>>4478535
Is there any reason to get into Nikon if I am already in Canon? I saw a T6i equivalent for $100 and I was tempted but I really didn't need it. Is there anything it is better at or unique? Why do people say Nikon is better for wildlife?

>>4478535
This is a paid ad and all photos are doctored and idealized. Just my guess by the third world currency. Thirdie units means someone is lying.

My sister bought the newest iphone and even when I try the photos look like absolute shit compared to a 24mp aps-c dslr. I doubt a slightly under 1" sensor actually delivers.

Or maybe it does at 0.25mp 40% quality jpegs? Idk I’m not as, jewbro says, cattle so unlike raj I own a 4k screen and have enough brain cells to notice fine detail and rendering

And maybe raj (rp means rupee? ruble of putin?) is just lying

>>4478544
>Why do people say Nikon is better for wildlife?
They're wrong. Canon has 1.6x crop ratio so for the same MP it has more reach. It also has better AF.
But Nikon has better sensor (noise wise and color wise), better ergonomics, more intuitive design, the 1.5x crop ratio is more versatile, and is overall better thought out. Shame about the lens adaptability though. If not for the mount and ML I'd still be shooting Nikon. They truly embody the joy of reflex™.

>>4478535
>a phone has better color science than sony
ohnononono

>>4478552
Indonesians lie more than anyone else. Their entire national identity is based on muhammad not being gay and singapore not being their military superior. I’m leaning towards purposeful fuckups and giving the phone more light than the camera.

>>4478544
Not for body reasons.
There's probably some Nikon lenses with special sauce that lack Canon counterparts (and vice-versa).

>>4478552
>Comparing an iPhone to a Vivo unironically

"Guys I shot a photo with a Canon PowerShot A460 and it looks nothing like the photos from this guy's R6 II, wtf?"

>>4478560
Every time I remember SEA exists I am terrified.

>>4478535
All the snoy photos are overexposed or underexposed and his wb settings are off.
The "ai" autosmudge bokeh is particularly obvious on the portraits of the dude and the sky looks worse without a sky filter, no shit.

I don't get it. your straight outta camton jpgs on most mirrorless will be beaten by modern smartphones with autoedits but have ever you tried taking your iphag photos into lightroom?

>>4478592
AI bokeh you are kidding right?

>>4478535
>new tech renders your expensive camera brick collection useless
heh nothing personal boomers

I ended up buying that viltrox lens
No self control

File: Screenshot_20251028-233005_1.png (221 KB, 981x840)

221 KB PNG

>>4478596
You telling me the smartphone with the 1.5' sand plastic lens is producing that level of background blur through optics and physical light diffraction?

>>4478535
Mirrorless cameras are basically obese and worse performing phone cameras.

File: no.jpg (26 KB, 739x415)

26 KB JPG

>>4478592
>yall absolutely need to be real photographers and spend five figures on overpriced outdated camera gear with tech that peaked 6 years ago and spend hours sitting infront of a boomer pc editing every photo to fix the soft edges and colors with your yearly premium adobe Lightroom subscription because you just have to okay!!!

>>4478607
You are NOT a real photographer unless you do that.

>>4478607
Yeah

eventually planning on upgrading to a nikon zf (or xpro3) from a canon t2i, any lenses i should look for?

>>4478552
>24mp aps-c dslr
Best bang per buck camera purchase you can make right now IMO.
I find models such as the D3200 rather consistently for $100 locally and for that it is rather crazy what you get for the money..

>>4478614
yeah probably z-mount

>>4478614
26/2.8 or 40/2

>>4478554
seconding, because most zooms for aps-cope are like 18-55mm or start at 18mm, nikon dx gives an extra 3º of fov at 18mm, still to match the 24mm ff equivalent fov you need 15mm for aps-canon and 16mm for 1.5x crop

>>4478535
Is the Z7II a decent upgrade from the A7II? I’m not really tied into Sony, I only have one lens. Just wanna get a camera body that’s gonna be good for idk twenty years or more so I can focus on getting interesting lenses.

>>4478619
It's an upgrade but make sure it handles whatever need your A7II isn't meeting now. Z-mount is technically super versatile in that it can adapt pretty much anything else but the e-mount selection is pretty huge. What interesting lenses are you thinking of?

>>4478619
It will be a signficant upgrade. Better ergonomics, UI and lens selection.

>>4478554
>calls himself cANON
>shits on Canon all the time unless he's comparing a Canon DSLR to some mirrorless
>shills Nikon and Pentax every second post
What did he mean by this?

>>4478624
lol who cares, the only good trip NatureGuy left a while ago so if you see a trip post, it's garbage

>>4478625
You mean Ambush? He still posts sometimes

>>4478622
I mean the only things my a7ii absolutely can’t do for me are pretty minor. I’d like a better EVF but the a7ii has one that’s good enough; it can’t see in the dark but handheld night-time shots are good enough and could only be better if I cared to carry around a tripod; I’m indifferent to more megapixels; I’m indifferent to better autofocus; I would like a bigger grip than the one on the a7ii but it’s good enough; I don’t care about video, tilty screens or what jacks and ports it has. My main desire to upgrade from the a7ii is to get a higher-resolution, faster-refreshing and brighter EVF and more capable IBIS for handheld still photography. I really like Sigma lenses so idek why I’d jump to Nikon, they haven’t allowed sigma to play on the Z-mount yet. What interesting lenses am I after? Apart from standard primes, maybe a nice macro lens? I think I meant to say “high-quality” lenses, not interesting.

I’ve never adapted lenses before. Does it come with any loss in image quality or maximum aperture?

I really think I’m just hyper-fixated on buying something since when I consider it rationally the a7ii is good enough for all my needs and I can simply buy a spare battery or a battery grip and a tripod. My brain just won’t stop demanding shiny new things.

>>4478544
I wouldn't really mix mount systems unless you had a really good reason. If all you've got is the body and kit lens then it doesn't matter, sell the fucker and get the nikon if you want. Nikon F mount bodies have some nice colours and generally better controls and functionality than Canon EF but in return Canon is more user-friendly (imo), better AF, the lenses work better for me, and I generally just enjoy Canon more. YMMV.

Canon is undoubtedly better for wildlife though just in merits of old cheap supertelephotos and fantastic AF.

>>4478605
I am yet to see an argument for this subject that doesn't bring up the irrelevant OVF/EVF shitflinging wars. The sensor tech is closer to DSLR sensors than phone sensors. Just because they removed the mirror box doesn't magically make it more like a phone.

>>4478615
If I was starting a kit out all over again, this is where I'd start. For whatever reason 1500Ds and the like (24MP APS-C) are like triple that price used.

>>4478627
No I mean Natureguy who was around 10 years ago. His photos were what made me browse this board. Ambush isn't nearly as good and his post quality is poor but at least he posts photos.

>>4478602
No I mean it's so absurd that bokehfags actually would do this.

>>4478628
I hear ya about shiny new things. Improving quality of life with a nicer EVF and better IBIS are pretty good reasons. Sony does have those now but Nikon's offerings are really solid these days that I'm also looking into.

Adapting lenses generally doesn't lose aperture or image quality if you are just using an empty tube with electrical contacts which is what adapting to Nikon Z needs. Nothing like adapting larger format lenses to smaller formats which needs speedboosters and shit. Nikon has the widest lens mount and the shortest flange distance which means it can accept pretty much any other full frame. The only things that might affect image quality are cover glass thicknesses and I don't know what Nikon's is like. For macro, Laowa has been killing it. I have the Laowa 65 in EF mount because that can be adapted to Sony or Nikon or L-mount pretty easily. For manual lenses, there's not much to think about but adapting autofocus lenses is much trickier. I know Sigma had issues with some of its earlier lenses on E-mount even though E-mount is fairly open so I'm biased toward native.

>>4478634
the guy who did the shitty aluminum foil and smoke crap in aquariums?

>>4478636
You aren't a real bokeh fag unless you start shooting large format film to get sub f/1 equivalent DoF.
There are 8x10 lenses you can get that have equivalent DoF of f0.4.

>>4478641
Yeah and he seems to have kept working on it if you check the "Artificial Landscape" section on his website reagandpufall.com. I remember his great mantis photos on /p/ but the other stuff was cool too.

File: natureguy.png (1.69 MB, 2014x1080)

1.69 MB PNG

>>4478641
>shitty aluminum foil and smoke crap in aquariums?
Was it this one?

>>4478535
These videos are an IQ filter.
They make a 1080p video comparing photos which take up 540x960 pixels.
Yeah no shit they both look sharp. Not one of those faggots does a 100% zoom.

