Your worst nightmare editionPreviously: >>4468045
You know sony cameras are good when /p/ has a full time shill making sure to cherry pick anti-sony content for the OPLast time he pit the cheapest sony 50mm up against a $3000 nikon prime with best buy demo shelf default settings lmao>cuz real photographers shoot sooc, sootb, to ensure the brand wars have some ground rules to prevent filthy dumb setting changing scum from pretending all ff mirrorless are the sameHe will now write a seethe post about some bullshit and then people will point out it happened to every brandHe will then cry about indians because he is one
>>4469284Buy an ad
>>4469284Your essay being assblasted is 10x more pathetic. Move on niglet
>>4469284Meeeds
Why does Sony being superior cause so much butthurt here?
>>4469288Because it’s associated with artistic success
>>4469284Sony cameras are shit and I curse vishnu. You cannot say the same.
>>4469276>pov you're a wedding photographer and don't have proper gear insurancewhy are women so dumb?
I got to use a leica... it felt amazing, now all I can think about is buying one.
>>4469308Buy this >>4469117
>>4469302kek, i remember this from the other threads. he legit refused to do it.
>>4469284I've heard it's not a shill but is just some autistic guy named Clive that has been banned from various camera forums for the same sperging. He's sort of like one of those people on /g/ that loves Android and hates iPhone or vice versa I guess.
>>4469284>>4469330assblasted samefag
>>4469331>this from the fag that posts a snoy thread every weekLol okay.
>>4469332ive never made a thread about your precious little camera brand
>>4469276I hope that never happens to me and I hope I can just rip out the curtain and use ES if it does. I've seen that people were locked out of cameras because some sensor noticed that the M shutter was broken.
>>4469302Sony cameras are good and i curse vishnu, ganesha, brahma rama buddha satan the talmud odin thor and zeuss. Christ is king.
>>4469363Also sony cameras are the best and I denounce the quran and accuse the prophet mohammad of talking to satan and lubing his personal dildo with bacon grease. Praise the lord. Phew. Forgot one
Rate the haul /p/, I posted this in the last gear thread and then another thread by accident. I love Pentax and Minolta because it lets me consoom for relatively cheap Velbon VGB-32B for $10New Manfrotto MT055XPRO3 for $50Both off craigslist in my neighborhood I might turn around and sell the Manfrotto for $100 on eBay, I just bought a Slik off eBay on the right that better fits my needs for $30 all in (this thing is nice but huge + it needs a head)The Velbon is actually pretty nice I would've just bought that but the Manfrotto was just $50 realizing I didn't need it and it's overkill.I fucked up buying the Tamron 17-50mm, didn't realize it was a APSC format lens until after I won the auction and I'm using it on a FF K1II. Probably gonna sell it for what I paid for it. The flash is nice to have a spare especially at $35 vs the $80 they go for new. The teleconverter I got at a crazy deal but I don't know if it'll work with my camera, the pins are different than the other Pz-AF version that's also commonly sold (this says Mx-AF). If it's Minolta I have A Mount lenses I can use it with.On the lookout for a few primes next. I definitely need a Pentax 50mm f1.4 and maybe a Tamron 90mm 272E. Just wanna pay under $100 (maybe $150 if it's the HD 50mm or 35mm f 2). I would also like a 28-105mm D-FA K1 kit lens but I wanna pay under $200.
>>4469284Sony cameras are shit, just like EOS R cameras are shit and Nikon Z cameras are shit, virtually all modern cameras are SHIT costcutting garbage with more software and processing than sensor output.
I got into photography recently when I inherited my dad's old system as he upgraded to GFX. I am contemplating upgrading as I feel the size and weight of the system is too large for EDCGot a 5d mkii and quite a few of the best EF primes as well as some zeiss primes from that era. Love the camera, works flawless I am in no way limited by my gear. Thing is I want a camera I can somewhat carry as an EDC, and the 5d+lens is just too much. Also draws a lot of attention.Was thinking of maybe getting into the z-system, maybe the ZF as I have heard great things about it, and especially lens adaptability. I have a nikon F3 I also shoot on, and a couple of lenses, would be cool to be have an overlap of lenses between a digital and my film camera. Looking for advice, maybe something completely different would suit me better? Budget doesn't really matter, but a flip screen would be welcomed. I like doing portraits of friends and family as well as taking it on the occasional hike/roadtripthanks in advancedont wanna be a nopic so here is one from a museum I took last year
>>4469398Yes. Nikon single digit D series slr's are the best.
>professional>doesn't have all his gear under warranty
>>4469284>>4469276sucks to be these people>>4469405D4 supremacy posting ITT, anything else is just a toy.>>4469409that's not the point, homie missed critical shots because his shit failed mid-shoot>Not having back-up bodies
>>4469398>all the cameras used by people more successful than me are bad! >>4469402Nothing bigger than an a5100+20mm f2.8 is "EDC" able but everything smaller than a bronica gs1 is no big deal for a photo tripDigital EDC is a tough question to answer without blowing over $1k to get canon rebel quality so maybe try a film camera like a canonet or an om2n
Imagine a world without videotards neutering cameras with useless garbage.
>>4469402ZF is almost as bad as the R cameras for destroying texture detail with it's AI noise post-processing (even on RAWs) because modern fast sensors have insane amount of color noise, the post processing destroys depth of color and texture in the images and leaves behind noise in black/white shadow situations.Get a EOS M with magic lantern for EDC unless you're doing it professionally, especially since you got EF primes and stuff, if you need a newer camera the last compact Canon before the images got over-sharpened and the noise reduction turned the images totally flat was the M5.If you need it even newer get a Fuji, they were the latest to destroy their images, I think the absolutely newest cameras they make are ruined though, because people are sheep who complain about noise in the colors and only want totally flat super saturated colors.The reviewers are of course happy about it because in their retarded tests the "sensors" perform "better", but really the images are just AI adjusted to increase test parameter scores instead of a pleasing image.
>>4469416>all the cameras used by people more successful than me are bad!KYS Sheeptard, you're not successful and you never will be.
Did jewtubers inflate the price of the EM5/10? I was looking for an early one but they seem expensive now if you want a not dragged behind a car condition one by the grading scales of these reseller.
>>4469423I don't think so they are still relatively cheap, but a lot of people are looking for older non-AI cameras so prices are going up across the board.AI gang thinks adding dehancers and shit on their cameras will make them take more pleasing pictures, but they are just adding one type of post-processing for another type.
