Snapshot editionPrevious thread >>4482160
I would have liked to have gotten the squirrel a bit sharper, but I think this is my photo of the day.
>>4485034He stopped to pose, here.
>>4485034Too bad that would've been a great shot
>>4485039Right? I think it's good to post your near-misses. It's encouraging to beginners to know that everyone misses shots. >>4485040I normally dislike power lines in a shot, but this seems to work here. Civilization Vs. nature.
>>4485042Neat!
just got back from my first west coast visit. also entering my ken era i guess.
>>4485050That's a good shot. But, you're not going to reach Ken-levels without maxing the saturation.
>>4485052Fuck! Idk why its turned>>4485050Foreground looks good. Shadows look good, but the shadows in the back and background look too blue imo
>>4485041Yeah I also post near misses sometimes. I like to see what could have been too.>>4485042Great scene!>>4485050Wonderful shot as well, maybe a bit too much blue for the sky
>>4485053i have, for the first time in my life, used the clarity slider. thats ken enough for me for now.
>>4485057I usually set a negative clarity, much better results
>>4485049I love the scene and it's a good shot... but as much as I hate AI deletion in post, I really want all those people to go away.
>>4485061What is ai deletion? I have no idea what you’re talking about. I shot and edited all these pics from Japan on an old basic iPhone with stock apps
>>4485063he wants you to use AI and delete all the people in the shot
>>4485063It's taking a big section of a picture and letting AI delete it and replace it with it's idea of the same area without people or other objects. Like I said, I hate it. But like I said, I really like your picture. I just wish those people weren't there.
>>4485065Ohhh ok. I like the people, makes it honest. I think it’s lame to go to a very accessible, popular place and try to remove the people, either through editing (ai) or cropping, to make it look you’re alone. You can still see the subject very clearly, the people don’t take away from it imo. On the flip side, I don’t like exploiting strangers either, but the people are so far away it’s hard to see any details. I did upload one photo of strangers, but that was a unique situation where they were already being filmed.
>>4485068I get it. And I respect it. A photo should ultimately be what you want, and not what others think. I posted some pictures of a network sport news team at the local stadium as they were outside with a crowd of fans and some people here freaked the hell out. Don't care. I loved the shots. But, on to looking at the deer shots I just took. Might be back with some soon.
>>4485068Oh and the photo with the balls in the mirror room. I did capture that guys face too. I don’t normally like doing that but it was hard not to get someone’s face in that room bc it was crowded. I was a tourist in super populated location so I like capturing that, it fits the theme. Like I said idc if people are in the shots, if you balance it looks good.I’d like to upload more but I think I hit my limit. Idk this is my first time posting here, maybe an image I tried uploading was too large?
>>4485073You need a posting loicence m8
>>4485077Imo deer are so common that you have to do something interesting with the background or catch them doing something unique. Something creative needs to happen. I can look out my window and see these images all winter.
>>4485078We don't always have the opportunity. I normally post recent pictures here.
>>4485078What the fuck happened to deer in your area? My yuro ass cannot come closer than 50 m from them, even getting smelled makes them flee and they're pretty good at smelling humans
>>4485080No that anon, I'm the one actually posting pictures... but I have a 100-400mm Tamron lens. It's perfect until the rare one ventures close.
>>4485082For me it's not a matter of lens, I just don't see them very often. Then again I don't practice hiding so that might explain it
>>4485080>>4485080Idk, I live in town too. Can’t drive out of town at night without a good potential of hitting one. Couple winters ago had about 30 in front of my house. My buddy is hunting a buck rn on the edge of town. I think the wolf population got messed up and now there are too many deer. I think a lot of people here feed them too so they get used to humans. I see them everywhere, even downtown. Bears too.
>>4485083You probably know this already, but if you didn't, deer are most active around dusk and dawn. That's the time to find them as they follow their travel pattern for food. When food's hard to find, they'll be traveling more. But they have a pattern of where they go and once you find a place on their map, it's like watching a car race on a road course. You sit there and wait for them to regularly pass by.
