File: Kek.jpg (1.07 MB, 2995x2391)

1.07 MB JPG

>>4484029
Are you paid for this?

And why do people keep using shutters as dust covers and acting surprised when it breaks them? Manufacturers literally added a "destroy shutter faster" option lmao

File: Zozzle.jpg (1.82 MB, 3024x4032)

1.82 MB JPG

>>4484031
There are a lot of broken r5 and r7 shutters on reddit…

File: Geg.jpg (1.22 MB, 3024x4032)

1.22 MB JPG

>>4484032
So many broken shutters

Turn off the shutter closed when off/shutter at shutdown, kids

Imagine owning an overpriced fragile mirrorless body in 2025 lmao

File: Lol.jpg (47 KB, 480x480)

47 KB JPG

>>4484034
Most DSLRs broke. Canon’s market dominance comes from the scope, reliability, and global reach of their tech support program. Their durability today is an illusion - survivorship bias.

File: wiki3.png (21 KB, 590x342)

21 KB PNG

>>4484029

>>4484029
Anyone buying the Canon R6 Mark III?

T6i chuds report in.

i like crop sensor DSLRs, zoom lenses, canon sensors, and femboy foxes.

>>4484053
Why were you doing this again? I forgot.

>>4484088
Nobody cares why, and that's fine.
Every anti-snoy gear thread made gets a wiki donation

Thoughts on the Powershot v1?

>>4484083
Well, I do agree with part of what you said.

I checked with my shaman about getting the Fuji XM5 as my beginner camera, but he advised against it. Does anyone know why that might be? 90% of his predictions often turn out right..

>>4484096
Please guys, my shaman can't give me explanations, only yes or no answers

>>4484099
>/p/ approved beginner cameras
APS-C Mirrorless, 15 y/o FF DSLR, SLR Blobmera.
>also approved somehow
Most expensive camera you can afford without needing a loan.

Take your pick anon, but don't buy a foolji

>>4484063
Undecided. If they make a throwback version like the ZF then very likely.

Right now not super convinced I shouldn't just get a 5DSR for high megapickle low ISO work and keep my R6 II for general use. 24MP is pretty fine really.

I probably won't upgrade my main body until the R5 Mark IV or later really.

>>4484103
10 y/o APS-C DSLR>15 y/o FF DSLR

>>4484063
I'll wait for BSI or stacked sensors become the norm for Canon. I won't be buying shit, my R8 is more than enough gear until then.
I fear they wont bother for a while as they've pretty decidedly gone for the hybrid crowd and crippling SNR seems to be their modus operandi instead of improving it.
BSI R8 Mark II though? Bought day 1 if it exists.

>>4484034
Mirrorless is for boomers now

>>4484034
It can be hard to imagine when you don't have a camera or take pictures
Maybe one day you'll get one

File: 1000996_s.jpg (1.22 MB, 1920x1280)

1.22 MB JPG

what are these new inverted (is that the term?) square lens hoods and how can manufacturers design them to flare in when most square hoods usually flare out?

>>4484118
It's just a design difference. If you flare out you can get longer and deeper hoods because as long as you don't infringe on the "cone" of vision the rest doesn't matter. If you invert it like this you just end up with shorter hoods which kind of fits the compact asthetic they're going for.

I'd argue a longer hood would be more useful but you're obviously going to get to a point where it's too large and bulky to be worth using. So, this inverted design for le minimalism exists.

>>4484116
>not owning a smartphone in current year

I just realized that mirrorless cameras always expose the sensor by default, even when it's off
doesn't this constant barrage of light hurt it? what's going to happen if i take a one on a trip, always strapped to my body, never shoved in a camera bag, hood on, no lens cap?

>>4484123
Literally nothing will happen. Same reason your phone camera doesn't cook itself for no reason. Like, don't point it at the sun for long period of time but that's about it.

>>4484122
>correct, I don't have a camera, only a smartphone
At least you're honest

Is there anyway to bypass a Canon Error 1?
I have extension tubes with contacts, but was trying to use it on a 400mm manual lens so I get the error.
What is the difference between using a Panagor Macro PMC 90mm F2.8 and a 28mm F2.8 with extension tubes? I don't really get how focal length works in macro, all I remember is that the lesser the focal length the higher the magnification?

>>4484127
In practice, focal length for macro just says how far away you need to be for a given macro ratio
You might need to be within inches away with a 30mm macro, or can be closer to a foot away with a 105mm
You need the reproduction ratio / magnification to see how "macro" a given lens gets, most are 1:1 or 1.0x
Extension tubes just let you focus closer, for more magnification
Totally depends on the lens for what will get you the most macro

>>4484126
based retarded unc

File: ducks.jpg (1.58 MB, 2296x1724)

1.58 MB JPG

>>4484029
Do you have any good recommendations for a backpack ;_; ?
>will be used for trekking and duck pictures
>side access for camera and hip belt are required
>30 liter volume, give or take
I'm currently using a Photo Sport BP AW II. A bit larger would be nice. The top compartment is very flabby.

File: Screenshot 2025-11-20 163917.png (492 KB, 1588x695)

492 KB PNG

>free with Amazon Vine

cop or not?

>>4484143
>Do you have any good recommendations for a backpack ;_; ?
Literally the one you have with you, pad it with towels if you are scared to break gear inside.

>Panasonic s9 + 18-40 on sale for $1250
Tempting...

>>4484153
panasonic really did it. they released a camera that makes the sony a7c look like a good buy.

>>4484095
based femboy fox enjoyer

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

917 KB JPG

>>4484155

File: Shot on fuji.jpg (267 KB, 770x1027)

267 KB JPG

>>4484157
>be sony weather sealing
>be so boss the camera still survives rain even if a fat redditor scrapes off the gaskets

What is the general consensus on Fuji GFX lenses?

>>4484162
No leaf shutter + laughable sync speed

fujis native lenses are great for pixel peeping landscapes shot wide open but fuji made an official hasselblad h mount adapter for a reason

>>4484162
The non-LM are slow AF to focus
I found them too large for such marginal difference from their FF counterparts
If I were re-buying into the format, I would just get the 45-100 f4 and call it a day, maybe the 55 f1.7 too

>>4484161
buy an ad

File: file.png (38 KB, 636x701)

38 KB PNG

what now

>>4484175
>bootleg fujifilm lens

yikes.

File: 1788-z50ii-16-50-50--fNpB(...).png (449 KB, 700x595)

449 KB PNG

Is there anything wrong with this setup?

I gave up and bought myself a second viltrox air lens, the 15mm one. I like these lenses.
Should I keep going down this road? Maybe grab the 56mm one? That way I'll never know which lens is mounted on my camera unless I look close, because they all look the same.

File: 24_14_dg_dn_a022_Impressi(...).jpg (298 KB, 1690x2400)

298 KB JPG

I was thinking of getting a compact APS-C body to complement my full frame main due to the resulting versatility of lens combinations. For example, I can use my 50mm f/1.2 on APS-C as a 75mm f/1.8 lens with the same exact rendering, instead of buying another lens. Likewise I can use something like a 28mm f/1.5 lens on APS-C as a casual and highly compact 42mm f/2.2 setup or mount it to the full frame body as a wide angle. I use rangefinder lenses.
The area where this setup seems mildly troublesome is carrying both cameras at once with different lenses, which however is the point of getting a second body; to avoid lens swapping in the field. Typically I'd want a standard or telephoto option on my full-frame camera and a tiny wide-angle pancake on a tiny body, but with APS-C crop it actually seems to make more sense go the opposite way, i.e wide on FF and standard on APS-C.
What do you guys think and what are your favourite compact APS-C bodies? The Z30 looks great to me but I'd prefer it to have IBIS and potentially a hotshoe mounted optional EVF, but that's kind of a pipe dream. Other options include going with two full frame bodies (e.g Sigma fp + my main) or sidestepping the issue by getting a GRIV.

>>4484185
You'll probably have more fun with a standard zoom and one fast prime to start off. Also those lenses are very slow. Have fun trying to get any kind of subject separation with that f/9.45 equivalent DoF.