>>4469423i've seen quiet a few "is the em5.2 the goat camera?" videos plop up on my timeline.
What is the cheapest camera with an evf with focus peaking?
having the system switching itch
>>4469421>>4469424You can feel free to ignore this fag because he is literally making shit up.>ITS AN AI CONSPIRACY!Nothing in this post makes sense. Literal 5g mind control gangstalking conspiracy theory levels of bullshit.Go be a retard on /x/. Or prove me right by rambling about targeted individuals, jews, eglin bots, glowies, alien demons, etc.
>>4469446Are you implying Jews aren't real?Also newer sensors don't have less noise they just remove it with deep learning algorithms.It's about as much a conspiracy theory as the Jews attacked the USS liberty.https://global.canon/en/technology/dl-iptechnology-2023.htmlYou are the niggerest of niggers on the entire planet, I bet you shoot on a Sony camera.
DESU, if your lens doesn't feature 5 or 10 aperture blades, I don't even LOOK at it. 12 blades is deemed acceptable. If your movie or documentary feature those, then I know the guys behind it are connoisseurs, men of culture with the finest taste.If it's an 9 or 11 blades vomit-inducing abomination, into the trash it goes.
>>4469421>>4469447That sensor been in use since 2018, noise behavior haven't change since. It would be a fucking joke if that old ass Nikon processor chip is capable of anything AI when it can't even focus properly.
>>4469451But that movie is like the worst looking movie of all time?
I didn't quite get what the deal about new nikon body construction was in the last thread
>>4469402>ZFWas my initial plan as a new edc but it's not all that small. But with the 40mm it must be a nice package. Leica M or Q can give you an small edc as well but quite expensive if you don't buy used and the tech inside isn't the best. But you can get some damn amazing lenses. Fuji x is small but apsc and I always find the images rather flat and lifeless. There are good deals for the Lumix S9 (probably because no one buys them) but they seem not of good build quality. Sigma BF is compact too and some are quite happy with its colors. But a bit too quirky for me.I went now with the new Nikon ZR hoping the sensor is fast enough for stills as it doesn't have a mechanical shutter. Other than that same photo specs as the Z6III, compact rangefinder style body, no evf (which I rarely use) and the option to do some fine video.
>>4469452Deep learning only applies in specific situations it recognizes, so if you're taking astrophotography it doesn't do anything, but if you're taking a portrait it probably will.The test image used on DPR is not a specific situation that is recognized by the deep learning algorithm (yet).As you can see, all these cameras basically take the same photo, but if you look at pictures taken by these cameras in normal situations they are vastly different.Also as I said, noise has not gotten better with the sensors, they only remove it in certain situations.
>>4469284>mirrorless scameraMight as well be a Sony, LOL. Although then it would have a baby mount with built in software copes for it (lifted exposure) and water ingress as the cherry on top. At least you can genuinely say Sony cameras are better than Fuji's, but being better than the worst isn't a high bar at all.
>>4469398>>4469405Based and redpilled. >>4469412His real mistake was trusting a mirrorless when the push came to shove. >>4469416ur b8 isn't good m8>>4469402Shoot film and you'll soon realize EDC is a meme because you'll feel bad for wasting an increasingly scarce soon to be banned resource on garbage snapshits.
>>4469465If you think the current batch of camera processors (which are all 5 years or older) are capable of deep learning AI and do it fast enough while processing the raw data stream and focus is laughable.
>>4469276But I dont have this problem because I dont shoot Sony
>>4469471clearly, it only happens when there is no way to comparably prove it
>>4469465You dont have a clue what you’re talking about and are pixel peeping AA filters while confusing dual gain stages for AIThe ZF has traditional and detectable smoothing above iso 12800 onl, no AI. Stop being a schizo.
>shills come out of the woodwork to deny what everyone can notice
>>4469461Is this finally the perfect FF EDC?
>>4469490not for photography. no shutter, flash sync speed 1/60 for "only" $2.7k lol. i'd pay $2k for the same camera with a mech shutter and no video at all... i hate cine so much bros. mirrorless is so shit
I got some old crap in an estate sale a few years ago and am finally sorting through it. I don't know much about older gear so hopefully someone can help - this 28mm Soligor lens has a T4 mount with an M42 adaptor but the fucking adaptor is stuck. Maybe I'm just fucking retarded but I can't get this damn thing to budge. The big fat Vivitar next to it has T4-FD adaptor which uses the same release design and works no problem, so I don't get what's wrong with this one. Is there something I'm missing or is it just broken?
>>4469490>that lens>EDC
>>4469284Fanboi gtfo.
>>4469482/pol/yp's law: if you think "shills" are out to get you, you are wrongthere ARE shills on 4chan but 90% are advertising their own youtube channel and the other 10% are advertising consumer elec shit on /g/ and /v/if you want shills.... every single camera youtuber is paid off via free loaners, free keepers, and free trips.anywaysit is not the same sensor used in the d750. CFA specs have changed. it has two gain stages now. quantum efficiency has improved. the .NEF format has been tweaked. the ADC is less noisy and the overall pipeline has been altered radically (it now has actual near 14 bit precision, instead of 12 bit precision with a 14 bit format). AA filter tech has changed a bit. the sensor stack is thinner.the zf does not use any sensor that has ever been used in a canon (canon fabs their own)noise reduction and sharpening in jpegs of course looks different because it is a different algorithm using a different processor so it tries to be more aggressive.NR in raws is not actually present at ISOs people actually use. the zf does some boring chroma averaging 12800+ (and EVERY fuji does heavy handed chroma averaging in jpeg)AI NR is currently only a feature on the canon EOS R1 and EOS R5II, probably because canon sucks shit at making sensors and these full frame cameras have the actual dynamic range of aps-c. the ZF and Z6III could very well be the last or second to last nikon cameras without AI NR, but they are certainly not the first with. the processing they have on board is JUST sufficient for autofocus. even sony can't figure out AI NR so the a9iii files just get traditional smudges from averaging pixels.
What am I in for?