>>4485079This one is cool and interesting. I like the backlighting. The deer seems to be very aware you are there taking the pic and the giant ears, nose, and eyes are locked in on you.
>>4485086Thanks. Fawns can be very brave and curious. but at the same time, panic and run from the sound of the shutter.
>>4485085Yeah I'm quite a ware of it indeed. What surprises me is how deer in your pics seem to be very aware of your presence yet completely unafraid
>>4485088I'm in an area on the edge between rural and suburban. Lots of pockets of woods, with one at the edge of my property. The deer are used to seeing people and when I want a picture like that, I'll make a clicking noise to get their attention and take the shots. But any movement toward them and they will quickly raise their tails and walk off.
>>4485099B&W works perfectly here.
I took this “photo” :')
>>4485101Thanks.
>>4485079Nice placement in the background and the lighting on the face is great. I've already reached the limit of my own backyard backdrop, but I still had fun while it lasted.>>4485050Fucking sweet. The background is a tad blue for this scheme though.
>>4485080I've groomed about five generations of deer. New moms bring their fawns to meet me. They like it when I pick bugs out of their ears.They are soooo close to being talldogs.
>>4485124Based
Hazy mountain shots are always a pain to process without turning them into shit
>>4485132i heavily dehaze even if it turns shit (very grainy)
>>4485136Yeah I do too most of the times, just look at how flat this shit >>4485132 was before ppBut for some reason attempts at dehazing always fuck with the colors big time and they're very hard to make kinda natural again. I guess too much stretching of the histogram is destined to fail.
Been trying to be a lot more destructive to my B&W rolls since i shoot worthless bullshit. I developed this in rodinal 1:100 at a rolling boil (275°F/135°C) and quenched in an ice water bath.Next project is to propgate fungus on the emulsion.
>>4485132>>4485137Rule 1- you can't add information that's not there in the first place. It was hazy. It will be a hazy picture. But, you can draw out more information. It's just a matter of how long you want to work an image. I slapped this together with layers and lots of individual tweaks to different areas. It's by no means my best work, but it shows you can draw out more if you're willing to put in the time. I spent... maybe 5 minutes. An hours work could probably make a nice shot.
>>4485124we have a forbidden bond.
>>4485050That's amazing. I need a tripod head>>4485130nyao why are u so cute
>>4485186
>>4485187
>>4485055>>4485056>>4485118thanks, yall got me all schizo about the colors again lol; every time i try to tame the blues i end up with a picture that feels too green to me - how about this one, too much?>>4485186thank you, i didnt use a tripod btw, its just two side by side shots stitched
>>4485141Yeah but it looks like shitAnd the scene irl didn't have such a hazy look, hence my attempt at stretching it quite a bit
>>4485200Yes way too much saturation in the highlights for me desu
>>4485210lil bit yeh them shits be orange as fucklike they burnin my eyes n shit but the shit dope tho with da road n shit nah mean
>>4485213are you okay anon
>>4485210damn. i always overshoot, then overcompensate, then hate myself for not overshooting even more. this any better? feels right, looks similiar to what my iphone saw, cloud-top-color-wise
>>4485243Sup heron anon how've you been, haven't seen your crispy bird pics in a minute.
>>4485000
>>4485255It's upside down can u rotate it please
>>4485255>dude... what if >no, dude, listen>what if...>no, oh my god dude>what if...>like>i turned it upside down?>duuuuuuuude...
lovely gum tree
>>4485140>135°CYou developed it in steam?
>>4485347or in a pressure cooker
>>4485034out of focus shit. why not delete that trash?
>>4485347Felt like it, i added sugar to the water too with the goal of causing as much damage as i could while still getting some images. The development proces was a dip/dunk in the dark for 30 seconds to reach full development.Almost burned myself and the neg looked like a bent and crinkled up pube but all i achieved was reticulation
Some damn nice shots itt
angle!
