>>4478109
if its light rain i just shoot as normal so long as my lens is weather sealed. if its heavy rain chances are I probably wont be standing in it anyway, but if I am, plastic bag.
>t. 5d2

File: 5e54bccd-2681-41fb-88c8-a(...).jpg (658 KB, 2048x1713)

658 KB JPG

Rain? That's cute.

>>4478111
You should try getting closer to your subjects man

File: c5edaed2-fd94-4906-b7c7-e(...).jpg (355 KB, 2048x1367)

355 KB JPG

>>4478113

The school of fish swimming around it is way cooler though and they would have certainly fucked off if I got closer, guess you've never worked in the water.

>>4478114
I don't wanna be rude but these really don't look good. The subject matter is super interesting but the photos are blurry and flat, and the composition feels thoughtless. The colour on the first one is also abrasive to the eye. I'm guessing you're using like a TG-6 or something?

Depends on camera, OM-5? Fuck it, we ball
5D IV? I'll probably dry it off every once and a whole le

>>4478109
Plastic bag...

Light rain isn't so bad. Medium or heavy rain will be an issue. Probably you should get a weather sealing bag. Though rain does make for some interesting shots, for example: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fFDTleFjRAE

I feel like if you're going to shoot often in the rain the best way of doing it would be to buy an ikelite or aquatech for whatever camera you have. Sure it's bulky but it'll be 10x better weather sealing than what you could get on any ILC camera on its own.

File: 2dab8ac2-6783-43ce-9364-e(...).jpg (3.51 MB, 2832x4256)

3.51 MB JPG

>>4478115

D700 and a housing with some 14mm Sigma EX lens that likes to backfocus I did my best to clean them up.

I have a way better setup now, D700 and D800 both with housings and Sigma 28/1.8 EX and I dialed the focus in perfect. The 14 doesn't backfocus on the D800 for some reason but the edges are really soft in the dome housing I have so as long as I don't put anything super wide on it the corners and edges look good. Underwater is weird, lenses do all kinds of weird shit with light in the water. I've been looking for a 20 that fits in my housings but anything not shitty won't clear the entrance to the port.

>>4478122
This one is much, much better. Clear subject, clear water, pleasing colours, nice and sharp. You should try some from underneath your subject, so you can get those beautiful light rays penetrating the water around your subject.

>D700 and a housing with some 14mm Sigma EX lens that likes to backfocus I did my best to clean them up.
Third party lens + nikon dslr AF + not tuning the focus in camera is a recipe for disaster

>>4478109
I never trust any electronics that claim to be weather sealed unless they are built specifically for going underwater. I also have some rain cover from Peak Design that feels like it's the same material as a wet suit, but it literally covers the whole thing and you have to essentially take the photo with the mindset of cropping later as you can't see the back screen or EVF.

>>4478114
Longer lens, if possible? Cut the first shot in half, keeping the left side as a vertical composition and it's a much more engaging shot

>>4478147
>that feels like it's the same material as a wet suit
hopefully a dry suit, not a wet suit. the same makeup as a wetsuit would mean the water goes straight through

>>4478155
Yeah dry suit then, I just mean it's that shell jacket style material that is meant to be waterproof.

The manual says not to shoot in the rain.

>>4478147
That's because 'weather sealing' doesn't mean anything. But we already have another weather sealing vs. IP rating thread up, and the retards in there come out of the woodwork to argue AGAINST having some sort of specification to compare relative ingress protection levels as marketing hype. This, of course, makes it EASIER for marketers to justify not adequately sealing to an expected level of performance, as 'weather sealing' can mean anything from IPX3 to IPX8. Light mist overhead to submerged underwater for an appreciable length of time. We put some rubber gaskets around the lens interface? It's weather sealed. We made a hermetically sealed chamber for the brains and redundant seals on the lens mount and all buttons? It's weather sealed. The retards in that thread argue that even having an IP rating on the spec sheet is just marketing consumerist bait. It gives you an expectation of how the device might perform in real-world conditions. They also seem to think that it would drive up warranty claims. It won't. Companies can all still deny warranty claims for water damaged goods. All they have to do is provide testing that shows their camera passed the particular IP level that was claimed.