>>4469284The actual truthactual shills hate sony aps-c in particular because it mogs fuji period, mogs nikon dx for features/resolution/lenses/ibis and mogs canon dx for DR/lenses/features (canon has better stab and more pickels on the r7 tho)
>>4469506Behold, all the bullshit a digital photographer has to know and understand simply to purchase a camera without getting fucked in the ass to the tune of $2000+ and having to cope, like this>stop picksel peep>it might look like shit but it spams snapshits with perfect autofocus really fast!>muh video codecs (no i have never been paid to do video and yes i know most pro videographers including in hollywood still shoot with dated shit that doesnt even do 8k raw)Meanwhile on film>DOES CAMERA WORK?>DA. GO CLICK.>NOW TO TAKE 10,000MP PHOTO WITH TECHNICAL PAN
>>4469490Almost. It just needs an EVF
>>4469498Don't know if anyone gives a damn but it turned out someone has already been inside here. I unscrewed the latch mechanism from the adaptor only to find that it had been glued on at some point. I'm guessing there should be a return spring or something in the latch casing which has since been lost, without which the latch just flops in place instead of returning to position. The dumbass who did this had evidently realised this was a problem for keeping the adaptor securely fixed to the lens and had glued the latch and the adaptor to the lens. Fucking boomers, man.I've ordered an E-FD adaptor from Amazon that arrives on Tuesday. Mildly excited to try out this lens and its fat Vivitar 90-230 cousin later this week. Will they be any good or will the previous owner have managed to fuck them up in other weird wonderful ways? Who knows.
>>4469276Shouldnt camera shutters last for well over 100k+ actuations?
>>4469276Just picked up a Nikon D90 + Nikkor dx 35mm 1.8g lens and a Fujifilm x100 for a total of $35 at a yard sale.I know nothing about photography or cameras, are these worth using to get into the hobby or dabbling with or should I just resell them? Which of these cameras would you be using?
>>4469490Really depends on what you want in a camera. I never shoot flash. Electronic shutter is what I use all the time on my z6iii without any issues. This and the z6iii are the true hybrid cameras. Most other "hybrids" can't shoot video in raw format meaning barely any post edit is possible. It's like a "hybrid" that lets you shoot stills only jpegs instead of raw files. So if you really do both equally photos and videos this is perfect. Also preordered it. Only thing I'm worried is the missing evf but you get a big bright screen instead..
by how much is magnification and effective display resolution decreased with the small viewfinder option on these new mirrorless cameras?i wear glasses/sunglasses pretty much every waking hour
>>4469421>>4469416>>4469461Thanks! I think I'm gonna rent out a ZF with the 40mm f2 to see how I like the files. The Leica is a good suggestion, but I would like it to have autofocus. Been using my dad's q2 a lot this summer though, it is absolutely wonderful, maybe I should just get one of those and then use the 5d for more planned stuff. I rarely shoot above 1600 iso so high iso noise really isn't an issue to me.
>>4469541Bruh same. It's annoying as fuck. I just deal with it, it's like a 15% decrease but I'd rather see the entire frame
>>4469538The Fuji is like 600$D90 is like $100
>>4469538the DX 35mm alone goes for $70~100
>>4469432I'm sure I saw one about em10 as well.
>>4469508>mogs nikon dxMy D2x produces a more realistic image with greater color accuracy!
>>4469509meanwhile on film>shoot film>want to share pictures>get shit scans from 20 year old noritsu>see shit scans, buy digital cam for "scanning">get better scans after thousands spent and hours of setup and testing>slowrealization.jpg>just use scancam for making pictures
>>4469490Nothing full frame can be EDC
>>4469558>>4469555So is this good gear to get into /p/ or should I just sell them?
>>4469653sell the fuji unless you really like it because you can turn a crazy profitkeep the d90
Thinking of buying the EOS R100 Canonis it worth it?should I go for the R50 instead?
>>4469652Why not?
>>4469652Insecure reddit soiboi culture turned "every day carry" into "concealed carry"Nothing can ever "print" through the insecure reddit soiboi's fitted clothesNo one can ever see the EDC reddit soi is carrying anythingThe EDC reddit soi can not risk anyone noticing anything he has and asking what it's forAnd the EDC reddit soi absolutely can NOT carry any amount of weight. He measures his life in grams.Meanwhile, back when men were men, the "EDC" for everyone was a full frame camera... at least.
>>4469652just tell us you're a huge bitch and your shit's all retarded>mfw daily RB67
extending the dopamine rush from ordering an R5 yesterday by watching videos about it.
>>4469655>is it worth it?no>should I go for the R50 instead?no
I like FujifilmI just think they're neatAlso rangefinder-style bodies fuck
>>4469655It is a perfectly good starter camera but you might be wishing for something with better features really quick.For example for wildlife, you'd really want the animal eye detect of the R50 and up - the R100 doesn't have it.
After much deliberation, I have made a decision on which camera I will purchase next
>>4469662It is a great camera. If you live in a socialist country like me I sure do hope you bought used. Got mine for $2k back in April after upgrading from the R7.
>>4469655I own an R50. The R100 is just a stripped down version of that. I used to use a 70D way back but only really started caring about gear capabilitiy once I went mirrorless. After about 3 months of using the R50 for travel snapshits and whatnot the novelty of "so small, omg" wore off and I was left wishing I had more controls and better tech. I bought an R8.If you're absolutely set on Canon APS-C, I would say go R10. If your budget is too tight, stick with a DSLR. If for some reason you're dead set on mirrorless get an RP used cheap.The R100 lacks shit as essential as a articlated screen, and if you get the R50 the moment you want a speedlite you need to buy an adapter that costs the difference between it and the R10.
>>4469662Why did you buy a R5?
>>44696871580 euros (well used on mpb)>>4469692The price was too good.
>>4469276I'm considering buying a mirrorless camera and I'm looking at the Nikon Z series. Has anyone here used a Z6ii? Is the Z7ii really worth twice the price? I'll probably get the 35mm f/1.8 S, if I go for a Z series camera.
>>4469695the sony a7iii is a bit better and has a better lens ecosystem
>>4469694>The price was too good.I'm surprised it's not under 300$
Thoughts on this backpacking kit for Nikon Z? 28-400, 50mm macro, 20 1.8 for stars. With a flash comes in about 5lbs. Can another system do better while doing landscape, wildlife, macro and astro?
This bad boy showed up today, 190 dollars for the kit with a bag and all original accessories.It's taken 1720 pictures, seems alright.
