of haze btw. It looks like a weird oil stain on the right in the daylight, but when you hold a light up to it that's how bad it gets. This is on a Pentax-F 100mm Macro from the late 80s. I bought this off a seller on buyee for $45.How much should I sell it btw? It's going for $150 in good condition on eBay. I was gonna list it for $60. It's the second layer of glass behind the first element.
>>4462967>>4462989Of course, every time...>[absurd anti-sony claim]>[absurdly pro-sony rebuttal]No, sony's stabilization is not great. It's heavily limited by the mount and you have to actively try to get 5 let alone the rated 7. The rated 7 assumes a vibrating hold with zero sway.Sony 7 stop is capable of 7 stops with effort but is typically about as good as nikon's older 5 stop.The issue is, shouldn't an aps-c camera that costs as much, from a company that has been developing their IBIS for two generations, be able to outdo it?
https://fujilove.com/hands-on-with-the-fujifilm-x100vi/> Fujifilm claims that the new IBIS system offers up to 6.0 stops of stabilisation. While I could not precisely test this claim, I could capture very usable photographs at speeds as low as 1/16 sec while handholding the camera and, depending on the light, even 1/4 sec was usable for some situations.oh geez$1795, 2025 premium camera
>>4463036Snoy jeet shills working overtime!
>>4463038$5100, no IS, 2025 premium camera
>>4463040>but what about sonyyyyyI don't give a fuck sony and fujifilm are 2/3 of the worst brands. Just add panasonic and it's the triumvirate of charging thousands of dollars for cameras that make you wish you stuck with a DSLR.
>>4463038>35mm equiv = 1/30 standard shutter>should be able to handhold over a second>everyone says up to 1/4-1/6 more like 2 stopjesusfujifilm is really just sony aps-c but silver
>>4462911In terms of buying used lenses I am kinda spoiled living in the north, fungus is rarely an issue and usually if present it is easy to remove as the living conditions for spores is limited in duration so it hardly ever affects the coating. Another factor with haze is the plastics creating gasses or oils evaporating over time due to similar factors. So just like with cars there are markets that are better than others.
>>4462906>>4462778>>4462973>>4462911>>4462912>>4462934>>4463035>kumoMeans both spider (蜘蛛・クモ), and cloud (雲).If the lens is くもっている, it means it's cloudy (hazy).
Yo. I've got a 5D IV and want a lens that can do astro nightscapes properly. I've got a EF 16-35 f/2.8 II that's garbage wide open and no better stopped down. Gonna sell that, but the III version is still pretty fuckin expensive and huge; I don't really want it.Ideally I want something with EXIF transmission and AF just in case, so I've been looking at the Sigma lineup and fuck me there's a lot. Wildly different pricing between a 20mm f/1.4 and a 35mm f/1.4 etc.
What's that site again where you can pixel peep camera's/lenses next to each other?
>>4463038>>4463040Both Fuji and Sony are rubbish. Cheap build quality that easily fall apart and extremely overpriced junk. Buy a real camera.
I've found some money so I'm back in the /gear/ thread.
>>4462139Redid the letters on my mom's old Sigma. Not perfect but good enough. Better than before. Half the M and all of the G was completely missing.I'm running some 800 through it to try and nail down an infinity focus issue with the lens (eg whether it exists or not) and check for light leaks. I'm sure it needs seals, just trying to figure out exactly how bad. I'm not sure if she wants this thing back or not. It was sitting in a bin for years with "some sort of issue with the focus I think."
>>4462588The M10 is a beautiful camera, but like the other anon said ZF is practical. I'm a ZF owner who only uses MF lenses. Most of my collection is made up of the classic nikkor lenses and the canon FL line. When I need something sharp i grab the 7artisans 35 or 50mm for the M mount. price to performance on that glass is great. Grab one on ebay and save yourself a couple hundred bucks.