It's like expensive watches. A Rolex can claim 100m of water resistance, but does that mean you should take it to 100m and swim around, shaking it everywhere? No. But you can expect a dip in a pool to not cause an issue when new. If you get it wet doing whatever the fuck and try to claim warranty, Rolex will laugh in your face and hand you a hefty repair quote.

Also important is age of the device, as gaskets degrade over time and a 5 year old camera will not perform the same as a brand new one of the same IP rating unless the gaskets are changed. Which is why you're right in avoiding trusting any electronics claiming to be weather sealed--they may be under a controlled static lab setting, but agitation, damage, and other factors in the real reduce performance.

>>4478163
>those retards are AGAINST manufacturers paying for IP ratings!
>anyways, here's why IP ratings don't matter long term, only add to the cost, and you should just insure and physically cover your gear anyways
IP ratings don't matter
Weather sealing doesn't matter

It's a modern marketing trend that has never been reflected in warranty coverage, as in, even if you're within the IP rating limits of exposure you get denied. I can only imagine what these people do with their cameras
camera on a strap, outside the coat to show off the bling, walking around in the rain no umbrella nothing?
or maybe some youtube grade "i treated my camera like shit and it still worked a day later - buy this brand that totally doesn't sponsor me (note: camera may not work after corrosion has spread for a few months)"

every actual, irl photographer physically protects their gear from rain and if their camera is hard to replace they double up on financial protection. it is not even difficult unless your camera is legit huge $10k shit, and you are on a paid gig that comes with extra gear insurance, backup gear, and only uses warranty-period-new equipment anyways.

like nikons animal autofocus working great for birds and nothing else, and "DSLRs have better autofocus than so and so brilliant mirrorless" bitching only really applying to single/nine point AF... manually tracking a bird... i have a feeling birdwatching boomers and all their non-artistic wikipedia-tier snapshits may have a hand in all this bitching. they waste a lot of money on this and can get VERY entitled about it. moreso than the vloggers, who were already entitled and overspending on pro gear meant for filming music videos and short films not fuckin' vlogs
>bro i paid ____ the ibis has got to replace a gimbal while i walk with extra swagger

Plastic bag... literally no need for anything else and it weighs practically nothing.

>>4478171
You didn't read my post, retard.

>>4478163
>Rolex can claim 100m of water resistance, but does that mean you should take it to 100m and swim around, shaking it everywhere? No.
People tend to forget that a lot of ratings are "up to" and don't exactly mean you can or should do that. Sort of like how a car can go up to the redline, but you probably shouldn't or at least do it very rarely.

Meanwhile some people take their cameras into torrential rain or into extremely humid environments regularly and bitch when it fails after doing it for a few weeks or months.

>>4478171
Vloggers are killing photography. Fucking every kit lens is going to be a 16-35 f8 soon. Every camera a shutterless a7iii with a body kit.

>>4478173
Based hobocam.

>>4478163
>It gives you an expectation of how the device might perform in real-world conditions.
lol no
>1 lab test done by ourselves is more valid than the actual experiences of photographers using our gear

File: Screen Shot 2020-07-06 at(...).png (185 KB, 1762x2152)

185 KB PNG

>>4478163
>as 'weather sealing' can mean anything
So can IP ratings

>>4478179
Hybridization was a mistake. I blame panasnoynic

>>4478109
>Do you trust the weather sealing?
Yes, but I'm also smart about how I use my gear in the rain. Snow or light to moderate rain, don't really think about it. Heavy + wet PWN rain, and I wipe off occasionally to be sure to not let too much accumulate just sitting on top. Sometimes use a half case, which I'm sure helps with side/bottom doors.
Only time I've been worried was a tropical rainstorm, where it was a pretty solid ~1hr of heavy downpour, but both bodies came out just fine.

I've seen a lot of weather ripped cameras (decade working in camera shops), sometimes all it takes is one splash, even for something relatively robust. I've lost count on how many people shared stories of their Rebel getting fully dunked and working just fine.