At this point in my life I basically just want to sell everything. I already cleared out most of the EF/EFS mount for a deceent profit, but it's not as if I had anything particularly nice to begin with. What do you think of just keeping these three?>EFS 24mm>EFS 18-135mm>EF 70-200 F4 USM (non IS) LI can fill in gaps with adapted lenses. I got a 400mm Vivitar TX mount thrown in from a nice old photo journalist I got a few other lenses off of, but I need to get a M42 TX mount to adapt it to M42-EF since it's a MD one now.Asides that, I still have a 50mm F1.8 II and a 55-250mm II. If I was on a full frame I'd have some use for the 50mm, but on a crop sensor it's neither wide nor telephoto, so using it by itself is not much use. The extra light is nice, if it was a STM for what I paid I would keep it, but for a plastic fantastic I don't see enough difference in subject separation compared to the 2.8 24mm to justify keeping it if I got a favorable sum for it.I can use the 18-135mm for general use, and the 70-200mm for telephoto and if I bring the 24mm I have an option for wider angle shots.55-250mm is better than the 75-300 I had, but if I get near what I listed it for I could get a 1.4 tele for the 70/200 and have a longer telephoto with better optics, so it feels redundant.
>>4469719>no viewfinderHonest question, why would you do this to yourself?
>>4469721It's my video camera, going to suffer with some magic lantern.My photo cameras have viewfinders.
>>4469712i went backpacking for 10 days with just the 24-120mm F4 S. got aurora borealis shots too. not sure why you need more. good to keep things lightweight
>>4469720Keep the 24mm if you’re on APS-CI swear it can do anything (if you can get close enough)
>>4469720The 24mm is great and dirt cheap, may as well keep it.The 70-200 is pree good but I'd rather have the IS version. Depends on how much you use it I guess.On crop just sell all that other shit you mentioned and get the 55-250 STM. It's way better than the II version you have.
Dear /gear/.I'm currently using (second hand) D750 but started to notice that my shutter already reported error few times at short exposition times (1/2000 and the like). If I would want to get replacement camera, is D850 logical choice or I should pickup something else? I already have 7 lenses so complete system change is out of question. Thanks for help.
>>4469744D850 is technically a better camera, slightly less character in the pictures but it's sensor output is still top 5 in testing so if you care about technical spec testing then yes.
>>4469773What do you mean by "slightly less character in the pictures"?
>>4469774>what do you mean by “character”Schizoid ramblings
>>4469744D850 is the only sensible upgrade unless you want to jump to Z or another mirrorless mountDon't fall for the sink cost fallacy of "not being able to switch"
>>4469695I'd take Z5II over either of those>>4469652Most of my EDC is with a FF
>>4469734Macro is a special interest of mine, and typically I get some wildlife shots as well. Mostly I do overnights or 3 days, if I was going on a 10 day I'd question bringing 5lbs of photo stuff for sure.>aurora shotsThat's possibly less demanding than milkyway shots without star trails? If I could get a 2.8 zoom lens at 24mm I'd drop the dedicated astro lens.
Am I the only person not impressed by the Leica "color science" from the Q series cameras?It's distinctive, for sure, but the 'it insists upon itself' meme comes to mind every time I look at sample picture from them. The color isn't really reflective of reality.
>>4469692>Why did you buy a R5?Name a better bang per buck full frame.
>>4469744D800/D800e/D810 is a good option, at a fraction of the price.
>>4469809Z6II. It makes everything-detect crutch dependent dog snapping pixel peepers seethe and brings modern full frame dual gain sensor quality to the <$1000 price point without being a janky, failure prone snoy with shitty heavily vignetting 3lb lenses.>but megaypixels. i must croooooop. i must zoom in. 35mm film is 900mp i must pixel peepee my dogs fur.Skill issue.Beware that /p/ has stupid gearfags on it that only shoot the most dogshit wedding photography (and are so bad at it they need to go through 14k+ frames per wedding to get enough keepers) and photos of their pet husky/corgi/german shepherd. These people have aggressively stupid gear opinions and I'm pretty sure the husky fucker just shills whatever he's selling on ebay because he told everyone to buy a D750 and then sold his.
>>4469744Just use this as an opportunity to switch to a mirrorless body.
>>4469803>shooting JPEGOnly have yourself to blame. And if you say no they were raws, then the colour science is not relevant and it’s on whoever processed the raws.
>>4469821>schizophrenic's aggressively stupid opinionNever change /p/
>>4469821I have never gotten worthwhile gear advice from any of the dog faggots and have only watched as they never followed their own advice beyond installing capture one and making a few darkroom prints. Oh thanks fkr reccing me a d750 huskyfaggit you said the autofocus was great but it sucks whats that? You went with a z7ii? Fuck you! The corgi fag is super irritating>how dare you claim a nikon z50 has "bad autofocus". people have taken in focus photos using a z50 so it has good autofocus. stop being entitled gearfag. >you can still take good photos with a potato in some situations>you cant tell a sony from a canon after i spend an hour editing>yes i own a full frame leica and $20k worth of gear overall why do you askOnly the hairy negatives fucker isnt totally dishonest because all he does is think photo on big film = good photo
>>4469744>tfw bought a second body D850 with only 9.6k shuttercount for 1.3k from a photographerit was a good day
Sweet, as of today my camera is now worth $200 more
>>4469834doesn't make your pics better :^)
I am tired of people who do this>monday:>why this POS is all you need>tuesday:>why i love my expensive full frame camera>wednesday:>i bought a hasselblad>thursday:>just shoot! this fujifilm is all you need to take great photos>friday:>5 best hasselblad X system lenses
>>4469836stop lurking youtube so much then
>>4469839That describes ken rockwell, most photographers blogs, and half the posters here as well>yeah this compact is the best camera for a pleb like you now me i am important as you can see by this building corner i actually need to enjoy using my camera and get great image quality in wildly varying situations. you need to stop caring and only post on instagram. only serious photographers like me are allowed to notice and care.
>>4469836You mean people that enjoy a variety of different cameras?
>>4469843
>>4469821>dishonesty>>4469830>more dishonesty/p/ wont get better unless people start being honest
>>4469845I mean hypocrites with gear opinions that don’t match their gear. I respect udunneedmoar coming from someone with a pentax k70 more than someone with a failjifool as a side camera to their fucking leicablad z9000.
>>4469848>with gear opinions that don’t match their gearNothing you posted in the example is hypocritical>I respect udunneedmoar coming from someone with a pentax k70Well there's your problem, what a silly perspective
>And that friends is why the olympuji xf10iii is all you need. >Cut! Thats a wrap>get this garbage away from me. where’s my R5?
>>4469849>i respect advice from people who follow their own advice but not people who say you can tow a trailer with a corolla but drive an f250 max power with complimentary truck nuts, glock and ar15Yes.
>>4469849Camera guys be like>*hits joint* weed is bad for you
>>4469851What advice are they not following?>you can tow a trailer with a corollaNo one says that though, more dishonesty. If we're going to play that game, the people here say you can't get to a grocery store with a corolla, so you have to upgrade to a current year SUV.
