Sup nerds, I got the new gear threadIs the Olympus OM-D a good camera?
>>4513965>I got the new gear threadNice, what are the specs? HOw many posts can it handle?
>>4513965Micro four thirds is objectively bad unless you can snag a fairly modern olympus body like an em1ii or em5iii for less than $350 or a lesser mft body for $150 or less. The IQ is nearly phone tier. The autofocus is fuji tier. The lenses are mostly shit. If you are going to get scammed for 4 figures just get a shitty aps-c sony or a fuji… or better yet - an actual good camera with working autofocus and passable build quality like a sony a7c. Mft exists for being cheap enough to be disposable. They mostly appeal to technology autists who miss the point of photography and enjoy gimmicks, menus and settings more than they care about the photographic end result and real photography beyond taking handheld photos of their anime doll collection.
>>4513999checked and witnessedM43 is dead, good riddance
Hasselblad sisters…https://fstoppers.com/originals/hasselblad-h6d-100c-comparison-review-full-frame-out-performs-medium-format-191500The phase one iq3 trichromatic users are laughing at us again
>>4513966not a big fan of the colors of this gear thread too many darks
>>4513966I expect that it will have the same post capacity as previous threads. The post rate will be lower, but posts will have a wider and more intense range of quality.>>4514026When It's not my room, but I can think about bringing a flash
>>4514051Did you want to see a super rare vintage lens worth around 6 thousand dollars?
>>4514052no
>>4514083Okay. Here's roughly 12k in vintage lenses if you count the sneaky one in the back lol. The crusty looking one on the right is a voigtlander petzval from their "golden age" of brass barrel lenses. The nikola perscheid is the rare and very expensive one. It combines spherical and chromatic aberration to produce a beautiful flou. A famous german photographer designed the lens to suit his style of portraiture. Still waiting on a machine shop to make a custom retaining ring for a sinar lens board so I can use it on my camera.I have more expensive lenses if you want to see them. Ever seen a 210mm lens that has a 500mm projection?
>>4514090>vintage funko pops>probably used to photograph rocks, leaves, and the catso glad im a 5dII+50mm f1.8 thad. gearfaggotry is a mental disorder.
>>4514091Portraiture actually, and obviously. :D
>>45140039 year old article.
>>4514092>the portraiture in question>>4514117its 9 years later and hasselblad is still jobbinghttps://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Hasselblad%20H6D-100c,Hasselblad%20X2D%20II-100c,Sony%20ILCE-7M5
>>4514134>hasseltrannies spend $50k to be 0.4 stops ahead of a 30mp snoy/100mp fuji>hasselblyat just rebadged the gfx100s instead of making a good medium format camerakek
>>4514135are there even decent hasselblad lenses?dont tell me, i dont really care
>>4514136not since they stopped using zeiss and started using fuji and nittoh japscrap glassthe 9yo article is effectively still current. phase uses rodenstock glass so 100% of lenses are actually good enough for a five figure camera instead of a ff tier “vintage character and retro soul” meme
Every time I have a day off its pissing down with rain. Anyway is a pentax a good rainy day camera?
>>4513999>The autofocus is fuji tierThe newer phase detect cameras from OM have much better autofocus than Fuji.>passable build quality like a sony a7c.OM cameras have actual weather sealing.
Why are the gear threads always the same exact arguments over and over again?
>>4514154>actually olympus is better than sony!Despite petapixel among others literally taking money from olympus to shill footurdd and denigrate sony, the AP adopted Sony for their robust weather sealing especially. But when you sell more full frame cameras than canon, a dozen or so lemons is inevitable and a dozen more retards will break their shit and blame the camera, so I can see where some of the online bitching comes from. >its better than fuji too!Yeah, that’s why fuji outsold om five to one and om is essentially out of business.
Looking for a camera system to use as a video/photo hybrid. Mainly to capture my kids growing up, some traveling, family events. Should be at least 4k with some sort of stabilization. The more compact the better because I also have to cary around baby stuff and/or my kids. As perfect a Nikon Z8 or A7V would be I'm a bit afraid that they are not handy enough. Especially coupled with full frame glass. There are also those smallish A7CII, Nikon ZR, Sigma cameras. Or is it fine to go apsc and buy a small Fuji like that X-E5 with the Fujicron lenses?
>>4514162the nikon zr, sigma bf, lumix s9, and canon r6v lack mechanical shutters, so any action or panning shots will distort. in video this is borderline irrelevant but photos get fucked up quick. its just between the a7cii and xe5 really. perfect autofocus and image quality vs meh autofocus and blurry photos that look kinda like a phones. ironically they have the same number of small lenses (sony’s small lenses are mostly 3rd party, only fuji has small zooms) and the prices are pretty similar. sony is the choice camera of the AP and most other journalists, fuji is a tiktok trend. sony is getting a pocketable pancake lens very soon. fuji is getting better autofocus in 2 years maybe. /p/ despises both because together they put om system and lumix m4/3 out of business. choose wisely.
>>4514163My last camera was the Pentax Q with a tiny sensor and I still enjoy looking at those photos. Somehow very nice rendering. So I'm not too worried about apsc. Since my main purpose is to capture memories it should be the camera that I bring always. Thanks for your recommendation, I try to check the A7CII in the store tomorrow and see how it handles.
>>4514161>Despite petapixel among others literally taking money from olympus to shill footurdd and denigrate sony, the AP adopted Sony for their robust weather sealing especially.What's IP rating do Sony's cameras have?>Yeah, that’s why fuji outsold om five to one and om is essentially out of business.High sales on mass market is a better indicator that a product is mediocre slop than it is exceptionally good. Normies are herd animals and don't make purchase decisions based on independent evaluation. Canon popular = Canon good in the normie brain. Do you think they actually sit down to research different camera brands and compare their strengths and weaknesses? Absolutely not, because that requires thinking, while the normie brain always wants to defer thinking to someone else.
>>4514167The IP rating’s strict legalese translation is the IP rating is meaningless and actually worse than an internal company standard and good reputation. Hence sony is all the AP uses anymore and olympus is literally dead. >to be fair, it takes a very high iq to pay $1000 for a MILC with a phone sensor. ask me about my elegantly implemented menu options. Kek. This is a niche market populated almost entirely by professionals and serious enthusiasts. Sales don’t lie.
>>4514170>Our weatherproofing is so good that we won't put it in writing that you can depend on itloool>This is a niche market populated almost entirely by professionals and serious enthusiastsIf that were true we would see a more even distribution between brands in camera sales because they aren't objectively that much better or worse than one another, as professional reviews show.>Sales don’t lie.Canon sells double what Sony does, no point bothering with Sony then...
>>4514171An olympus IP rating is invalidated if you press a single button just once. Because the rating does not test that. Canon and Sony are in warzones without IP ratings. Olympus is dead. >canon sells double sonyNot in FF. Their DX lineup is undeniably better… and literally the only one available in most stores. But sony is king in the full frame market. You don’t corner basically all of photojournalism and reduce canon to handing out free samples at the olympics by being bad at making cameras. Being bad at making cameras causes innovation to halt and give way to lifestyle marketing. See: pentax and olympus.
>>4514171Olympus warranties have never covered water damage.
>micro fool turds STILL seething at sony and fuji for making their entire sensor size obsolete outside of spy drone and android phone cameraskek
just got my r6 mk ii a week ago and it's a hell of a difference between the t7i I've been using for years. I'm currently using the EF 24-70 ii with an adapter, but the next lens I'm aiming for is probably the rf 70-200 f/4 for landscape and nature photography. That way I have the best of both worlds with a lens for portaits/low light/general use, and another for travel/landscape/extra zoom and can fit it all in one small bag.
>>4514172>An olympus IP rating is invalidated if you press a single button just once. Because the rating does not test that. Canon and Sony are in warzones without IP ratings. Olympus is dead.do this with your sony:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BtUsPLx2dM>>4514173>Olympus warranties have never covered water damage.IP53 is not a submersion rating.
>>4514179>they paid for an official IP rating reeeee!>still coping this hard for a failed camera brand Kek fanboys are pathetic. I dont even use sony. I have a canon 5dii. I have used sony, and found it great. Bringing it up makes fanboys of failed brands seethe so of course, I can’t help but remind you, sony won :) Keep being mad about it until you get over yourself and stop being emotionally invested in failed camera brands lol
>>4514179>uh, the olympus broke so submersion is at fault>Sir, I was just shooting in the rain>gomen ip ratingu no covers shooting only static camera please see the warranty info itadakimasu
>>4514180>Kek fanboys are pathetic. I dont even use sony. I have a canon 5dii. I have used sony, and found it great. Bringing it up makes fanboys of failed brands seethe so of course, I can’t help but remind you, sony won :)You use obsolete DSLR so I guess you can relate to us OM System fanboys since mirrorless won.
>>4514148depends. if you have a recent body like the k-1 or k-3 + a lens with weather sealing you should be alright. i've never let my gear get drenched but i've been in some light rain with it before.
>>4514186Of course it did. It combined a dumbed down camcorder with a photography camera. Most professional photographers have to provide basic videography services or they make almost no money. No matter what any of us think of slop video or how stupid normies 8k hdr (on a 4k screen 20 feet away) placebo is, cameras are professional tools first and hobbies second, and if professionals can’t run profitable businesses we are all fucked and there would no longer be enough money in photography to support any innovations whatsoever or give us the benefits of an economy of scale.
>>4514148I want to find a good rain cover but it seems like they're all the same quality as single use trash bags or something really retarded like a cover with no rear window to see the EVF/screen.
>>4513965Reader, heed my warning. You can currently buy a mint condition Nikkor 20mm f/4 AI pancake (there is no AI-S version of this lens) for basically nothing. They're rare, sharp, and super compact. One of the smallest lenses for F mount. I think they have been overlooked deerly, I think mostly because of the f/4 maximum aperture. There is no way they're going to stay as cheap as they are. All it will take is one semi popular tiktok zoomer to make a video about how 'bussin' and 'lowk slept on' it is, and prices will skyrocket. You know the kind of people hyping up F3's, FM2's, FM3a's love this sort of shit. Look at the 45mm f/2.8P AI-S. They're about triple what this lens is and the 45mm is a way less desirable focal length. If you think you'll ever want one of these, buy one now.
>>4513999>The IQ is nearly phone tier. I wish this were true. I have a fairly new phone and its nowhere close. If you buy iPhone for example, you are locked into 'ProRAW' not actual RAW. My phone is something around 40mp in ProRAW, but that is upscaled. The actual sensor is a 12mp unit. You can use some apps to shoot true RAW, but the quality is horrible. The phone is designed to be used with the native, unconfigurable AI-enabled smoothing, denoising, sharpening. Take that away, and you are left with low resolution, noisy images, with high distortion and terrible edge sharpness. The only saving grace of the phone camera is that its a very small way to shoot ultrawide, my specific model has a 14mm (they call it 12mm but its more like 14) full frame equivalent focal length lens. If anyone cares, the app you can use to shoot true RAW on iPhone is called Unpro.