>>4484175
Refund it and buy it off AliExpress instead with their BF discount codes

>>4484185
>Is there anything wrong with this setup?
well, yeah
you get two zoom lenses with slow apertures, so you still have to swap lenses. why not get a superzoom 18-300? go all in on the shitty glass
on the other hand, you have two zooms with slow apertures, why not get one with a decent aperture, say an f/2.8 or f/4 standard zoom and maybe one telephoto prime and a macro prime?
it seems like this is a kit of compromises, perfect if you don't actually know what you'd like to photograph yet

>>4484253
>What do you guys think
I've just reached the point where I actually have the opportunity to carry two cameras at once, I'll get back to you when I actually do something where I can take advantage of that. Two APS-C bodies, one with a 18-35mm zoom and another with a 50-135mm zoom, typical journo kit.

I think telephoto with a smaller sensor size makes sense when you want to carry two cameras because you don't want to add more bulk than necessary. sure, full-frame mirrorless bodies are light but the glass for a full-frame telephoto zoom has to be heavier than a lens with an APS-C image circle. don't go m4/3 it's dogshit IQ imo

>>4484185
Nope. The 16-50 is tiny and almost pancake size. No point getting a superzoom at 4x the size and price. You can always get the 24/1.7 later. Have fun.

>>4484271
Would you say it is a pseudo pancake or more like a muffin lens?

>>4484272
Its not a pancake. Nikon make a 26/2.8 pancake though.

>>4484273
So its a muffin lens?

>>4484274
Almost. But its still smaller than the big snoy muffin lenses.

>>4484276
Huh. Interesting. So more like a scone lens?

>>4484278
Yep. Theres only 1 pancake zoom lens that comes to my mind, which is the Panasonic 12-32mm.
Pancake > Scone > Muffin

>Refurbished Canon R6 mk 2 on Black Friday or a New R6 Mk3
i read that that mk 2 is better for low light but the mk 3 has better auto focus on low light, any thoughts?

File: RF 45mm f-1.2 STM.png (643 KB, 1013x929)

643 KB PNG

lirly what is the flaw? I was gonna go nikon but I don't think any z lens can match this at 500 USD

File: rf-45mm-f1.jpg (203 KB, 1344x2016)

203 KB JPG

>>4484290
>what is the flaw?
Nothing. Canon won.

>>4484290
Turdingly soft corners and periphery until f/2.8. Like, horrid. If you won't be using f/1.2-2 regularly you're better off with the 50mm f/1.8 STM or 35mm f/1.8 IS STM.
But that's compared to other RF/EF lenses. Compared to Nikon (or anyone else really) there's nothing like it value-wise.

>>4484282
But where do you place the biscuit lens?

>>4484297
That fringing is nuts.

>>4484311
Still does better than the EF 50mm f/1.2L, so you're basically getting "vintage" pro performance at modern consumer prices. Comes with modern mount, coatings, and warranty. Not bad considering brand new it's still less than a used aforementioned EF.

File: cringe.jpg (59 KB, 300x555)

59 KB JPG

>>4484297
>>4484311
There's some photo in that fringegraphy

>>4484314
uh that's just the color of her hair

>7 posts per hour on a saturday afternoon
/p/ is truly dead lol

>>4484326
Photography in general, everything that makes you go out and see something to be fair

>>4484290
>>4484298
The Z 50 1.8 S is already much better for the same price (when on sale like now) for anyone serious
The Z 50 f1.4 is also frequently on sale for $500 and also generally better

>>4484331
All of this shit is overpriced and gay. A canon 5div mogs both the z6ii and z7ii hard, is better made and less soulless than the z8, and takes superior lenses to nikons overcorrected sterile soulless crap (50mms the size of 85mms lmfao). Canon EF lenses are on par with and better than leica’s german made M mount glass.

Mirrorless is for bad photographers and gearfag hobbyists who just take pictures while walking their dogs. It’s a videography and pixel peeping gearfaggotry system, not a photography one.

>>4484334
>schizo rambling
Nice, you are why the board is so dead nowadays

should i pick up a $150 canon 7d mark 1 or a $200 5d classic or 5d mk2 im bored with my current cameras and never owned a canon before

>>4484342
5d classic. I hear it outperforms 8x10 film.

File: IMG_0224.jpg (100 KB, 700x525)

100 KB JPG

>>4484334
I shot with a 5DIV from close to its release until this earlier this year. Never truly got the hang of the colors in that time and carrying it around with a typical L zoom was a pain in the ass. Perhaps I should have been using compact primes then, but nevertheless I am now enjoying myself a lot more and taking markedly better pictures with a mirrorless camera and adapted rangefinder glass.
Granted I think a 5DII plus some classic prime like the 50/1.8 is an excellent budget setup to learn on or keep around as a beater combo. Pic related was once the setup of the man who designed our site mascot.

Daily reminder you're a sucker if you buy cameras other than Sony. Peace and Love.

I scratched the lens hood of my new macro lens the day I got it and I genuinely wanna kill myself

>>4484342
5D classic for a truly straightforward experience of joy
7D for cope format modern crutch technology.

>>4484361
Put a second scratch on it.

>>4484310
>fixed /4 chinkshit
Biscuits are only for snoycucks that cant get anything smaller than a muffin

File: Snoybiscuits.jpg (296 KB, 912x843)

296 KB JPG

>>4484367
Isnt the brightenstar biscuit a copy of a pretty "nice" Japanese lens made by that one guy? I cant remember the name.
Any idea why all small lenses are named after quickbreads?

>>4484343
>I hear it outperforms 8x10 film.

Until you have seen what it is capable of, you should never believe these ridiculous statements.

>>4484298
It performs the same as any double-Gauss F1.2 design costing thousands more. It is the compromise you have to accept. It is not a bad lens in that regard, just a reality of the optical construction. You want compact F1.2? This is what you get. For anyone not needing the extra stop the 50 1.8 or the 35 1.8 are much better choices indeed.

Anybody using a D850? I was looking on Nikon's website for their black friday sale and noticed they're still producing DSLR's. That camera looks like a beast and I kinda want one now :(

>>4484368
You mean MS Optics?

>new Nikon Z6 II for 1200 EUR
yep I boughtened

>>4484029
I want to sell my Sony gear as its just sitting on my shelf collecting dust. It does not spark joy. Recommend me a new camera system that is actually fun to use and will get my back into photography /p/.

File: old grandma camara.jpg (139 KB, 1600x1200)

139 KB JPG

Found my old grandma camara, its beaten up but everything seems to be working though.
Out of sheer curiosity I discover that aliexpress is still selling some black and white 127 films.

>>4484381
My go-to camera when I need to make sure that I encounter no issues whatsoever is my D850e. imho there’s no reason to get anything more expensive unless you’re doing professional photography, and even then, you can still use it if you know what you’re doing. I know some wedding photogs who keep one as a backup while doing shoots.

It can also serve as a defensive weapon, in case you ever need a heavy object to bash anyone or anything.

File: d62e02_64de5317b94845c69d(...).jpg (56 KB, 520x488)

56 KB JPG

>>4484395
Correct. Ty. What a based fellow.

>>4484381
It would be kind of dumb to buy one new, considering you can get a lightly used D810 for like 300 USD.
It's like 97% of the same camera.

recommend me a good value stable studio tripod
I'm using my portable one that I thought was alright but I need to take dozens of product style shots and I'm realizing just how flimsy it is I have to adjust it constantly after each time I touch my camera

>>4484253
you know your camera probably has a crop mode right

>>4484413
>I was thinking of getting a compact APS-C body
>brings up crop mode
Ah yes, I wasn't aware crop mode would make the camera smaller my apolocheese anon.

>>4484414
Since you don't need the second camera it actually makes it the smallest possible (0cm width).
But that you might not want to sacrifice resolution I would understand, but would you really leave your house without the full frame? Would feel a bit naked. So either crop and lose resolution or carry two bodies I think

What are some nice lenses for the z-mount? I haven't use anything other than the prime 50 S series.