>>4462588Leicas are overpriced and unreliableThe zf is poorly builtIts almost like companies dont think the retro crowd is smart or rational
>>4463117pxlmag
>>4463203at least the zf can be bought off the used market (usually japan, so nikon will never fix it unless you pretend you bought it in japan and send it out to nikon japan, good luck) for <$1350M10s are still $4k and still need "CLAs" (fixes for manufacturer mistakes) every 2 years like the film leicas made out of soft brass. Some people have had their lens mount come loose, others have had their shutter jam.Leica just doesn't make sense unless you buy two just to tell everyone you did.
>>4463203Howe you figure the ZF is poorly built? I’ve owned two, their build quality is solid as fuck, like a metal brick in the hand, & makes the rubber & plastic blob bodies feel like the cheap Chinese garbage they are by comparison.Now the ZF’s top plate & knob arrangement, that’s fucking poorly done, I’ll give you that, and the puny 24mp sensor is god damn inexcusable on a premium camera from a premium camera brand.
>>446322324mp has better color fidelity at high ISO but its built like a sonyZF is a plastic shell with thin metal platesZ6II is a monolithic magnesium alloy cage
What happened to short telephotos of a reasonable size?
>>4463231They added autofocusThere are plenty of modern mf small short teles
>>4463231I think we will see some come along, but expect screeching about digital corrections.
>>4463233That was never an argumentI think it's all the aspherical bullshit like anyone cares about SA at f2 on an 85mm
>>4463236>What happened to short telephotos of a reasonable size?>They still existNice, no more need for discussion then
>>4463237One still existsOnly made by sigmaOnly for shitty cameras
>>4463236Nice camera, how is the AF tracking? Is it good for moving stuff?
>>4463231135 film is basically m43 in terms of overall iq; m43 has loads of reasonably sized teles. My 45mm f/1.8 is tiny! My 185g 60mm 2.8 is like a 135mm. Lots of cheap cameras and used lenses too.
>>4463266No 35mm film is more like 16-24mp FF digital in terms of IQ depending on the stock usedStuff like kodak gold is 16mpVision3 and slide film is 24mp But true color MP, not bayer MPIt's how they get super detailed 4k footage out of an APS-C sized exposed areaM43 has no exposure latitude whatsoever and the rendering will never be as good because the lenses are overcorrected to keep up with the undersized pixels. It's nothing like shooting film. It's far closer to a surveillance camera than a film camera.
>>4462683I like this border. :)
Hi. Im looking for a new lens for the nikon f system a 50mm or something close to that. Anything between ai and af-d is fine and preferably the smallest aperature for the least money Any recomendations?
>>4463266Try projecting an m43 image to the size of a movie theater screen. Compare with 35mm film. :)
Gonna buy the Zf soon, probably in grey because it looks so hot. Together with that 40mm kit lens. Next up the 24-120mm F4 lens which I heard is very good. And then just for fun the 35 or 50mm apo voigtlander. Hope that ends the GAS once and for all.
>>4463381Probably the best mirrorless setups you can get. You can't go wrong.
>>4463374Nikkor AF-D 50mm f1.4 is the obvious choice here.f1.8 is fine too.
>>4463401Yeah thats the one ive been thinking about. The f1.4 seems to be the better choise i shoot a lot in the dark and mostly handheld so i need all the light i can get
>>4462139Whats a good camera that works well with my vintage lens? Mainly my pentax takumar SMC 50mm
>>4463411Any full-frame mirrorless camera.
>>4463411>>4463412Wrong.Make sure it has IBIS.
Does shutter count matter in the age of silent shutter?
>>4463381Just get the Z 50 f1.8 S over the 50 APO
>>4463415Those are mechanical actuations. I would not pay that much for one with that amount clicks. I got mine for the same amount with 100k clicks.
>>4463426>Those are mechanical actuations.gotcha, thanks
>>4463413Yes, should have included IBIS.Any full frame with IBIS.
>>4463415That's a scuffed price for such a high shutter count. If (You) plan on only ever using electronic shutter then it's of no consequence, but fuck that. I see R5s with sub 100k shutter go for like 500 euro less
>>4463429>for like 500 euro lessWell I haven't, I would jump on an R5 for €1500 honestly.