>>4514193Intredasting. Canon and Pentax film era 20mm's are shaite though.
>>4514197As far as I understand the f2.8 20mm's by Nikon are also quite average, this seems to be a bit of an exception. Especially considering stuff like the 45mm f2.8p and GN pancakes are optically quite bad and not very bright considering you can get an AI 55mm f1.2 for about half the price.
>>4513965I don't want to waste a spot on the catalog with a tripod post so asking here: anyone use this and recommend it (or not)? I need something with a stronger head and taller. Don't wanna spend more than two-hundred dollary doos. Can get this one for $160. The amount of moving parts it has makes me wary of one of them getting weak and sagging over time but it is cheap, claims to hold 10kg and also detaches into a monopod. Recommendations accepted and wanted. Thanks very muchly, blessings be unto you and your family and ancestors forevermore and forever, amen.
>>4514217>K&FI hear some pretty rough things about their filters, so I don't expect their tripods to be much better. You'd be better off getting a Manfrotto or Benro instead of cheaping out.
Thoughts on the SL3-S?
>>4514225I think Leica are greedy as fuck.
>>4514218thanks 4 input brah, much 'preciated
>>4514225its exactly as good as any other mirrorless camera that costs a quarter
>>4514238Is that so? What camera for 1300 bucks is exactly as good?Next best thing would probably be the Nikon Z8 which costs 3200 but has a worse EVF, worse build quality and shitty UX. Or you take the Lumix S1R II for 3000 with worse ISO performance and again worse build quality.
>>4514239look man if you think you're getting good value per performance out of a leica, go ahead and buy it. you're exactly the kind of customer they were hoping for.
>>4514239>What camera for 1300 bucks is exactly as good?Yes, taking his off-hand remark literally is sure to be the basis of a great, intelligent discussion... NOT!
>>4514241>off-hand remarkYeah that's why I added the two cameras that in my opinion come close, yet still not quite there
>>4514187What about a k5 ii?
>>4514186>the virgin using foolturds because you think its good based on specs and mental gymnastics and lies you believe about superior sony and fuji>the chad using a dated full frame dslr because sensor size is simply the only thing that matters for tonality and the optical viewfinder is the last stand of photographic integrity
>>4514239Stop being a fag and buy an eos r5
>>4514244wouldn't pay the $2-300 that they go for used honestly unless it comes with lenses you want, same money can get you a k-3 or k-70. for it to be properly weather resistant you need a wr lens with the little gasket on the lens mount, 18-135mm is a pretty good one imo. k5ii is a 3 generation old sensor in pentax terms (which is caveman vs every other camera company) while k70 is last gen. much more flexible sensor in low light/dynamic range. heres a k70 + 18-135mm combo for $300 and $375, should suffice for 90% of scenarios. pick up a 35mm f2.4 plastic fantastic ($70) or the 50mm f1.4 ($100) and you have all the lenses you could really need, maybe a 80-320mm tele ($80) or $250-300 55-300mm plm https://www.ebay.com/itm/366475134016https://www.ebay.com/itm/157994545947would not bother with a k1 unless you're a full fledged pentaxian weirdo retard like me, would sooner go k3-iii if you're spending that money
>>4514265the pentax k1 and the k3 iii has some obscenely sexy dials holy shit. How is that even legal?
>>4514225If you buy a Leica, buy an M-mount. All this other Leica stuff is nonsense. It's like buying perfume at Porsche or buying a salad at McDonalds - nonsense. Buy the M6 or M11.
>>4514179>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BtUsPLx2dM [Embed]holy based
>>4514277well the k1 has mode dial failure if you try to twist it while its lockedk3 is pretty good though, i really suggest you stick to apsc re: pentax and go for at least a k3. k3 = better metering, programming (program line settings like iso ramp up, more accurate auto exposure/shutter speed/iso), more af points, 2 card slots, top lcd - i paid $225 for a beat up one with a tamron 28-75mm f2.8 ive been meaning to sell but it takes good photosk70 = smaller, better sensor (can run high isos like iso3200 with minimal noise so you can really push/pull the raws or get sharp photos), smarter/quicker af despite less focus points, flippy twisty screen. i paid $150 for mine w/a broken screenk70 is more prone to aperture block failure, i think the risk is overrated and worst with the k30/k50s. k3 is a brick shithouse in comparison look locally + ebay pentaxes other than k1/k3-iii arent worth shit adorama wont even take them for tradein lolinitially i bought my k70 for a travel camera because k1 is a fucking brick and i wanted something more disposable but between the k70 and k3 i find myself picking up the k3 more, ymmv. i think its shit cosmetic condition (scratches/wear from shooting in what i imagine salt water) makes me more likely to chuck it in my backpack or leave it in the car. especially with a shitty cheap <$40 lens idc about. i know we have a few more /p/entaxians. that $300 k70 is a great deal, the 18-135mm is a $100-120 lens on its own. literally get that + a 50mm f1.4 prime + a 80-320mm or 55-300mm tele and you have all the lenses you could possibly need for any situation. wr = weather resistant. pic was k3 + tamron 80-210mm f4-5.6
>>4514295>i know we have a few more /p/entaxians.hell yeah we do. luv me k-3iii, luv me k-1, simple as. you're right the k-1 is a chonky boi, but what a fuckin machine tho. it's been years and i still get excited when i pick these up to shoot.
I was severely disappointed by the overall sharpness of the 40MP sensor on my Fujifilm X-T5 and so I traded it in for a Nikon Zf and immediately every photo I take now looks like it came out of a magazine.I also wish someone told me Nikon does the film simulation gimmick 100x better by having a recipe maker and easy downloads of other people's shared recipes.Oh, and the Nikon app actually works.I hate youtubers so much, the comparisons between these two cameras only talk about "the shooting experience" and aesthetic appeal of each, not one mention of how exponentially sharper and with a better lens ecosystem the Zf is. So much bullshit and "vibe" jargon flung around about every Fujifilm camera, I was fooled.
>>4514335>I was severely disappointed by the overall sharpness of the 40MP sensor on my Fujifilm X-T5 and so I traded it in for a Nikon Zf and immediately every photo I take now looks like it came out of a magazine.Nothing wrong with the sensor, it's their JPEG processing that trashes fine detail and makes it look like a painting.But yeah, shooting RAW to bypass a gimped JPEG engine is gay, so you made the right choice.https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/3690824164/fujifilm-x-e5-production-sample-gallery/1460141150
>>4514335Its the sensor. Even a $300 copy of capture one can only marginally improve it. Its nowhere near a hr ff or even the canon eos r7. xtrans is for suckers.
>>4514337I certainly notice that the RAW photos look clearer, but the Zf's JPEGs come out so crisp, even with an "OK" lens the quality is really super. I also notice how many shooting options and whatnot I was missing with the X-T5.Regardless I'm a complete noob, the X-T5 was my first camera and I went for it because it seemed like a fun camera to use, which it was, and then you start taking pictures and it's rather disappointing.
>>4514340>I also notice how many shooting options and whatnot I was missing with the X-T5.One thing Nikon does not have which Fuji does is blinkies during preview.Very useful for knowing if/where overexposure happens and correcting before taking the photo.Nikon has Zebras which can be set to indicate overexposure, but it's only allowed in movie mode, which is retarded. I would like to try Nikon but I've been using Zebras in still photo mode with my Lumix for over a decade. No way I'm going back to checking blinkies in review!
>>4514344Sony has done this for ages but with working autofocus, weather sealing, and a worthwhile lens selection
>>4514300i want a k3-iii but i need to sell my k1 first to justify it, i paid $900 hoping i get the same amount back. ff is a meme i dont really feel like i need it while the improved autofocus programming + improved auto settings (k1 is pretty bad imo for this...you kinda need to "nudge" it to the iso/shutter speed you want more than you should for a flagship camera) would be more useful to me k1 ff would be more useful if you shot a lot of vintage lenses and did exclusively still shots like landscapes and portraits...maybe i'll sell my k1ii + k70 and pick up a k3-iii and keep the k3-i as a travel cam. i do like the high-iso performance of the k70 though its a stop behind my k1ii (k3 is 1.5 stops in comparison). 36mp = 50mb raws too :( https://www.ebay.com/itm/318460780053good price for /p/entaxians k1 battery grip + battery + 50mm f1.4 fa prime for $100i have all 3 so dont need pic rel 50mm f1.4 fa + k3
>>4514344>still photo mode with my Lumix for over a decadeSo you've been shooting for over a decade and full have to rely on blinkies for exposure?I do wish Fujis DR200/400 settings made their way to other systems.>>4514335If it weren't for the Zf being so good with adapted MF glass, I would switch back to an XT5 for sure.
>>4514364how did you get access to get these shots? do you work at an airport?
>>4514385I just saw an XT5 with a lens on marketplace for $400. Gonna cop it and I think Fuji are scam tier.
>>4514388Thats a scam alrightEnjoy being robbed
>>4514351>Sony has done this for ages but with working autofocusSony's exposure preview is broken though and Lumix autofocus even a decade ago is extremely reliable.>So you've been shooting for over a decade and full have to rely on blinkies for exposure?Yes, just like you rely on clipping indication in your RAW editor, I rely on it in-camera for exporting my RAWs to JPEG at the moment of capture.
>>4514416>the #1 ff brand is BROKEN guiseIts actually not. It correctly cancels preview in extreme low light to improve SNR and the refresh rate. You’re a dunning-kruger amateur that passionately argues for shooting jpeg and are totally out of tune with what skilled photographers with proper equipment want. You have never posted your photos through all your bullshitting because they suck. All anyone has to do is look beyond /p/ and notice you’re the only retard who is turned around enough and far enough up his own ass to actually believe what you post. “Professional cameras should have the instagram app on them” levels of bean souping consumer idiocy.
>>4514393I doubt they will even reply to me
>>4514417its amazing how recognizable the lumix shill is. i feel sorry for his victims. panasonic reliability is about on par with the first ever sony a7 and the new $3000 s1rii has worse af-c than a fujifilm. panasonic is literally the only company that has to blacklist influencers for criticising their cameras because once they start, they inevitably notice literally everything sucks and despite being 1% of cameras sold they are incredibly likely to break spontaneously (sensor failures, motherboard failures, etc).
>>4514420>its amazing how recognizable the lumix shill is.I can only recall two in recent years, one shot picrelThe other was artrepro who was above this type of arguing
>>4514423This one is a total nophoto, not an okayishphoto with that dull high contrast editing style people with bad color science always end up using because their colors are too bad to handle brightness and saturation
>>4514416>Lumix autofocus even a decade ago is extremely reliable.Now it's even better than Sony.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG8-ecvu3ko
>>4514458Hahahaha. No. It’s not. Literal 2/3 miss rate. Look beyond this shill vid and its nothing but complaints and “well, i shoot in af-s at f5.6-8 and its pretty accurate most of the time”. Any influencer claiming a lumix is better than a sony is undoubtedly lying. Like that julia trotti video aka the one and only time the a7cii was accused of having nikon levels of green tint. And when gerald undone got blacklisted by panasonic for refusing to lie and wanted to tell the truth about their cameras flaws. Sales do not lie, especially not in a market dominated by professional users. Lumix is the bottom seller for a good reason.