File: 1749422817044081.jpg (116 KB, 1024x1167)

116 KB JPG

Why shouldn't I get a Godox iT30Pro?
Seems like the perfect small flash

>>4484428
What body? I have a ZF and love my Thypoch lens as well as adapting some M mount lenses. >>4484407
>>4484410
I was asking more out of curiosity since I didn't know they were still being sold new. I've never personally bought anything brand new and don't get the desire to do that.

>>4484428
I haven't tried them yet but the Tamron lenses seem nice for the price, will probably buy the 70-180mm F/2.8

File: screen-shot-2016-10-29-at(...).png (65 KB, 277x222)

65 KB PNG

just bought a Panasonic Lumix dmc zs100 from a thrift store for 50 bucks

what we thinking

File: Godox-iT30-05.jpg (46 KB, 1200x675)

46 KB JPG

>>4484432
>small
It's massive.

>>4484439
Thoughts so far? I've tried to snipe a couple of Ebay Auctions for the adjacent models.

>>4484439
Very good. People tend to think that these cameras because they are close to a decade old are worthless, but there isn't much to differentiate them from contemporary digicams.

>>4484029
this are a few sweet deals, way cheaper than ebay. equivalent to keh "bargain" grade (picture quality unaffected)

Rebel T1i
$41, low clicks.
https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-eos-rebel-t1i/sku-3182405
$42, "
https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-eos-rebel-t1i/sku-3528228

nikon d7000
$154, "
https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/nikon-d7000/sku-3008102

Got an old EOS-1 SLR off fleabay the other day and the mirror is getting stuck up top when it fires. Even set to a fast speed like 1/4000th it will just sit up there most of the time after firing and slowly fall back down into place. You can push it with no resistance to get it back into position as well.
Pretty sure it's fucked but does anyone know how hard of a fix this is? It was a good deal but I guess now I know why it was.

I'll just return it if it's proper fucked and/or a cunt to fix.

>>4484470
I am so glad I don't have to rely on ebay to acquire used gear. It is just a bunch of amerifat resellers dumping junk while feigning ingorance and japs over-exaggerating the condition.

File: IMG_1090.jpg (3.4 MB, 3502x3243)

3.4 MB JPG

Canon sale is active.
Want to buy an R100 since focus peaking but I'd be better off just buying a 400 f5.6 than dumping money into bodies,
I am mostly satisfied with the results most of the time considering it's freehand with a 70's f6.3 through an OVF, at high ISO, through a pane of glass.
I still want a OM5 or OM10 for the extra reach, IBS and focus peaking but they are kinda expensive for what really.

Does it make any sense to buy a point and shoot in 2025?

i need a mini tripod for night photos with long exposures. must be sturdy enough to support 1,5 kg camera with lenses. must be small so i can take it in my jacket or back pocket. 30euro max.
i don;t care about carbon or other fancy stuff i just need something to hold my camera so i don't put it on the ground
any recommendations?

>>4484473
Idk why anyone would buy an R100. An R50 is like an extra $100 and is vastly superior. Then again I'd just go R10 if I was stuck on crop.
>>4484477
So long as it has a decent telephoto zoom going for it, it'll still btfo any phone except at 24mm. Being able to use a real optical zoom is the main point of these digishitters. Obviously bigger sensor better but even a 1/2.3" sensor with a proper zoom will be alright so long as it costs you less than $100

>>4484481
>So long as it has a decent telephoto zoom going for it, it'll still btfo any phone except at 24mm. Being able to use a real optical zoom is the main point of these digishitters. Obviously bigger sensor better but even a 1/2.3" sensor with a proper zoom will be alright so long as it costs you less than $100
Any model you'd recommend?

>>4484477
only if you really hate your phone photos and can fit one in your handbag next to your purse
p&s cams still aren’t good enough to btfo ilcs and never will be bc physics and no one buys them so no one is pumping money into r&d
but people buy phones so not only are phone cams getting better physically but a dickload of research and development has gone into improving image processing so your snapshits look s-grade (unless you zoom in or print, so don’t do that)

is there anything more out of touch than a flat field macro lens?

>>4484488
Why would that be a bad thing

convince me not to upgrade from an R10 to an R6mkii

File: 1765256248[1].png (719 KB, 1684x862)

719 KB PNG

where the fuck are the reviews??

>>4484502
No. Buy the R6. Could wait until the MkIII drops in full and get some deep discounts on the MkII.
Berry gud camera. Doesn't suffer from the true hybrid cripple shit the R5II does.
I tossed up between it and the R8 and there's really no wrong choice.

>>4484486
anyone

>>4484506
R6 doesn't have RAW burst, which is a deal breaker for me. plus the price difference between the mk1 and the mk2 is only ~$200 for some reason. I'm kinda hoping that the mk3 lowers prices, but I'm also worried there's gonna be more tariff nonsense or other bullshit that drives up prices

>>4484508
Sorry. I meant like, yes get the R6 MkII. I didn't mean to make you think the MkI version.
>plus the price difference between the mk1 and the mk2 is only ~$200 for some reason
Yeah that's been true basically it's whole lifecycle and idk why exactly, the MkII is a significant upgrade.

>>4484509
thank you for clarifying. I thought you were smoking crack but I was trying to be polite

>>4484481
Only advantage for a White man who only shoots photos is the faster burst rate, rest is videoslop.

>>4484458
>People tend to think that these cameras because they are close to a decade old are worthless
I think you are ignoring the fact these cameras are even more expensive than FF DSLRs in the used market since 3 years ago

File: Ricoh-GR-IV-HDF-Ricoh-GR-(...).jpg (124 KB, 1080x904)

124 KB JPG

The GR IV monochrome really makes me think. I didn't buy the normal IV because I'm afraid of that tiny sensor compared to my full frame lineup of cameras with the Leica Q2 currently being my favorite. But I shoot lots of B&W and the Leica mono cameras are too expensive for me. The Ricoh may just fit right in. From what I read a mono sensor offers more detail/sharpness and DR. Though, the sensor is still small. Will it still shine with its IQ? Or should I stick to my Q2 and just use a B&W preset?

>>4484090
Is anyone supposed to care? What's the point?

>>4484570
That thing won’t come out until like the middle of next year, it probably won’t be in stock for another 6 months after that and the initial batches will probably be defective in every imaginable way.

Maybe you’ll find some for under $2,000 by the end of 2027.

Why does the Fuji X-Half make reddit seethe so much? It makes me want one even more. I know, I know… But I have a real camera already. And a real camera doesn’t take the kind of photos the x-half does, unless you sit at a computer and fiddle around with settings like a sucker.

>>4484598
>arbitrarily shaming yourself into wasting money on toys
in this very moment, you have ceased to think like a man. you now have the brain of a 16 year old girl.

load up on dildos and vibes sugartits. you're a lady now. orgasming by sitting and fiddling around with your weiner is for suckers. it's way easier to let something do your prostate for you.

>>4484585
Nope. No point. Just like most the board.

>>4484604
See!!! Right here! This is the kind of pure unadulterated cope and seethe that this camera causes. God I want one so bad. I bet this faggot spends hours a day in lightroom. Sunk cost has consumed him. Someone taking… dare I say… BETTER photos… all without touching adobe? His mind doesn’t even allow him to comprehend it. He has been blinded by all that wasted time fucking around with camera raw files. The idea induces pure seethe that manifests into vitriolic cope.

>>4484614
>all but confirming everything I said was true
How can one camera cause such seethe. No one was this mad about the digi hari. I really have to experience it for myself. The only other thing that creates comparable reddit seethe is when Behringer releases perfectly cloned instruments and redditors lose their mind, because of sunk cost.

>>4484604
>>4484614
>Cant afford a couple of hundred on a hobby and starts having a meldown
Holy shit how poor are you? LMAO

Anyone know anything about IP security cameras? I want to wire up my kitchen with five or so to record cooking content for shmedia. What brands should I look into? Is it worth getting c-mount cameras, or is are high quality bubble cameras enough?