Finally developed this roll after like 3 months sitting on it
>>4485451i never heard of developing film by sitting on it, is that some sorta chicken method or what
>>4485490It’s a new method I developed
am i a cool "photographer of the street's" yet mom
Gloomy
>>4485547no ideaam i?
>>4485551hell yeah brother
>>4485550Is this a joke?
>>4485554What's funny about it?
>>4485554The color banding, the pubes on the sensor, the fact that its just a blurry mess..?
>>4485569>>4485562missed
>>4485140Just buy fomapan. It comes pre fungussed.
>>4485573Too late, i got some strips marinating in some microbe stank water + yeast + sugar. Ill post results eventually if i get cool results.
>>4485600You can buy geotrichum culture that may be nice to use if you soak your film in milk first. You could also let some bread or meat go moldy, scrape all the mold off, blend in water then soak your film in that. Let it sit in a sealed tupperware container on top of a wet sponge.
>>4485612Alternatively, you could just shoot digital and use the faggot slider in LR
Looky me, I'm a special snowflake that still shoots film in the digital age. Ain't I unique and edgy?
>>4485545This has the potential to become the next Kodachrome. Wait, you said sitting, I thought you meant something else nvm.>>4485531Noice>>4485308If you squint, you can see a kookaburra sitting on the gum tree looking merry and gay.>>4485050Nice light, nice pano
>>4485000here's a big toxix toad from Paraguay. I wish a had my fucking flash. I'm an idiot for not knowing an sb-26 would not work on my lumix. >>4485042neat>>4485221great clouds. how much editing?
Night shot under nearly pure green light at the renfaire the other night. Pulled some colors out using LRC.How'd I do, lads?
>4485601Nice, but the spot reflection (from a filter?) needs to be removed.>>4485606>>4485636>>4485659Comfy and souper shaarp. Almost rockwellian.>>4485621Film is great when the photographer is mature enough to view it as another tool in the toolbelt.
>>4485677Flash is one thing, the main problem here is the missed focus
>>4485612I like this idea, ill give it a try. Thanks anon>>4485618Im trying dawg
Today's lesson: if you don't ETTR, you'll make ISO 200 look more like 2000 when you recover in post
>>4485734>ETTRwelcome to 2012 loljust get a proper modern camera and you can just lift shadows without shit like ETTR and god knows what fuck poor people do to make their historic cameras work lol
>>4485734also learn to focus and return that fugly cat and get a photogenic one
>>4485677>great clouds. how much editing?hey man, thanks! just the usual color grading, nothing out of the ordinary, the sky just looked great that evening. heres the raw
>>4485742now i notice that i might have pushed the exposure up a bit too much. well it is what it is.
>>4485736The focus on the eyes is proper. I don't know where this persistently wrong idea came from, but I've never heard it from anyone who actually shoots for a living/passion.
>>4485754>eyes in focus - everything okbabies first prime lens, I see. just shoot wide open - no one cares for unimporant shit like ears or nose in a face. eyes and bokeh is enoughpost again when you learn to step down properly
>>4485731the flash would have made it like the front page of national geographic. was holding my phone flashlight, and with open aperture to get the shot.I couldn't focus the camera with one hand.
>>4485734>>4485735>>4485736>>4485754>>4485769its a fine picture, gear obsession ruins minds
>>4485769Oh, you again. How is anyone supposed to learn anything from you - or even care - if you seeth more than you advise? This was your problem in the other thread.It's almost like you don't actually know what you're talking about and you don't have a valid complaint.
>>4485743Yeah I think you need to preserve some of the softness in the clouds (avoid oversaturation too)I'd also suggest trying to refram to get the end of the road's curve in a corner and to erase that crack which is distracting. I think I also overexposed the foreground a bit but here's an attempt.
>>4485779Its an amateurish soapy blurry catBokeh works on people. A lot of lenses have a slightly curved field of focus that hugs the shape of the human face better so focusing on the eyes also gets the nose and ears in focus wide open. And on people, the pores in the skin being a but soft is ideal. On snouted animals like cats it’s just a blurry mess
>>4485779It's seething that he carried over from the M43 thread, even after being informed that he was responding to 5 year old photos in a troll thread. The ego is a funny thing, especially on this slow board.