>>4478628
The Nikon camera + prime lens would set you back ~$3200.
An a7 iv has better autofocus, better IBIS, same EVF resolution with 100% sensor coverage but not OLED, is lighter, has a larger grip and battery than your a7 ii, you already have a lens, the least expensive lenses and the most to choose from.
All that for ~$2000 and you're already used to Sony's menus.

It's a no brainer really.

>>4478607
Giga trvth nvke!

>>4478648
>100% sensor coverage
Wait, achieving full sensor coverage is still a problem with EVFs?

>>4478646
>asthetically pleasing and creative photography
>/p/ doesn't approve
It IS a gear board after all.
>>4478653
>Wait, achieving full sensor coverage is still a problem with EVFs?
No. Idk what kind of retardation that anon has going for him. Unless he means viewfinder magnification but I'm honestly giving him an easy out.

I shoot jpg and no one will stop me.

>>4478662
Incredibly based.

If I get a weird strobing effect under certain artificial light sources, does that mean I fucked up and I should switch back to PAL from NTSC?
I thought at this point all that had to do with anything was recording framerate (50/100 vs 60/120)

>>4478709
You could try taht but artificial light sources have all kinds of frequencies often not tied to mains and some cameras have settings to counter that effect. If the light is on a dimmer, try changing brightness. On my Christmas lights max fixes it.

>>4478713
Yeah I ended up fucking with shutter speed to get rid of that, although I took a shot or two that looked kinda funny with that effect. If only switching between PAL/NTSC didn't throw an annoying warning about how the SD is formatted...

>>4478535
Is the “film look” of real film photos due to the lack of interpolation? I guess what I want to know is how detrimental to image quality is interpolation?

>>4478535
Breaking News:
Snoy jpeg engine sucks donkey dick

>have an em1-iii and a tg-6
>tg-6 doesn't have pasm
>em1-iii does
>can barely tell the image quality difference
>have horrible sinking feeling I wasted 3000 dollarydoos

>>4478535
I want to get a CPL. Any recs ? I've only got a bentax k5 and a 35mm 2.4 prime lens so not looking to invest in top quality gear quite yet

>>4478759
Any CPL is a CPL and does the job. Just remember to get a filter size that can be used with your future lenses too, step-up rings exist. Unless you want to buy three different CPL filters to gather dust....
I have a Hoya Fusion, it's thin, cheap and somewhat a pain to remove off the lens, because of the slim aluminum frame and the spinning wheel.

Black mist filters,

>>4478759
>>4478760
Shit quality CPLs WILL fuck your IQ. It will look like you're missing focus but you aren't. Just avoid the bottom of the barrel CPLs like amazon $10 one or the KF Concept K series.
I find aluminium rings to be a pain in the ass to remove and are too simple to overtighten. I buy URTH filters (formerly GOBE) and they fit smoothly and it's almost impossible to overtighten them.
I would pick one or two sizes and step-up ring the rest. I picked 67mm and 77mm. If I ever buy a lens that takes 82mm or up I'm just fucked, but that's typically only for f/2.8 zooms or f/1.4 primes.

>>4478646
looks like it to me, basic high school photo project. every photo just looked like crumpled up garbage being lit by a desk lamp. i guess i can see it appealing to children who just got their first rebel (you)

>>4478643
>doxing people
he took some photos of a dead bug anon. his photos of his dog were his best work since they were the only thing with any soul.

>Canon circa 2025: FSI-CMOS
>Everyone else 10 years ago: BSI-CMOS
>Everyone else 5 years ago: stacked BSI-CMOS
Can't make this up.

>>4478775
This sounds like doghair aimlessly crab bucketing before the might of basically him but creative and good at this

>>4478775
Pics of his dog?

>>4478799
If that's the price of having another player in the large imaging sensor market, it's worth it. Sony's chips are state of the art which is why everyone uses them but it'd be nice to see TowerJazz, Samsung, Toshiba, Aptina, and Fairchild back in the game. The BMPCC Fairchild sensor was something. Maybe it's just nostalgia for Precambrian technological periods but Foveon, SuperCCD, Kodak CCD, CMY were all cool experiments. I hope that Panasonic organic sensor comes out ... any day now but I'm guessing global shutter + computational stacking will be the meta in the coming years.

>>4478814
I don't crab bucket, and I think his stuff is cool and creative. Very different from my stuff tho.

>>4478815
https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/text/dog/username/natureguy/page/1/

>>4478775
sounds like sour grapes but I agree the artificial landscape stuff does look like a well executed high school project. Although even that is on a way higher level than anything the useless tripfags produce when they even bother to post photos. Every set apart from natureguy that's inspired me over the years has been done by anon and I can't think of a single time another trip posted a set that was stunning or had any kind of creativity. It's always been some anon out of the blue.

>>4478821
>snapshitter sucks off his favorite trip
A story as old as time.

>>4478822
sorry if you are one of those trips, nothing personal

>>4478816
>organic sensor
>Tons of tradeoffs
>Pixel crosstalk
>Revolutionary in 2013, not so attractive in 2025 as CMOS tech advances

Mmmmh, sounds familiar
>Panasonic’s organic sensor, a global shutter technology it has been developing with Fujifilm since 2013
>Fujifilm

KEK! Of course Fuji is involved. Same story with X-Tranny. Designed to solve Moire in low resolution sensors (X-Tranny 1 was 16 MP), now completely useless in the realm of high resolution sensors with tradeoffs in interpolation, chroma resolution and processing power for no benefits whatsoever.

>SuperCCD
Exactly the same story. Fuji pushing forward an outdated tech with tons of gimmicks. Interpolation was ridiculously complex, and they had the guts to pretend that 6 MP with a SuperCCD sensor was equivalent to 12 MP on a CMOS sensor, which was completely wrong as interpolation significantly reduced resolution, negating any benefits the octogonal photosites provided.
Again, same story with X-Tranny being softer than equivalent Bayer CFA sensors because of its complex interpolation. Noticing a pattern with those techs and everything Fuji touches?

>>4478826
Most gimmicks don't pan out but sometimes they do. I remember when autofocus came out most photographers thought it was a gimmick and for a lot of years it really did ruin a lot of shots but I'm glad to have it now since it works pretty well for me. Eye controlled focus was and probably is still considered a gimmick but I love it and wish more cameras had it. X-trans, Foveon, organic sensors or even Canon's regular bayer CMOS might be objectively inferior but I'm happy they are trying.

>>4478827
Sony won. CMOS is king until QIS/SPAD sensors reach mirrorless cameras. Then we'll enter a new age of photography with near-darkness autofocus, motion prediction, photon counting for vastly better low light performance, etc.

>>4478829
photon counting will be endgame for me and I can leave /gear/ forever

>>4478821
idgaf what you like but running promo for some tripfag is gay as fuck. take your own photos queer.

Why are cameras getting more expensive per iteration?

>>4478909
No longer are, really. Your dollars are just less valuable.
Gold and house prices have basically been on parity for 70 years, but now a house costs 10x your wage instead of 2x. That means your dollar has less purchasing power.
Same thing happening with cameras and all electronics really. Any price discrepancies with this theory are due to manufacturing streamlining and volume. If you buy Chinese shit it's cheaper because the workers make $1.30 an hour and the businesses don't have workers insurance.

There was a point where this was not the whole story and better and bigger features were being pushed down the line into budget models, but you don't really want a Nikon D7600 or whatever to be manual focus only and have no light meter just to save 8% of retail cost.

>>4478854
thanks for your useless advice

>>4478909
Cameras peaked a decade ago and phones pretty much killed digital cameras. All thats left is camera manufacturers rereleasing the same shit with some AI buzzword sticker on it and doubling the RRP because they have nothing else to improve.

Whats the best compact FF camera with small lens for an edc? Does such a thing exist?

>>4478930
I used to edc the Olympus Stylus film camera years ago does that count? It was a cheap but nice camera back then and developing was also fairly inexpensive. Not worth the price they are asking these days since they were not that well made as two of them ended up breaking down on me. I have a friend with another influencer meme film camera, the Contax T3 and he loves shooting it.

FF digital? The RX1 is the smallest but the Leica Qs are the "best". A7C and a small prime would be my pick. Sigma and Panasonic also make a very compact FF camera but not having a mechanical shutter is a big limitation.

>>4478930
The Lumix S9 seems pretty compact with the 26mm f/8. I'm seeing it for the first time though, I'm sure someone else here will tell you why considering the S9 with that lens makes you deeply retarded and gay.

>>4478930
Why do you need full-frame?

File: edc.jpg (1018 KB, 4993x3744)

1018 KB JPG

>>4478930

>>4478725

no

it is but if you look imagemagick filters you notice many interpolations are quite good

File: Nikon_ZR_front.jpg (94 KB, 940x627)

94 KB JPG

>>4478930
Nikon ZR with the 40mm f2. But only if you don't do flash photography. And you can shoot red raw movies in addition.