>youtuber claims panashit/om shitstem is better than sony with proof >nothing happens>panashit/om shitstem stays irrelevant>the fatal flaws the youtuber found in the sony are never reproduced >the advantages of the panashit/om shitstem never materializemany such cases going back to the gh5even if lumix finally reaches “usable” it’ll be behind. and still be a lumix. >*internal circuitry fails for no reason*
>>4514417>It correctly cancels preview in extreme low light to improve SNR and the refresh rate.False. Preview still reflects aperture changes regardless of how far out of the range you are, and it also works correctly in video mode at the same settings where it fails in stills mode, so it's definitely bugged for still photo. Maybe they fixed it on a7R VI.
>>4514489Sounds like you’re doing something retarded. I never have this problem. >>4514475>two more weeks until the g9ii makes full frame obsolete!
>>4514193It's probably dogshit compared to a 20mm f2.8 Viltrox, so it doesn't matter if gearzoomies blow it up.
>>4514193tokina 17 3.5 is cheaper and mogs it and available for most systems
>>4514160Because this is the internet, sir.
>>4514494Soft wide open, flares like crazy, an entirely different focal length.
>>4514386yes im airport operations
>>4514497
>>4514498i really never felt a need for a ff sensor tbqh...80% of the pics i took and liked were with apsc sometimes ancient ones like ccds
>>4514499i really like my pentaxes though where i wouldnt wanna sell the k1 and move to mirrorless ff like a sony a7iv yet, at the same time the misses on the k1 really kill my enjoyment, the af is as bad as the k3 (i think the k70 has the better af programming, its quicker/smarter despite less ff points). my biggest issue is like i said how dumb the auto iso/shutter can be, i often shoot full auto in program mode and it runs too high isos/shutter speeds for the situation than even other pentaxes (high auto iso = pentax trait i noticed vs minolta/sony)i figure a k3-3 is gonna be smarter/more responsive where the pics i take will come out nicer than what i would with the k1ii (im acknowledging im not the best photographer so the better autofocus and likely better programming/metering will help me)
>>4514499Full frame is very important for taking quality dog photos! :D
>>4514496Sharper than the pancake nikon, and it has a built in hood that reduces flares on most versions. the difference between 17 and 20 are a single step towards or away...
>>4514393I just have to give him $50 so he’ll hold it. what a deal!
>>4514497awesome. what lens were you using on these?
>>4514509plane/airport: pentax-fa 50mm f1.4rainbow + this pic: quantaray 28-90mm f3.5-5.6 (shitty sigma 80s zoom i paid $20 for on ebay) body: pentax k3
>>4514501>only full frameAs a self described artisanal cat photographer/artist I would NEVER use anything less than a 100MP medium format sensor to capture the divine beauty of my feline furbaby.
>>4514492Damn thats crazy man but that's an autofocus lens for mirrorless camera. This is for SLRs. >>4514494I have the tokina, it's no where close. The nikkor is much sharper, especially wide open.
>>4514502Even with the hood if flares like crazy. It's a bargain bin lens, the kind you get a two for one deal on. The coatings on tokinas are awful until you get well into the autofocus era.
>>4514512post a planesperg thread sometime, also get me some shots of the A350 pls.
>>4514514>>4514517i have in the past, usually i dump a few pics here and there in /n/'s /gag/ i'll try to get you a a350 or 2 but i only have a 24-70 f4 pentax-fa (never used this lens desu, got it with a k10d im probably gonna sell not happy with my pentax ccds i prefer minolta/sony for ccds) on my k3 + doing taxiway painting so might not get runway shots >>4514514quantaray 28-90mm f3.5-5.6 + k3 + iso 1600 f/8 1/60 shutter speed 90mm focal lengthshe hates me :( lighting was bad and white
>>4514519same iso 1600 i like the grain on the k3 for a cmos but pentaxes automatically run super high iso for indoor shots
>>4514521same little girl 2 years ago, pentax kf + 35mm f2.4 pentax-da (35mm 1/60 f2.4 iso 3200)pentax k3 iso 1600 noise = iso 3200 on a k70/kf its definitely a more advanced sensor...would imagine a k1ii could pull iso 6400 and k3-iii would be closer to iso 5000 for the same noise
where do I get more of these arca swiss plates with holes for a neck strap?all I can find are jewish quick release systems that look like they'll fall apart the second you take them outside
>>4514515>SLRsget with the times, gramps
>>4514523Aliexpress search arca plate with strap holes. Multiple results.
>>4514533>mirrorlessgood goy. sony (hardware provider for every MILC but canon) is developing real time censorship AI at the same time they integrate AI into their cameras. good DSLRs and film cameras are going to get very valuable, as in, its not trustworthy journalism without them. https://www.gamingbible.com/news/platform/playstation/sony-ai-censorship-tool-912739-20251219
>>4514546>sperging>schizophrenic rambling about AIBro, I don't care about your boomer-tier AI conspiracies and stuff, I just take pictures.
>>4514552>sperg schizo boomer3 meaningless buzzwords means you’re angry and have no response. Should have tacked incel and brown on to complete the seethe pentagram. Mirrorless cameras are set to become worthlessly untrustworthy. The worst part is most of them never did anything better than a DSLR other than AF coverage that’s only useful for sports photography and terminal f1.2 addicts. In fact, image quality has gotten worse (more moire to boost dxo scores, more noise to boost video specs) and IR focus assist beams remain broken. The entire thing was 100% professional driven (no video=1/4 the clients) and the benefits are still limited to top tier canon and sony full frame models.
>>4514552>i just *make a camera AI enhance pre-censored picturesmight as well use your phone. we’re <10 years away from cameras refusing to photograph anything in a uniform or camo pattern.
>>4514554Well at least when they all RIP, you'll have one less reason to be here constantly complaining
>>4514517>a350here you go philippines a350-1000, i used the pentax-fa 28-70mm f/4 al on my k3actually not a terrible lens, about as good as a kit lens with mild aberrations
>>4514560im sure the pilot was amused and saw me taking pics of him
>>451456070mm 1/250s f/14 iso 200>>451456243mm 1/200 f/14 iso 100this was at 70mm 1/800 f5.6 iso 100
>>4514564van ruined this shot a little might be a good vantage point in the morning 70mm 1/1000 f5.6 iso 100
>>4514546bro are you retarded
i was trying to get a buddy of mine to buy this but since he's being a fag and refusing to get into photography at all i figure i share the deal with my friends on /p/https://washingtondc.craigslist.org/mld/pho/d/gaithersburg-pentax-photo-gear-for-sale/7936716634.htmlno relation, im not even near dc. the k3 for $200 is a great price if you want to flirt with the k-mount ecosystem, imo the only thing better than that would be either a $800-1000 k1 or $1200-1400 k3 mark 3. would also recommend you pick up the pentax-fa 50mm f1.4 for $60 (that's normally $100) and the 35mm f2.4 (throw him $40). i really like the k3 to the point its my favorite pentax (more than the k70/kf).
For event photography on a budget, is Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 a good option? I got Fuji XF18-55, 56mm f/1.2, 35mm/f1.4 lenses already but in my first ever photoshoot I felt like I need some extra reach without getting too close to my subject's face. There's also the 16-80mm f/4 from Fuji that is cheap to get due to being a kitlens, but don't know how that one performs.
>>4514628The 56mm would be perfectly fine for any kind of photoshoot on the tele end. The only time I reach for something more tele at an event is when I can't physically get close enough. Most of my portraits get done closer to 50mm.The sigma 17-40 is a great option, I just use that and the 90mm f2 as needed for events.For just a photoshoot, I'd be fine with just the 35 or 56. Don't overthink things.
>>4514657>canon NEVER made a good 50mm FFI would agree but it should be noted that 1) the later f/1.8's are very sharp, especially for the price2) the 1.4, 1.2L and 1.0L are all ancient and stayed unchanged for their whole life3) personally I would still go the f1.2L as its unique in being pretty tiny for an ultra-bright autofocus lens. if you look at your third party options from manufactures like sigma their 1.4's are like double the size of canons 1.2 and not even weather sealed. 4) the 1.2 is not a great lens but it's definitely good enough, its been a journo favourite for a long time, and has only sorta been replaced now due to the better RF options.
What was your experience with pic related? Just found out there's one nearby.I have a canon r50 in good condition, and 4 lenses (3 sigma, 1 laowa) in mint condition. All with original boxes and paperwork. Will they beat feebay?
>>4514217I have their $50 64 inch and it is fine. My only complaint is the plastic tabs that hold the legs in/out seem cheap but they have held up.
>>4514628what type of event? do you have media access? i think the 18-55 should be fine already>>4514705they were the only service i could find who would repair the shutter on my bessa r2, and they did a fine job with that. i've also bought a few mf accessories from them with no complaints. oh but if you're talking about selling gear, there's no way an actual middleman will get you more value than ebay
>>4514135At least they get leaf shutters.
>>4514148Yes, if by "rainy day" you mean financially, in that you can't afford anything better.
>>4514189>there would no longer be enough money in photography to support any innovations whatsoeverGood; then they would be forced to refine the current technology.
>>4514704>the later f/1.8's are very sharpYou mean all of them?
>>4514705>Will they beat feebay?No, they SELL at ebay prices sometimes. I have purchased a couple of lenses from them that were within $50 of ebay auction end prices which is a no brainer because supposedly they actually honor their warranty if something goes wrong.
Are voigtlander lenses good?Found out they make them for Fuji X. I understand they are the only manual lens that also has electronics.
>>4514727Voigts are *good* but they're not really competitively priced, they're like a luxury good. For some mounts, like Leica thread mount, they're basically essential as they're the only modern lenses made for that mount. For fuji X, you have many more options, even autofocus third party lenses. Pretty sure viltrox, 7artisans, ttartisans all have autofocus options for fuji X.
>>4514727They are excellent but you have to pick them carefully as they design depending on the niche you are looking for, competitively priced in some of them and not really in others. For example the modern corrected stuff or the artsy vintage stuff named Classic, and some of them even have the coating option.For some mounts, like M-mount, they are essential because they are the best without having to pay Leica prices nor having to gamble on the popular chinese M-mount lenses spawning recently.
>>4513965Imagine if Sony applies the Xperia 1 VIII's new two-layer transistor pixel sensor to MFTs, it will likely achieve low-light performance and DR that surpasses existing full-frames. Resolution should be around 24MP to 30MP.It seems unlikely that Sony is prepared to cannibalize its own full-frame market, but it could happen if they believe there is room for growth in the compact camera market.Ideally, Sony needs to fully commit to MFT and build their own bodies and lenses.