>>4463415Sensor readout speed is 1/209" or 4.78ms on the R3, so you absolutely can use it in full electronic shutter all the time ; but that's still very expensive for 218k
>>4463431that's the R5 in my pic
>>4463433KEK. Well then no, avoid
>>4463434Yeah the R5 has a readout speed of like 16ms, even worse than the R8's 14.5ms. These are okay numbers but plenty of situations will arise where mechanical is prefered.
>>4463435Point is, that's still far too expensive for a camera that was used very intensively.
fyi for anyone who orders stuff from overseas; starting tonight/tomorrow, anything coming from oversees that is under $800 will cost at least $80 more than before.
>>4463438Hahahahah holy shit. What a shit time to be American
>>4463438Meanwhile in non-EU yurop, more specifically Norway we had the privilege of having tax free imports for a whooping $20, but our government graciously increased it to $35 provided it included shipping costs, then they decided that even $1 should be taxed because it was bad for some unspecified job sectors.Yeah, Amerifats don't know how good they've had it.
>>4463438You shouldn't be buying things from overseas often enough for this to matter. How many cameras do you need?Excessive globalism has devastated the environment and left nations crippled and interdependent. Fundamental domestic industries like german manufacturing and british steel totally collapsed because bankers and CEOs could abuse laborers in other countries without raising as many complaints, resulting in single points of failure that are an existential threat to our species.The best time to cut it off was yesterday.>but it was "good for the economy"meaning the total cash flow and amount of debt generated. that never benefited us, it was an unsustainable system that only benefited the bankers and CEOs. their economic system ONLY functions with perpetual population growth and perpetual economic growth. therefore their economic system must be destroyed.Fools who became dependent on so called "capitalism" will experience some short term pain. The good news is your WFH tech support job isn't all you could ever do, and there are lots of infrastructure projects on the horizon and all of them will need workers and offer on the job training. Factories are short staffed right now and many offer base pay up to $25 an hour. Get to work, comrade!
>>4463442norway is also better to live in than america has ever been because of socialist policies like that
>>4463445LOL
needing a 28mm lens to go with my ZF for some landscapes. Prefer MF but if theres a cheap AF one that would work as well. I primarily shoot 50mm and have recently been enjoying 35mm but need some wider angle shots for certain ideas. won't be used all the time so not wanting to spend much. open to film and modern lenses.
>>4463443>Globalization badNigga you realise the greatest deterrent to world war game over is the fact all the major players have economies linked together right?
>>4463447OG Nikkor 28/2.8 8-element
>>4463448Russia and Ukraine have linked economies btw. The actual deterrent is that globalist governments are united against people of their countries.
>>4463443Aliexpress. Wanted to buy a piece of crap for $5 (cf. any camera cleaning products)? Lol no, buy it from Jeff Bezos for $15. Although maybe Aliexpress has local warehouses in the US, I don't know.
>>4463447For mf, I would wait for for the new Voigtlander APO-lanthar 28 f2. Just came out for M mount, native Z should follow in a few month.
>>4463375I just did that and the m43 shots had much better resolution than the 35mm film. Was a pretty cool experiment. Thanks for the tip anon
>>4463467The voigtlander 28mm f1.5 is also pretty good if you want something with good sunstars and a little less corrected but better for low light. The thypoch 28mm is also pretty good for the price if you don't care about it being chipped.
>>4463471You should show your results to steven spielberg. I bet he would hire you.
>>4463474It's me, Steven, and I do plan on hiring him.
>>4463471Yes thats why everyone films on the g9ii and equivalence killed imax (not)
>>4463447Thypoch Simera 28mm f/1.4, Voigt 28 f1.5 Nokton, Voigt 28 f2 APODepending on budget
>>4463490>>4463472>>4463467All good lenses as well. If it were me, of those three probably the Voigt 28 APO, f/2 is plenty for landscapes shot at f16 and f11
Off topic, but where does one post their stuff nowadays? Still Flickr or is Instagram the place to go?