>>4478184
No shit. That's the point. That's how the standard is written. It gives you information about the level of ingress protection the camera was designed to withstand. What you do with that information is ultimately up to you.
>>4478183
Wow you're right, there's no POSSIBLE way that we could anticipate a certain level of performance from a standardized lab test. We HAVE to rely on shills to recommend a camera after it has been released to tell us about how it REALLY holds up.
While you're at it, you should tell all the film manufacturers to stop putting their ISO speed on their packaging and datasheets too. We can just listen to the experience of photographers that have guessed and checked until they figure out just what the right speed is, and then have arguments about what the REAL speed is. Or take the plastic bag over the camera approach and say "JUST SHOOT IT AT ISO 100 AND STAND DEVELOP IT IN RODINAL".
Retard. Or simply just a marketer-brained individual. Basically the same thing. You're one step away from me calling you an audiophile.

>>4478189
Yes IP ratings are useful and easy to get. I wonder why camera manufacturers avoid getting them? The question has been answered for you but you don't want to accept the answer.

>>4478202
>This, of course, makes it EASIER for marketers to justify not adequately sealing to an expected level of performance, as 'weather sealing' can mean anything from IPX3 to IPX8.
no shit retard

>>4478207
wrong

File: 1705326869912060.jpg (5 KB, 201x200)

5 KB JPG

Just use a fucking plastic bag and Google weather updates.

>>4478202
because they would pay money for a meaningless number that only applies to a static camera, not being used, recertify for each body+lens combo, all to STILL deny your warranty claim the moment you admit you pressed a button, spun a dial, or turned a zoom ring.

>>4478223
>>4478202
responding to your own post is brown-coded

File: Lmao.png (174 KB, 750x605)

174 KB PNG

>>4478226

File: 2025-10-27-220505-chrome.png (25 KB, 344x148)

25 KB PNG

>>4478227

>>4478238
Brown this, brown that. I like how afraid you are to say black

Could it be because you are? :^)

>>4478109
Canon90D - trust it so much id even risk submerging in in 1 m of water for 10sec to get a nice underwater pic.
My SIGMA 24mm ART lens is also same waterproofing.
Had issues with sand and water in greece. only issues is the selector wheel/ up, right, down, left button. more specifically the up button doesnt work till fully dried.

>>4478357
Use your trip code cANON, you're the only person who actually thinks the 90D is good

Could I just get away with not approaching rain? Will enough humidity still be an issue for something like the a6500?

>>4478364
Not approaching rain: missing shots
Unfortunately the a6000 series is more or less the most poorly sealed currently sold line of mirrorless cameras that advertises weather sealing, they're honestly very indoors cameras

>>4478189
>It gives you information
It gives less actual information than marketing materials provided by the manufacturer lol

>>4478109
this is what everyone gets for falling for the hybrid meme, how do you expect a camera to be weather sealed and still properly vent to shoot video

>>4478367
Just what I said the other day basically. Fuck I would yeet every bit of video capability of my camera into the sun if it boosted SNR and meant I could shoot in the rain without fear.
Unfortunately with nothing else to show off and put into modern cameras the manufactuers were forced to add something so they picked something already developed just in another market segment. It's like once 250cc motorbikes hit the limit in the 90s they started giving them all the flagship features to seperate themselves from the competition: it didn't really make you faster it just gave you more stuff.

File: IMG_2989.jpg (171 KB, 640x825)

171 KB JPG

>>4478364
Sony added the same great weather sealing given to the a7c starting with the a6700
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1_YaLe3rAbA

>>4478365
Lying POS anti-sony shill

Remember: everything /p/ says about sony sucking is either a lie, a 10 year old problem, or an ancient lightroom bug. These retards will literally crank the green slider or look for a retarded woman messing up her white balance and say "snoy is green".

In my opinion, nikon is persistently green instead and has very harsh inaccurate color even in raws.

File: Sony-Alpha-A7C-Mark-II-sealing.jpg (61 KB, 600x600)

61 KB JPG

>>4478372
>great weather sealing
>No seal on the battery compartment
>Links retarded video of guy in light rain, no sandstorm, no snowstorm, nothing actually challenging

What is wrong with Sony users?