>>4514657>nikon NEVER made a good 35mm FF lens for F mountI struggle a bit to understand what's wrong with my 35 mm AF-D f/2.First when I bought it, the aperture blades were sticky. That caused the aperture to be too slow to stop down during the exposure. Then, while in China, I got some sweatshop to disassemble and clean it up. To me it looked like the issue was fixed, and the negs I got back while in China looked okay. The slides I developed at home, however, was blown out...I tested now by spot metering the sky, and stopping down:>1/5000 f/5.6 -> 1/1600Setting exposure compensation to -1.7 whille stopped down gives me 1/5000. Should I just do use -1.7 while using this lens, instead of opening it up to adjust whatever? I have bought the repair manual, but I can't be arsed.
>>4514745The only reason the lens would be causing bad metering in camera is if the AI metering ridges on the aperture ring are misaligned, and the only way that could be the case is if the whole aperture ring is misaligned. What camera are you using it with? Newer autofocus cameras don't even use the AI-S prong/wheel around the mount anymore, I think the f4 was the last.
>>4514748I think it must be the latter as I was using the F90X. I did the test now with the F5. Overexposing on digital as well. Could the chinks inadvertently have assembled the lens incorrectly when they serviced it? It's much better to have it un-gunked at least, and then know it overexposes by a known factor.
>>4514749Both the F90X and F5 have the AI metering prong on the mount. What happens when you set the lens to F22 and flick the switch (switching it to camera controlled aperture)?
>>4514743i really like olympus cameras (glass, software, autofocus) but i dont like paying high end apsc/entry level ff pricing for m43can i either get a cheap sony m43 (probably not happening when a zv1 is $600 msrp and a rx100 is $900-1100 or a olympus apsc/ff
>>4514743> It seems unlikely that Sony is prepared to cannibalize its own full-frame marketWouldn’t the same technology also apply to a bigger sensor? Theres always the same argument with miniaturization - “once we achieve this on a small thing, surely the big thing is over!”.
>>4514727They’re hit and miss and tend to develop aperture encoder issues that mess up some cameras because they are not weather sealed. Why pay that much for a gimped lens thats the same as a cheap sigma?
>>4514194>The actual sensor is a 12mp unit. Isn’t it the opposite? It’s 48mp but it uses pixel binning by default. > You can use some apps to shoot true RAW, but the quality is horrible.Is it? In what way? Apart from not having full resolution I found Lightroom DNG capture quite decent and not having baked in NR/HDR alone is worth it. Even the resolution is not a huge loss because phone 48mp is not that much more detailed than 12mp. Sharpening does a lot of heavy lifting in the default processing.
>>4514750Thank you anon, now we're getting somewhere. Left is the aperture ring set at f/8, while right is f/8 controlled by the camera (lens locked at locked f/22). So just shoot in P (for pro) or only use A on F5 then?
>>4514770>Isn’t it the opposite? It’s 48mp but it uses pixel binning by default.As far as I understand its 12mp with upscaling, I could be wrong, but I dont understand why it would produce a 12mp RAW file then.>Is it? In what way?Unbelievable noise and horrible dynamic range. The actual sensor size in this phone is larger than most point and shoots, like a canon g10 for example. The noise, even at base ISO is way way worse than any digicam i've ever seen or ancient DSLR ive ever seen. Results are similar do a nikon d1 in terms of real world usability. The 12mp thing is really no issue for me personally, I would happily choose 12mp if it meant the getting decent RAW results, however it seems these are still designed to be purely computational photography. Probably the reason why, even on the latest iphone, the first party camera app still only supports 'ProRAW' rather than actual RAW.
>>4514771The F5 has two control dials, you can still shoot manual with the lens set to F22. In fact, its a much better experience that way, its how the camera is designed to be used. That's how I shoot my F80.
>>4514335For me it was exact opposite lmao. I constantly feel the need to adjust every ZF photo. Even my friend commented that all my new photos look like they have a layer of grey film on them. On Fuji 90% of shots look how I imagined them to be. > Nikon does the film simulation gimmick 100x better by having a recipe makerOn paper yes, but Nikon lacks easy tonality settings, color chrome settings and WB tint that make recipes so good. (If you change WB color - it’s there globally, you can’t assign it to a recipe).Also grain looks muddy and it’s unusable.Base profiles are night and day too. > easy downloads of other people's shared recipes.And they’re all gimmicky shit. > Oh, and the Nikon app actually works.Constantly disconnects for me. Doesn’t even have a “select all new photos” button which is a massive chore unless you format your card every shoot. Transfer is notably slower too. > "the shooting experience" It is better tho. Ergonomics, custom buttons, tilt screen, weight, aperture rings. Nikon exposure is fucking weird. It’s often over or underexposed. I often have to fiddle with EV just to get it right. Subject detection quirks have been discussed in other threads. Fuji may struggle to focus sometimes, but at least it focuses on the thing I wanted, not some random subject in the frame. >better lens ecosystem Absolutely unhinged statement. There are 3 lenses for the kind of camera it’s trying to be. 40/28mm pancakes and 40mm Voigtlander that everyone gets.
>>4514628If 56mm is not enough I’d rather get 90mm f2 over Tamron.
>>4514773I tested for f/22 also, both sides with no camera attached. If I jiggle the lever I can get the aperture even smaller, which should be the correct size. Then for f/2.8 there's barely any reduction in size. I therefore think the problem is twofold:>the aperture ring is misaligned >the blades are still a little sticky
Basically every review I have seen about the XT5 says the build quality is inferior to the XT3. What was your experience here? Is it that bad? I have a pretty dinged up XT3 but I do want HEIF support, larger battery, and IBIS.
>>4514774idk what to tell you, that's just been my experience, I have had the exact opposite experience to everything you just said.
>>4514777>2026>$1600 mediocre aps-c>not just buying a sony
>>4514727They're my favorite lens brand, have owned 10 for m-mount so far, with one I've been using for 14 years now. For x-mount the 18/27 are neat, but I'd skip the others in favor of 7/TTArtisan alternatives. Or go m-mount + adapt. Good native Z mount options too.>>4514777Not as good as T2/3 era, but fine. I mostly noticed it with the top dials, but nothing else I can recall. I miss mine a lot more than I thought I would.
>>4514777Not worth it anymore. Fuji was cool once. The other option was a DSLR. Now it’s snoy prices for worse gear. LARPERs who cant milk their coffee shop macbook intellectual look anymore still eat them up.
>>4514773>>4514776Not the most scientific method, but you get the idea. Notice the jump in overexposure from f/16 to f/22 as well.
>>4514792Fuck.
>>4514705I've bought several things over the years at a fair price. I've only ever sold to them during there in-store buying events. Could definitely get a bit more with ebay, but it was well worth it to avoid the hassle. Just drop off gear, wait a few minutes, big check. Last two times I went, they never checked functionality at all either, just graded (and priced) on cosmetics alone.
>>4514758if a true Ricoh GR killer with new MFTs is possible it would probably cost more>>4514768>apply to a bigger sensorYeah, that’s certainly possible. But stacked chips cost more for every layer you add, and the yields get worse. Plus, full-frames are already bright enough for the majority and me. So, I don't know. But if brighter full-frame really comes along, I might just sell off everything except my F4 zooms.
>>4514804Do you really think this linux user tier pipe dream over half understood sensor tech is worth getting worked up over? The canon 5DII and 5DIII are technically identical to micro four thirds, but the photos still look better than any crop sensor despite how the extremely underexposed and ISO 25600 photos of brick walls and bookcases turn out. Nobody has ever cared about seven stop shadow pushes and even technically peak sensors still look bad in tests meant to make their DR improvements look relevant. People only care about color, tonality, and rendering, and only a larger sensor can improve all 3 from zone I to X. Before pro cameras went consumer, it was normal for even $50k MFDBs to have technically poor “dynamic range” but produce superior results when properly exposed. Today consumers go -5 on their GFX100S to protect every highlight and it looks bad.
Are there any phone gimbals that work with ANY app? I just want basic stabilization and the ability to zoom in and out without touching the screen, but for reasons I am forced to use a shitty 3rd party camera app that doesn't even have the functionality the native iphone camera app has, and all gimbals seem to require their own apps for things like controlling zoom levels.It would be on a tripod most of the time.
>>4514805noi must underexpose 5 stops and zoom in 300% on the noise to determine camera goodness
>>4514805But I can't quantify those things! How am I supposed to win arguments if I can't point to charts and graphs?
>>4514788>not just buying a sony
>>4514811>the cost of working autofocus circa 1990Now download the raws and do it in capture one
>>4514808You can, but its dense gobbledygook. Someone (me) posted a video of an accredited leica engineer explaining it and everyone thought he was a schizophrenic retard denying the superiority of the nikkor s line camera mounted MANPAD. Anyone can describe how fire looks, but communicating it objectively is a whole field of science. The nuances of photography are like that so reviewers focus on the easy stuff that anyone can measure and demonstrate.
>>4514814You're telling me some nerd at leica HQ has the maths for 3d pop?
>>4514813heh
>>4514823holy fuck snisters... mogged by a cope sensor camera for ladies... its so fxcking over...
>>4514805>canon 5DII and 5DIII are technically identical to micro four thirdsNo, they aren't. Even those old ass full frames still carry a lot more highlight information and have better low light thanks to the bigger sensors. Maybe not the 200% they would enjoy if the sensor technology was the same, but there is definitely some advantage in many, probably even most, scenarios.
>action cameras can now be used as pocket camerasthoughts?
>>4514829>>canon 5DII and 5DIII are technically identical to micro four thirdsThe reason he said this was probably because so many people's experience with a 5D are with the 50mm f/1.4 USM or some other similarly dogshit lens. If you some good glass on them like modern macro lens, you can see how much detail the sensor can resolve.
>>4514830No thanks
>>4514834AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>4514829We need more m43 dog pics to properly determine the quality of the sensor.
>>4514833The EF 50mm 1.4 is a fine lens, especially stopped down detail wise. Even the 50 1.8 at f5.6 is as good as the newest RF 100mm 2.8L Macro at any aperture. He is talking about color, tonality, and rendering and even old FF DSLRs beat the newest m43 in most scenarios.
>>4514837I figure when he says 'technical identical' he was talking about resolving power, noise, dynamic range etc... one of which would be affected by a poor choice of lens
>>4514838And the 50mm 1.4 is a fine lens for getting the most out of that, just not wide open. Although even wide open, you still get some of the advantages of full frame like dynamic range. But he was talking sensor only I think to just keep the discussion to format size since lenses throw a big variable in the mix.
>>4514837Let's also not forget that it is essentially the only cheap fast fifty auto-focusing lens that can be adapted to any mount.