Or if you are fine with fixed lens: Leica Q

>>4478977

do they have one without video capturing and without video output

>>4478977
It actually did not occur to me that the Nikon Zr was so small, wtf based re

>>4478930
You can get a Leica Q2 between $2k-$3k.

>>4478977
I want to say whats wrong with it but watching consoomers get screwed is funny when it extends beyond their inability to be responsible with money

Even funnier is never noticing it and spending $2k on a camcorder to shoot building corners

>>4478930
Sony a7c and a 35mm f2.8

File: C32A4409_Aston.jpg (2.93 MB, 4360x2906)

2.93 MB JPG

>>4478759
I like my B&W

Agree with buy the biggest you plan to use.

I standardize on 82mm. The only lens I want that won't fit those is the RF 200-800 but that is a fairly niche lens and 95mm is way less common IME. 82mm seems to be widely available and fits my 24-70 natively.

File: PXL_20251026_232434475.RA(...).jpg (3.46 MB, 4032x2268)

3.46 MB JPG

>>4478763
swag

File: 1742710882253481.gif (536 KB, 800x792)

536 KB GIF

>>4479012
>B A S E D
>A
>S
>E
>D

>>4479011
That's a Ashton Marten not an B&W.

Man fuck all of this noise why can't I set minimum 50 shutter speed on my snoy camera
Piece of shit

>>4479046
show us on the nikon f3 where the minimum shutter speed was

cameras are for artists not tech nerds whose real hobby is setting up software to their autistic liking. adaptable, creative people not autists who want to do something only one way and get mad if they can’t. thats why sony is popular and micro four thirds is not.

File: a7crumble.jpg (917 KB, 1304x5000)

917 KB JPG

>>4479005

File: Fucking lol.png (727 KB, 750x937)

727 KB PNG

>>4479093
That’s an a7cr and a 28-60, not an a7c and a 35mm f2.8. Learn to read.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Lumix/comments/1nmzg7y/s9_rear_dial_repair/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Lumix/comments/1h5vkjw/dcs9_inwarranty_repair/
For a shutterless cold shoe scamera tacked on to the 1/30s readout a7iii sensor, that almost no one bought, this is a lot of problems

Just panasonic thangs

>>4478930
minolta cle
>>4478988
>>4478977
this desu. also where are the strap lugs?

>>4478535
I knew it would be that paid shill chinkphone before even opening it kek.

>>4479099
>>4479100
I always forget that Panasonic still make cameras. If people want that LUT SOOC shit, why not just get a Fuji?

File: 1538391.jpg (16 KB, 268x268)

16 KB JPG

>triggered snoy shills

File: 1621509677718.png (167 KB, 744x804)

167 KB PNG

>Discussing photography techniques
>"Oh yeah, I often do that with my [MODEL]
>"[BRAND] makes it so easy to do that"
>"I find I get best results with my [BRAND]"
or
>"Only selling because I just switched to [BRAND] as I just bought a new [MODEL]"
People just can't fucking help but to flashbang you with ads about which toys they have no matter how irrelevant it is to the discussion. It's so fucking cringe.

>>4479109
/gear/ is the only place left with this shit. Thankfully the removal of EXIF from photos on /p/ means gearfags can't bitch because they don't like what camera took the photo and have to actually criticize the image itself on its artistic merits.
I'm not sure why I come in here anymore desu, all I care about now are lenses.

>>4479109
They're just like jannies. They do it for free. LOL

>>4478977
I lowkey want this

thoughts on a zr with a dzo prime?

>>4479135
For some stupid reason, Nikon made the ZR essentially video only. It has no mech shutter and a 1/60 readout. That’s better than the s9 but still garbage. A person turning their head or walking would distort. For reference the a7cii has banding issues with the 1/160th readout of an EFCS only body.

After the zr I sold all my nikon shit and bought a canon just because i’m not patronizing companies that do that bullshit to $2k FFs. Shutterless/half shutter is only acceptable with budget junk if its under a 1/200th flash sync. Cameras ARE for flash and freezing motion far before rendering and pixel peeping discernment.
>my kill list: nikon, panasonic, sony
Never buying ANY of these again unless its a dirt cheap <$750 a7c (version one). The first a7c is surprisingly more premium feeling than the a7cii, and i’m not the first person to say this. Sony actually lowered the build quality.

>>4479140
what's a good camera for practicing still photography and videography without any compromises?

>>4478535
I need a slightly more capable body than the K10D to use with my APS-C Pentax lenses so I’m considering the K-5 II. There is a variant, the K-5 IIs, without an anti-aliasing filter, which increases sharpness but also produces more pronounced moiré. Am I gonna miss that? The IIs goes for a couple hundred more on average used so… not really sure if it’s worth all that.

>>4479141
It doesn’t exist. Photography and videography inherently have different ideal workflows and features that don’t crossover well. You either get ok at both or get a video and a photo camera separately. Inb4 hybridshitter cope

>>4479144
not even the Sony α1 II? what does it lack? if so, name two separate cameras ideal for both workflows.

>>4479141
Everything has compromises, that's just how it goes. Hybrids do a decent enough job but you will absolutely need an ND filter (a good one, don't buy some trash K&F from amazon).

>>4479141
Literally any camera made in the last 10 years

On the basis of resale value, is Leica worth considering above the typical $2k-$4k range cameras?

The depreciation on most FF cameras is so insane that I feel like it might be worth just doing the Leica thing.

>>4479150
Mirrorless has held value pretty well, I'm stunned at how much some near 10 year old Canon's and Sony's still go for so much. I personally wouldn't bother with Leica since it's just a meme brand that lives of trustfund tards that know the name.
Buy a good camera and just use it until it breaks, even a camera from 10 years ago is still perfectly fine today. You don't need to be trading shit in every 2 years like a phone.

>>4479140
I wouldn't even touch a used a7c. Better off getting a used Canon RP or Nikon Z5.

>keep thinking I made a mistake with my gear
>lurk /p/ constantly
>one day I got up and just went for a walk with my camera
>had tons of fun and saw the pictures
>they're good and have high image quality
>realise the time I spent lurking /p/ reading about gear autism I could've been outside taking photos
Unless you're a professional, you use the camera that sparks joy and makes you want to shoot
It is as shrimple as that

>>4479145
rolling shutter is worse than the A7S/FX equivalents for video. It's pretty good though but it is a compromise. MP count is lower than the highest res Sony's. Again very good but still a compromise. No global shutter but global shutter is currently a compromise. There are probably special video features it doesn't have but I haven't looked into so it might but things like 32 bit float audio, waveforms, certain codecs, built in ND which is only on their pro cine cams, timecode.

>>4479154
>larping on /p/
grim

>>4479155
>>4479153
>>4479144
Deranged nigger rich consoomers

They wont be caught dead with last year’s shoes or the second best brand, not even if its cheaper, because its cheaper.

>>4479164
4chan in general is chock full of the kind of person who feels ashamed if their car is more than five years old and isn’t at least a BMW 3 series or a WRX STI, and calls other people brown pajeet shill cucks and poorfags for thinking thats retarded. Such is life when being anonymous and having no social life means all that you are is all that you cam buy and show off.

Eliot Roger is /p/‘s role model and they don’t know it.

Brandfag hierarchies are literally all their ego is. That is their personality.

>>4479152
>Mirrorless has held value pretty well
This simply isn't true. Old Sony gear plummets in value like there's no tomorrow once their replacement model is out.

>>4479170
Every mirrorless does. You just ignore everything that isnt sony because you dream of buying one once you escape india.

Canon r5s and nikon z7iis are almost down 50%

Also, please stay in india.

>>4479172
Nope, Sony prices drop the hardest because people see them more as computers and not artistic tools that hold value (like Leica).

File: file.png (114 KB, 253x306)

114 KB PNG

Why are boomers so fucking retarded?
They buy the most dogshit, cheapo scams they could possibly fall for brand new then try to sell them years later after not even using them for more than what they paid new. Do they really expect sentient beings to waste as much money as they did? This shit just sits on ebay or marketplaces clogging up results, never ever selling.

>>4479159
>it's a larp to actually take photos
I have a theory that most boards are terrible because the actual hobbyists aren't on 4chan, they're doing the hobby

>>4479170
>>4479172
Mirrorless market is just moving too fast. New models drop with artifically unrestricted "upgrades" and the /gearfag/ situation is worse than ever before because of how accessible photography has become.
By the time you buy a new model there's leaks for the next one 6 months down the line. So instead of someone buying a 5D and keeping it for 20 years, you buy an R5 and look forward to the R5II you can buy in two years time.