>>4478388
I like dunking on snoy as much as the next anon, but how fucking often are you expecting to be shooting in a blizzard or a sandstorm?

>>4478389
Does it matter how often I do it? If I did it once I'd still want my camera to survive it once.

Sandstorms happen 24/7 where I live, it's kinda part of being outside.

There is nothing "great" about Sony weather sealing, it's made to survive light precipitation (and not active rain) and nothing more, it's a joke

>>4478361
its my first camera and its naturally going to grow on me

>>4478388
He set it in a puddle and the battery stayed dry lmao

Cope harder

>>4478394
>sony’s compact is SHIT because it’s not as big and robust as a canon R1! I live in hell and it would never survive
At least it’s not gimped by nikons awful color science and bad autofocus, m4turds image "quality", or panusonic/fujis unreliability (and even worse autofocus)

File: its-post-your-m43-photo-t(...).jpg (1.02 MB, 4378x3283)

1.02 MB JPG

>>4478401
>m4turds image "quality"
Your best work gets mogged by redditors with an E-M1X if image quality is the only metric you measure photography by

>>4478418
Ambush shoots m43 and mogs hard

>>4478418
this looks like shit
>e-m1x
>$3000 for this
lmfao. i bet his lens was another $3000 knowing how stupid m43 lusers are.

mogged by a canon 5dii
mogged by a canon r50

face the facts. market share is truth and the free market works. if the product was good, more people would buy it. simple as. olympus is out of business. what does that say about the shit they sell? more than theoretical scenarios about snow storms that will TOTALLY kill canons do, honestly!

canon > sony > nikon, everything else is scam garbage.

if anyone has an opinion to the contrary, if you're so right why does everyone including most professionals (more qualified than /p/) select canon (pro cameras) over sony (compact cameras), over nikon (poorfag cameras), over everything else (garbage for gearfags getting scammed for the first time)

File: vPJCspU47LztUK23rXAt6R.jpg (125 KB, 1980x1320)

125 KB JPG

>>4478421
idk who ambush is, should I lurk moar?

also le "I can't fucking create art with m43 I need a big sensor to make up for my penis size"

Minimalist Wings. Shot with an Olympus E-M1 Mark II paired with a Panasonic Leica 100–400mm f/4–6.3 lens (Settings: 400mm, 1/320s, f/22, ISO 125) (Image credit: Tomasz Michalski)
The Young Bird Photographer of the Year 2025 award went to 16-year-old Tomasz Michalski from Poland for his minimalist composition Minimalist Wings, depicting a black vulture with outstretched wings in Nicaragua.

File: some-of-my-favorite-m43-p(...).jpg (113 KB, 640x1137)

113 KB JPG

>>4478422
>market share is truth
Argumentum ad populum
>the free market works.
Disproved by atleast a quarter million philosophers at this point
>olympus is out of business
Because the higher ups got caught in a fraud ring, not because their cameras weren't selling
>more than theoretical scenarios about snow storms that will TOTALLY kill canons do
We were talking about your cope a7c that gets mogged in every single way possible by an Olympus E-510, no one's mentioned Canon.

Also complimentary redditor M4/3 pic

File: imaginemyshock.png (407 KB, 645x215)

407 KB PNG

>>4478423
That's a shopped snapshit

>>4478425
So not only are you getting mogged by an M4/3 user, but you're also getting mogged by Jews?

Sucks 2 Suck

>>4478423
>AI generate a bird
>mostly nonsense barely looks like a bird
>contrast +9000000 saturation -1000000000
>it's art!
>thank you, $2000 camera setup I definitely used for this!

>>4478424
>"muh philosophy and heccin fallacies"
Greece collapsed as a society. Why do you still follow their religion?
>complimentary phone tier snapshit
You didn't need $2000 of micro fool turds to take this 0.5mp photo with green tinted zombie skin. You could have used a $50 canon point and shoot... and gotten a better image.

I think you're angry at sony users because they actually take photos instead of downloading cope from reddit

>>4478445
>>thank you, $2000 camera setup I definitely used
Yes, micro four thirds glass, are you mad? Where's your trophy/award?