Do I need a proper camera for my vacation in Switzerland in two months? Is 2 months sufficient time to learn how to shoot?I've never had one before and use my phone for my basic photography needs.I'm thinking starting with a Sony 6400
>>4463520My wall and 4chan
>>4463520I post mostly here and to my IG story, I post client work to business IG and websiteI mostly view stuff here, gear-specific FM threads, and specific flickr groups
>>4463524I did Ireland on a D800 and Sigma 35/1.4 ARTAny modern camera made in the last like, 10 years, they all take the same picture. Find out what one has the controls that work best for you and buy it.
>>4463524>Is 2 months sufficient time to learn how to shoot?If you're talking about the technical side, yeah easily doable. Make sure to get extra batteries btw.
>>4463527>>4463528Good advice.But a big part of my Q is whether I need a big camera or not?Is it worth it as a normie who may or may not get into the hobby?
>>4463530>need a big camera or not?No
>>4463530sony a7czeiss 35mm f2.8simple as. when you are done you can sell it for what you paid, and quickly, because it is a desirable model
>>4463530You do not "need" more than your phone to produce an image with mostly identifiable content, no. But applying rules of needs to leisure is communist faggotry and poorfag cope (same thing). The question is what do you want and what can you afford?
>>4463532Cool thanks. I'll make do with S25U. Anyway I'll be taking mostly vacay shots and the odd family event.>>4463533Personally the idea of selling doesn't appeal to me. I like to keep my stuff.>>4463534>The question is what do you wantRule the world with an firm yet just hand, harem of beautiful women from all around the world etc>what can you afford?~$1000Fuck it I'm buying the camera. Life's too short to ponder this stuff.
>>4463539At least get an a6600Also the ff 28-60 kit zoom has a GOAT range on APS-C. Why dont we get 35-80/90s anymore? Why is everything 24 if not 20mm? Fucking vloggers thats why.
>>4463539I’m keen to sell my EXCELLENT, read ‘em ‘n weep, EXCELLENT Sony a7ii>hear hear!with the STELLAR Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 >hear hear!why am I selling? out of the generosity of my heart, I can no longer prevent my fellow americans from experiencing the SHEER JOY of this camera!>hear hear!
>>4463552would you recommend a6700 (1300e/$1500) over A7C (1100e/$1285)?
>>4463557that's unironically a good setup. just throw in the zeiss 24-70 f4 (a technically mediocre lens by gearfag standards that is still so useful annie leibovitz used it)not cutting edge with auto-everything AF or the best battery life and stabilization by any means, but old sony color science was basically designed around the zeiss T* coating and looks like total shit with anything else, especially the overly neutral coatings on their G and GM glass. using an older sony camera (before the same generation of color science that started with the a7iv) without zeiss T* coated lenses is masochism. also the a7iv+ color science is shit anyways and is basically a log gamma for stills. meant to be edited. almost as bad as how far canon colors have fallen from the glory of the 5dII to the flat and cold EOS R colors.
>>4463567A bigger sensor is always better. The superior tonality achieved by larger pixels results in exponentially less color stretching.
>>4463569
Canon is selling the official camera of 4chan /p/ - Photography for $530
>>4463604Is this a shillI aint buying ff sized m43
>>4463315>Vision3 and slide film is 24mp>But true color MP, not bayer MPeh, comparing porty 160 and FF bayer digital, latter clearly has more usable resolution>>4463443>You shouldn't be buying things from overseas often enough for this to matter.this (no comment on the rest of the post)I don't like paying more than I used to any more than the next guy, but frankly speaking basically everything I buy from overseas is either above de minimis (rip) or I can figure out a way batch shipcondolences to the one anon who buys cheapo pentax stuff from japan, you might want to skip ebay from now on and go YAJ/mercari via proxy, if you don't already
>>4463606portra 160 in 35mm, scanned at 4000dpi (real dpi, on a coolscan 9000)digital scaled down to match, both exported at quarter resolution for upload limitpictures taken several weeks apart, which is why there's such a difference in framing & lightingalso the film did not scan entirely flat but it's in focus in the center, ignore the edgesokay sure the k1 is 36 not 24MP, but I could do a 60% crop on it and still get a higher-fidelity image than the portra 160whether the quality is better, well idk that's up to tastefull:https://files.catbox.moe/afo1zh.jpghttps://files.catbox.moe/0w1f58.jpg