>>4514826>>4514823Whatcha doin, samefag schizo?https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/lRlWMfJOjjLd9QkGp1D4ew/Whats this? Why did anon get different results from the same raws?https://archive-media.palanq.win/p/image/1776/61/1776613236025.pngMust be a skill issue
>>4514840definitely wouldn't go out of my way to do that but it's a nice perk I guess if you are on RF. My experience with adapters has been pretty poor.
>>4514844yes, the magic RAW processor will make it all go away.https://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_a6700/sample_images/sony_a6700_45.jpg
>>4514785Oh I’m not looking for a fight, sorry if it came out this way. I just found it kinda funny how different my experience has been. I’m glad you’re enjoying your camera, I wish I did too.
>>4514844dont start coping now lil bro LOL!
>>4514814I have no idea how it works in terms of lens design, but visually I always see it as a diorama effect where subject looks like a cardboard cutout on a blurry background vs smooth transition between all focus planes.
>>4514814>Someone (me) posted a video of an accredited leica engineer explaining itWhere?
>>4514849
>>4514849It's projection. He is always samefagging so assumes his adversaries are as well.He also accuses adversaries of being Redditors, which probably means he's a Redditor.
>>4514855You could post this image and swap any brand onto it, that's just how gearfagging is. Don't get the Panasonic fag started, he loses his mind.
>>4514847>>4514849>>4514855>slow board with 5 people on it>y-yeah like 3 different people came to my defense i winSamefag melty, tbqh.
>>4514560>>4514562>>4514564oh hell yeah, i'm late but thanks anon. i never get tired of seeing the A350, just something about those sleek lines, the curved winglets, the cute raccoon-eye lookin' windows on the flight deck, she's a pretty bird. nice pics as usual, i think i have one of those 28-70's kickin' around here. i've picked up so many pentax lenses over the years i lose track.
>>4514519>>4514521also, nice catte. here's a phonepic of my fluffy bois
>>4514869Which phone/app is this? Processing looks unhinged
>>4514882yeah it does. it's straight out of an iphone 15 pro, i just cropped it a bit. which is a big reason why i started carrying my GR3 as often as i can
>>4514869Not a single hair was individually rendered. Extremely sad.
>>4514777Get the R7
>Near mint
>>4513999>The lenses are mostly shit.i'll agree the sensor leaves something to be lacking but the lenses, with few exceptions, are fucking great even at the entry level, and frankly it makes me sad that olympus died and panasonic got in bed with leica instead of vice versa because full frame olympus glass would be fuckin' bitchin', like the old proper OM System stuffthe $3000 super telephotos that are rebadges of a tamron? yeah, they're stupid. a $150 80-300 that's somehow sharper than the 'leica' despite being made of plastic and hope? a nifty fifty that's actually sharp wide open and less than the cost of the body? holy fuck why doesn't every company have setups like this, the entire lens industry is a FUCKING SCAM
>>4514922MINT+++++
>>4514924agreed. i picked up a e500 with the 50mm f/2 macro and the 2 kit lenses, even for a 4/3rds camera from 2006 im impressed how sharp the lenses are. awful dynamic range though, it shits itself on a cloudy day and gets noisy after iso 400. the lenses + gui make me want to pick up a om5/em5iii as a walk-around/travel camera....but the problem is apsc cameras arent that much more and more useful >>4514864i gotta sell a bunch of pentax/minolta shit, realizing i have all these lenses i touched maybe once or twice. always come back to the 50mm f1.4/35mm primes, a good fast zoom (17-50mm f2.8 tamron for pentax apsc or 28-75mm f2.8 tamron for minolta/pentax ff) and either the minolta 100-300mm apo or 80-320mm pentax or 70-300mm tamron for a telemost valuable ones in this box being the macro lenses (pentax-fa 50mm f2.8 + minolta 100mm f2.8 macro w/a messed up ); 2x 28-75mm f2.8 tamron a09 zooms, and a k10d with relatively low shutter count (k200d has like 100k shutters). rarely do macro photography. might sell the k70 too theres 2 on ebay for $300 and $370...maybe i'll give it to a irl buddy of mine for $200 but he doesn't have any interest in photography. i like my k3 more despite the reduced dynamic range. all gonna get replaced with the 28-105mm f3.5-5.6 pentax d-fa wr hd and maybe a minolta wide angle (11-18mm)
>>4514922
>>4514947>i picked up a e500 with the 50mm f/2 macro and the 2 kit lensesHow much?
>>4514949was $150 2 years ago almost, local sale. dont think im gonna sell it, e300/e500 isnt worth shit used but the macro lens is surprisingly expensive used. took this with it, its a fun camera to use. if you want a ccd for the colors go with olympus (kodak 4/3rds ccd with nice grain in the e-1/e500/e300) if you dont want to fall into GAS (rare/expensive lenses, dead mount, no dynamic range). personally im selling my pentax ccds because i hate the photos i get out of them (but i love my konica minolta 5d/7ds and sony a390...)
>>4514951>was $150That's pretty good.>e300/e500 isnt worth shit usedReally?After I bought mine (and returned it due to a broken mode dial that the seller didn't disclose), they've been stuck at over $100 on eBay.>the macro lens is surprisingly expensive usedI know; I've been looking for one.>its a fun camera to useThey are, aside from the lack of live view and custom modes.It's surprising how competently made/designed of a camera it is.I don't understand why it was limited to only 3fps.
>>4514947the em5 size bodies are too pointlessly small unless you have actual chinaman hands and if you put a grip on it, you might as well have gotten an em1/om1.
>>4514924The lenses are sharp and only sharp. They all have flat rendering and nasty color casts. Most have double image bokeh and weird transition areas that look like a blur overlay layer instead of progressive defocus (also seen on high mp ff with overcorrected lenses). >it uses the sharpest part of the lens bro!Sharpness is the least important aspect of a lens. If all you care about is grain and sharpness at 300% zoom you will be consooming for life as your photos look faker and faker.
I'm a hobby shooter that has an A6600 sitting in a camera bag I haven't touched in years (other than to move it)I want to grab a full-frame camera but I don't know if should stay Sony or go Canon/Nikon. I have a bunch of Sony lenses, so I'd like to go either A7V or A7RVI, but the Canon R5 Mark ii splits the difference price-wise, while having the best rolling shutter
>>4514952Yeah $100 seems to be the median now. I think its the season, around the winter they were $60-100. I love the shutter on it. Here's another pic from it, sooc zero edits>>4514953I didn't think it was that bad, I would want one with a 14-42 EZ Lens and a 20mm; get a tele to throw it in the backpack for traveling and keep the EZ or 20mm on it in your pocket. Its small enough it could replace a 1in sensor P&S with that lens >>4514959A A6600 is still a REALLY good camera by 2026 standards. Why not just use it? Is there something about a FF sensor that will make you use it more than your current high end APSC? Are there any photos that you feel like you could've gotten better with the larger sensor? I go back and forth between a K1ii (36mp FF DSLR from 2018) and K3 (24mp APSC DSLR from 2014) and there's very few times where the K1 would've really made a difference...more times I've ran into where I would've rather had a faster lens or more reach though. Or maybe the real problem is that it doesn't elicit joy. Go to a camera store and finger fuck a bunch of them. That's why I personally shoot Pentax...they just feel nice and fun. What makes them undesirable makes it challenging to work around for me. You should pick up a LA-EA5 adapter and go shopping for Minolta lenses, it might rediscover some joy in that camera you stopped using.
>>4514959If you dont shoot with a pocketable toy camera what makes you think you’ll use a real one?
>>4514960>>4514961FF isn't necessarily required, but Sony doesn't seem to make a great APSC hybrid. the A6700 is good, but rolling shutter is still assI don't think going FF will suddenly make me use the camera more, but I enjoy shooting stuff like hockey and motocross, and a bigger body would make a longer lens feel less awkward, plus all the other features (again rolling shutter, video)again I'm just some retard with more money (aka credit limit) than sense. there's a 90% chance I do nothing and wait another 2 years before looking at a new camera
>>4514922So is that dust or fungus?
>>4514959If already Sony, probably stick with Sony. You'd be fine with just the A7V but you could go with the A7CII if you want to be slightly more compact.Canon is a good choice but it does mean starting over again. Also keep in mind Canon don't allow third party lenses on their FF cameras either, which is annoying and means they can set whatever price they want on FF lenses. Fuckers.
>>4514952cAnon confirmed yesphoto. Nophotos in absolute shambles.
>>4514959>>4514969>Canon don't allow third party lenses on their FF cameras either*Full frame auto focus lenses
should I buy a spare battery? genuine ones are only 90 bones right now and I have drained the battery on my camera a few times taking photos all day.
>>4514963>rolling shutter is still assit has mechanical shutter up to 1/4000s. r u talking about video rolling shutter? you get that until you're spending like 10k on a global shutter camera.
>>4514959a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, my friend
and better the sight of the eyes than the wanderings of desire
>>4514988If you're managing to drain a battery while you're out, yes. I usually finish the day with 50% but even going flat once would prompt me to get a second.
>>4514990After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting.
>>4514963Buy a LA-EA5 adapter and experiment with some <$100 Minolta Autofocus lenses. 50mm f1.4 (Sony or Minolta), 28mm f2.8, 35-70mm f4, 35mm f1.8 Sony, 135mm f2.8, APO 100-300mm or 100-400mm, and a fast zoom like a 28-75mm f2.8 (Tokina ATX Pro, Tamron, Konica, etc).A6600 is a great body and still $1000 used. All the newer bodies will give you is slightly better DR + autofocus and better video capability. Instead of wasting $2000-3000 (body only, chances are if you have APSC lenses you'll probably have to sell those too and pick up FF E-Mount which is $$$) just pick up a $200 adapter and $200 worth of lenses and have fun. https://www.ebay.com/itm/800210087128Again, a a6600 is a great camera. The only thing better is a entry level FF mirrorless (a7iii, R8, Z5ii) or a a6700. Even the improvements in AF aren't worth it if you don't have a fast lens that can keep up imo. Its not like you're coming from a a6000 or a Rebel.>>4514995Agreed. Once you have it and the novelty wears off you'll have a camera with <500 shutter counts waiting to get traded in sitting in your closet collecting mold.
>>4514995A life lesson really. My ex was trying to get me back badly and for a long time, then immediately lost interest when I finally agreed.
>used a 167v film-era speedlight on my DSLR rated for 25v flashes maximum for hundreds of shotsit still works somehow
>>4514882That’s what pushed me towards getting a Fuji also. Sad, because I really liked early iPhones specifically because they used to have a natural pleasant rendering compared to your usual android. Sometimes I think it’s just nostalgia but then I go back and look at the photos and they ARE better in every possible way.