>>4469853>you can get to the grocery store with a corolla>you drive a fucking WRX STI. if the corolla isnt worse where’s yours?>SO? AM I WRONG? DISHONESTY.
>>4469830Based and honest post. We would be better off without dishonest gearfagging like people defending the shitty autofocus of cameras they dont even use>z50 is fine! yes i use a zf. so?
>>4469830No one seems to know my actual opinions, or just comes up with weird half truths about them. You included.
>>4469855Except it'd be more like I have both cars, and still choose to drive the corolla at least half the time, because I know it's fine for me 90% of the time. When people complain about issues with their driving, they should probably try to be a better driver before simply getting a new car.>>4469852I like weed. It has pros and cons, and I smoke everyday, but definitely isn't a great choice for everyone. That's how I usually describe cameras too, because I understand different people have different needs and preferences. I just want people to be honest when talking about them.
>>4469856If people were honest and fair about the limitations of cameras, I'd have nothing to bother replying
>>4469858>literally *hits joint* weed is bad for youNo wonder you’re retardedMaybe people dont like corollas because trackday dudes sperging about corners aside they’re not very fun and cant pass shit on the highway?Maybe people buy nicer cameras to worry less about fiddling and just take a high quality photo with a better made device?Stop smoking pot for a year or two and you might realize why people dont like low end junk instead of going all "like chill maaaaaaaaan its just like a different experience like everything is coooool maaaaaaaaaan"ffs fucking druggies
>coping fujislugs are potheadspottery
>>4469858mhmm would love to smoke a big fat blunt and then go out in nature with that M. Growing legal weed here in Germany made me buy a macro lens, lots of fun
>>4469858I used to be like you, and looking at this picture I feel nothing but revulsion. You will feel the same way some day.
>smoke weed>spend $10k on a manual focus only camera>’sall good bruhhhh like, it takes pictures maaaan its a viiiiibe>sober>see $10k manual focus camera>What kind of fucking idiot…
>>4469835>implying he even uses a camera
>be wealthy person in wealthy nation>spend $10k on a manual focus only camera>be poorfag >see $10k manual focus camera>can't afford therefore need to insult others who canpoorfags being poor
>>4469858>A fucking pothead is the shit gear simp that simultaneously overspends on bullshit cameras/p/ in a nutshell. This is who is giving you advice. Someone who inhales smoke that makes him retarded. That explains the taking over 10,000 photos to shoot a wedding and all the shitty dog pictures.>I smoke every dayPOT DOES NOT WEAR OFF IN A FEW HOURS. It takes over a day to fully wear off and builds up in your system. You are always high. You are always retarded.This website in a nutshell. You're getting advice from marijuana addicts. They fuck themselves over and think it's fine. Electric guitar is brought up often for having as much of the same shit as cameras (people who overspend on "mojo" and people who underspend on junk and claim its the superior choice "if you only do this") and it has huge appeal to people who smoke too much weed.
>>4469881>Cue the "its not a lot of money to me" copeIt is a lot of money to you. You just have no sense of fiscal responsibility and can't plan for the future because you're a fucking pothead and you're probably planning on offing yourself instead of retiring. Fuck this site.Enjoy your pothead advice retards
>>4469883my future is all planed out anon, no worries. I'm not even the pothead you are referring to. >being this butthurt that some people can afford nice things lmao
>>4469284This is sad. Get a life dude.
>>4469883>projecting this much maybe dont get into photography if youre poor
>>4469809>Name a better bang per buck full frame.5D M3, 6D, 6D M2, 1DX, 1DX M2D4, D750, D800, D810, D850K1*Pukes a little*Also A7 III ->
>bro 10k for a toy is nothing because of my magic first world country powersThe saddest of larps besides my girlfriend goes to another school and my dad works at nintendoit translates to "i have no kids and live worse than my career allows"
>>4469885obviously he has a life because he doesnt live on /p/ desperately trying to keep people away from the brand thats #1 in full frame market share
>>4469889lol nice try anon
>>4469712>28-400May as well use your phone or a mft camera. If you're willing you haul another kg or so you can bring a 100-400, the much better 105 and the 24-70 2.8 which can do double duty for astro. You can probably shave 2lbs off your base weight?
>>4469712Bring this instead:24-120F mount f1.8 thingySkill
>>4469858>pothead>tons of wasted money on displayhttps://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3125637/> Chronic marijuana users (MJ Users) perform poorly on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), a complex decision-making task in which monetary wins and losses guide strategy development.> MJ Users are less sensitive to negative feedback during strategy developmentpot makes you dumb. so dumb you dont register a material loss. when a pothead makes a financial mistake they dont go "SHIT! CHANGE COURSE!" they go "whatever, its like, an experience, dude". you see most people on /p/ get kind of stressed at the notion of blowing four figures and finding out the camera they bought underperforms severely and they could have got the job done for half the money. its a really stressful idea for a normal person. so they call fuji shit and say a dslr or old sony is better (which is correct). and then you go "like, every camera takes pictures man, its like, an experience, just roll with it" and post a comparison you made while high that puts fuji in a studio up against an ff auto mode snapand now we know why
>>4469858One day you will have to quit (maybe to maintain your rights or be employable) and you will look back and realize how badly you fucked up by taking up daily marijuana use. Once a week is medically defined as too often.
>>4469882>>4469902>>4469903>>4469878>>4469867Found the newfags, welcome to /p/
>>4469905Pot is objectively bad for you and cannabis legalization precipitated the mass shooting epidemic kicking into high gear as well as an uptrend in motor vehicle accidentsIf you actively use cannabis you are a risk to yourself and others
>>4469883My house is paid off, and I have a decent amount in savings & investments. I would absolutely stop smoking if it were a financial burden, just like I would sell most of my remaining gear, and never own a Leica, if it were a financial burden.Even in this post I recommend most people don't smoke.>>4469902Yeah, maybe if they smoked it would help with their financial anxieties from being poor
>>4469906>you are a risk to yourself and othersYeah, a risk of having too much fun
>>4469908No a risk of wrecking your life with impaired decision making and violent behavior. Read. Your poor decision making is on display here. Sober up and look at yourself. Read the IGT study again. Without smoking pot. And now read these. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/may/8/connecting-dots-of-mass-shootings-to-marijuana-leg/https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9462911/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40170208/Throw your pot in the compost bin and get your life in order.