>>4463606>condolences to the one anon who buys cheapo pentax stuff from japan, you might want to skip ebay from now on and go YAJ/mercari via proxy, if you don't alreadymy gf is seething because usually i would bundle it with her used designer vintage purchases from buyee japan so the cost wasn't that bad otherwise you wouldnt see me buy $10-30 vintage lenses that cost $40-80 to ship. ironically she voted trump 2024...she's gonna end up a single issue voter. im a little miffed because the pentax stuff i buy goes for literally 30-50% markup here. like im looking for a 50mm f1.4 prime for my new k1ii, its $60-80 on yahoo auctions and $120-140 here. 35mm f2 fa is $70-90 vs $170. often the sellers shipping from japan on ebay are simply just taking yahooauctions listings and reselling them + markup lol. and you probably still gonna get hit with tariffs going through them now. i wanted a oem camera strap and magnification eyepiece, $17+25 from ricoh's store on rakuten vs $38 + $32 off ebay/amazon here. we just missed the tarriffs on a $380 sonia rykiel handbag she bought that arrived this afternoon (its her money and as much as i bitch and moan about it shes not slowing down) >>4463443i need all the cameras you have to understand my last hobby (cars) had me spending $500-1000 bare minimum to do anything and sometimes i didnt even wanna spend the money its more like i had to because something broke or it was to avoid something even more expensive breaking
>>4463461Was leaning towards this one as I have a Nikkor 50mm f2 and love it. >>4463467Voigtlander makes great stuff and if i decide i can't wait i already have an M to Z adapter>>4463490Would love to try the Thypoch
>>4463624>often the sellers shipping from japan on ebay are simply just taking yahooauctions listingsyeah I'm the one who keeps pointing that out lmao>cars>its more like i had to because something broke or it was to avoid something even more expensive breakingfuck me so truein the last two months, just on emergency repairs for my DD, I spent about half what I've spent on all my hobbies combined, ever, lifetime sum
>>4463604
>>4463606This looks like a minor focus miss or some shake issues. Maybe just underexposure. >>4463608This is closer but the scanner is eh. https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/comments/18if5vm/trying_400_megapixels_scans_on_several_film/35mm film, well shot and well scanned, can reach 400mp. You can see details that are just one pixel in size meaning this is at or not even the limit. Most people are actually referring to the limits of common scanners and f11-f22 shots, minor focus, exposure misses, and their shaky hands when they say film is just 24mp. All film is diffraction limited at the same aperture regardless of format mind you so 4x5 can’t be scanned huge and outdo 6x7 without ideal ons and 6x7 can be shot poorly and scan looking like less grainy 35mmDigital is easier and more foolproof to get a sharp shot with but this demonstrates why an apsc sized exposure on 250d can fill the silver screen and look good for the front rows.
>>4463579>color stretchinglook! The zoophile fell for the M43 schizo meme
>>4463636I've found the diffraction thing to be complete BS when speaking in practical terms. Maybe the higher technical demands of 4x5 and 8x10 are what make it seem so much better than smaller formats in practice. I've taken some 8x10 shots that seem just as high or near to the resolution of 35mm shots, 8x10 cropped to the size of 35mm, of course.Also when comparing film formats in real life you would be comparing the same shot, and not equivalent crops all the way down, so you do get more and can enlarge more with bigger film.Sometimes even if the science says one thing it is not true in practice because the science is looking at perfectly ideal situations that rarely exist or occur in a normal setting.(you have to shoot 8x10 on a tripod, while most 35mm is shot handheld) Also 8x10 contact prints look way better than enlarged film EVEN if there is no visible grain on either print.
>>4463636did you even read that thread https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/comments/18if5vm/comment/kdgxizr/
>>4463406Then go for that. It's dirt cheap anyway. Can be had for about 100 bucks.That said, it's of course not ultra sharp wide open at f1.4, but it will work in a pinch (or at night).