>Greece collapsed as a society. Why do you still follow their religion?
The Greeks knew about the free market?

>You didn't need $2000 of micro fool turds
True, you can take this with an OG E-M10 and the kit lens, so only $150 of micro fool turds, not sure why you're judging a whole format by it's flagship

>I think you're angry at sony users because they actually take photos instead of downloading cope from reddit
You cretin, I am a Sony user, I shoot Sony APS-C, I am mad against noone and I judge noone for their preferred brand, I'm angry at the a7c because it was a monumentally lazy release that lacked any flagship qualities of a full-frame camera (like passable weather sealing)

>>4478433
I'm just pointing out that you posted a very good example of nepotism and a very bad example of photography

File: 183c095036c84ca9a5d5db268(...).jpg (202 KB, 1120x840)

202 KB JPG

>>4478455
>I'm just pointing out that you posted a very good example of nepotism
He might be Jewish, he's still in fucking Poland though, no teenager from the hellholes of Eastern Europe is getting cameras without working their ass off, a true nepotism baby would have shot that picture with an R5 II or something expensive and flashy

>and a very bad example of photography
>Literally award winning
I don't know what you guys consider good photography anymore.
Here.
Here's a full list of other established and known photographers who've shot M4/3:
Ewen Bell
Nicholas Hess
Amos Chapel
Any guy from the National Geographic ever who had to do videography
Matt Weber
Mitsuaki Iwagō
Richard Cook

Here is FUCKING SAUL LEITER USING A LUMIX M4/3

File: Chromatic_aberration_lens(...).png (89 KB, 1200x723)

89 KB PNG

>>4478418

>>4478459
You had to point that shit out to me, that's some of the most beautifully rendered CA I've seen,
You haven't seen real CA until you've shot with the god-blessed EF 70-300

>>4478454
>I'm angry at the a7c because it was a monumentally lazy release that lacked any flagship qualities of a full-frame camera (like passable weather sealing)

Why are you angry about a product that was not designed to meet your needs? It's a cheap camera for people who want FF quality and interchangeable lenses in a small body and it's still the only offering out there for that. (inb4 Sigma FP or S9 - if video is your thing, fine but this is /p/hotography and no mechanical shutter is a deal breaker)

>>4478462
>It's a cheap camera
wat? No it isn't, it's an alpha 7 series, E-mount is one of the most prohibitively expensive platforms

>interchangeable lenses in a small body and it's still the only offering out there for that.
It's a fair point, I know they're alone in their current market, but I still think the a7c is gimped beyond what I consider acceptable
I hold compact cameras to a higher degree in wanting build quality and weather sealing because I'm more likely to use & abuse them, taking a Z9 or something to a dedicated portrait shoot is fine but if I had an a7c, it'd be in my fanny pack and I'd take it everywhere 24/7 regardless of weather or the situation since it's lighter and more discrete, and thus ironically I need it to be more resilient than that Z9

Right now I still think I'd take a Fuji APS-C or a M4/3 over it, but if the a7cIII ever comes & delivers I'll probably buy it

>>4478458
>im appealing to authority, why won’t you chuds just agree reeeeeeeee

>>4478465
>>4478454
Everything you post is straight up gearfag disinfo totally detached from reality with ass backwards priorities mixed with lies, delusions, and good points taken totally out of context and tainted with entitled expectations. It's rambling nonsense. You are so nonfunctionally obsessed with actual nonsense about gear I can see you seething and selling all your camera gear in the future because you can't find a setup that is sufficiently "based" according to all the shit you ranted about on 4chan anymore.

Successful and competent photographers never come to /p/ anymore. It's a handful of absolute losers like cANON, doghair, sugar, and zach shitposting about what they think being a photographer would be like if they were one.

I feel sorry for any clueless retard who comes to this board and takes its advice. It's not even ironic, it's like richard stallman unironically telling people to use gentoo on a librebooted thinkpad and check email in emacs because thunderbird is too bloated. 4chan is slowly becoming known as the place you go and take seriously to if you want to ruin a hobby for yourself. The closest thing to sane posters still left are the ones posting aggressively wrong information just to anger the loser schizos still stuck here. Sadly you actually take yourself seriously and are one of the schizos they gaslight into increasingly retarded beliefs.