>>4514997Listed a bunch of Minolta stuff for sale. Already sold a 70-210mm f/4 Beercan for $39.99 + 7.99 shipping and a 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 (80s first gen) for $44.99 + 7.99 shipping after listing within the hourI still have 12+ Pentax lenses. Seriously pairing down my collection, some of these lenses I bought 1-2 years ago and I touched 3-4 times. For example I never shoot Macro so the Macro lenses were used a whole 3 times. Some have defects (slow aperture blades, mold). I would say most of them I either got with other camera purchases as a bundle (100mm Macro, 70-210mm, 18-70mm, Sigma 400mm, 28-100mm, 75-300mm) or they were failed purchases off buyee that actually ended up being junk (the 2 50mm Macros). Others were perfectly fine...just too heavy (who knew a all-metal cylinder would suck to carry like the 70-210mm or 35-105mm)Of the Minolta AF lenses I'm keeping:Primes: 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.7, 50mm f1.4 Sony, 135mm f2.8 Zooms: 35-70mm f/4, 28-75mm f2.8, 70-210mm f/4, and 100-300mm APOI would like to get a super wide angle. 11-18mm or similar. Its the focal length I'm missing. That or a 100-400mm APO.
What do you guys use to carry your APSCs while outdoors? Should I get this small pouch that you can attach to your belt? Im afraid of getting scratches in the camera while open carrying it around. Or should I stop caring and just get a sling or peak design camera clip for backpack/belt?
>>4515288I have a rivercase bag that was enough until i got more gear.The shoulder type bags are ok for only for street photographyYou cannot carry one if you want to ride a bike, want to do macro or any type of pics that need you to get low as it will always drive you offbalance, hang in awkward ways that will come in between you and the subjectNow looking for a backpack type but all the people I've spoke too lost lenses and cameras because of they thought the backpack wass fully closed and when the picked up the backpack lenses felt of. One friend wanted to pick up something from the ground bent over and the cover was not fully closed and one lens felt over his head hit a rock and straight to garbage. So i m kind of scared of backpacks
>>4515288I used to just wear it on a strap but it’s annoying to fiddle with a strap when you’re actually taking pictures. And as much as I like peak design quick release straps - it’s still faster and less annoying to just put a camera into a bag if you swap 2 bodies. Recently got this Bellroy 4l sling and I’m quite happy with it. Just big enough to fit my X-E5 with 35mm + flash easily without adding extra bulk. It’s somewhat weather resistant, which helps with non-WR cameras. And most importantly not ugly. Can recommend.
>>4515296Just to be clear this is for casual EDC. I’d get a backpack for outdoors since I can’t imagine not taking a bigger zoom lens.
Do I sell my XT3 for a ZF?I have the XT3 with the 50mm f/2 and a Voigtlander 35mm macro. I really like it, aside from the build quality which is embarrassing. I have heard the ZF has good build quality by comparison, and I can't deny the appeal of full frame. My only concern is that Nikon refuses to put aperture rings on 90% of their lenses, so I would have to go with Voigtlander.
>>4515301The build of the zf is astoundingly poor. The bottom is cheap soft plastic, the card slots make no sense, the articulating screen is creaky cheap feeling plastic, the shutter dial locks in retarded places, the grip leatherette feels cheap and sometimes peels (random, happens sooner or never), and nikons button array with zoom keys is seriously fucking retarded and does exactly nothing useful without several presses and as of the last firmware i used this POS camera with cant be remapped. I don’t mean this to compliment sony, because next to a pentax or something sony feels like cheap plastic with shitty shallow wobbly buttons, but next to the nikon zf the sony a7c and a7cii feel premium. You like your fuji yes? If you have to larp just buy an xt5/xe5 and pretend the 40mp is actually 24mp and you wont be able to see the xtrans worms and color smears, so it will be like a normal camera. Nikon autofocus isn’t even that much better, especially next to the xe5 (the xt5 isnt as close but is still pretty close). Canon for big lenses or sony for smaller lenses for ff, canon for cheap apsc, fuji for expensive fashionable aps-c, micro four thirds was killed by the 90d/r7. Hasselblad, not fuji, for medium format. Avoid nikon, panasonic, leica. The camera buying guide, definitive.
>>4515301the way fuji designs their "grip" bump provides significantly better grip than the one on the zf. if you add the grip plate, the zf is as tall as the z8 and just has a shallower grip and an awkward reach from the grip to the controls.
>>4515288I also use a Bellroy sling if I need to carry camera and a bit extra, but not the Lite nor Venture. The straps on the normal sling are part of the loops, so it has really good compression. Also fits a Steam Deck. For more inclement weather, I usually go with the Matador Camera Base Layer.> Im afraid of getting scratches in the camera while open carrying it aroundCringe.>>4515301Had my Zf since launch, but I'll probably ditch it for X-T6 or Z7III/Z8II.pros>great MF / adapted lens support>held up in tons of rain>50 f1.8 s z is excellent, 28/40 make a good edc kit>pasm dial has practical applications for mecons>AF is good, but takes some getting used to, not great if you want to all area AF and forget it,>effectively only 3 custom buttons>most z lenses are large and feel unbalanced on it>feels heavy, needs grip for anything moderately weighted, half case is good option for grip that's lighter/smaller>dial locks design is badI sold my X-T5 after I had the Zf for a while, and regret it much more than I thought I would. I much prefered using the X-T5 (outside of for using adapted MF glass). It's a shame most of what I prefer of the Zf is simply firmware stuff that Fuji could do too.
>>4515315>preserving resale value is cringeExpensive cameras are either business expenses that get cycled out to keep manufacturer support or toys that get cycled out to avoid severe depreciation because hobby photography benefits 0% from anything nicer than a canon r50Everyone itt is strongly encouraged to take good care of their shit instead of throwing money away beating it up to fulfill a romanticised artist stereotype
>>4515316>preserving resale value is cringeYes
>>4515317>throw away money. beat your shit up until it’s worth half. it makes it look like you shoot in warzones when you actually don’tCringeRolling blunts with benjis for beta males
>>4515318>throw away moneyBut I make money using my cameras
>>4515319So do I but I take care of them so they’re not destined for the bargain bin when they finally go and I don’t look like some retard who bought his entire work setup by selecting the cheapest ebay listingsWould you get into a limo with scratched up, peeling paint?Would you hire a mechanic with rusty tools?If someone auditioned for first chair with a glued together student yamaha, would they be put on a proper instrument ASAP and expected to care for it?Do you wear gray sweatpants and an anime shirt to work?
>>4515320Maybe you should focus more on making money with them so you can worry less about saving maybe a few hundred dollars by babying themI believe you can do it! Sending positive business vibes your way
>>4515301I would not switch to Nikon since they don't have blinkies or zebras in live view, while Fuji has real-time blinkies.
>>4515321>making money AND having self respect? impossibleMaybe if you focused on self respect you wouldn’t have to cope with looking like a bum and ruining your equipment
>>4515325Sony and Fuji really are the GOAT for people who dont need ideal ergos for using a 24-105 f2.8 for 8 hours or the best long term support in the industry (carepak plus)
>>4515321>make more so you can throw it awaystupid gangster/hood fantasy ideal>make more AND dont throw money awaywhat actually happens when you’re not a slob with your camera
Some lenses retain value or get more valuable as time goes on. Get those lenses.
>>4515330Do they beat inflation or limit client opportunities tho?Often, no and yes to each
>>4515331Good question. I guess if you get them for way less than they're actually worth you have a good headstart. Who knows about the future tho.Depending on the lens it may provide a unique or sought after look that not many people can achieve without your specific lens.
>>4515288What outdoors are you doing exactly? Unless you're doing some really jungle shit where you're having to weave your way through dense bushes and trees, I don't see why having your camera would get scratched up.>>4515296>>4515315I have a 4L sling and it still feels too small for a mirrorless with a 35mm on it. That and no padding or any protection doesn't inspire confidence. It just looks like this giant cube is across my chest, it usually compresses down really flat so seeing it fully bulked just looks bad.
>>4515306ZF also reaches 1kg with most grip attachments.
>>4515301I tried to move to ZF and ultimately went back. Lens selection, aperture controls and ergonomics became a “why do I even bother” dealbreaker eventually.
>>4515350It's feeling lately like the only worthwhile cameras are Canon and Sony. Why the fuck can't Nikon up their game a little? They actually used to be decent 30 years ago.
>>4515301To add - biggest upgrade reason people mention is AF but if you’re going with a Voigtlander anyway, then it’s kinda moot. X mount ironically has a bigger native Voigtlander selection.
>>4515351Their core fanbase is really militant so maybe that keeps them afloat without improving.
>>4515353I hadn't considered the fear of change as being a factor. Even so, I didn't think Nikon had a fanbase that were that militant. The only Nikon stuff I use are film cameras from the 80s and 90s anyway so I don't really have a horse in this race.
>>4515354>>4515354>The only Nikon stuff I use are film cameras from the 80s and 90s anywayThat's the Nikon meta. Nikon hasn't released a competitive camera since the F5 (idk about mirrorless maybe their mirrorless are good, I haven't used any other than the zf which was shit). The F5 was a good competitor for the EOS-1n. Their DSLRs are genuinely so shit. The colours come pre-rockwelled on most of them, but they vary so much from model to model it's no wonder the only userbase they could acquire are professional hobbyist boomers. The build quality, despite what nikon people say is total fuckin ass, same story with the AF. It's not like you can't take good photos with them, but for the price why the fuck would you ever choose them.
>>4515356Their prosumer DSLRs were really good and beat canon at shadow recovery by 3+ stops before and after the 5d iv aka green line machine. Nikon was the landscape, wedding, and journo meta. Canon ruled the planned shoot.
boo Nikon
>>4515368nikon definitely sucks these days. they literally just repackage sony hardware and fanboys convince themselves its better because the menu is missing 20 customization options but also has pictures
>>4515301Nikon lacks raw-accurate highlight warnings in live view. Sony and newer fujis have this. It’s the only useful thing about EVFs (OVFs didnt even need focus magnifiers because they had infinite resolution)
Canon FD lenses I believe are becoming hot again.>Be me>Collect vintage glass for fun>Search youtube for "Canon FD" and sort by newest first from time to time just to see if people utilize them creatively>Tonnes of hits, usually just a couple, most videos have few views, but still there seems to be a trend going onCanon FD was hit hard by the boom bust cycle where FD 55mm 1.2 Aspherical for instance would set you back $5k whereas now you can get one in good condition for $1k.Perhaps it is time to load up a little and profit from wannabe movie creators?
>>4515361I have a d800 and yeah the dynamic range is better than canons at the time but the issue is canons wasnt bad enough to cause issues. Landscapes you don't need dynamic range unless you refuse to bring a tripod. And nikon autofocus was so much worse than canons you would be crazy to choose them for weddings, journalism or sport. The 1DX series sold so much better than the adjacent D4/d5/d6 as evidence of this
>>4515378>Perhaps it is time to load up a little and profit from wannabe movie creators?Kill yourself. That kind of behaviour just fucks the regular buyers. You want profit go start a business.
>>4515380>you dont need dynamic range bro you just need this tripod and these filters and i have a fill flash in my bag ok uncnikon is for cool kids. canon is the dad brand.