>>4479176
What's for sale isn't what's selling. You don't see the good deals because people buy them. That leaves the overpriced bullshit to look at constantly and yes, stubborn fuckwit boomers will absolutely refuse to negotiate but that's as much of their loss as yours.

>>4479175
this posters breath smells like cow dung curru

>>4479184
>curru
good morning saaars!

>>4479185
Sorry I gagged while typing

affinity photo/vector/layout suite is now free
*with a canva account

AI features are paid but the core program is free
neat I suppose.

>>4478763
I ended up buying some of those KF Concept filters before I really understood the quality requirements.
IQ is kinda all over the place.
On my a 28-60 kit lens with a 40.5mm thread, there's no reduction in image quality aside from the colour cast.
On a 50mm prime with a 55mm thread, there's a tiny bit of softness if you pixel peep.
On a 70mm-180mm zoom with a 67mm thread, the quality is absolutely dogshit atrocious at 70mm and gets worse as you increase the focal length.

So, obviously, the longer focal length is going to exagerate any angular defects in the the filter, but the difference between 70mm with a 67mm filter and 60mm with a 40.5mm filter suggests that either the smaller filters are easier to make or there's just a big lottery.

>>4479165
I own a WRX STI and I shoot a Pentax K1ii because I like the camera despite being objectively shit. I'm actually carrying it on a Eurotrip despite being a fucking brick of a camera with its 28-75mm f2.8 Tamron A09 occasionally swapping lenses with a 35mm SF10 that has a 50mm f1.7 F Prime.

I look like Sugar right now literally dual wielding cameras with the mantits out from the straps crossing each other over my chest

>>4479143
Have never missed the AA filter nor have I ever shot with it on my old KF.

On that note, look for a KF/K70/K3. Better camera all around. You could get one sub-$400 used and have seen them as low as $200-250 USD in America.

>>4478614
I'm also choosing between Zf and X-Pro3 (or 2) right now.
I like Nikon in every aspect except its size so I'm stuck. X-Pro3 is also great but has some reliability problems and I'm looking for something that will stay with me for many years as everyday carry and travel companion. Has anyone any suggestions?

>>4479226
Never choose Fuji. Poser garbage with subpar performance, build quality and design. Have you looked at the S5 II?

>>4479224
I did some tests on these some months ago as I also did the dumb thing and just bought kits of KF concept and it included a lot of K series stuff.
I also now use X series filters at a minimum and the URTH is my endgame, so I've got a good mix.
Anyway yeah, basically longer focal lengths magnified the imperfections in the glass filter and made it more obvious. I concluded at the time that the K series was passable at 50mm and below but you could still peep the effects. The X series was practically imperceivable in terms of quality reduction EXCEPT at 300-400mm on my crop camera, so again, the reduction is there but only noticable as you go longer. I have since tested my URTH stuff and even at 400mm+1.6x crop there's literally zero noticable quality drop.
Lens sharpness also matters; the K series was fine on my 18-45mm kit lens because it was so undemanding.

As for filter size influencing quality, I'm going to guess you got a lemon or you were mixing series'. They make the B and D series as well but I think they're phasing them out. Otherwise nfi.

Anyway, as with all things buy once cry once.

>>4479225
>I shoot a Pentax K1ii because I like the camera despite being objectively shit.

If a 30mp+ fullframe DSLR is objectively shit I'm fucked

>>4479231
By /p/ standards it is and I should've bought a D750/RP for less money or a Z6II or A7III for the same money.

My biggest complaint is the autofocus sometimes missing, expensive lenses for nice ones, and it wanting to automatically jump to a higher ISO than necessary. The size isn't actually that big of a deal. I usually set it to program line normal and it figures it out for snap shits 80% of the time sometimes switching to shallow or deep depth of field if I want bokeh or not.

>>4479229
I haven't, will do, thanks. Tho I must say I am a sucker for retro aesthetics in my cameras. Will probably get the nikon after the next two months of tism fueled research

>>4479234
The 'sonic is pretty retro tho

Explain to me like I'm the biggest retard in this board why if using S-log3 gamma on 8bit is such a horrible idea, people still keep using it and pushing for it like that's been debunked or some shit

>>4479229
>poor performance, build quality
>shills panasonic
lol

nazi is wrong about something who woulda guessed. The Jews are just smarter than you bucko.

>>4479101
>>4479100
>>4479099

>>4479259
Ok yikes
https://www.reddit.com/r/Lumix/comments/1ewobuz/s5ii_shutter_af_issue/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Lumix/comments/15bltff/lumix_s5ii_shutter_button_stopped_working/
You never hear of this shit with nikons… despite nikon selling 14 times more cameras than loomicks.

>>4479226
Owned Zf and Pro2 since launch, and Pro3
Zf gets you, in some cases, best in class performance in a retro body, a real workhorse and modern GOAT for adapted glass.
Pro2 was peak X-Pro, get it if you want to use the OVF + small lenses. Pro3 adds some QoL features, but was otherwise a step back.
All have survived years of rain, snow, and beach shooting for me. Pro3 screen is fine, but I never let it go past 90 degrees either.

>>4479251
Log shoots in a flatter profile to give you more flexibility with grading in post
8-bit gives you less flexibility with how far you can push grading in post compared to 10-bit
If you have to shoot 8-bit, you need to be more conservative with grading in post, which means getting it closer to your desired look in camera, which can mean avoiding log profiles altogether

>>4479269
Thankfully there is a solution!

Canon, pentax and fuji do not need color grading like nikon, panasonic, and sony do!

>>4479271
Which Pentax camera do people use for video?

>>4479272
K3III and use it cinematically (no autofocus, external stabilization only)

Vloggoids hate it. Real visionaries appreciate it.

>>4479273
>Real visionaries appreciate it.
You mean people that can't afford a camera actually meant to be used for video

That new 45mm f1.2 lens from Canon that only weighs 300 grams and will cost €499 sounds really interesting. Will apparently be similar to the EF 50mm f1.2L. So that's a straight up 3D popping portrait beast.

>>4479268
thanks for that post!
between Zf and X-pro, how much of a hassle is carrying the former around? I need to hold it before making my decision anyway because I have zero idea if the 200-300 grams difference is a lot or not. When I go out with my camera I hold in my right hand for hours, so I would probably need a grip for the Zf anyway (which again makes it weigh another 100g more). But it has the appeal of a camera that is meant to last and age nicely which I really like and wouldn't require me to be extra careful with it all the time

>>4479277
What makes you think a K3III is cheap?

It's like $1200 used and $1800 new, I actually don't know who's buying them. Actually I can tell you no one is because they come up for sale once every other month while K1s come up once a week. Just buy a 5D Mark 3/4 like a normal person you could probably find one used that already has slog option installed from Canon

>>4479281
Any info more substantial than a patent? Really looking forward to getting this if it's real. If not I'm just getting the pancake.

>>4479294
According to Canon Rumors it will probably be released together with the R6 m3.

>>4479284
Just get an a7c and a 35mm f2.8

>>4479233
D750, sure, but RP? No.. anon, the RP is one of the most gimped cameras of all time

>>4479313
It actually has worse shadow recovery than the fucking eos m6… version one. And half a shutter. What the fuck is wrong with canon?

>>4479281
The EF has shit corners throughout its aperture range and looks like ass wide open.

>>4479321
It was le 1st gen mirrorless syndrome, where a company's first mirrorless product is absolute dogshit, besides Olympus/Panasonic who cooked from day1

>>4479327
By cooked you mean made janky dogshit and in panasonics case, never improved the reliability?

micro four thirds was a mistake. it should have been aps-c. sony and 16mp xtrans were not serious competitors and eos-m was slated to be killed.

>>4479325
Yes, if you want sharp corners you have to buy a modern highly corrected optic. But for wide open portraits (smooth skin) and 3D pop, you can't go wrong with the older double gauss designs.

File: sneed.png (2.74 MB, 2207x1159)

2.74 MB PNG

>>4479333
>cANON will defend this
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=0&CameraComp=0&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

if i want to mainly photograph my Lego shit, do I go for the 105mm nikon macro vr something lens? (I have z5ii)

>>4479351
The price of this lens for the actual value it offers today is comical. You can get a 100 dollar lens that performs better than this.

>>4479351
great now post the results when used on a mirrorless.

>>4479268
yea the only real reason i would want the xpro was because the ovf was just fun to use, figured a zf would just be better in pretty much every way other then that though

>>4479259
>>4479263
>https://nikonrumors.com/2023/08/07/here-it-is-nikon-z8-strap-eyelet-issue-recall.aspx/
>https://m.dpreview.com/news/6237374185/nikon-z8-recall-how-to-check-if-your-camera-is-affected

hmmmmmmmmm

Viltrox 25mm not as bad as I thought it'd be, why did I bother looking for a sigma lens before this one

>>4479366
Mirrorless make optical elements higher quality?