>>4484442
Is this your first time seeing a flash?
It's shit though. Too close to the lens. Shadows away from the lens will make photos look unnatural. There's a reason why flashes are so tall.

>>4484620
>IP security cameras
Fair bit but I'm more familiar with PoE enterprise stuff. You can get some with decent image quality but they're not cheap because they're designed with wealthy corps in mind who need to be able to zoom in on ID badges and the like from 20m away.

You're going to need a workstation or at least a server to run the cameras to, maybe still get DVR but that's a bit overkill if you're just going to record select timeslots instead of 24/7 recording. If you're a consumer you could get away with some basic TP-link stuff but the IQ is still going to be pretty ass unless you're lighting your kitchen real well. In fact if your lighting is decent and powerful enough it'll look alright.

You might be better served just getting some Elgatos and running them to a small NUC in your kitchen. Chuck a small monitor in and you can control them through OBS relatively simply. That'll coss shitfucks less than any high-end IPSec camera setup.

>>4484641
Yeah they don't have to be IP specifically, my kitchen is tiny so they could all be plugged into the same switch/power strip if need be. I figured I'd have an old thinkpad or something in the corner serving as the DVR/NAS, what I really want though is the ability to flip a switch or click one button and all cameras immediately start recording. Thanks for calling out OBS, I haven't kept up with open source projects in this space and OBS seems like a good controller, any other projects I should look into?

>>4484414
is having a second body a means to achieve a complementary focal length, or is it the goal itself?
sounds like you're trying to talk yourself into consooming

File: _DSC1145.jpg (3.78 MB, 2917x4375)

3.78 MB JPG

Need a cheapish low light hybrid cam to adapt my dusty rusky m39s to, is snoy a7sii my best bet?

>>4484646
>buying things bad
Soyuz nerushimy, respublik svobodnykh
Splotila naveki, velikaya Rus'!

File: 001.jpg (99 KB, 800x600)

99 KB JPG

>>4484570
You're overthinking it. Mono APS-C is probably close to if not on par with full frame color when it comes to the stuff you mentioned.
However at least to me the main draw of shooting native B&W is using color filters. With the GR series this is only possible using the filter adapter which deletes the main draw of the GR, that being convenience and pocketability.
>that tiny sensor
Relax, it's not m43

File: 3773193c4522465e9736dd10d(...).png (532 KB, 640x479)

532 KB PNG

>>4484598
>toy-tier build quality at the price of a new APS-C kit or excellent used full-frame
>full of gimmicks like a film advance lever that does <something??>
>muh film simooolations
>8.8 x 11.3mm sensor is not half frame, typical fuji deceptive marketing
Yeah, plenty of reasons to hate it.

>>4484664
>leica design ripoff
>phone aspect ratio
>tiny ass sensor that couldn't even compete with MFTurds
>""film"" simulations
>LARP-tier ergos
I desperately want to know how many sales this thing makes so I can judge how fucked the cattle are these days

File: 1755091290424396.jpg (244 KB, 1203x1377)

244 KB JPG

>>4484414
>>4484413
Original poster of the question here, I hadn't thought of crop mode, but it's out of the question unless I go buy a >≈40MP camera. Cropping 1.5x from 24MP leaves just 10MP which is uhhhh
>>4484646
Yes, the idea is complementary focal lengths without having to swap lenses all the time. I already do this and it gets annoying (but still less annoying than packing a fuckhuge f/2 zoom). At the moment my usual setup is a 50/1.2 and 28/2.8.
I'd like to do something like a compact 24/28+50 and/or 50+90. That means:
>buy e.g 28/1.5 or similar plus high res body, use crop mode to get it 42/2.2 (a bit boring, this is GR40 territory)
>the same with the 50/1.2 to get it to 75/1.8 - not quite 90 but whatever
or
>sell GR40 to fund GR28, sell 28/2.8 -> carry GR28 in pocket with 50/1.2 on main
or
>get compact second full frame body, just use the lenses I already own
Trouble is that the compact full frame market is very limited.

File: aj7hjHo8DaB3L2D3A6ZNj5.jpg (543 KB, 2000x1125)

543 KB JPG

>>4484598
The concept is very nice, overall nice package and I would gladly pay the price for it. But the problem is, despite having an even bigger sensor, the samples I saw had a worse image quality compared to my old Pentax Q. Not sure why, probably awful lens? Reminds me how much I miss the Q, I sure hope it makes a comeback someday

>>4484664
>>4484673
More reddit seethe lol. You queers sound like someone who has only ever held a pencil their entire lives melting down because you just found out crayons exist.
>>4484688
This is the one thing holding me back, because ive seen very mixed results. I have a feeling the “shitty” pictures are from people like the posters above^ that wouldn’t know what to do with the camera even if they had it. For every good photo I have seen from the x-half there are 10 bad ones. This isnt a camera you take senior portraits or product photography with and I think that breaks the minds of autists.

>>4484697
Impressive copium, very nice.

>>4484698
Not as impressive as the knee jerk seethe that happens at the mere mention of the word “xhalf”. Autistic fucks can’t stand that people are having fun with an $800 camera with bad specs. In a way it might be the most powerful camera ever made, considering it influences emotions before the shutter even clicks.

>>4484707
t. terminal case of buyer's remorse

>>4484708
I dont have one. I want one because it makes autistic people go crazy. And because it takes nice photos if you know what you are doing and are a person that touches grass.

If I only do paid work occasionally, it's better for me to rent lenses, right? Seems more and more like owning anything beyond a kit zoom and a couple primes is a waste of money. Bodies also seem like a consumerist scam. The whole thing is a consumerist scam.

>>4484673
>implying leica isn't going to license it and then charge a markup on a rebranded one

>>4484710
We are all victims

>>4484031
>>4484032
>>4484033
Fake news, these are AI generated

File: file.png (84 KB, 456x456)

84 KB PNG

>>4484480
How tall does it need to be able to go though? The Manfrotto Pixi EVO can hold 2.5kg and is small enough to fit in a jacket, but it's not very tall even when fully extended.

>>4484283
I'm faced with this exact dilemma. Gut is telling me to go with refurbed MkII and invest the rest of the money in glass.

File: lumix_bundle.png (365 KB, 1339x601)

365 KB PNG

This is cheaper than a used S5II + lens that got a tariff price bump and has been out of stock since launch so you can't get it anyways. This is a backup for a S5IIX. The S1II is appealing but not twice the price appealing.

>X-pro 2 + 35mm 1.4
Or
>m240 + 50mm Voigtlander

Fuji package is ~$1200, cheaper if I went XT or XE over x-pro, but it’s aps-c, but you do get autofocus
Leica would be $2500 for the combo, but full frame, M-mount so the lenses are usable forever, and I honestly like using real manual focus
Use would be for travel, portraits, and maybe fashion/influencer photography for some people I know at my gym.

Only real downside of Leica is spending that much money up front, and needing a whole second camera to shoot sports or action. Granted, the x-pro autofocus probably isn’t up to the task for that either.
I’d buy a cheap DSLR, but I really want to downsize my kit, I leave my blob behind a lot unless it’s a dedicated photo outing, while the options above could go in a small bag or backpack pocket.

>>4484765
You're going to want decent high iso and the m240 ain't gunna be it.

Get an xe4/xt4 and whatever meme lens you want.

File: 1756102785-COaDJZtIKeuHY9(...).jpg (379 KB, 2000x1333)

379 KB JPG

>>4484765
I tried a used X-Pro2 in store and it felt pretty cheaply built, as it's made of that kind of plastic that always feels oily no matter how much you clean it. I don't think the sensor has aged very well either, but if you're into simoooolations and shooting jpg then it's probably fine.
If it's a retro-looking setup you want, why not try a Zf with an adapted VM50 of your choice? For M glass It's the third somewhat optically compatible mount after of course Leica M and SL, due to its thinner sensor cover glass than other non-Leica options. If you just want a reasonably compact setup, around that budget you can't go wrong with a Z5ii these days.