>>4515387With landscape photography, regardless of your dynamic range you need to be shooting with HDR bracketing. Not really negotiable, and pretty simple.
>>4515388Same goes for resolution, all you need is like 12mp and then you can just stitch for anything moreSame goes for bokeh, all you need is a tele and you can just brenizer
Is it stupid to spend $200 on a camera backpack if the entire front section is taken up by a thin, deep laptop section that I’ll never get any use out of since I am buying the backpack for travelling on day-trips with my camera gear? Yeah, I can imagine that laptop pouch being useful if I ever go travelling with this backpack but that’s not going to happen very often. It’s a Tenba Fulton V2 16L. Should I look online for something more fit-for-purpose or am I overlooking a massive benefit in having a laptop pouch? I await the advice of my esteemed counsellors.
>>4515397Tenba have a few better models, there's one where it still has the camera section like that but also a small top section to store other shit. You could also just buy a normal clamshell backpack and use a camera insert, I've been doing that for a while since you can use a large or small insert depending on that days needs and have room for other stuff.
>>4515398Is this what you mean by an insert?
>>4515399You can find some that will be almost exactly like in that Tenba backpack, Tenba actually make them too.
>>4515190Listed a bunch more Pentax stuff. The Pentax stuff I didn't list I ran out of time to take photos of (2x Takumar-F 70-210mm and a Takumar-F 70-200mm, Pentax-FA 28-70mm f/4, Rokinon 80-200mm f/4.5, Sigma 50-200mm DC HSM OS, K200D, K10D). Of those the DSLRs are probably the only ones worth more than $30 ($80 and $100-120?)I'm shopping for a 28-105mm D-FA WR HD (K1 kit lens) and a Sigma/Tamron UWA Zoom. Kinda feels good to sell a bunch of shit ngl. So far the Minolta 50mm f1.7 Prime and 50mm f2.8 Macro (oil) sold.
>>4515401Listed a bunch more Pentax stuff. The Pentax stuff I didn't list I ran out of time to take photos of (2x Takumar-F 70-210mm and a Takumar-F 70-200mm, Pentax-FA 28-70mm f/4, Rokinon 80-200mm f/4.5, Sigma 50-200mm DC HSM OS, K200D, K10D). Of those the DSLRs are probably the only ones worth more than $30 ($80 and $100-120?)I'm shopping for a 28-105mm D-FA WR HD (K1 kit lens) and a Sigma/Tamron UWA Zoom.Kinda feels good to sell a bunch of shit ngl. So far the Minolta 50mm f1.7 Prime and 50mm f2.8 Macro (oil) sold.forgot pic hehe
>>4515401>28-105mm D-FA WR HDLook on Amazon JPthey also have new K1-IIs for $1900AU which is crazy, price of a used one in good nick.
>>4515403I just checked, cheapest there is $278 + $27 shipping used-good and $361 new. BH in comparison is $496 new and I'm looking at eBay seller wanting $248 for his in "excellent condition" waiting for him to drop the price a few more bucksPentax stuff in Japan is way cheaper than USA brand new, but used its worthless vs CanoNikon for certain things (newer lenses still hold crazy resale from lack of sales). Also forgot to screenshot the FA 50mm f2.8 Macro I listed for sale for $137 shipped. Its a little on the high side, I figure if no one buys it in 2 weeks I'll drop the price on it + the 28-75mm Tamron $20 bucks to $100-110. I used it twice, I never do any Macro photography. I got lucky on that, I paid $50 for it off buyee and it was like new. Love how this pic came out, I shot it through my windshield too. I had to crop out my wipers.
>>4515409Sony a58 + Sony 50mm f1.4
>Hurr wat camera? durr>Crossposted from bird generalA bunch of birds made nests in my trees. I want to photograph them at a passable level. My phone's optical zoom is only 2x, and the 6x cropped zoom looks awful.I'd like to photograph them digitally at a budget of like ~$400, but I'm not sure that's realistic. The most common recs I see are used mirrorless like Sony A6000s.
>>4515419Canon 80d/90d, EOS R7, EOS R10 (kinda garbo compared to the DSLRs but sometimes people basically give them away)Sony a6500+Sony and canon will give you the best color, quality, and autofocusAvoid nikon, panasonic, fuji, olympusOlympus especially is a significant image quality/color science/autofocus downgrade from canon and olympus fanboys often pay to use AI cope. Their lenses are sharp if you spend as much as FF and that’s it.
>>4515420olympus colors are some of the worstonly looks good as a “mood” not “good color”, the older the better (the newest ones are awful)
>>4515382Somebody is poor (you)
I bought a Leica lanyard for my shitty Kodak superzoom because it amused me
>>4515374>Sony and newer fujis have this. It’s the only useful thing about EVFsOM System and Lumix have this as well.
>>4515436yeah but them you’re stuck using a shitty camera
>>4515422You can tweak your color however you want on newer Oly/OM.
>first camera was rebel t3i, cool cheap intro to photos>then I got a 90d, perfect ergos and much better image quality>then I got an R50, a downgrade from the 90d in basically everything but being mirrorless and very compact and light>eventually moved to Fuji xt3 because I wanted the retro style and tactile dials, grip still not good enough tho>now interested in Sony A7Cii for full frame and it has the largest selection of voigtlander lensesWhat do anons think about my camera journey, will the Sony disappoint?
>>4515449A regular A7 is still just as small as your X-T3 with a better grip and controls and an EVF that isn't a downgrade. With the C models it stands for cucked, they're not any smaller in a meaningful way for the vast majority of scenarios.
>>4515444>paying FR flagship prices for a phone sensor because they finally added 1/8th of sony’s picture profile editorFucking kek you have no idea how far behind they arehttps://helpguide.sony.net/di/pp/v1/en/contents/TP0000909106.html
>>4515451>sony: puts a full color grading suite on camera>/p/: this menu is so confusing i want my nikon. no really. i cant read.
>>4514335>he doesn't know you're supposed to turn sharpness to -3 on every modern fuji camera
>>4515453the sorrows of being a jpg shooter>>4515435i used a wiimote strap on my leica for many years>>4515449>will the Sony disappointevery camera you get will disappoint, its just about figuring out which disappointments you actually care about or not
>>4515449>Sony A7Ciidon't there's much better optionsa7iii or a7riii will serve u much better
>>4515330/p/ sees gear as an investment and not as a tool, notice there's something lacking in this post.
>>4515456>a7iiiFor the love of god anon, do not listen to this guy. Get the A7CII or at the least an A7IV (A7V if you have the extra cash) and you will be set, just do not get the A7III.
Is it dumb to dip into my savings to buy two new lenses, a bag and a macro flash diffuser? Only got ~$11k and this would deplete that by around ~$2700. Should I just... save my savings? I'll start working again in the new financial year. This purchase right now is partially motivated by an EOFY sale on one shift lens I want and a backpack I need. Since I'm going into my savings I figure I may as well go all-out and get a macro lens for the macro shots I want to do and a diffuser to make it easier to use a flash. So, is it worth it? I hate spending lots of money. I've also got, y'know, bills and whatnot to think about, but this is different and I don't think it will put me in hot water to get this stuff I want now. I don't have car registration coming up for a while and I won't need to service it soon. Don't need new clothes or shoes. I can afford food every week. I'm just not in the habit of spending my savings. Thoughts?
>>4515462I usually go for it when it's EOFY, especially if it's a few hundred dollars off, but you could also wait for Black Friday if you don't really need it all right now.
>>4515462Make the diffuser yourself and use a macro tube to start off with. Post pictures of your results and we will either allow you to spend 30% of your savings on gear or not.
>>4515465>spend 30% of your savings on gearwhen you put it like that it's not so appealing...
>>4515462spend the money. unless you have a more pressing reason to need a large amount capital up front then all you're doing by keeping it in the bank is losing value as inflation and cost of living goes up.since you're already a poorfag I'll spell out budgeting and the purpose of having savings in 2026:>have enough for a replacement car ready to go for when you wreck your shit>have enough to fix your current car if it shits itself in a minor way>have enough to cover 1 month of expenses so you don't starve because of one missed paycheque>have enough for spurious purchases that could get you long term work e.g. renting camera gear for a shoot when the other retard they're consulting with will only bring what he ownspick two of those and that's your float value. you can spend that at any time providing:>you have a source of income to replenish it>or you would be objectively worse off not spending the money
>>4515469>unless you have a more pressing reason to need a large amount capital up frontthe idea of having savings at all is for a house deposit. the minimum is 5%. hence my hesitation, since I barely have enough as is, let alone dipping in for some hobby gear (I don’t make money off photography). would I have enough savings AFTER spending on gear to: a) afford a car if my current one shit itself? yes, basically 8k, but I would be in a very tight situation. b) a minor or major repair up to 3k? yes, and it would still be cushy. c) a month of expenses incl. food, fuel and all bills if I get no work? probably… only if my car stays sweet. d) to rent gear for a shoot? as long as I’m not hard up because a, b or c has happened, yeah. btw, eye opener: rent gear to be a pro for a day. I mean… I probably can, but I could just put some money aside through the year instead of breaking into what’s supposed to be a savings account for a home deposit. that would also leave me in a safer position if I need to spend big on essentials in an emergency.TL;DR: I need a job.
>>4515473Don’t dip into house deposit savings to fund a hobby. That’s lunacy. Once you have bought a house and are on a more stable financial footing, then go knock yourself out and buy a couple of fancy lenses.
>>4515475What this guy said and at least wait until you start working and have an income
>>4515451>>4515452Sony's interface is shit. It's not designed for fast-paced changes in real time. Also, as soon as you enable picture profile a bunch of other controls get disabled.
I have a Nikon D750 setup which lacks a long telephoto. Should I get a Z8, a 180-600mm, and the f-lens adapter, or should I just jump to a different platform? I see Fuji has, for example, a 150-600 lens in their lineup which looks nice as it isn't a pumper like the Nikon.I really just need 600mm+ for sunset and moon shots. Snapshits I just use the iphone.
>>4515444checked.Pentax has this too.
>>4515462Yes you fucking idiot>im already doing weed so i might as well shoot krokodilAre you capable of logical thought at all?Are your snapshits of bugs so important they demand $2700 of the best instead of a $100 minolta af 100mm macro, a godox, and a homemade paper diffuser?Are you fucking stupid?Save. Up. To. Buy. A. House. Not. To. Pretend. To. Be. Rich. On. /p/. >>4515469Oh my fucking G*d YOU PEOPLE ARE FUCKING RETARDED>inflation exists so buy the newest snoy when you’re so poor you need to save for a down paymentIs inflation 10%+ yearly depreciation and an ebay fee that shaves 13.5% off the BUYERS gross total, effectively taking 15%+ off your payout? No. You fucking moron. With you and all the dimwits walking around /p/ with $10k of gear that will never ever ever pay for itself in a million cat snapshits and clearly no appropriately matching level of wealth (ie: newest snoy owned by an apartment cuck), I am beginning to genuinely see talking monkeys who saw something shiny and want it instead of human beings with a photography hobby. Grow up. You do not need the new shiny, curioud george.