File: IMG_0711.jpg (89 KB, 800x600)

89 KB JPG

I bought an A7II. AWB does not work really. Ergonomics is shit, none of the buttons or dials are where your fingers are, but I got it with the battery grip and that makes it ok, it gives a very tight grip on the camera. It's a very small camera as is.
IBIS is very good, much better than I expected, takes out the micro jitters in video and I can handhold 1/2 seconds on a short lens.
Autofocus is ok, works like on a late stage dslr.

The camera is small and looks cool with the grip on, like very solid. I don't expect anything to break. Adjusted the evf sensor with an electric tape hack I found online. Pretty happy so far.

Don't pay much for this generation, but it works well if you mostly take pictures of static subjects.

>>4479285
>It's like $1200 used and $1800 new
That is cheap lol

>>4479284
Weights not a big deal but does feel heftier, but the 40/2 and 28/2.8 are so weightless it balances out. The leather half cases add grip with less weight and bulk, I use those if I don't need the arca plate of a grip.

If I want a 90 degree FOV for horizontals, do i need an 18mm lens for full frame?

>>4479175
>Leica
The Gucci of cameras, exclusively owned by people for the brand name.

>>4479251
Who's saying that? I only ever see people ask "can I use 8bit for LOG?" and every answer is always no. I've yet to see anyone pushing that it's a good idea.

>>4479425
Yes. Hence why they actually hold their value.

>>4479431
>rich people selling dumb shit to other rich people
Classic.

>>4479425
Gucci makes very high quality products

>>4479442
kek, not for some years now. its been cheap trash made for chinks for some time now and lives off the name.

>>4479442
A lot of "luxury" brands are just outsourced from Chinese factories and suppliers.

>>4479446
>>4479449
Leica is still made in Germany while other camera brands are all made in 3rd world asian countries

>>4479452
Except for the D-Lux stuff which is just Panasonic. A lot of the M series is made in Portugal and assembled in Germany. The electronics are the same Asian chips and snoy sensors everyone else uses. QC is German and that is worth something though.

File: 1749661383253241.jpg (267 KB, 1152x2048)

267 KB JPG

>>4479452
Kek. Leica has a manufacturing facility in Poortugal, most are manufactured and made there. This M9 component is made in the Philippines. The correct term is "Assembled in Germany" not "Made in Germany".

>>4479427
There's a bunch of random videos out there on the subject
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9cJKnQJaUY
This guy for instance just pumps saturation up to get rid of some banding issues.

File: gyro.png (431 KB, 941x951)

431 KB PNG

Did anyone try this chink stabilizer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGb705hLHQg

Is it as decent as it looks?

File: 71SbdPYPHoL._AC_SL1220_.jpg (126 KB, 1216x855)

126 KB JPG

Let me guess, you *need* more?

File: snoy.png (7 KB, 363x95)

7 KB PNG

>>4479506
Yes

>>4478662
I shoot HIF. It's like JPEG, but requires a $1 purchase from the Microsoft Store.

>one of the reasons listed to use a sony fx6 is that it looks like a big professional camera which makes clients feel like you're a pro instead of using a tiny mirrorless body
this can't be real

Just bought the Fuji x100vi the other day after drooling over it for the last two years. My first new gear in years and what a great little camera it is. I've been wanting something like this for years and it's living up to my expectations so far.
I'm just trying to make some recipes to mimic the look of the french movie Pacifiction.
New gear after a gear drought is fucking great

>>4479478
That video in now way suggests that is a good combination
It's more like, if you want to shoot 8bit log, try these settings, which is just increase saturation so you don't get banding since 8bit)
He shoots log for.dynsmic range + matching his other camera better, and suggests against grading log yourself unless you are experienced
He further explains you have to get WB and saturation more right in camera since you can't do as much in post

Do you actually watch the videos or just see the title?

Are DSLRs as resilient as people say? I'd like a cheap beater digital for protest and bad weather days. Are the old pentaxes as bomb proof as people say or would something like a d600 be good?

>>4479540
They btfo basically any mirrorless camera but don't be a retard and assume a 500D is going to outlast an R3 or something. They're still electronics at the end of the day.
If you want bulletproof you get a mechanical SLR or better yet a rangefinder.

>>4479542
I've been bringing my FM2 to these because it's durable and not so expensive that if it got fucked I'd be mad. But I'd like to get a digital so I can be more liberal with my shutter and not have to wait a week or two before being able to get the images out.

File: 1730274223517324.jpg (102 KB, 749x1024)

102 KB JPG

>THERE ARE MANY FUNGUS
>APPEARNCE IS BEAUTIFUL
>LIGHT DAMAGE FROM NORMAL USE
>EXCELLENT +++
>IF YOU EXPECT GOOD CONDITION PLEASE BUY ELSEWHERE
>THERE ARE MANY DUST. DOES NOT AFFECT SHOOTING MUCH
>[85% of the price of good condition product]
These Japaniggers refusing to let the prices go lower and pissing me off.

>>4479540
They're pretty good, main issue these days is with the lenses given a lot of them are 20 years old and a lot of the AF stuff is starting to die.

You can get a nice DSLR for really not a lot of money these days because all of the retards have "upgraded" to mirrorless instead, biggest danger point is the shutter, and most of those can be swapped out for under a hundred bucks if they do eventually fail after hundreds of thousands of uses.

Did I fuck up by purchasing a Canon R10 and a 18-150 lens as my first proper camera?

>>4479540
As long as the gaskets are still good for both the body and the lenses.

>>4479379
>nikon fucks up
>immediately offers to fix it for free
>panasonic fucks up
>lets it go because they have fucked up every single camera they have ever released, they have less than 1% market share, and the only people buying their trash are either suckers that will eventually realize their mistake or never use their camera anyways, or amateur videographers filling a spec sheet need until their gigs pay enough for them to buy a sony fx3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMi1SOWP49M
panasonic makes the sony a7iii look like the worlds most reliable camera

they basically don't exist as a camera brand. they're a mix between a scam and a charity service.

the vast majority of people who buy lumix cameras are being scammed.
a tiny minority are benefiting from their charitable tendency to enable literally every video codec the sensor can support (despite the rest of the camera being dogshit, ie: $3k s1rii has worse autofocus than a nikon d300)

>>4479544
on the other hand, I bought one graded "B- hazy as-is" (in person) and it looks almost new

>>4479558
Yes. Crop sensors are always stupid, and the 18-150 is pretty mediocre.

It's not the worst camera in the world, but you probably could've got something better for the same money.

>want a nice 50mm lens
>the old sigma 1.4 is pretty good for under a hundred bucks, start waiting for a good deal on one
>wind up spending 250 bucks on the art version instead
I can feel myself slipping into gearfaggotry.

>>4479578
It's fine we all do things like this (I hope)
I got a sigma 30mm
Not long after I got a viltrox 25mm
Ended up using the latter a lot more, I feel like I wasted some money (on my camera body as well, but that's another topic)

>>4479506
the a7iii is the same camera but better

>>4479442
Their perfumes suck in terms of performance and base ingredients. Their leather goods also are low-par compared to budget handmade stuff from rural-centric countries.
t. fragfag

>photography archive
>doesn't archive photos
Can we fix our archive pls

>>4479583
the a7iv is the same camera but better

>>4479653
the M11 is the same camera but better

>>4479669
Uh, no. The M11 is an a7riv but worse at everything but using overpriced soft lenses from 1950.

>>4479546
>biggest danger point is the shutter
Correct
>most of those can be swapped out for under a hundred bucks
Hah, are you trolling?
It would be cheaper to buy a new (used) camera.

>>4479578
>>4479579
I liked the 85mm f1.8.
So I bought the 85mm f1.4 as well.
Goddam

>>4479390
>none of the buttons or dials are where your fingers are
Just wait until you get the unfixable issue that all A7 series cameras get where all the buttons except the shutter button just stop working.

>>4479678
and the rubber seals start crumbling away

dogs licking camera

Am I crazy or are the previous generation Hasselblad X series cameras some of the best bang for your buck systems on the market right now?

X2D 100C was like $7k just a few years ago, and they can now be had for like $2500. The quality shits on anything within the same price range.

>>4479705
Ehhh the lenses are still so expensive, and they have the shutter in them. The GFX gets around this issue but they GFX also have some of the worst autofocus of any camera currently on sale.

>>4479705
Where are you seeing $2500? That would be a crazy good deal.

>>4479710
Saw several on eBay last month, I even saw one closer to $2k.

>>4479707
Maybe it is the cost of entry into the lenses why they sell for so cheap, relatively speaking?