What are the latest camera or lens release rumors for 2026?

should i bother with a $380 refurb nikon z30 + 16-50mm kit lens as a travel/vacation cam setup

wasnt big on carrying my ff dslr brick around europe last month wish i had something smaller that fit in a hoodie/cargo pants pocket...the z30 + kit lens actually fits pretty nicely.

a6400 and om5 is $200 more and the nikon z dx kit lens is sharper/faster than either the om5/a6400 for the size (its a nice pancake once collapsed)...apsc nikon def has better iq than m43.

hoping i could get the z30 2 lens kit with the 50-250mm tele for <$500 on black friday

>>4484481
i was looking at the r50 too but the z30 fits in my pocket better. r100 too gimped vs z30 i like how the z30 charges through usbc.

>>4484801
forgot to mention i want to have sharper pictures from better af from a modern mirrorless. i found myself with a bunch of soft/missed focus pics from the screw drive lenses (usually either use a 50mm f1.7 prime or 28-75mm f2.8 zoom) i'll keep my dslr just for fun shooting or when i want the absolutely best image quality.

>>4484780
Yeah, the ZF is almost certainly the better option, especially since it handles M lenses well I can work on a good lens lineup while potentially saving up for an M body.
Still considering the Fujis, but good point about the sensor maybe being on the old side. The results I see on social media look nice, but I like that really moody grainy look anyway, which hides a lot of sensor shortcomings.
Z5 with M lens looks crazy haha
>>4484779
Fair point on the ISO, m240 is only good up to 1600 or 3200, and that’s probably going to be a headache at times.
Too bad that newer M cameras are either wildly out of my price range, unreliable, or both

>>4484819
>Z5 with M lens looks crazy haha
A little goofy, but it's still lighter and more ergo than the Zf after all.

>>4484819
>looks crazy
Oh yeah because how the camera looks is what makes photos good

>>4484830
True, just hadn’t pictured the combo together before is all

>>4484847
Jesus you people are touchy
Was not a value judgement, just funny to see the ergo body with the giant Z mount and then this little tiny M lens that barely pokes past the grip

>>4484401
A7C2

>>4484676
>unless I go buy a >≈40MP camera
So instead of selling your current camera and buying a 40MP one, we're buying a second crop camera?

File: Powershot.png (3.38 MB, 2485x935)

3.38 MB PNG

Hi, can any seasoned camera pro help me understand something?

Look at the 2 photos in pic related. Why does the photo on the right look so much more pleasing to the eye than the one on the left?

The camera on the left has a 1.4inch almost micro four thirds sensor and the camera on the right only has a 1inch sensor. The camera on the left should be a clear winner because of its bigger sensor, but that ain't the case.

Can someone please explain why?

Has anyone shot a Olympus OM-PC or OM-G? I have a OM-2n I like a lot but its in fantastic shape and I feel neglectful shooting with it on rainy days or taking it mountain biking. the PC and G are cheap as fuck and take my lenses. Does anyone know if they're close to the same tier as the single-digit OM series?

>>4484854
They both have bad white balance.

>>4484854
>less overexposed colors
>tighter shot (the background isn't relevant to the picture)
>more blurred background

>>4484859
yes, but how come a 1inch sensor camera can do this unlike its 1.4inch sensor counterpart?

>>4484852
I don't want to sell my current camera.

>>4484868
It looks like the right is just shot at a longer focal length equivalent

>>4484253
>For example, I can use my 50mm f/1.2 on APS-C as a 75mm f/1.8 lens with the same exact rendering
This is wrong though, it will render the same as a crop of your 50mm lens unless it's such an overcorrected, flat plane lens that it renders the same across the entire frame.

>>4484879
That's just a technicality and frankly a waste of a post, but unsurprising coming from a tripfag.

>>4484880
>That's just a technicality
One with possibly highly noticeable effects depending on the lens.

File: L9999777-1200x520.jpg (156 KB, 1200x520)

156 KB JPG

>>4484401
Depends on your budget I guess. I've had the most joy with the first Leica Q. Incredible image quality with that sweet lens, body feels of high quality and nice to hold. But it's fixed lens. Easy to bring anywhere in a small bag, no need to think what lens to bring, etc. A bit slowish though and the EVF isn't so good. May wanna get the Q2 instead.

Or you get the Nikon ZR. You can still shoot photos (electronic shutter only) but also dive into the world of video. It's also fun to explore, lots of things to learn and try. That's what keeps me a bit busy now in my free time. The red video files are a beauty to work with. BUT compared to Leica it feels like a computer, similar to sony probably.

Why is Leica shit so expensive? If it justifies the cost who do pros usually shoot Nikon or Canon?

>>4484895
Big part is the sales volume they can actually do
There’s not a big market for fully-manual digital cameras, so they have to charge a lot.
On top of that, the people who want one will pay quite a bit, because they specifically enjoy that optical rangefinder experience.
Now, the M EV1 is a completely ridiculous thing, there’s no way that should cost even half of what it does.
The lenses are good, but probably legitimately overpriced for how good they are. Almost everyone I know who shoots Leica says that Voigtlander is 98% as good for 5-10% of the cost

>>4484890
>pic
Imagine a dog coming up and licking this.

>>4484896
I appreciate the explanation. I was worried people would think I was baitposting.

>>4484895
It's what the market dictates. They wouldn't sell for that much if the average buyer didn't think it was worth it.

Simple as that, many a men have made fortunes by accepting that logic throughout all of history.

>>4484854
Right image is taken from farther away and zoomed in, leading to a more flattering perspective
Right also has a more reddish white balance
Right is also exposed less / darker, leading to less clipping of the sky and darker midtones and shadows

Nothing about the differences between these two are camera specific, they are very simple things you could (and should) adjust with with any camera

File: 251126072.jpg (2.58 MB, 2250x3000)

2.58 MB JPG

>>4484765
X-Pro2 and M10 are my forever cameras lol
Had Pro2 since launch and it definitely brings enough to the table to pick over my M10 often
It's held up through the most rain, sand, and drops of any camera I've had
Zf/Z5II are too good to ignore if you want to use M-mount glass though

File: 251126070.jpg (3.91 MB, 3000x2250)

3.91 MB JPG

>>4484819
Here's Pro2 at 6400 (f2, 1/60th), with minimal sharpening and zero NR applied, for reference

I'll wait for the Xpro4

>>4484903
>>4484904
>very opinionated about very expensive cameras
>flatly lit bokeh dog picture, center composition
many such cases

>>4484854
Better background separation
Better contrast
Slightly warmer tones

>>4484907
Good thing I post hundreds of other photos here for you to nitpick
>nophoto whining
many such cases

>>4484916
>my good photos go to another thread
arent you just the homo that posts the same two collages over and over

gearfags… many such cases

>>4484917
I've posted a few dozen of collages, hundreds of photos here at this point
These photos were both from today too

Sorry for both enjoying gear + actually taking pictures

>>4484903
>>4484904
Assuming the color pic is the m10? Nicely done getting a dog in focus on manual, if so.
B+W pic looks great for a 6400 iso sensor from 2016, at least on my screen

Out of curiosity, when are you using the x-pro over the m10? I assume when you don’t want the mental effort of running manual focus, or when you don’t want to carry your $5k camera+lens around?

Tbh, I’m really leaning towards the Fuji. I really really want the Leica, emotionally speaking, but the cheapest m240 on eBay is the same cost as an x-pro 2 and 3 primes, and the image quality seems good enough with either option.
Definitely considering the zf+adapter route, but I’m on enough of a budget that any M glass I got in the near future would be Voigt or Thypoch at best 7artisans at cheapest, so idk if it really matters as far as a long term investment.
If I liked the native Z lenses more I might go that way, but theyre all just so chunky other than the 40/f2. Never done manual focus on an EVF, but all the youtube guys are going wild for the zf, for whatever their opinions are legitimately worth.

>>4484926
It's said that Nikon currently has the best manual focus aids in EVF. Leica only does focus peaking, although in my experience it is quite good and I usually don't have issues getting accurate shots with it under regular conditions.
Also tried Fuji manual focusing on the X-T5, didn't like it.