>>4485784yeah man, gotcha, that looks pretty natural, but. tending to the overcompansating bit, i went the other way. regarding the crack - which one? and as to the reframing, i am now more than 8000km far from mojave and doubt i will be back in the near future so... it is what it is
>>4485809Might be my esl brain using the wrong word, I'm referring to cropping here like I did in the last pic, but idk if it's really better. The crack was on the road on the foreground and became a bit too noticeable with the increased luminosity and crop
>>4485814oh i see now! something something bias, i really didnt even notice the crack down there... i thought you wanted the right part of the road/shoulder to be included in the reframe
>>4485814
>>4485836Stitch points should be shifted so the flags don't look like they're dissolving, and the traffic lights aren't all lit at the same time.Also, why isn't the building symmetrical at the ends? Are they extensions?
Do you have Pareidolia? This photo triggers mine.
>>4485836>sunny day in england challenge (IMPOSSIBLE!)
>>4485842
1derland
mother's hands
>>4485838ever heard of a long exposure? i doubt any stitching happened on this one
>>4485903>fantaPanorama copy.jpg
>>4485821Yeah favourite version so far
>>4485903>ever heard of a long exposure? i doubt any stitching happened on this one16 vertical shots at 50mm on PTGui.>>4485838The flags are fluttering, each shot in the pano was like 10 seconds. The ends of the building are not symmetrical.
>>4485999Clean you sensors, reverse satan
>>4486004You're not my real dad! What the hell is a reverse satan?
A p&s snap of a frozen small green clump, 1:1 crop.
>>4485734I like it. Great use of DoF.>>4485735This is completely the ass backwards way of thinking. Why would you want to lift shadows? Modern sensors are way too sensitive imo and are ruining photography.>>4485736>>4485769>what is depth of field
>>4486068>>4486071i like the atmosphere in the first one but the grain is off, you use dehancer or something?
>>4485000just a snapshot from my convertible
Architecture can be a little disorienting when cropped right.
>>4486211spooky ghost cat
reminds me of my dear katerina
>>4486210I think the word you're looking for is "dishonest".
>>4486268I don't understand. Architecture can be a little dishonest? Or a little disorienting when dishonest?
I don't like any of these photos
>>4486306They can't all be zingers. Last thread was fire.
New rule, we can't comment seriously on photos that are older than an arbitrary amount of timeToo old and it's shit post analysis ONLY
>>4486329Cute dogs.
>>4486342What a stupid comment
>>4486402wheres ur photo ? yeah you have NONE
>>4486306So why not contribute some of your own that are better?>>4486334The one with the pictures of museum exhibits? Really?
>>4486334This board is a mystery sometimes
>>4486334> They can't all be zingersPrimus fan?
>>4486403That *was* my photo
>>4486407It makes much more sense when you view it as a space for people who hate photography
universal chair
Replaced the cable on my iems to a golden one.This is as close as I can get with my 85mm, so I recently ordered a macro lens. Should be coming next week.
>>4486448
>>4486452Dishonest/10
>>4486452Nicely done. Would you mind explaining how this us achieved?
>>4486461Perhaps a zoom burst
>>4486461Nta. Looks like a zoom pull. Smoothly zoom in (or out) while the shutter is open. Shorter shutter speeds require very fast pulls, but you can effectively do these out to a few seconds depending on how well you manage your shake and how smooth your motion is.
>>4486402>seething
>>4486464Bingo>>4486466Nta?
>>4486408Primus sucks
>>4486466Dope tech. Gonna try this later
>>4486487Not That Anon
Think I accidentally created an image from a 2012 horror game
yip nibbashttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoom_bursthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_zoomprolly gonna use tripod and ND filter for this techniques, prolly motorised zoom would be best but probably only exists on prosumer video cameras
>>4486497Rockwell lite
>>4486491I love you for this
>>4486497>2012But it was taken recently right? Otherwise we can only shit post about it
>>4486507Yeah, like two days ago
>>4486508Okay, I like it
captcha: 8gag4
>new lens>whaddya think?
this 21mm might grow on me
Hmm. Wasn't really worth getting shouted at by an angry tram driver.