>>4478424
>>4478423
these look like shit. just use your phone.

no fucking wonder only autistic nerds buy m43 trash anymore. truly the linux thinkpad of cameras.

>>4478466
Dawg, how? There's no authority saying M4/3 is superior, I'm just saying that if you think you "need" more than M4/3 IQ, you are kinda gearfagging

>>4478467
YOU DONT UNDERSTAND
SONY'S TRAVEL ORIENTED CONSUMER COMPACT CAN'T WITHSTAND IMMERSION OR BEING USED IN A MONSOON UPSIDE DOWN
ITS OVER
ITS USELESS
NO ONE CAN BUY THAT THEY'RE GETTING SCAMMED
OWNING THAT IS ADMITTING TO EVERY OTHER GEAR EXPERT LIKE ME THAT YOU ARE A MORON
OLYMPUS CLEARLY HAS SUPERIOR MARKETING MATERIAL
YOU NEED TO BUY 5 DIFFERENT CAMERAS FOR EVERY TASK
BUT WHEN SONY MAKES THE PERFECT CAMERA ACCORDING TO MY EXPERT OPINIONS I WILL TOTALLY BUY IT!

>>4478469
I'm just saying that if you think you "need" more than iphone 13 pro IQ, you are kinda gearfagging
You are just a nobody
You don't deserve better
You aren't a professional
You shouldn't be allowed to have that
You wasted your money
That's like killing a child or maybe even two
You pathetic consumer
You bald glasses wearing beard haver
Stop owning things
You're playing into the jews hands
How dare you call me an idiot for buying micro four thirds when aps-c is cheaper and looks better
Dont you know its fifty grams heavier
Ugh

>>4478461
on dxomark, the Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 EX DG Canon has 33 micron CA and 32 on the nikon version

File: small-bird-sitting-on-a-t(...).jpg (865 KB, 2500x1872)

865 KB JPG

>>4478467

>Everything you post is straight up gearfag disinfo totally detached from reality with ass backwards priorities mixed with lies, delusions, and good points taken totally out of context and tainted with entitled expectations. It's rambling nonsense
Huh?

>Successful and competent photographers never come to /p/ anymore
They never did to begin with, competent photographers run blogs and websites, this is an imageboard, I come here when I'm bored with /jp/ posting 2hu

>It's a handful of absolute losers like cANON, doghair, sugar, and zach shitposting
Man, I have no idea who these people are (besides cANON) and I'm not sure why you felt the need to insult them

>It's like richard stallman unironically telling people to use gentoo on a librebooted thinkpad and check email in emacs because thunderbird is too bloated
Richard Stallmann has endorsed Thunderbird as free software, Gentoo is a modern operating system capable of playing videogames like Cyberpunk 2077 and editing HDR video, ThinkPads are reliable and highly rated laptops you can get with Core i9s, I don't understand what's so wrong here? Seems like sane takes to me.

>I feel sorry for any clueless retard who comes to this board and takes its advice
If you get your advice on a silver plate from ANY spot on the internet without doing your due diligence with self-research, that's on u, there'll always be trolls

>4chan is slowly becoming known as the place you go and take seriously to if you want to ruin a hobby for yourself.
>slowly becoming
Have you ever been to /mu/ and /3dcg/? Half of you are irrationally angry for no reason

Also
>Le ad hominems for no reason useless post


>>4478468
>these look like shit. just use your phone.
Sure, here's a picture taken with an Xperia 1 VI from Sony's website, happy now? Go play with your smartphone and Instagram reels if you hate cameras so much.

>>4478471
Holy freaking based.

>>4478474
You don't need to know who those people are. All you need to know is that one guy is obsessed with them, and if he brings them you should ignore his advice. He is the biggest gearfag nophoto on /p/.