>>4484926
They both Pro2. The Pro2 is much better to use one handed, so anything from walking the dog, festivals with a drink in hand, etc. It's much more convenient for just getting snapshots. I also tend to use it in more extreme weather conditions, or traveling in poverty countries, or when I want to dual shot with the Pro3. I also use it for 1-button printing to the SP-2 Instax printer.

Voigt glass is great, I went back to it from Leica and haven't gone back. I wouldn't hesitate with Thypoch either if was restarting on a budget. Would skip 7Artisans/TTArtisans though.

Zf (and Z5II/Z6III/Z8) offer the best system for MF with adapted glass. You just turn the lens until the AF box (which also still works for eye detection) turns green. Everything else is pretty reliant on focus peaking or focus zoom/check, and I'm pretty sure everyone else omits subject/eye detection entirely. You can even hold the shutter button, turn the lens, and have it only fire once in focus.

>>4484921
>my good photos go to another school
ok nophoto

>>4484930
I just posted some more elsewhere you can go comment on too
>nophoto
That's why I make be sure to post photos

>>4484932
>my good photos are over there, behind you
ok nophoto. just post one (one) that isn’t a dog.

>>4484895
Why is a Rolex so expensive? If it justifies the cost, why do pros use Garmins or G-Shocks?

>>4484933
no dogs here >>4484925
some dog, some no dog here >>4483549
did you have a particular subject in mind?

>>4484111
erm actually

D700 > everything even modern mirrorless enshittified devices

>tfw dust in my gear

>>4484929
>The Pro2 is much better to use one handed, so anything from walking the dog, festivals with a drink in hand, etc.
Etc = wanking?

>>4485014
Gotta make sure your dick pics have creamy bokeh.

File: IMG_3245.jpg (43 KB, 720x371)

43 KB JPG

A nikon d7500 produces higher image quality with more honest and filmic rendering from a more reliable device than a fujifilm xpro anything and has a real OVF not a fake one.

They also have a similar front profile (the one your subject actually sees)

>>4485095
jesus the xpro is so fucking ugly. it looks like someone left their chinese plastic leica copy in the sun.

>>4485096
I think both the Nikon and Fuji are damn ugly. I miss when industrial designers had some skill. Japanese designers really lost their mind after the bubble. Not only cameras but everything. Germans are the only ones left doing some good designs.

>>4485098
Germans aren’t doing design. They’re reusing design.

>>4485095
Used both, prefer the X-Pro
D7500 is fine, but X-Pro offers a lot more
I brought my Pro2 to Thanksgiving today so we'll see if we get some more pics for you guys

>>4485104
>it offers a lot more
worms
and gay hookups (also worms)

What if someone put a camera in a dog bowl.

>>4485106
Woah dude, I smoke lots of weed, but you're on another level

I was recently gifted a used but in good shape Nikon D850e. As a I read about it, this camera seems comparable to many modern cameras in terms of image quality.

How is that possible? has camera technology not advanced much in the last 10 years?

File: Oldasslens.jpg (750 KB, 1440x1066)

750 KB JPG

Someone is selling this on FB for like 200 bucks.

600mm f5.6, manual focus.
Anyone seen this thing before?

>>4485133
It's so good Nikon is still selling it. Lucky bastard.
The only things that have improved are basically video functionality and ISO denoising.

>>4484959
>12MP
Toy camera

>>4484959
D700 is only glorified because it was probably the last affordable "pro" camera people bought before ditching dslr for mirrorless.

>>4485138
That's Nikon's first 600mm. Actually a kind of neat thing, the focus and aperture section is removable and can be transferred to a 400mm f/4.5 and 800mm f/8 "head" to save space, weight, and money.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/600mm-p.htm

>>4485133
> Nikon D850e
Do you mean D810E or D850?
In either case, there have been many models released with improved image quality, but those cameras were already so good begin with that further gains are pretty marginal for most people.
There have been tons of not IQ-related performance improvements with modern cameras too. Now you can get a Z8 that shoots 20fps with better AF, more features, etc.

>>4485152
Nah, D700's were still pushing $2500 in 2012, D750's launched at $2300 two years later
People weren't ditching their DSLR's for mirrorless in 2014, they were picking them up as a secondary option, most people didn't seriously consider swapping until like 2018 when Canikon started putting serious models out

Decided to buy a better SLR than my EOS 3000 and holy shit the features on this thing are awesome.
Eye controlled DoF preview is a godsend and I do not understand why this still isn't a thing on modern Canons.
Not to mention this thing is built like a brick and I reckon I could commit blunt-trauma assault with it and document its performance in said assault without issue.

Did digital kill off innovation?

>>4485155
I meant 800e. I also received it with a Nikon 105mm f2.8. The quality of the image portraits that it is producing for me as a mess around with it is amazing, I love it.

File: DSC_9906.jpg (2.92 MB, 4256x2832)

2.92 MB JPG

>>4485151
This is a 3 MP "small" quality jpg SOOC from my d700. Do you think that your snoy acriiviiviiv can post an image to the web that is discernible in any way from this, other than much, much worse colors?

>>4485160
>3MP
>4256x2832
Anon experiences brain damage, pt. 14

>>4485163
Meant MB, you caught my typo, but my point stands

>>4485166
Yeah fair, I'm not trying to be a cunt but I thought your brain melted for a second.
I agree that lower MP means fuck all after a certain point because most web-viewing and prints are not delivered with their maximum MP in mind, but are downsampled. a 12MP 5D from 2005 will btfo most other cameras bar the roughly similar modernised counterparts like your D700, and both will still look great.

>>4485021
My dick needs an UWA lens to capture it all

>>4485155
>most people didn't seriously consider swapping until like 2018 when Canikon started putting serious models out

Yes.... exactly. It's just nostalgia fags. The d700 isn't that great of a camera, it's mid.
People bought them during the infant phases of mirrorless, and then when they became serious they switched.

>>4485160
>blurry underexposed flower
id hope someone with a snoy a7criv could do better than having 90% of the subject out of focus yeah

>>4485171
Aliasing and bayer blur. 45mp looks better than 12mp when both are at like, 8mp. Fact of life is, digital photography always looked worse than film until digital camera passed 30mp, which is only 22mp except on a black and white test chart. The same resolution as a frame of vision3 scanned with modern pixel shifting mirrorless - or printed in the darkroom by a competent photographer.

>>4484361
A scratched hood drops the resale value much less than a scratched front element.
If the lens is something I might want to buy 2nd hand, please do not use the hood. (In most cases - there are exeptions - a scratch on front element needs to be ugly indeed before it noticeably affects image quality. And even then it's usually in situations like shooting against lights at night.)

File: s-l1600 (1).jpg (188 KB, 1600x1600)

188 KB JPG

randomly came across peak aesthetic camera on ebay

>>4485096
i agree

>>4484361
There's a second function to hoods... they protect the front lens. My 500mm is scratched to shit because I rest my lens on it and lay it down on the ground all the time. People need to stop worrying about scratches and shit unless you're planning on reselling rather quickly.

Is an APSC camera with a pancake lens from Viltrox better than any phone camera?

>>4485236
The only pancake lenses that are better than phone cameras are made by canon.

EF-M 22mm f2
EF 40mm f2.8
RF 28mm f2.8

File: IMG_3254.jpg (36 KB, 414x738)

36 KB JPG

>>4484717
they arent. its what happens when people use the shutter as a dust cover instead of just letting dirt get on the sensor cover glass.

>>4485239
Why are brown people like this?

>>4485236
Any APS-C is better than a phone camera anon.
>captcha: OK GR

I ended up buying a Niyien A1
I don't regret it, this little fucker is magic

File: IMG_20251128_151438141_HDR.jpg (1.7 MB, 2230x3863)

1.7 MB JPG

How are we doing poorfags.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/197833044547?chn=ps&google_free_listing_action=view_item
Buy this if you need a telephoto.

Anyone know of some 300mm's that are around that price? 400mm has it's value but at this range brids are basically taking up the whole frame.