>>4469907>what is opportunity cost?(smoke pot and you’ll forget the answer and become insensitive to the concept for the rest of the week)
>>4469887>Dslrosaurs and a snoyOpinion disregarded.
>>4469909It's okay, I do an hour of weightlifting to offset the bad of smoking
>>4469910>opportunity costI did my undergrad in econ lol, didn't start smoking until after 25
>>4469913And yet here you are with $12k next to pot just to produce the same jpegs as a $350 cameraYou could be yielding 12% a day off crypto scams and it would be smarter than owning a soulless digital leica
>>4469914What good is money if you don't have fun things to spend it on?What camera will give me the same JPG's?
>>4469915Nikon d610 and skill
>>4469900I'll consider, would be nice to have those along.>>4469901? No I want to do macro. And birds. And potentially dangerous animals without having to get 120mm close to them.
>>4469911>Doesn't know mirrorless cameras sacrifice image quality for cost cutting practices.Nigger opinions are worthless.
>>4469928And better low light performance! It is what the people wanted!
>>4469914>Average /p/ is a schizo essay writing poorfag that bought NFTsIt all makes sense now
Rumors about the usual social media influencers having been flown out to Japan. Canon R6MK3 coming up?
>>4469276I wish Sigma would make something normal. What is this? It looks like it will give me arthritis. The display panel on the back is a nice touch, thoughever. It seems to take inspiration from Hasselblad's body designs.>No EVF.I just don't get it. Who wants to stare at a screen?
>>4469942No, comparing it to Hasselblad is too generous. It looks more like they studied white goods manufacturers like Fisher-Paykell. >SHAMEFUR DISPRAY!
>>4469942Maybe it could be comfortable to hold with that textured frontside.>$3995AUHmm... >No, I don't think I will.
> Had my camera for a while with just the motorized kit zoom.> It is relatively small and goes back to last selected focal length when the camera turns on.> Think all zooms are like this.> Get a longer zoom.> Its advertised size is at the shortest focal length.> At the useful focal length it becomes a foot long dildo.> No longer fits in the bag. Uncomfortable to carry around.> Have to manually extend and fold it all the time.Fuck it, my next lens is a prime.
>>4469942>No EVF.>I just don't get it. Who wants to stare at a screen?Are you implying EVF's aren't screens?It's literally the same thing.
>>4469942>Who wants to stare at a screen?Go on any Instagram modern camera post and the zoom zooms and boomers are constantly arguing over vf vs screen. Zoomeis hardly use the vf because it just isn’t a thing they ever grew up or were conditioned to use. Their frame of reference is using a phone. It’s quite fascinating really
>>4469955Another anon. I thought I didn't want an EVF, but then I went out of the house once and now I do.
>>4469942This is your EVF.
>>4469950Now this is A grade autism
>>4469855>>4469867I drive a Corolla to the store and the WRX STI for fun because the Corolla gets double the gas mileage and doesn't care if I redline it while it's still cold if it even warms up for that short tripThe closer equivalent is a militant $5,000 Miata owner coping and getting all sour grapes about why he can't afford a new $70,000 sports car. There's nothing wrong with accepting you can't afford a better camera or don't want to spend the money. /p/ is a gearfag hobby, just the gear costs less than other hobbies. >>4469858 has more money than you and that's perfectly okay. It's like the workers at B&H walking past me with Leicas on their hips while my homeless looking ass is fingerfucking cameras with a $400 K70 off my neck. I made $150k last year and I'm either buying a $15,000 GC/GD WRX STI or a 5.0 Mustang this year...I'm comfortable dropping $2500 on coilovers while I would audibly cringe if I dropped that amount on a camera or lens...my most expensive kit is my $900 K1ii I sold my Pentax KF for. I could afford a $70,000 sports car but then I couldn't save for a house or have any disposable income.>>4469911>DSLRosaursGot me to smile
>>4469955They are amateurs and as such they feel like they don't need it. They certainly have no intention of developing their skills, they just want the "nice" photos they've seen on tiktok. The G7X II and III are perfect examples of just how stupid they are. The sensor in those cameras can be found in several models and what little differentiate them is not worth the additional cost which can be over the double. The G5X for instance which has an EVF I've seen locally for as little as $250 and still be slow to move. The G5X II which has a pop-up viewfinder and thus should be less intimidating is going for less than the G7X III even though they were released at the same time and the G5XII having a higher retail price. Same story with the EOS-M cameras.. viewfinder = scary.
I dreamt of LUMIX S 135mm f1.8.It was a great lens.
>>4469942I actually really like the BF, just as a second camera for having fun. Really all they gotta do is make a BF with an EVF and shutter and I'd be on L mount. I will stick with my APS-C DSLR until then.
>>4469962Please explain how an EVF is not analogous to a screen.
>>4469823I will bite - why exactly would mirrorless be better? I mostly use camera at events and in low light conditions. I'm rather concerned with reported very small battery capacity in case of mirrorless and it's not really rare for me to shoot 2-3k photos at single concert or similar stage performance.
>>4470004>at events and in low light conditionsfor one, the evf will show you how your settings expose the sensor instead of how your eyes have adapted to the dark
>>4470004Rough rule is you need 3x as many batteries with a mirrorless compared to a DSLR.The only reason to get a mirrorless camera is for video and high speed tracking autofocus.
>>4470017As well as being smaller, lighter, better lenses, faster shooting, the EVF. The only advantage DSLRs have is they're cheap and have better battery life.
>>4470018Woah, trvth nook. The hyllics on /p/ will not let this crime of a statement go unabaited. OVF is clearly at least 70% more sovl and better for anything because who would use an electronic screen to view the world? That's obviously just as bad as sitting at home with google street view you mindless sheeple buying new hardware.My personal estimate is no fewer than four anons will now tell you how EVFs are inferior and how you've basically killed photography by letting this spooky demon into the market share.
>>4470018>being smallerYes, not always a good thing, ergonomics are noticeably worse on mirrorless cameras, but size is good for some things, buy a Insta360 or use your phone, or are you some sort of girly hands fag?>lighterPlastic is lighter than magnesium, it's also less durable.>better lensesFalse, cost cutting plastic lenses are not better. Canon EF L series lenses as an example are vastly superior to RF lenses.>faster shootingIf the camera is in sleep mode the DSLR is SIGNIFICANTLY faster if you need to get a shot real quick, the mirrorless can shoot pictures at a quicker rate, but why would you do that if you can just shoot a video instead?>the EVFJust use the fucking liveview screen you retard, whats the fucking difference?OVF is a lot faster, no delay and you get information you can't get through the screen.Mirrorless cameras are video cameras with a almost good enough photography afterthought.DSLR's are photography cameras with a almost good enough video afterthought.