>>4486523nice pic burto, but hes probably right, isn it "illegal" to be there ?
>>4486525Don't think so, its an open crossing. Probably just pissed him off that some tourist was basically stood in front of the tram.
Haven't been around in a while friends. Nice thread. Dumping 10 from Mexico a couple weeks ago.I really like these>>4485050>>4485118>>4485531>>4486497
>>4486556
>>4486558
>>4486560
>>4486561
>>4486562
>>4486563
>>4486564
>>4486565
>>4486566
>>4486567
Do photos from last year that I just started looking through count?
>>4486576It's bad enough to post photos, but if it's an older one, we can only shit post about it
>>4486568Cut subject
>>4486577True. Perhaps this sheep can make up for it just a little bit
>>4486578I liked how it cut his face off a bit. The top and bottom 8 shape from the tuba is what caught my eye along with the weathering of the metal
>>4486581I don't like it
>>4486586Cutting bad
>>4486587What is it about it that you don't like?
>>4486589Sorry, asking for specifics or details about what someone doesn't like just means you're butthurt lol
>>4486591I just wanted to know what I could improve on lmao
>>4486593Understandable. Sorry to bother you Sir
>>4486515>>4486520why do people add white borders around their photos? what benefit does the border provide to whoever is looking at the photo?
>>4486568>>4486578No cut subject.
>>4486612I don't like your comment
>>4486614I don't like your character.
>>4486606It seems like you have more to say.
>>4486568>>4486567>>4486566>>4486558>>4486556Really great pics
>>4486629Gracias anon
Cropped this one. Whaddya think?
>>4486591That doesn't even make sense.
tfw hardly been out to shoot in the past two months and nothing good came of the times when i did go. >>4486568bueno set
>>4486531My hometown, fuck the tram drivers. Why tourism in Manchester?
I really like the soviet style picture, makes you feel calm.I usually go outside and picture stuff close to this at night.
>>4486732
>>4486735
>>4486752too bad beauty dont pay no bills>>4486737thought this was a fuckenfuck u call ema fucken one of the fucken tea party niggas when i seen da thumnail>>4486677shit treeu dat nigga wit no eye, i recognize your absolute garbage eye >>4486667i like itukraine?
>>4486752its raw for surebut u cant beat those perfrect slices god gave meshit be layered n shit, b fucken hate that, shouldna done da zoom hate da fucken zoom but idk. sometimes u be wantin it more better and i got i aint got da ideal spot for what i see u know
>>4486754garbage fucken phone too i live and swim in fucken poverty, my life is shit this wont end well. cant move no mountains i was soa yin today i can't move no mountains...but what i can do, is crash as fucking hard as humanely possible wehn da mountain finally appears that i be knowin is there nah mean
God damn it, I want exif metadata back.
>>4486735>>4486737CUT SUBJECT
>>4486754Dat shit looken way better when I be looking at it on my phone but on da pc it look shittier
>>4486753>>4486677KekDat nigga so shit at photographyU recognize his shit by how shit it isU can't make this shit upYo when u gonna take up tetherball or magic cards and shit, b?
>>4486677Fucking hideous to look at No other picture is pure shit like this is in this entire threadAnd all dis nigga does is take pictures all fucken day everyday
>>4486677Must be rough shooting with a 2mp 1/1.5" sensor and 70% viewfinder coverage
>>4486755You talk too much
>>4486752>>4486800Fuck IQ - shit's comfy either way. Great shot.
>>4486640nice, south africa?
>>4486809thanks man, iq?>>4486807i love it, gonna talk more i think now
I see he's still malding
>>4486732aww
I wanna go out and shoot some photos but, IN MY COUNTRY it has been raining non-stop, I haven't seen the sun in like 2 months, and it goes dark at like 4pm now. FUCK MY WORTHLESS INCEL CHUD LIFE!