I am perpetually tempted by the earliest EM10's and EM5's, look good, magnesium, would be better to adapt lenses on, focus peaking.
I shoot manual long lenses free hand a lot and get by with it and never used a camera with IBS how much does IBS help?

>>4485277
It depends. On Panasonic/Olympus it's pretty decent so it'll help on video. There's plenty enough videos out there showcasing it. Outside of those, you're looking at something subpar that probably helps better if you also have some sort of lens stabilization. Electronic stabilization can do quite a bit, but it needs processing files with gyroscope data + it crops the image (+ you need to use a high shutter speed). There's a device in the market that can add this functionality to basically any camera.
IBIS can help in the sense that you can drop the shutter speed a bit more on handheld mode.
It's often recommended if you use a tripod to disable IBIS in any case

Sony A7iii or Nikon Z6ii? They are about the same price for me used, I've studied raws and I prefer sony. But the nikon has better ibis and better video..

>>4485282
I like Nikon

>>4485282
Nikon. Sony is a meme.

>>4485282
The IBIS is equally shit and the sony is better in every way except some video codec and arthritis-friendliness. Just get the sony unless you absolutely must have the Z 24-120 f4 or cant afford the f1.4 GMs but can afford the f1.8 S lines. Dont get the nikon if you want the best 16-35 f4 or the only 20-70 f4, or the only 50-150 f2, or the best 28-70 f2, or third party lenses that aren’t shit (AKA just sigma)

>>4485282
Nikon mogs Snoy and has better lenses

>>4485282
Sony is the best. Nikon is for hipsters that samefag a ton and hate sony. See: the last 50 /gear/ OPs and constant anti-sony FUD spam.

File: IMG_7529.jpg (2.03 MB, 3547x2660)

2.03 MB JPG

I'm curious about Fujifilm X-T50.. What's the consensus on the camera? Any black friday deals I should be aware about?

>>4485310
>Sony is the best. Nikon is for hipsters

You have it backwards. I bought Nikon and Pentax DSLRs over Sony, and I am no hipster!

>80 buckos for a Canon LP-E6P battery
I've never purchased third party batteries before. How good are they?

>>4485332
The really cheap third party batteries work but capacity and durability may be whatever and if it's a battery with higher then single element voltage (like 7.2V or more ) the elements inside are likely not matched. If so, one of the elements may eventually swell enough to get stuck inside camera. So always take such batteries out of camera when not in use.
The genuine original batteries from China which cost about half of western ones are same as original and the only difference is text is in hieroglyphs instead of english.

>>4485332
I've bought a bunch of third party LP-E17s for my Canon R8 and they're fine. Capacity is a bit lower and you cant see how much charge is remaining (it'll just shutdown with a full bar showing), but mine have USB-C charging ports in each battery so it's simple to keep a spare or two topped up over a long day.
I also got two for like $30 so for the price of one genuine I get four chingchongnese batteries. Not bad I'd reckon.

>>4485305
>>4485310
good morning saars

>>4485328
>pentaxpacos
>nikon ninos
Kek KEK

Canon and Sony: cameras for the white man

File: beegcanon.png (1.65 MB, 1076x1093)

1.65 MB PNG

>>4485369
>4chan presents: The White Man

going on a trip to yurop and I'm gonna bring my a6000 and 35mm for snapshits, but would something wider be better? I don't wanna carry around more than 1 lens but 35mm on a crop sensor might be too tight. I don't normally do landscape or architecture photography so I never got anything wider than the kit. Or should I just use the lens money on something like a cheap compact?

>>4485376
50mm was always the standard kit for small travel SLRs.

>>4485377
135 SLRs were always the small compact amateur option compared to the professional MF

>>4485376
I usually bring my FF big boi with me on trips and only use the 40mm. Small, light, no need for more.

>>4485392
>135 SLRs were always the small compact amateur option compared to the professional MF
The standard travel focal length for 6x6 MF was 75-80, about 50mm equivalent. Look at the Zeiss Ikons, Agfa Isolettes, various Hasselblad 500s etc. The same also applied to later MF kits like the Mamiya 6 (75mm being the most compact lens for that system). Even guys with a Pentax 67 on travels most likely use(d) the roughly 50mm equivalent 105/2.4 as their main lens. So what exactly is your point? I am simply telling anon that 50mm (or equivalent) has been a typical focal length for travel since forever.

>>4485392
Irrelevant

>>4485393
I assume he's trying to mog on APS-C or something, while also coping that he doesn't go MF. I dunno, probably autistic

File: pro photographer i hardly(...).jpg (564 KB, 1051x754)

564 KB JPG

u may not like it but dis is what peak performance looks like

File: snoy_shooter.webm (3.52 MB, 576x1024)

3.52 MB WEBM

>>4485369
>Sony: cameras for the white man

>>4485406
>sensor rot
>yearly inspection needed or the shutter falls apart
truly german engineering

>>4485411
thats the m9 ur thinkin of, the m8 is pure joy

>>4485336
>>4485346
Thanks. Guess I'll give third-party a go.

Any affordable tripods that don't use cheap plastic shims?

>>4485369

Snoy and Kwanon suck!

File: NikonD2x.jpg (83 KB, 1000x750)

83 KB JPG

>>4485374
>4chan presents: The highest resolution 12mpx camera with the most realistic imaging and greatest color accuracy for the White man!

File: 104045537_p0.jpg (425 KB, 858x1200)

425 KB JPG

>camera gear is on average 40% cheaper in japan than in europe
we're getting seriously raped over here, jesus.

>>4485433
Is it? I typically see it being sold at the same prices we see in the U.S., minus the tariffs.

File: Adorama_228-1.jpg (305 KB, 850x565)

305 KB JPG

>>4485427
D2x is the most iconic of the "older" Nikon DSLR's for me, had a D2h for a few years, and loved the body
I remember this pic being posted here sometimes long ago

>>4485239
I'm glad I looked at enough forums and posts when I got my mirrorless to learn how retarded it is to do that. I was initially going to have the shutter closes for every lens change until I read about how that could fuck up the shutter, so I'd rather deal with the dust risk instead.

>>4485282
You'd be better off looking at Sony vs Canon rather than including Nikon in the discussion, just saying. Out of the options you've listed though, Sony would be better than the Nikon.

>>4485433
government is doing the rape though. it's 20% import VAT ontop of 8% tariffs. what would cost you 1000 euros costs 1300 in the end because yo voted for communist policies, eurofag
well at least syrian rapists now get free health care lol

>>4485282
i liek nikon colors but the z6ii has terribad autofocus (it's that first gen Z AF which is still better than current fuji but it's still bad). I'd take the A7iii
or I'd get the Z5II ... which has great AF and great colors and great low light. it might be the most perfect fool frame camera when you consider price

>>4485441
NPCs overestimate how sturdy a shutter is and how sensitive a sensor is. it's funny. because the sensor has protective glass infront of it and the shutter is a bunch of hair thin titanium blades that have to move in 1/8000s over 36mm. that's a speed of 1040 km/h = 645 mph

Why do people often say that if you don't want to edit, you get a Fuji?

>>4485460
The colors thing is always funny to me. Sony makes the majority of camera sensors on the market for most brands (Fuji included I think) so the only difference is what colors the manufacturer chooses. Color science only matters if you're sticking with SOOC JPGs, whereas with RAW it literally doesn't matter at all. Some people have also fucked around with Lightrooms files to allow it to load color profiles from other manufacturers for their RAW files and they end up looking exactly the same as if you had that original camera anyway.

>>4485461
So it's better to just get a Sony?

>>4485462
Yes and no, it comes down to your preference for pretty much everything else (camera menus, lens options etc).

ZVE10 with Sony 35mm f/1.8 OSS

or

Fuji XM5 with kit lens

Can you choose for me? Free $10 Google play gift card if I get enough responses

>>4485464
Fuji saar, is best camera for bootiful colors and love deep

>>4485464
fuji is perfect for uploading them immediately to your instagram.