>>4470004As >>4470010 says, you get your exposure as recorded by the sensor, directly trough the EVF, it makes adjustments much much simpler. >>4470019I saw a live specimen of this type of schizos once at the mall, the dude was desperately looking for a DSLR.
>>4470023>Yes, not always a good thing, ergonomics are noticeably worse on mirrorless cameras, but size is good for some things, buy a Insta360 or use your phone, or are you some sort of girly hands fag?cope>Plastic is lighter than magnesium, it's also less durable.cope (pro FF bodies are still made of magnesium, but that's not the point, try to hammer a nail with your boomer box and see if the delicate mirror still works.>False, cost cutting plastic lenses are not better. Canon EF L series lenses as an example are vastly superior to RF lenses.https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1197&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=1417&CameraComp=1508&SampleComhttps://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=1415&CameraComp=1508&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0p=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0>If the camera is in sleep mode the DSLR is SIGNIFICANTLY faster if you need to get a shot real quick, the mirrorless can shoot pictures at a quicker rate, but why would you do that if you can just shoot a video instead?C O P E>Just use the fucking liveview screen you retard, whats the fucking difference?t.streetfag (explains a lot really)>Mirrorless cameras are video cameras with a almost good enough photography afterthought.>DSLR's are photography cameras with a almost good enough video afterthought.no
>>4469918>Nikon d610Can't crop like the M11. Much less dynamic range and lenses that can't at all compete with Leica glass. Nice try though
>>4469942>I just don't get it. Who wants to stare at a screen?I rarely use my evf for several reasons: I shoot mostly from hip or chest level because I'm not a manlet. For landscapes where I could use the EVF it is more difficult to compose and get the horizon even. That leaves me to very bright days with direct sunlight where I can't see shit on the screen. The only usecase where I use the evf but I would trade it for a smaller, lighter body
>>4470004You know you can still get 2-3k shots on a single mirrorless battery right?>>4469949That's why internal zoom/focus lenses are dope>>4469980I also worked at camera shops for many years, so most of my gear purchased is with the vendor employees discounts
>>4470025You're the one coping, poorfag can't afford a real camera along with his little toy video camera.
>>4470028>You know you can still get 2-3k shots on a single mirrorless battery right?No you don't you get about 400-500 shots or so on one battery.
>>4470031I can get 500+ shots on single battery with my R8, and it's battery cucked.
>>4470030take a family photo faggot, lets see those Hasselblads you undoubtedly have stashed up your own ass right next to your head. >>4470031factually untrue, those retarded rated shots measures are totally out of touch with reality, even on an R5mkII I fill up a 128GB card before I'm at 1 bar on the battery, the R7 has easily twice the autonomy, if you need more than that then bring a fucking spare, its not that hard. If you're out shooting all day, a spare battery may be justifiable but if you're just a tourist, then you 100% will not need a spare battery.
>>4470032You can probably take more if you're shooting them within a short timeframe, but if you're up all night or at a wedding the shot information is relatively accurate.
i got a nikon d5000 at a yard sale for like 5 bucks a while ago and forgot that it was missing the lens, are those things really 1-200 fucking dollars and do those "telephoto" things that are like 10 actually work as a normal lensi'm not a photographer or need turbo autist quality i've just never had a camera that wasn't shit and this one was cheap
>>4470023>Mirrorless cameras are video cameras with a almost good enough photography afterthought.>DSLR's are photography cameras with a almost good enough video afterthought.That's pretty much I'm afraid of. I mean, I don't care at all, completely at all about video performance. I use my D750 for various tasks but things like architecture/tourism use is rare for me, portrait more but truly demanding are those events - it's not rare for me to shoot at 1/320 with iso 3200 or 6400, for example, this also demands quick and precise AF. Weight is not a concern either since I assume that with those grips for solving battery problem (no, I won't risk having to replace battery multiple times during performance) and converter for lens mount (since I won't be buying new, more expensive lenses when old ones works properly), it will weight similarly. Meanwhile when I check Nikon mirrorless on cameradecision, I see rather confusing informations like Z7 having somehow worse low light AF than Z6 and lacking various functions D850 have. I do not cross off mirrorless solely because of that, I'm simply trying to figure out proper tool for what I intend to use camera for.
>>4470031I get +1k on most mirrorless I use. The CIPA ratings are effectively for screen time, not shots.>>4470035For weddings I usually get around 1.5-2k per battery, or 2-3 batteries for an 8-10hr wedding.>>4470039If you have no lens, look into the 18-200 as a general purpose option>>4470041Modern mirrorless lowlight AF is much better, especially if you shoot peopleZ7 does have worse lowlight AF than a Z6, shouldn't be surprising, same as D750 vs D810 and many other examt, but if lowlight AF is a priority, you should be looking Z5II
>>4470042>18-200thanks but>search that>a bunch of different brands>they're all 100+ dollarsi'm a poorfag but wtf it's just some glassguess i'll continue using my cybershit
>>4470004>I mostly use camera at events and in low light conditionsAll the more reasons to switch. Newer sensor means better better ISO performance and with little light they tend to autofocus better than DSLRs. Canon has an 800mm f/11 lens now, you would never be able to use autofocus with a lens like that on DSLRs, but mirrorless bodies handle it fine.
>>4470023>you get information you can't get through the screenif it's not on the screen, it's not on the raw
>>44700353+ hours of shooting, ~490 pictures, and the battery was still above 50%
>>4470048Exactly.You may not know your settings are wrong without a OVF, you remove a crucial element, reality.It's not a big deal in cinema cameras where everything is hypercontrolled, checked and doublechecked before the camera is even turned on.
>>4470051You could have bought a Pentax 645Z for the same price as your entry level AI slop camera Sergei.