For landscape and portrait photography, I can't think of a better value than these X cameras in the $2k-$3k range if you're willing to go all in with their lenses.

>>4479705
You must mean the X1D series cameras because I’m looking at the most recent sales on eBay for used “hasselblad X2D” and I don’t see any bodies that sold for less than $6700AU.

>>4479579
I now find my sigma 30 1.4 dc dn big since I just want a portable apsc setup. Maybe I should just get a 25 or 35 1.7 viltrox air. I can get one for a new one at $115 and that price range reminds me of the 50 1.8 nikon plastic lens for (d)slr around when flickr was still very popular.

>>4479714
>Maybe it is the cost of entry into the lenses why they sell for so cheap, relatively speaking?
Cant you adapt EF glass to it? There are many EF lenses that cover medium frame sensors. Like the Sigma 40mm f1.4 for example.

File: A-Look-at-the-RF-45mm-f1.(...).jpg (30 KB, 460x575)

30 KB JPG

its coming

File: 2519643.jpg (667 KB, 1600x1944)

667 KB JPG

This is 3D pop. This is how the pictures from the new Canon 45mm will look like.

>>4479726
>nu canon with baked in raw nr and god knows what else
>3d pop like lf film
lol no

thats like saying the new glockfield 9mm supercomp tactical operator socom XD ORS sheepdog defense platform pist will totally be as good as a smith and wesson model 29 this time

>>4479714
I checked sold listings and $3600 was the cheapest sold not from a 0 or 1 seller with most going for a bit over 4k.

>>4479722
>f/1.2
>350grams
>$500
Snoyboys on suicide watch

>>4479722
MEIN GOTT.
If this thing is even as optically good as the 35mm f/1.8 I'm getting it.
I was about to get the EF 50mm f/1.4 just because muh low light, but this is going to btfo it forwards and back.

>>4479722
>as cut out by a 3 year old

>>4479719
>my sigma 30 1.4 dc dn
do you like this lens? they’re fairly cheap and I like the focal length

>>4479719
I have both the sigma 30mm 1.4 and the viltrox 25 1.7. I grabbed both for roughly the same 180€ (used sigma without lens hood and brand new viltrox). I've seen people claim the viltrox was cheaper somewhere but it's the price I could find it at.
The viltrox is noticeably lighter (I mean it's 90g less) and without the lens hood almost pocketable. I'm more comfortable using it at its max aperture of f1.7 while on the sigma I often use f2 unless it's really dark. I also notice less barrel distortion, it's quite sharp. The manual focus ring is less "smooth" but slightly faster to turn, which I actually prefer. It does feel more plasticky though.
I find the sigma to have a more responsive autofocus, and bokeh is fantastic (I didn't make a comparison there though) but that's about it. Honestly I'd use that one more for video.

>>4478118
I bet his shitty diesel won't even start up from the cold

>>4479753
HK, then SEA share the same ecommerce apps with discounts that sell products also straight from China, HK, and sometimes Japan. But it would depend on the import customs tax per country. Aliexpress for the western market.
I notice that the sigma 30 1.4 has purple fringing wide open when the person is behind the sun. It shows on the hairs. How's the viltrox 25 1.7 when wide open in this regard?
>>4479745
Yes, it's a good lens, the CA can be visible wide open in certain situations. The focal length is good for tight spaces.

>>4479717
Yeah the X1

>>4479731
They vary, but have seen several under $2k and as far as I could tell they seem to be in very good shape. I might pull the trigger on one of them because I’m not excited about any other cameras on the market right now and everything new is overpriced as hell.

>>4479721
I know an adaptor exists, about how well they work idk

>>4479841
*Under $3k

>Excited for Lumix 24-60 2.8
>Didn't pre-order it
>Now MSRP went up 15% and it's backordered

why do people think they need more than a 500 dollar camera?
i think they take good photos and theyre sharper than my screen

>>4479857
>lets make the 24-70 gayer
snoy tier

>>4479860
why are you a marxist? people can buy whatever they can pay for. money is earned and spent, not allotted by some literal autist because he thinks the way he does things is best. this is why the autistic should be put in mental hospitals. karl marx had aspergers and his rambling resulted in the deaths of 60 million people in asia.

Bros what is /p/'s recommended baba's first camera? I've looked in the sticky and everything but can't find any guide on this:
>want a low price (preferably under £300)
>good all-rounder (don't want to buy 15 different lenses right off the bat)
>preferably relatively small and portable
>of course want something that actually takes really nice photos though (if I can't get something that takes better photos than my phone camera then just forget it I guess)

>>4479841
No, the X2D is pretty consistently around $4k looking at listings all the way back to August. Any X2D under with a Buy It Now under $3k is an outright scam and any listings where the seller has with a feedback of 1 or 0 is also very likely a scam but of course that doesn't stop bidders from trying (and getting scammed).

X1Ds are fairly plentiful slightly under $2k. Although the X2D is double the price it's still a bargain. Besides the 100MP vs 50, you get IBIS and phase detect.

>>4479873
an older model APS-C DSLR like a D3300 almost always has the kit lens and add in a DX 35mm 1.8.

>>4479873
Full frame DSLR, like Canon 6D/5Dmk2+ or a Nikon D610. If you want something lighter you could go for a cropped mirrorless like M43, like the Olympus P5 or M10. Personally I don't see a point in crop sensors, and weight doesn't mean that much when any cheap lens that isn't junk will weigh 400g+ anyway.

>>4479873
Ignore gearfags like >>4479884
And basically all of youtube

It is such stupid fucking advice its like they want as many people to quit as possible leaving a few autists to realize the camera is just shit and buy a sony

First, aps-c minimum. Simple?
Second, DSLRs suck. Avoid them. They were a mistake. Like motor-drawn carriages. The design flaws are many and inherent.
Third, EOS M cameras or a canon RP.

>>4479873
a canon eos m6 or m50

micro four thirds is gimmick garbage
>wow my blurry phone iq went with a 2 second handheld exposure. at least i didnt need a $12 tripod!
and do not get a dslr. you will never take that loud ugly hunk of shit with you. only literal autistic people still like them. you know the type. all of them have brown hair, shitty beards, and no social life. they’re probably all from canada.
dslrs were marketed as part of a product lineup that excluded large sensors from common use and was meant to drive anyone who wasnt doing planned shoots to an ultrasmall sensor PNS that was essentially disposable and would get replaced once a year. they could have been smaller or better but that wasn’t canikon’s business strategy.

File: DSLRman.jpg (9 KB, 173x262)

9 KB JPG

>>4479900
Literally every DSLR shill looks like this with varying levels of fat. They’re all canadian presently or ancestrally and they all go to the same gay biker bars in idaho, utah, and ohio. They all like telecasters, cars, trucks, guns, and computers. All of them drink french press or pourover coffee. Half of them are furries and half of them are weeaboos. None of them are normal. Their dogs are all german shepherds and huskies. Their cats are never orange or white. They all think movies suck now except for john wick and top gun. They all hate sony. They all like skinny asian women.

Every single one of them is exactly like this. They arrived on earth via a flying saucer fleet 1984-1997 and JD Vance is their leader.

File: YT.jpg (2.97 MB, 2506x2407)

2.97 MB JPG

Hello human. Do you have time to talk about some of my favorite pieces of earth technology, the Canon 5D mark II and the Nikon D750, over a cup of artisan french roast?

>>4479836
>I notice that the sigma 30 1.4 has purple fringing wide open when the person is behind the sun. It shows on the hairs. How's the viltrox 25 1.7 when wide open in this regard?
It is there to a lesser extent. That's actually the thing that bothers me most about the sigma.

File: Leica_M11.jpg (3.92 MB, 5526x2657)

3.92 MB JPG

>buy a Leica and just carry that around
>it's amazing

Damn... I guess Leica-fags were right all along.

>>4480015
based leicatranny spending xher OF foot pic money

>>4479902
You are the boring cringe kind of mentally ill.

>>4479902
>They all hate sony
Nah everyone hates Sony, not just them

>>4480035
People on 4chan maybe, other people don't care. I've been working professional in photography for the last 7 years and every photographer always has a Canon or a Sony (Canon tends to be used more for commercial/product stuff, Sony more for the creative/artistic freedome side). Nikon seems to be disappearing which is kinda strange, some studio I knew people at changed all their stuff from Nikon to Canon.

File: 20251102_201909.jpg (1.09 MB, 3392x1564)

1.09 MB JPG

>>4479902
The fuck you calling a shill?

>>4479873
Nah fuck it, I'm gonna make enemies of both sides for you:
DSLRs are a good option if you want minimum financial investment in the hobby. Once you have the sheckels though it makes sense to go either forwards or backwards: get an SLR and dev at home for the vintage experience, or get a mirrorless and go full hand-holding to get the easiest experience.