>>4486829Lovely noise
>>4486826Same thing here anon
>>4486826carry an umbrella and do some kino rainy night shooting
>>4486853why bother, some nophoto will shit on your efforts no matter what you shoot
>>4486864Or some nophoto will reply to vaguely complain about something that may or may not have happened to them while blaming others as justification and being part of the same problem.Fucking nophotos, man.
>>4486864some scientists conducted an experiment to assess the effect of praise on gifted students. for one group of gifted students, they would assign them tasks like drawing and writing and, when they completed the tasks, they received negative feedback. this group, when given more work, performed to a higher standard and displayed self-motivation. on the other hand, the group of students to whose work the scientists responded with positive feedback displayed disinterest upon receiving further assignments and the quality of their work diminished.
>>4486868>get bent I post more pics than 99 percent of the users here
>>4486869But what kind of negative feedback was it?
>>4486864the source of your motivation should be internal. relying on external motivation is feminine and a reason why so many females are on SSRIs nowadays
>>4486871"it's shit"
>>4486870Spoken like someone who's absence won't be noticed. You should take some time away from all the hurty mean words (that you certainly contributed to/caused). Learn to focus your lens, too.
What’s up with this dark band that would roll across the screen of my a6700?
>>4486957photography is about the interplay of light and color. Technical perfection and the pursuit of it is antithetical to artistic expression. Go play with your snoy some more, nophoto
Should I remove that woman?
>>4486974Your mind is a mess. Small wonder you keep spamming across different unrelated threads. You need a rest, and we need a break.
>>4486979>every poster is the same person and they're all out to get me!!MEDS. NOW.
I fucking hate how there's this one OM System shill working overtime spamming every thread with his shitty blurry photos.
>>4486824Ikr?Absolutely adorable
>>4486982I'm assuming that you don't know that the "dsc" prefix on the file name means that it was taken with a Nikon camera LMAO
>>4486984>files cannot be renamed
>>4486987I'm the poster of the blurry image in question and I will post exif if you want, but I'm giving you the opportunity to drop it because you're about to seriously embarrass yourself. This pic was taken at 200mm f2.8 on a d700. I'm not OM shill I'm D700 shill, different posters.
>>4486989I'm not the same anon as the one talking about an OM shill
>>4486995Anon is truly patheticAverage /p/enises can't tell the difference between a FF telephoto pic shot wide open at a fast aperture and a micro 4/3 shotThis board is absolutely cooked These are the people critiquing your photography and choice of gear
>>4486996I think your pic could be interesting as some kind of abstract shot, but it would probably be even better if the branch wasn't as recognizable
>>4486997valid criticism, I was going for the contrast between the red and white, maintaining coherent shapes was not a consideration, it's out of focus because I was closer than min focusing distance on the lens to make the bokeh extremely pronounced
>>4486997all the shots in this series were in this vein
>>4486999etc
>>4486998I look at it as I would look at an abstract painting with spots of bold colors. In this regard I also think that the very dark and unsaturated areas (the middle of the branches) should be avoided, but I don't know if it's doable.>>4486999Not fond of the right-hand side here, have you tried cropping it out?>>4487000Bit of the same thing here, I think in general you would get better results if you tried to remove as much background distraction as possible - dark tones especially. This would probably require retaking the shots altogether unfortunately
Where there's smoke..
I am very disappointed in myself for knocking this lens on the ceiling rafters when I lifted my camera overhead to get the strap off from around my neck. However, I think it's going to be a good friend of mine for a long time. I am only just beginning to learn its power.
>>4486978Nah gives some scale, and ai sloppa bad mkay
>>4486966Assuming that shadow wasn't present in the actual scene, it's caused by rolling shutter. In order to avoid this you should turn off the electronic shutter and use the mechanical one.
>>4487260Thanks for not only the tip, but for being one of the only people on 4chan who are worth a damn.