>>4478472
lol I'm aware of that lens
still want one in K-mount tho, they're cheap now

>>4478458
>that picture
Once again, it is a snapshit that has been photoshopped into a meme that's on the same level as selective color

>>4478476
>only one guy dislikes me and my friends
no anon, a lot of people do

cANON is a horrible tripfag
doghair almost killed /fgt/ twice
sugar is a retard who raided /m43/ and started a simp club called the sucrose army
and zach is just literally fucking retarded

can't forget
>ambush: doxed moopco, one of the better photographers here, and made him leave
>cinefag: aggressively idiotic neo nazi, was annoying and stupid until all the good street photographers like isi left
>chosis: fuck him

>>4478474
Do you see what I mean?

>>4478474
Looks like m43

>>4478474
>smudgy flat dead snapshit

>>4478481
Jesus, why is everyone here at eachothers throats? It's just photography man, it's not that deep

>>4478485
What does FF look like, can you give me examples? I need to gain this knowledge of being able to identify a sensor by image alone.

>>4478489
It's taken with a smartphone dude, what the fuck do you want? Are you expecting A-Grade optics from your telephone???

>>4478490
It's literally one obsessed freak that got btfo so bad he can't let it go. Bigger nophoto than cAnon, btw.

>>4478497
What's with him? You guys are actually hurting eachother over this? What the fuck do you mean some guy got doxxed?

>>4478481
moopco is literally insane and on several pills. he had 2 or 3 ok photographs and the rest were walk in the park snapshits. he doxed himself through isi (a good photographer) years before he decided to have a problem with ambush. he posted photos with gps in the exif and got banned for it at least 2 times before making his fake catalog thread which he also got banned for. he was the source of everything he claimed was attacking him and everyone got sick of his lies and vitriol. good riddance i say.

>>4478394
Not every camera is built for that, most that withstand blizzards and sandstorms are made for that sort of purpose. The vast majority of people won't be using cameras in those conditions, which is why specialist cameras exist for those purposes.

>>4478497
>its literally one
Is he on several pills
Or are you all so unyieldingly retarded (like the snoy hater and cANONazi) that it drives everyone to be as aggressively shit back as they possibly can

>>4478559
Im not sure, but I don't think so. His takes are so unfathomably stupid I would be embarassed to ever post them.

>>4478559
The guy has some very very obvious tells also. It's funny.

>>4478559
>also
>>4478575
>also
Nice tell you have there.

>>4478559
There are nearly 24000 examples of "literally" in the /p/ archive you schizoid boomer.

>>4478577
Lmfao. Nice try.

>>4478559
I'd just like to point out that the guy >>4478504 was responding to also said literally: >>4478481

Is he arguing with himself or are you just a retard who thinks everyone who disagrees with him is the same person?

>>4478366
Let's take a look

Canon marketing materials:
https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/eos-r1-reliability-durability/
on water
>Drip-proof testing – see the right-hand video below – was used to verify the performance of the EOS R1’s weather seals in conditions that approximate the camera being used in a downpour, or when the camera is placed on damp ground such as when photographing from the sidelines at a football match.
No description of how long the test was conducted for, no description of flow rate, no description of distance of source to test subject, no description of angle.
We get a six-second video clip that appears to match with IPX1 when the camera is facing lens-down.
An IPX5 tested device: Water jets Water projected by a nozzle (6.3 mm (0.25 in)) against enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effects. Test duration: 1 minute per square meter for at least 3 minutes. Water volume: 12.5 litres per minute Pressure: 30 kPa (4.4 psi) at distance of 3 meters (9.8 ft).

on dust
>Richard shares an example of how the EOS R1 is earning its reputation as a trusted tool for professionals: "I was covering golf in the Middle East, where it was very sandy and dusty. But I had a lot of confidence in the weather sealing on the EOS R1 and the RF lenses I was using. There was no problem in terms of the heat either. The daily temperature was around 40°C, and the EOS R1 kept on firing in conditions where I previously might have had issues with a camera.
Essentially: trust me bro, this guy we paid said it's good. No description of ANY testing at all.
An IP6X tested device: you know the product has been tested against IEC 60529 to show NO dust ingress.

You're retarded