This isn't some magical world where higher effort automatically translates into better results. Large format film will btfo basically anything but that is not for everyone for good reason; it's a bitch to pay for and work with. So other than that, you either want to take shit slow and use an SLR (or rangefinder or a compact 35mm film or whatever) OR put life on easy mode and get youur PhotosNAO.

DSLRs are a good middle ground where things are easy enough to use and the image quality is definitely there, but are cheaper because of the older tech. But they're not as special and don't make as much sense as a traditional SLR, and MILCs make more sense as a modern camera, so:
>5DII/III/IV or D700/800 etc. with a kit lens for cheap and high IQ
>Canon RP for cheapest MILC
>EOS SLR like a Kiss or 630 for e-z mode film
>FD SLR like a AE-1 for manual film
t.canon shill, more options exisst.

>>4480048
>no mention of lenses
typical

>>4480036
>Nikon seems to be disappearing
because everyone buying a Nikon is a jet setting tourist, they are very popular that way

>>4480056
Are they? I would've figured that would be Fuji.

>>4480048
I bought a few lenses and have a camera and use my phone. Apart from weather coverings I feel that is good enough as tools for me. 1080p is good enough for filmmaking to me too. I don't care about impressing Netflix. Most people use Amazon Instant Video anyway.

I got a t2i and 5 old vintage lenses.

>>4480068
>>4480090
You sound like a gearfag.

>>4480097
Sounds like a gearfag making excuses for being a poorfag.

Is it fine to carry a lens that weights about 1.3-1.4kg with a strap attached to camera lugs/tripod mount, or should I attach it to the tripod collar of the lens instead?
Some say it's unsafe to do the former, because it puts too much stress on the lens mount, even though it's made of metal.
Anyone has experience damaging their gear like this?

So, is Nikon going to block Sigma lenses and just accept Tamron lenses (Sony)?

>>4480109
I have lenses more expensive than your entire net worth lil boy

>>4480130
I only see people getting out of their nikon Z gear, and its not selling fast. There was a surge of hype for the zf and z5ii especially in japan but now everyone is selling theirs. On the other hand it is very hard to find a used sony a7cii.

File: IMG_2854.jpg (4.13 MB, 2432x3634)

4.13 MB JPG

posting here because /fgt/ threads are dead
selling my mamiya 645 pro so i can upgrade to 6x7
can’t decide between fuji gm670 or pentax 67
i want something i can shoot handheld but also has that super crisp quality. i know pentax lenses are very nice, but still not sure what to choose between the two
maybe some of you can enlighten me?
>pic for attention

>>4480250
Fgt is so dead. It's sad. Anyways get a mamiya 7 or are you a poor?

>>4480257
>Fgt is so dead. It's sad.
Entire board is full of gearshills and pompus cocksuckers. I've seen new anons approach this board and get show down like Fr*nch partisans in the 40s, because nobody wants to actually help them.
I don' even fucking know why I bother anymore here man. I want this place to be good but you've got some ingrained mental autism otb that won't allow anyone to get better.
If anyone improves while visting /p/ it's pure fucking chance or their own effort and research.

>>4480250
645 and 6x7 look the fucking same. Dont waste your time.

>>4480273
35mm and 6x7 look almost the same if only one camera scans instead of relying on shatbeds and labs

>>4480273
yeah they’re close enough, but main reason is because my mamiya is awkward to carry around, i wanna get something more ergonomic.
may as well use it as an opportunity to my 6x7 as well, just like how the format looks better
>>4480257
k

>>4480295
Just get a 645 with a grip or a rangefinder style body instead of an overrated film wasting machine and stay away from old school scanners that only make larger formats look better because the actual scanner resolution is dogshit (even hasselblad flextights are actual dogshit)

What is the cheapest body that will have focus peaking and works decently with EF lenses?

>>4480332
If you don't need evf, magic lantern. Peaking been standard for 10 years, so there has to lots to choose from otherwise

>>4480334
Focus peaking through EVF, I don't care about anything else. If the R100 was like $300 I see in some older deals I'd probably get that.
It's less of an upgrade and more just a manual focus only body. I get satisfactory results with this 400mm telephoto from the 1970's but with a OVF, manual aperture, manual focus,tripod and 6.3 at the fastest it's like juggling knives. The hits are hits but it's like 10 percent.
>just buy a better lens!111!!!!
Maybe If I found one in person but I'm not spending $600 on a lens that came out in 1993 and gambling on it coming from Japan or something.

>>4480110
I have broken a camera tripod mount with a 2kg lens. A giant chunk of metal got ripped out. Attach to the tripod collar if one is available.

>>4480332
>>4480339
I'm confused as to why you want EF if you're just going to be manually focussing? Sure you can do it and it'll work fine but it's extra money, weight, and size for a feature you're not using. If it wasn't for that and you were going to use manual lenses then I'd suggest an original A7. Or maybe an adapter will give you aperture control with EF lenses, I don't know I'll let you look into that.

>5 months since the Z8 got the firmware update for Maximum Aperture Live View
>Nikon still hasn't updated other cameras
Why is it so hard to add a feature every other brand has? I've been wanting a Z5ii, but I can't feel good about making the purchase with this feature absent.

File: IMG_9675.jpg (3.94 MB, 5226x3568)

3.94 MB JPG

>>4480352
I would mainly be using it for manual lenses but that doesn't mean I want to preclude the use of the rest of my EF lenses with an adapter if I intend on using a big telephoto but also wanted to bring a EF pancake without needing to bring two bodies.
I mentioned it because I don't know if there is some system that is just completely incompatible with autofocus adapters and EF mounts.

>>4480363
It's not very precise anyway, I think you'll get much better results if you punch in and focus

Is there such thing as a quick deploy tripod?
Like a harris bipod with the spring actuated legs but naturally larger due to the height needed.

>>4480363
Why is telephoto glass so low-contrast?

>>4480371
It's a Vivitar T4 from the early 70's so probably not particularly great optically even for when it was sold but it's possible to get pictures that actually look decently detailed so that's more than what can be said about the 75-300 I had before getting a 70-200.
I shoot canon faithful preset and it was very cloudy so that doesn't help.

>>4480379
>I shoot canon faithful preset
I fuckin thought it looked a bit pink
Never understood why that preset did that. "It's to better simulate what you saw!". No, I did not see a magenta spotlight attatched to a UFO pass by as I took a photo.
Y u not shoot neutral and just either give it some basic sharpness like +2 or post process?

>>4480354
Z8 is getting all the goodies for some reason, it has double the shit the Z9 has despite having the same specs inside.

>>4480370
There's the Smallrig x Potato Jet / Tribex. I swear I've seen another one that was very similar, had a pistol grip where you squeeze it and the legs drop, but I can't for the life of me find it.

>>4480097
Ehhh... They're just tools. The least used lens is my 85 F/2 and most is ironically the cheapest, my F/3.5 70-210mm. Everything in my toolbox I have used. They all have wear on them in some shape or another. I'm planning on using them again for another commercial I'm filming soon.

File: IMG_9922.jpg (1.96 MB, 4234x2094)

1.96 MB JPG

>>4480368
I did punch in a few times, but unless you are on a tripod that is very stable and already locked on it's not very practical for just walking ar ound. Having to use live view to check exposure and punch in makes it very hard to get any opportunity shots. Like this one I has to basically rush to unfold the tripod to hope of getting it before flying away with all the set up needed. Not that it's particularly great but I never saw that one before. I'm hoping that if I tried something with an EVF it'd would make BIF at least somewhat possible with the lens.
>>4480390
There was reflections from leaves and It's from the 70's so the chromatic aberration makes everything look purple. Water can look decent but if you have a lot of small object's it x10's.
I'm looking through other ones and nothing really screams pink to me in most of them.
I haven't tried other presets since it seems overwhelming with choice, I just want something sharp and looking mostly correct, though neutral might be worth trying I suppose.
I just shoot jpg since I want to take the picture a look at it and not have to play with software.

>>4480371
Contrast is a slider. Lens contrast only matters for film.

>>4480097
>>4480109
No, sounds like someone talking about his gear
, but you two sound like you are gargling from the semen from sucking each other's dick.

>>4480400
>Zach reveals one of his many twisted fantasies.

>>4480402
Nah, his twisted fantasy is to one day be successful at not taking himself seriously.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (255 KB, 1280x720)

255 KB JPG

>>4480399
>i can just edit in the photons that never hit my sensor
this shit is why photography is renowned for uncanny, tasteless, bland, and garish aesthetics while cinema is renowned for such supreme atmosphere that a synonym, "kino", has taken on new life to mean "superior aesthetics"

and that is because cinematographers know what they're doing. photographers think lenses are just accessories and the body is the most important thing they will ever buy (with the brand name and megapixel number being king). cinematographers know bodies are just bit depths and codecs, nothing else, and the lens is what actually creates the image. the sensor doesn't matter unless it's film.