>>4487290Nice pic, but too grainy imo
>>4486989In other words, a 12mp D700 is EXACTLY as sharp as a 20mp OM-5?The D700 also has a noisy sensor by FF standards, on top of having poorer shadow recovery than modern cameras. It's basically FF sized m43 like vintage medium format is MF sized FF, and a $5000 sinar hy6 takes the same photos as a canon 5ds.https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205DS,Hasselblad%20H4D-50,Nikon%20D700,Olympus%20OM-D%20E-M5%20Mark%20IIIDoesn't this lend a little half truth to the meme that 1 full frame megapixel equals 4 m43 megapixels, but it's actually a 1/2 resolution cut IRL, because m43 needs vastly sharper lenses that cost a thousand fucking bucks (used) for an f2.8 prime?
>>4487311The colors are still better on larger sensors even if they're older imo, and the data backs for the Hy6 are only around 1500-2000 depending on type if you buy them w/o the body. 5k is for a full package mod2 Hy6 with a lens or two and a databack or filmback(700-1500 alone depending on if its 645 or 6x6 format).With that said they are definitely studio queen cameras that only really shine with a lot of good light.
>>4487311ALSO just to add to this you can buy an adapter cable and back and use a P1,Sinar, or Hasselblad databack on a 120 format slr with interchangeable film back if you wanted a very inexpensive way to actually use one.
>>4487314Hes right actually. Sinar has 16 bit raws at least, but the poor SNR means it doesnt actually put any meaningful data in those 16 bits. The hy6 has the same 10 stops of DR as a 5ds so its function is true flash sync with leaf shutter lenses. For flashless raw IQ it is plain math. It can not achieve IQ the 5ds can not and is somewhat behind a z7ii and S prime.
>>4487311>micro four thirdies accidentally btfo themselvesAncient 12mp ff ewaste with basic bitch hand assembled double gauss primes from 1992 = newest bestest 20mp om system with the moast advanced aspherical anomalocarid dispersive extreme band stop frequency logarithmic descattering lens elements in telecentric mathematically perfect arrangements kek
>>4487311This is actually >literally precisely wrong lmao.The D700 has a sensor that produces extraordinarily LITTLE noise compared to other FF sensors due to it's very large relative pixel sizeIt's actually, seriously, truly unbelievable how fucking sincerely retarded people here are, and how opinionated these selfsame people will be about shit they have literal antiknowledge about
>>4487322it's just incredible haha. You actually cannot tell the difference between a M4/3 shot and a shot with a FF DSLR with the fastest telephoto lens on the market wide open at it's longest focal length, and instead of introspecting about this astonishing fact AT ALL, your response is > M43 btfo againI can't even into words how fucking stupid the average gearfag here is
>>4487320Not too bad for a 2006 era camera. Those big sensors are definitely limited in use, but if you can get enough light on the sensor they really shine. Its what they were designed for. The rodenstock and zeiss lenses made for the system are also superb.With that said I would not recommend them to anyone that wants a casual snapshitting camera. You will not get very good results with them, but they are very fun cameras to use and I love the ergos.
>>4487328>12mp ewaste dslr with a super noisy dogshit sensor and cheap lens made with 1990s tech looks the same as the newest $1799 om-3 with a $1000 f2.8 equivalent zuiko pro prime>ff loozes >:(lmfao
>>4487328>i used the worse ff gear ever, a 12mp piece of mirror slappy shit with a soft as balls lens, and people said it looked like m43. how could this mean m43 is btfo?Foolturds shills lack the ability to think critically and may not even be self aware
>>4487311The d700 could be 20x sharper I still wouldn't use a pos nikon dslr. Nasty colours, dogshit autofocus. Only talentless boomers use those. Sorry. Just facts.
>>4487290great pic but could be improved with wider grain
>>4487381m43 or phone?
>>4487389What difference does it make
>>4487393It looks so dreamy and painterly!
Silver tones.
New bread:>>4487411>>4487411>>4487411
>>4487393I'm just wondering if my m43dar is advancing.