>>4485466
Do you recommend the kit lens or should I get a third party? It's need to be super compact

>>4485467
Kit is good enough. I'm guessing you're traveling and mostly taking snapshits of your trip (not a judgement, just an observation) and the Fuji with a kit lens is a good pick for that kind of casual use.

when is the RF mount going to get some professional wide angle primes for photographers?

>>4485468
What if I want something better than the kit lens but just as compact? What would you recommend? I'm coming from a smartphone

>>4485460
Because their colors are pleasing from the get go. For example if you shoot Sony you have to manually post process your colors after youve taken the shot because you have to shoot RAW. It comes down to if you enjoy spending hours editing or just want to take photos.

>>4485464
Fuji or Nikon Z30 when it pops up as a Nikon refurb for $380

I hated my ZVE10, it really feels like you're getting a barebones camera vs the a6400. Too delicate with not enough controls. The kit lens was kinda meh too but the AF worked great.

>>4484929
Good point about the printer, as dorky as it sounds, that’d be a really handy feature for some of the stuff I’ve thought about doing with events for friends.
Also, if I’m being completely honest, the one-handed snapshitting thing also would come in handy. Being able to take pics one handed at a group outing or whatever makes a lot of sense for my actual life, rather than the theoretical life that I imagine when I’m shopping online.
Also one handed use is great if I need to jerk off about my killer sooc colors while taking more pics

At this point, pretty strongly leaning towards the Fuji and then either moving up to X-pro 4 when it comes out or doing Leica at a later date when I’ve got more money. Thanks for the info on the Voigtlander lenses though. Sample shots I see look amazing, and it’s good to know that the quality is there in practical use.

Also still hoping/planning on doing some kind of serious overseas travel, and being a little more incognito would probably be good haha

>>4485473
please answer or I'll hang myself

chat, I think I need to retire my a6000. Is the 6700 the best upgrade or should I find a used a7 iii or something

File: 51jtHKj9v+L._AC_SL1500_.jpg (51 KB, 946x721)

51 KB JPG

>>4485487

File: rape.png (488 KB, 1049x879)

488 KB PNG

>>4485457
You think I voted for VAT, dipshit? Reducing sales tax is on the political platform of exactly ZERO political parties across the continent.
Besides, if you look at something like lenses from Voigtlander you can get over a 100% price hike, and that's not remotely explainable by VAT or tariffs (the latter of which don't even apply, we have a trade agreement)

>>4485473
For Fuji, the 35 f2, and you can pair it with the 16 f2.8 for a small little kit
The 23/27 f2.8's are fine optically, but use the slower / louder AF system, especially not great for video
Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is worth it over the kit but a bit bigger

>>4485457
>be american
>get 20% price increase minimum for gear across the board
>even on shit that's not directly affected by tariffs (just because we can haha)
>don't even get healthcare
remind me again who we're owning with this bullshit?

The Sony 16-55mm G lens isn't really worth the $400~ (used) extra compared to the Sigma right? I mean it doesn't even have OSS, I'm not crazy right?

>>4485332
good enough to be half the cost

Zoom lenses have optical compromises. If you are serious about the quality of your images, then only good primes will do.

>>4485565
You wouldn't be able to tell the difference if I showed you a series of images with modern to semi modern primes and zooms.

>>4485239
>>4485441
Yet another problem that the DSLR has pre-solved

>>4485577
Nah, you just have the same people fucking up the focus screen and mirror itself instead

>>4485578
Ur not going to fuck up either of those unless ur trying to. try again mirrorless cuck

>>4485579
Same with the shutter, it takes a retard in either case

>>4485580
Nope. shutters are incredibly fragile and putting it that close to the lens mount is asking for trouble. obviously you don't understand what a shutter is or how they're constructed. Nice try tho

>>4485581
> shutters are incredibly fragile
True, good thing mirrorless gives you the opportunity to use e-shutter more effectively instead, reducing that wear and tear. Anyone that has issues form the shutter being down is just poor at handling cameras, period.
Nah, just worked at camera shops for a decade or so. Seen far too many dislodged focus screens, damaged mirrors, and ripped DSLR shutters.

>>4485583
>Nah, just worked at camera shops for a decade or so
That's a really long time have still learned nothing. You have no clue what you're talking about. Sorry, just hard facts. E Shutters are also dogshit, the fact you would bring them up says a lot, lmao. Mirrorless toys are breaking left and right because they know the gullible morons dumb enough to buy them aren't discerning enough to know when a camera is made well or not. You got ewaste. End of story.

>>4485572
ive used both. it takes $1000 for a mirrorless zoom to beat an old DSLR prime in mere sharpness it still loses more contrast and color.

>>4485585
Go make a post in rpt pointing out the pictures taken with zooms and the primes.

>>4485584
> Sorry, just hard facts
Sure, if that's what you call your opinions lol, definitely had a lot more shutter-related DSLR repairs taken in than I ever did with mirrorless
>>4485585
I think you're really overestimating how not-great most DSLR primes actually were, and definitely underestimating how well modern zooms perform
But also, what a great opportunity to prove us wrong with some example pictures that prove your point!

>>4485459
if something is rated to move that fast consistently for hundreds of thousands of actuations, doesn't that just prove how sturdy it is?

>>4485608
Not really. CPU cooling fans are also rated to move really fast but put your finger on it and you'll break it. Just because something is fast doesn't mean it's sturdy.

>>4485609
why would I put my finger on the shutter blades?

>>4485610
That's not the point though.

>>4485611
so it matters when it's a cpu fan, but not when it's a shutter. got it

>>4485613
You might be retarded, anon.

>>4485611
>>4485614
not an argument

>>4485614
This

>>4485615
This

>>4485608
>capable of speed = sturdy
lol

>>4485623
missed the actual point, esl king?
>rated for hundreds of thousand of actuations
so for anyone not handling the shutter blades like an actual chimpanzee it's not a problem

>>4485624
Going back to that CPU fan thing above, that's rated for thousands of hours run time, but that doesn't mean it's sturdy if something unexpected happens (same as with a shutter).
>inb4 b-but i woulddnt touch with my finger
That's call an example autismo. I'm sorry that you're retarded.

>>4485565
I like primes, but unless you're carrying a full bag of them, you're just missing a ton of shots. The ones you do take will be crisp though. Zooms just let you take more pictures.

>>4485626
There are some really good zooms around but the price can get really high if you want quality and speed.

For me, it's the Sigma 17-40mm f1.8

File: 1753792521758453.png (1.3 MB, 1200x800)

1.3 MB PNG

>>4485627
They also tend to get large and heavy, which decreases the fun for me. The whole package not weighting you down while you're enjoying the walk is part of the experience.

I'm running pic related (A7C2 + Tamron 28-200), which is very versatile, but it's already on the heavier end of what I would like to carry. I'm probably also not taking it to something like a friend's wedding and would instead pop on a prime or the kit 28-60.

File: 1743982178806919.png (495 KB, 405x720)

495 KB PNG

>>4485632
Jokes on me. That's the wrong camera. I guess it's the A7C in the pic or something. Reposting.

File: 1741841072860714.png (3.02 MB, 2560x1939)

3.02 MB PNG

Does anyone here use as manual prime as their daily driver? I need an anniversary present idea for myself and thinking of getting the Voigtlander 35mm F2 Apo-Lanthar to run on a compact FF mirrorless setup. How's the experience compared to "modern" AF primes?

>>4485632
>28-200
Pretty big. I tend to go with zoom lenses that are about 24-70 or something like that.

>>4485637
It's definitely chunky, but you get a lot of optionality out of it. You can fit anything from a wide vista or a downtown building on the 28 end, or shoot some moderate proximity wildlife or binds with the 200 end.

File: IMG_6070.jpg (769 KB, 2100x2056)

769 KB JPG

>>4485635
I do and it’s pretty cozy

>>4485666
That does look comfy indeed. What PD strap are you running?

>>4484033
There is literally no reason to have a shutter like this in a fully electronic, digital camera. It is just put in there so the camera has something that can fail and turns it into trash needing replacement.

Redpill me on Fuji kit lenses. Are they better than kit lenses from other brands?