>>4480354
>I've been wanting a Z5ii, but I can't feel good about making the purchase with this feature absent.
Reminder that you're an actual retard

Here come the nikon shills to fend off their buyers remorse

Maybe the Z6IV and Z8II will be as excellent as the R6II and R5. Some day! In the meantime, just pretend your kenrockwell vibrance vomit can compete with canon color science... I mean, surely, if you were going to grade instead of relying on SOOC color and c1/lr bundled profiles, you would have bought a sony so you'd at least get every photo in focus.

Or is there something about the nikon user national pastime (pixel peeping and DR chart comparisons) i've missed? hmmmmmmm?

Hey, are your lenses getting any smaller yet? Or are the 3 small ones getting any better? No?

>>4480412
>yes, I don't actually have a camera and just shitpost online
good response

>>4480418
Many such cases...

>>4480418
Maybe his art is just finding faults with things. Perhaps the rage version of Roger Ebert on photography and filmmaking. I admire their perspectives, but people like that tend to be blind to the idea that art can be cheap too if done with the right soul.

>>4480412
But is he wrong? Niggors have been paying a premium for worse sony bodies for almost a decade now. All the nonsensical sony hate is actually nikon buyers remorse.

File: 1731144798310278.png (88 KB, 1146x298)

88 KB PNG

Convince me not to buy the Viltrox AF 56mm f1.2 Pro

>>4480397
>I'm looking through other ones and nothing really screams pink to me in most of them.
Ah okay fair. I just remember Faithful normally giving everything a more magenta hue than Neutral.
>I haven't tried other presets since it seems overwhelming with choice, I just want something sharp and looking mostly correct, though neutral might be worth trying I suppose.
You can always expeirment with DPP4 after the fact since you can switch through profiles while looking at it and judge what you like the most.
I typically use Neutral but with Sharpness +2 / Fineness +1 / Threshold +5, but always post process RAWs. That's just a good starting point that I can also ignore if I don't think it needs more imo.

The advanced level autism is downloading Canons Profile Editor and creating your own profile then loading it into your camera. Those 3 extra custom slots? Yeah you can just upload a predefined custom profile you made and apply it to your OOC JPEGs or through DPP4 RAWs. Canon also make 8 extra OEM profiles that you can load up the same way and honestly a few of them are nice enough to use.

If you spend 20 minutes to an hour fucking with DPP4 and the custom profile editor I reckon you could get more out of your JPEGs but at the same time I totally understand not giving a fuck about all of that and just going with what you use now.

>>4480436
The sigma 56/1.4 is just as good, cheaper, and way smaller. No meaningful aperture difference. F1.8 vs F2.

Also viltrox color cast is kind of gross in practical use. Not as bad as ttartisan but still sterile and nasty in a way you can only appreciate when you know how things actually looked.

>>4480436
>chinkslop with purple shit and ass flare
sigma 56 1.4 or fuji 50 f2

>>4480436
$551US for THAT???

>>4480442
China thinks their lenses aren’t shit lol

File: 1734764749426903.png (3.9 MB, 2560x1440)

3.9 MB PNG

>>4480440
>The sigma 56/1.4 is just as good
lmao no at least not in sharpness
vignette is easy to correct
plus no aperture ring so the sigma is basically a non-starter for fuji shooters

>>4480444
All of these 600% zoom corner crops look the same and if fujicucks would use a giant lens just to avoid using the more ergonomic body dial I respect them even less. They are retarded gearfaggots with no soul.

Just buy the fujifilm branded fujifilm 50mm f2 to match your fujifilm branded chinese leica copy fag.

>>4480446
>this other lens is just as good
>here's evidence you're wrong
>THAT DOESN'T COUNT
just admit you don't like china so I can discard your opinion

>>4480446
gotta pixel peep those corners wide opn bruh. thats what fujifail is all about. that and larping, $2000 cameras with worse autofocus than an a6400, worms, zombie skin, 40mp sensors with 24mp detail, and weather sealing that makes sony look military grade.

>>4480447
>uhm, if i zoom in on the far corner wide open…they are clearly 10% different!
Gearfaggot hylic. Go buy a nikon then you’re headed there eventually.

>>4480449
No thanks. I like the rangefinder body style

>>4480444
Far right and far left images look the exact fucking same. Only the middle (overpriced pixel peeper lens) is any better and only slightly at max zoom. Are you seriously pixel peeping the pixel peep?

>>4480450
>pixel peeper that pixel peeps pixel peeps AND a fashion victim
buy an a7cr and a gm lense so you can crop your cropped crop for reach

>>4480452
>AND a fashion victim
No, I like it for the corner EVF as it's more comfortable and the rest of the camera doesn't get in the way of my face
Why do you retards assume so much about why someone chooses a particular body?

File: pepe.jpg (40 KB, 735x640)

40 KB JPG

>cropshit canon body
>long manual focus lens
>longish L series lens that is almost 30 years old
>get mistaken as a pro and people asking about my gear
Feels weird.
>was reselling stuff I bought in kits a while ago
>some mexican with a $3000 mirrorless who worked for pay bought a 50mm 1.8 from 1990 off me
>another dumb bitch who was going to buy a 75-300 but kept delaying and never showed was also "pro" and was charging like $100 or more for like 30 minutes.
Honestly I wonder if I should do pro work, all I need to buy is a battery grip and a non porverty lens and normalfags heads will explode into gold coins when they see me.

>>4480453
>pixel peeper, fashion victim, and a noseberg

>>4480454
If you aren't using a phone or an obvious point and shoot with a tiny lens, most people will think you're a pro. They don't understand that you can buy all this shit for a couple of hundred bucks these days, they think any camera that isn't glow in the dark still costs a grand.

>>4480411
Are you the guy who pretends focusing at f/1.8 vs f/8 makes no difference? Or are you the guy who's convinced a z50 can focus in candlelight and tries to prove it with a table of numbers? Add to the conversation or don't bother posting.

File: classy.jpg (63 KB, 859x1024)

63 KB JPG

>>4480454
>Buy good condition SLR off an e-recycling shop
>comes with 50mm lens
>thisshitisoldnigga.jxl
>Sell lens on ebay because don't sneed it
>Auction style
>Sells for more than I paid for the camera and lens off the shop originally
>free SLR
I don't know if I'm just getting lucky but I've done this twice now. Which really isn't a lot but it's strange that it happened twice.

>>4480473
I'm the guy actually takes photos and knows OP is complaining just to complain
A Z5II has a 2.5 stop lowlight AF advantage over an R5II and a +4 stop advantage over an a7RV
If it were actually an issue with lowlight AF, we should be seeing an awful lot more complaining about bodies like those
OP just wants something to complain about since they don't actually take pictures or understand lowlight AF

Why are you mentioning unrelated apertures and an unrelated camera and even framing things dishonestly?

>>4480492
It doesnt matter because nikon wont get anything in focus anyways. Its just a worse sony a7iii in an uglier body complete with equally bad color science.

>>4480509
yeah thats true. niggors are just even more autistic snoys. no one ever said their r6ii’s low light AF held them back, but a lot of people say their z8’s shitty autofocus (and its better! than the zf and z5ii) missed great action shots that even a mid tier snoy would have nailed.

>>4480492
>unrelated apertures
There are no unrelated apertures when discusing Maximum Aperture Live View. If you want an f/8 exposure to have a chance at being in focus in low light you're going to get it faster and more accurately by focusing at f/1.8 on a z50
>unrelated camera
Because like some people here, I don't read a spec sheet and pretend I know things about a camera I haven't used. This is the camera I experienced this issue with first hand. I have had people here try to convince me that it was simply user error that focusing at 1.8 produced better results than at 5.6+ and the camera is fine in low light (because they read an EV chart saying it should be)
>framing things dishonestly
There's no dishonesty here. The Z8 didn't get this feature for no reason. Nikon felt it important enough to include in the firmware update, despite me seeing very few people online talk about it. It's a good feature. What's the harm in adding it? And ultimately, what is dishonest about wanting a feature on a camera that costs almost 2k, that you know through experience would aid you in your personal shooting environment?

A knee-jerk "you're a retard" response to a genuine concern over interest in a feature is worth far less than an on-topic complaint.

>>4480482
A few years back I bought some seats from an old Mercedes and they had the original first aid kit still attached underneath, and I sold that for a few hundred dollars online. You can get insanely lucky with used shit sometimes.