>>4463445It is, but how in the fuck is that a socialist policy?It hurts everyone equally, which means it doesn't bother richfags at all and makes small purchases basically impossible for poorfags.And the only purpose is to protect """"local"""" shops, that dropship trashpiles from aliexpress at 20x price increase.Fuck em all to death.
>>4463693The irony doesn't get bigger by the fact that the same socialist government who are so overly concerned about the lower classes essentially tells them to sod off when buying parts to repair old stuff because if buying through retail locally it is too costly and the stuff gets thrown out and replaced with new chinkshit. Even better when some young environmentalist søy-latte drinking faggot is talking about how we "should not buy from china" while posting from his gay iphone.
I know Leica isn't all that popular here but I'm considering selling my canon system in favor of buying a used Q3 43. Reason is that I have tons of lenses that I barely touch because most of the time my 50mm is in use. They are all collecting dust. Being a dad now a more compact body is also welcome. I'm pretty sure I'm fine with a fixed lens camera. What do you think?In addition I sometimes shoot photos at small classic porsche meetups and I'm the only pleb with a huge canon camera while all the classy Porsche granpas shoot with their Leica Ms. I could blend in a bit better lmao.
>>4463743you could also just sell your other lenses and keep the canon, anon. The Q series is certainly appealing but as a dad myself I prefer to sink my money into many lenses I can have fun with rather than one body
>>4463630I have the OG 8-element 28/2.8 and it is ridiculously sharp, color reproduction is amazing, it's small and the focus throw feels nice. It's also CRC. Almost zero distortion and CA, if you don't need f/2 it is the obvious choice.
What's happening here? I thought the sony stuff was a memehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qodx92wt_us&t=467s
The Canon cripple hammer is like throwing money down a pit. Why can't I get monitor out on a fucking camera? No, only for top of the line! Ridiculous,
>>4463825Nothing to do with the body/sensor. Notice how the vignette is pretty much only along the top of the frame. Something is up with the adapter. If that or his shutter is crapping out.
>>4463839Nice, so sony is fine to use with non sony lenses?
>>4463840If you're not using a fucked adapter then sure. Here's an example at f/1.2 top left, notice how it's even in all corners and a smooth gradient and mostly at the sides because the sensor crops more off the top and bottom of the image circle. Top right is f/2, bottom left is f/2.8 where it's very minor, and an actual photo of something at f/1.2 where you can see it doesn't even actually matter when you're not taking photos of a white wall.
>>4463845I don't care that much, but I have some canon fd and summicron-r lenses that I would like to keep, will they vignette?
I'm traveling in 2 weeks, was planning on getting a refurb Z30 and forgot the fucking tariffs. Now what was $400 is now $600. Fuck that.Is this a good deal? I know it's not nirvana, just is the price decent.D5500AF-P DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VRAF-P DX 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G EDAF-S 50mm 1:1.8 G$349, says barely used and no visible damage in pics.Could I sell this afterwards for the same price? Thanks.
>>4463851No more than on any other full frame body. Anyone that chimes in and says the Sony mount is too small, that the plastic blocks the sensor, is talking rubbish.
>>4463853This is the official European travel camera for anyone not shooting mirrorless or FF, when I was at Moab last year I saw so many tourists with these.They're decent, you'll get some good pictures with it. I have something similar and I have a Tamron 16-300 on mine, it will take the same pictures as my D4 and no one on /p/ will know the difference, do it.
>>4463853that's a good price, pack an extra battery and leave the 70-300
holy mother of god im retarded. can someone tell me what exactly do I need for battery charging a zf? mh34 charger, AND a cable?
>>4463899Can it not just charge with any old type c cable?
>>4463825Steve Huff was relevant 15ish years agoHe's gone schizo now like the other early photo online personalities (Eric Kim)
>>4463899any USB-C cable + power source that supports PDIf you want to charge externally, just get the smallrig dual charger which also comes with two 3rd party batteries at half the price of an MH34
>>4462481GFX 100s II anon here. Stop obsessing over things like sharpness / CA and actually go out and shoot.
>>4463853Pretty decent. As far as lenses go, get a 35mm prime and then a Tamron 18-200 to cover everything else. That was my two lens travel setup for a good while.