>>4470023>ergonomics are noticeably worse on mirrorless camerasErgonomics beyond "could even trump reach this without shifting his grip? quickly go from everyone has the same hands to "but I don't have arthritis". Canon, and DSLRs, exemplify this. They are either designed for arthritic people, or for soulless, non-artistic snapshitters who have a 24-70 f2.8/70-200 f2.8 and speedlite attached 24/7 and walk around like that all day. AKA the paparazzi. No one gives a fuck about those "photographers". Cameras got worse ~for them~ because everyone fucking hates them.>Plastic is lighter than magnesium, it's also less durable.The good news is mirrorless actually have a better magnesium/plastic ratio than DSLRs, and use the magnesium where it aids durability instead of denting (the frame) and plastic for shells, which really matters for lenses because having a plastic coating over a metal frame results in superior shock absorption and lower chances of decentering upon impact.>If the camera is in sleep mode...Paparazzi shit. This doesn't matter to real photographers. Even wedding candids aren't affected by this weirdly specific scenario.>Just use the fucking liveview screen you retard, whats the fucking difference?3 point holds are stable/sun glare.>OVF is a lot faster, no delay and you get information you can't get through the screen.OVF is a lot dimmer. OVFs have <40% focus point coverage and literally can not take certain photos. OVF gives no additional information that is relevant to the end result.It also comes with mirror shock. and focus inaccuracy, due to the combination of imaging and focusing being on 2 different planes, and the lens being focused wide open and shot stopped down.And it ALSO comes with inferior lens design. The mirror box occupies space that lens designers require to correct most designs. This is the sole reason leica stayed in business! Most non-hueg SLR lenses are very soft until f4. Great as an option. Shit as a default.
>>4470056>Pentax 645ZI'm not buying a 10 year-old brick, thank you>SergeiAlso it's Ivan from Bulgaria, fuck the ruzzkies
>>4470056>it's the retarded schizo that thinks mirrorless are running AI, and he confirmed it by comparing the AA filters on dpreview>>4470061Zooms also got a lot betterOn SLRs, any zoom that starts under 70mm can not be sharp all the way through. It is not optically possible. It will always underperform even shitty primes even at f8. Even today 24-70 f2.8s struggle with bokeh rendering. It's a difficult range because a 24mm lens has to be very close to the sensor, or a complex retrofocus design.On mirrorless, nikon's 24-120 f4 kit zoom is as sharp as or sharper than EVERY. SINGLE. F. MOUNT. PRIME. And it's the fucking kit lens! Tamron makes a budget 35-150 f2-2.8. Sony sells a fucking 20-70 f4. This would all be literally impossible on a DSLR unless it was purple haze to f5.6 and always smeared so badly on the edges that group portraits without deep cropping would be inadvisable. Even low budget lenses like the nikon 40mm f2 were never possible on SLRs. The SLR version of that lens would be 2 inches longer and more complex to attempt to achieve the same performance. The 40mm f2 performs at and above the standard of the majority of leica M mount primes.Removing the mirror box does great things for what actually matters in photography (rendering a good image). There is a good fucking reason the majority of significant photography was shot on leicas for 100 years, and SLRs were confined to studio shots at f8-f16. It's because SLRs are the antithesis of sharp photographs, AND the antithesis of pleasing blur. They only have weird smeary, glassy multicolored optical blur when a leica lens or mirrorless lens has glow.
>arguing with the DSLR schizo
>>4470064>Muh sharpnessOk now we know you're fucking coping, everyone knows your DLSS sharpening filter ruins pictures KYS boomer.
>>4470064>When room temperature IQ thinks he has the good shit but in reality has trash and trash taste.Nice try.
>>4470067>post is about lenses>n-no it's an AI digital filter the lenses could not possibly be superiorthe lenses are superiori dont think you appreciate how much the lens mount matters.leica stayed in business with buggy manual focus cameras entirely because a short flange distance enables superior lens design. if DSLRs were outright better no one would have bought a leica ever. leica would not have retained fanboys. they would have been as dead as zenza bronicas for simply not producing the results. but leica had staying power because their shorter mount let them make sharp lenses with pleasing rendering and glow instead of having a divide between clinical overcorrection and blurry shit. canon stayed in business despite making awful sensors and unreliable, buggy cameras relative to others entirely because they had a shorter and wider mount than nikon and could make better lensessony is slowly ceding their #1 position to nikon... entirely because their narrow lens mount prevents them from staying competitive with RF, Z, and L mount lenses *and* prevents them from actually getting ibis to perform to its rating in any scenario but CIPA's vibrating test table, and IBIS is huge. it's the replacement for OIS at focal lengths <200mm and makes lenses simpler, smaller, and more reliable.
>Take a series of 100 pics with the electronic shutter>Check out the first raw file and the last raw file on a shutter count website (tried multiple sites, same results)>mechanical shutter count does a +100What is this fucking sorcery, it should be +0
>>4470072Stop spreading false information in an attempt to make mirrorless cameras seem better than they are.The distance between the sensor and the lens has no impact on sharpness or image quality.
>>4470023>Being smaller not always a good thingYou can always add a grip or a half-case, but you can't make shit smaller than it comes out the factory as. I put a half-case on my R8 when using my turbonerd teles and it's perfect.>Lighter means plastic, means bad. Metal goodEngineering plastic is not far off the durability of metal and saves significant weight, but it's also way cheaper to use plastic versus metal. Prices are already overinflated as is.>EF L lenses are superior to RF lensesRF consumer lenses? Absolutely, and I agree hands down since there's rough parity of prices between EF L versions vs RF consumer, but RF L lenses beat the shit out of both (rightly so)>DSLRs are faster out of sleep modeWhat the fuck kind of poor-man's cameras are you buying? My R8 goes from sleep to shooting in like 0.8 seconds. >EVF makes no sense to use blah blahThere additional features of an EVF are fuckin' great. The resolution and shading from the sun are already differences enough to use it over the screen.>>4470032I get about the same, but I've had days where I get 700-800 so long as I stay out of the menus. If I'm constantly changing shit it's more like 150-400. Registering C1/C2 to a couple of common setting swaps is handy for this.
>>4470079You are either trolling or missing the point, but you should know lots of macro lenses do really poorly with extension actually, especially ones that have floating elements. Something to be aware of.
>>4470082Any lens made has a optimal distance metric, but the distance a lens is from the sensor has no impact on the sharpness of the lens or the picture taken, if that was the case then phone pictures would be the sharpest pictures.
I'm sorry to even ask this question about replacement camera. I will stay on my D750 until it breaks (it's currently at 1/3 of expected shutter life so I'm probably panicking).
>>4470079>flange distance doesn't impact lens design options ever
>>4470073Electronic shutter is a real shutter you bigot.
>>4470079>100mm macro/enlarging lens doesnt need elements right at the sensorand neither do telephoto zooms or UWA zooms!but everything <50mm and most general purpose zooms do which is why leicas dominated most photography long after the invention of slrs and through the dslr era, because most good photographs are taken between 24mm and 85mm, and mount design has a lot of influence on how good those lenses can be without going full snoy gay master