>>4515479>i can scroll between a dozen profiles in real time from an imenu item so its a shit interface i cant use quickly>it disables the inferior “creative styles” option that shouldnt even be on there what a ripoffDo you ever stop and make sure you know what you’re talking about before you speak?Do you also get confused when M mode disables cont. bracket?Do you mald at priority modes because you need to use minor exposure compensation adjustments on any system and thought they should be idiotproof?Do you ever, ever, yknow, think? With your brain?
>>4515489btw ur sperging out on someone whos only bought two cameras in the last 14 years. so no, they are by definition investments that have returned a profit.
>>4515489When people say buy depreciating consumer toys because inflation exists and pretend investments do not we are truly reminded why sheeple are also called cattle
>>4515492>i need $2700 to take a photo of a bug>fuck my home savings inflation exists and is only 23% behind depreciation and the fee i’d pay to cash out quickly>investments that beat inflation? impossibleAnd then there’s that idiot saying you should pay to rent gear for paid workWho has never heard of a business card, and kicking the entire fee to the client, with a contract (including interest and a small claims summons if they never pay)Financial literacy does not require education. You could develop it by having intelligence, critical thinking skills, and knowing what loans, compound interest, investments are. That’s it.
>>4515494Dont you know? Here on /p/ all of us are SERIOUS pros. We NEED the super sharp Nigoy 105mm f1.4 IS USM L Macro and at least 67mp to deliver our very rich and influential clients photos they can print nose-touching-print sharp at their usual minimum size of 60x30. And we aren’t showing up with a godox with paper taped to it. No way. We gotta look sharp. Our bug photos are serious. >meanwhile on earth: pro wedding ‘tog shows up with an a7iii and third party lenses, butters up bride, charges $1000/hr, leaves
As one of the few actual homeowners here, don't sleep on just rentingBut also don't take financial advice from here
>>4515491There's a reason why everybody who uses Sony shoots RAW and post-processes. It's because Sony's interface is so slow and janky you can't practically do stuff in real time.>will the Sony disappoint?Sony is a one trick pony - fast autofocus for stills. If that's mainly what you care about you won't be disappointed. Otherwise, look elsewhere.
>>4515498I own 3 homes. I rent two. Don’t rent unless it’s to someone, or for someone who can legally owe you. Average rent exceeds a well structured mortgage and returns zilch. It’s better to live with your parents until you can house hop through the boonies to move with a career if needed.>>4515499Sony is largely used for video which is effectively jpeg/heic (8-10 bit). Those profiles are for professionals who actually know how to set a look. You can switch between a dozen settings (pp1-11+off) by pressing ~i~ and scrolling through the assigned box with a jog wheel. >its slowWhat? No. It doesn’t lag like your android phone. >and jankyIt has literally everything a competent person needs and understandsMost importantly you’ve never used one and blatantly expose that fact, with the alternate possibility you bought a $2500 professional tool and got mad that you had to know/learn things and have a triple digit IQ score to use all of its features easily
>>4515499Anon. Stop fucking lying. Sony doesn’t outsell all brands other than canon combined and constantly trade the "#1 in full frame market share" title back and forth with canon because they are bad. Everything you have said about these cameras has been half-informed disinfo.
>>4515499>everyone shoots rawthats because raw is superior. more time to focus on the actual photo. just ettr and do adjustments later. very few professionals use jpeg for stills anymore, mostly just journalists pushing shots live (the famous trump assassination attempt photo was shot like this - on a sony with his preset picture profiles, btw)however most video is “jpeg” and is 50%+ of what mirrorless are used for. most video doesnt even get “color graded” because its a huge time sink that requires a decent pc and the more editable footage is, the faster it fills cards and literally cooks the sensor. mirrorless mostly exists because professionals have to do a lot of video and deliver it quick, or make barely any money. not for any other reason you imagined applies to stills. for stills, DSLRs are arguably superior because you can see what you’re photographing instead of whats in the low res jpeg preview, and just know your meter and your camera’s exposure latitude (note: requires human level intelligence)
>>4515503>just ettrkek, just get APS-C quality results out of your full frame.
>>4515507ETTR is literally exposing to fill the shadows as much as possible and reduce noise, instead of effectively shooting iso 6400 in the final photo when your camera is set to 1600 (ETTL -2). It could also just be called correct exposure leaving the term ETTR reserved for maxing out the potential of the cameras base ISO settings but that’s something that confuses tards. Also, FF can’t get aps-c quality. The photo will always look better at, below, and a bit above “equivalence” on a global, zoomed out level. Equivalence barely holds up at 100% zoom to pixel peep noise and sharpness. It doesn’t account for tonality.
Most cameras with good metering get pretty close to ETTR automatically, usually just a little lower to save highlights in high contrast scenes. My camera pretty much sets 0 at a level thats as bright as it can expose without clipping highlights.
>>4514335Sensors have no sharpness, sensors have megapickles. Lens have sharpness. A sharp lens will give a sharp image on 50MP as well as on 12MP. A shit lens will give shit image on 50MP as well as 12MP. Simple as.Get a better lens, enjoy sharp images.
>>4515516That is totally incorrect. Mono sensors are sharper than bayer sensors across all color pairs. Bayer sensors are sharper than xtrans sensors across all red/blue containing color pairs. Sensors without AA filters are sharper than sensors with them. Xtrans acts like a shitty, cost cutting AA filter (fuji actually makes CFAs) that nukes red/blue resolution, improves green/mono resolution, and introduces sharpening and color bleed artefacts just so the aliasing/false color it generates can be handled by aggressive chroma denoise. This allows fuji’s marketing department to tell retards xtrans cameras are immune to moire. They actually aren’t, at least no more than canon DSLRs were. They are immune to moire on traditional test charts but real subjects show it especially if good raw converters are used instead of fuji’s jpeg engine that sacrifices further resolution to hide xtrans fuckups.
>>4515499>who uses Sony shoots RAW and post-processesThat's because anyone who genuinely cares about what they are doing does that
>>4515507Good bait
>>4515518American incel logic. Subpar.
>>4515522>nonsense responseconcession accepted
>>4515522https://www.captureone.com/blog/fuji-x-trans-sensor-excels-in-capture-one-7https://medium.com/@nevermindhim/x-trans-the-promise-and-the-problem-31407fa43452https://medium.com/@nevermindhim/x-trans-vs-bayer-fantastic-claims-and-how-to-test-them-475b4f1b7faeinb4 that one fujislug that malds every single time but can’t refute any of it
>>4515462What fucking macro lens is 2700$?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNWsCcaxC8oPutting this out here as irrefutable proof. You can mald all you want with all your charts and links and trashcan shots, a good lens will always be good no matter how cheap or "bad" your sensor is.
>>4515524The C1 article is fine, and there's also the DxO posts too that you should also link, but the other two editorials are silly
>>4515530This is a good article too, https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/10/the-8k-conundrum-when-bad-lenses-mount-good-sensors/Lens gets you the look in terms of sharpness, optical characteristics like vignette or coma or aberrations, bokeh, etc. Sensor just determines how well that can be captured.
>>4515532Hold on I have to watch a classic. Again.>Look, Lok! a lock!>takes a 100 burst shots of the lockI really miss those times
>>4515419>>4515420>>4515422Thanks for the tips. Someone local has a Sony a6400 for $500 in good condition, so I may buy that soon.I need to decide on a lens and I'm thinking the Sony 18-135mm might make sense, but open to other suggestions:>I want a single lens to take hiking / traveling and be compact>I don't care about big aperture / bokeh>I don't shoot at night>I would mostly shoot at 18mm, but want the ability to zoom to what's equivalent to ~4x or 6x on a smartphone for the occasional yard bird
>>4515530>>4515532problem is that a lens can be too good for a sensor.If the sensor has no optical low pass filter a sharp lens causes moire patterns as in pic related.
>>4515539With that nonsense you just told everyone you never held a camera before.
>>4515538And I understand it's a kit lens but I also don't really know what I want yet and just plan to carry something around traveling. So it's compact + cheap and I think it might work for a year or two
>>4515540If the lens is sharp enough to focus a single point of light small enough to trigger a single R G B photosite instead of a couple adjacent photosites it's going to generate a false colour which is most visible as moire, but also has other bad effects.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd2TyUrVBL8
>>4515538I don't know if that will be long enough for birds, but it would still be a good lens to have. Perhaps look at the 55-210 to go with it.
>>4515544Yeah, maybe I just get a Sigma 18-50mm for traveling and just get the 55-210 kit for the rare bird shot when I'm at home.
>>4515545The 18-50 and 18-135 are very close in size and weight. If you're only taking one lens out with you then having that extra reach can often be nice. You say you don't care about getting a shallow depth of field, and if you have the room to step back 135mm even at f/5.6 can give a similarly blurry background as 50mm at f/2.8. Disregarding any differences in optical performance you'll be weighing up the speed advantage of the 18-50mm, which can be negated in some circumstances (when you subject isn't moving) by the IS of the 18-135mm (the A6400 doesn't have IBIS).
>>4515546This makes sense. Maybe the 18-135mm will work then
>>4515543That is not how moire works, buddy. Go back to school and try again.
>>4515507>>4515508ETTR is correct for any ISO above the base ISO, with the exception of bright scenes where you just want to shoot dead on the metering value for max DR>>4515514also correct, evaluative metering is what you're describing and is the default for all digital cameras since it's highlight preserving, the big gotcha is that it's dumb as a rock so if your lighting sucks (blown out window behind the subject) you need to ideally fix your lighting
>>4515546>>4515545>>4515544>>4515538>>4515419Someone I know decided to give me a Canon 60D and a Canon 18mm-200mm lens for free. So I'm going to use that for a long time and learn before buying anything elsethanks for reading my blog
>>4515571Nice, that's a decent camera and you can't argue with free. I'm sure it will serve you well and that's an ideal lens to figure out what focal lengths you like should you want to get more in the future, and there are a lot of cheap EF lenses out there for you to try.
>>4515539>problem is that a lens can be too good for a sensor.Nope
>>4515508If you're adjusting ISO to account for exposure changes when doing ETTR, you are doing it wrong lol
>>4515508>The photo will always look better at, below, and a bit above “equivalence” on a global, zoomed out level.Unless you post unlabeled examples here and asked people which are FF and which are not and they can't do it
>>4515598huskyfag and doghair already proved sensor size has a lookcANON and corgicucks tests were purposefully botched and shrank to instagoy resolution to hide the big sensor superioritybest posters /p/ ever had. we need them to come back and post weekly proof sensor size is the only thing that matters.
Had to rma the battery, sony niggers asked fot the whole package. Now having to send the camera also.
The best cameras have not yet been made, but the best lenses have!
