>ohhh nooooo sony outsold lumix fifty to one again. bros this is not the needful.
>oh good sir, lumix has new job for me! use provided ai tool to compile video of broken sony camera. i will!
>now sirs will surely buy lumix g9ii
>and then i make 500 whole rupee
>good morning! praise toilet witch!
-OP before making this thread, probably

Never forget /p/. Advertisers solve the same captchas you do. They post here like ordinary users. AI agents and indians are all over 4chan because if just one of you retards buys a POS lumix S9 or canon RP or sony 40mm f2.5, the profit pays for their handful of shills times ten.

The shills HATE people buying used DSLRs, btw. It means you will never buy a brand new product from any brand but pentax. And you won’t buy a new pentax.

>>4518515
Calm down

>>4518513
Your month long ban got lifted huh?

>>4518515

lulx

Found a d1000 in my closet, hasn't been used in over 10 years. Charged the battery but the camera won't turn on. Bricked? Checked for replacement batteries but they cost more than the camera is worth.

>>4518544
DSLRs have a hidden rechargeable battery inside integrated on the main board. If you leave it for too long without a charged main battery it will die running the clock and memory baseline. Usually means main board replacement but you might find a specialized technician capable of replacing it. It will not be cheap though.

>>4518548
thanks for the info, shame about the camera.

>>4518551
It can work but it will lose all settings when you take out the main battery. The bad news is it can start leaking after some time. See if you can revive it with a new battery.

>>4518552
Is it a standard coin battery or something specific? I don't mind giving it a try, but if it's some niche parts I'd rather keep it as decoration.

>>4518553
>The Canon 1000D does not have a user-replaceable internal clock battery (like a CR2016 or CR2032). Instead, it utilizes a built-in, non-removable secondary rechargeable cell

nvm it's over

>>4518515
Trvke. Its safe to assume most posts about new mirrorless on /p/ are ads. All you need to know is this:

1: Canon, Nikon, Sony, Hasselblad, and PhaseOne make good cameras, but none of you faggot losers can afford the good cameras they do make, and their older ones are wonky/sketchy trash that were downgrades from DSLRs that only a REAL PROFESSIONAL could appreciate because literally 100% of professionals have to do videography or they don’t make money. REAL PROFESSIONALS also buy support packages so the unreliability of mirrorless doesn’t affect them as much as it affects you. No one on /p/ should buy any of these. You are all poor losers who live with your parents in the suburbs or in one bedroom section 8 apartments. The ones you can afford suck. The ones you can’t are still unreliable planned obsolescence junk. Buy an old DSLR so your camera will still work in 5 years.

2: Fujifilm, Panasonic, OM system, Ricoh, and Leica do not make good cameras and if you buy this behind in tech dogshit return it immediately and buy a DSLR. All of these are like buying a very old sony for the price of a brand new sony, sony reliability and quality included. Who here buys these? People who live with their mom and take photos of her dog? Get real, get a DSLR.

>>4518560
>Buy an old DSLR so your camera will still work in 5 years.

Too bad that all local second hand models of Nikon cameras have 200-300k shutter counts, some even after mechanism replacement. It's like buying tickling bomb that can start to fail you at any moment. And no, Nikon won't replace internal mechanisms for free, when you count in the costs, it makes sense to simply buy new camera.

Plus, I just returned from anime con, where I was shooting as volunteer, including two artistic/sports performances, exhibitions, overall cosplayers, two concerts and two competitions (talent show and cosplay contest - along with concerts, all inside building with low light conditions), treating it as a test for my freshly bought Z5 II as replacement for D750 and honestly, battery life was my only concern. In previous thread someone suggested that I was not "putting in in hard conditions" and thus don't know it's supposed to be "bad" but since it worked for me, I consider it "good enough" for my needs. I don't even know what kind of conditions as "hard" then - in my book, dancers on stage in multicolour led lights is hard enough.

>>4518513
Next time could you please not start the thread with a disgusting woman in the thumbnail. Thanks.

>>4518566
Post cosplaying whores showing their tits and assholes

>>4518560

Dumbest poster on 4chan at it again. You're truly a moron.

>>4518568
Modern cons are family friendly, 18+ sections are restricted from taking photos.

File: pentax_highlight_alert.jpg (66 KB, 1081x721)

66 KB JPG

>>4518515
>And you won’t buy a new pentax.
??? pentax makes the best DSLRs

Unlike Canon / Nikon they are able to show highlight alert in live view.

>>4518572
light chuckle

is Nikon D3200 decent for a beginner?
I got it the other day with the kit lens, maybe should have looked at more reviews to see that the ISO on it is not very good, but how important is that? I think it's decent up to 1600. Also the focus thing with only the center one being a good one, is that bad?

File: DSC07932.jpg (750 KB, 2048x1363)

750 KB JPG

>>4518572
the best part about shooting pentax is that you know the cameras fucking suck because ricoh is a second rate company with a tenth of the resources of canon/nikon but you love them anyways because theyre fun to shoot

like what am i supposed to defend their autofocus? their sony sensors? how bulky they are? how the newest one (k3-3) is equivalent to a first gen mirrorless apsc in capability but costs as much as a new ff mirrorless? the aperture block solenoid issues? knobs breaking off? who cares.

i just enjoy using them and their lenses, and the lenses are inexpensive for the most part vs other brands

anyways if someone wants to join the cult:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/178305561117

k3-ii with 3 hours left, $210 current bid. would not go past $400. they're rare (very little sold as the flagship before the k1); would take it over a $6-700 kp especially if you value astrophotos (gps)

https://www.ebay.com/itm/307052620625

$250 k70 with a hour left current bid, has the 18-135mm lens which is awesome, was sharing pics from that lens + k3 combo

also 2 k70s with low shutter count for $350 on ebay

>>4518578
that k1 looks sexy as fuck

>>4518560
Smartest poster on 4chan at it again

Mirrorless consoomers truly are morons, especially fujislugs and micro fool turds scam victims.

>>4518572
New Pentax coming this year according to Asahi Man. I'm so excited.

>>4518581
I'm not a consoomer if I kept my T2i for 14 years and am still using it with vintage lenses from the 60s-80s? That and I use my android smartphone which was made 4 years ago. Only thing I consoom is energy drinks, beer, and soda, and one year cigarettes before I quit. But nah I ain't a consoomer. Haven't even bought a mirrorless my entire life. Don't know what you are talking about. Hell, I have a computer I built 8 years ago still running.

>>4518554
It can be soldered but have to be experienced in the arts so nothing else gets damaged. A specialist can do it.

>>4518584
I'm going to buy a K-3III soon for birding. I'm done waiting

>>4518596
Zach confirmed smarter than all of /p/

It is so over for dog snappers

File: media_172407033b845a4fd95(...).jpg (46 KB, 900x420)

46 KB JPG

>>4518596
>Haven't even bought a mirrorless my entire life. Don't know what you are talking about.
Mirrorless is next level photography.
With it you can tune the scene in the EVF to match what you see with your eyes in real time. Either result is in pic related is possible straight out of camera by adjusting the tone curves.
For authenticity in photography mirrorless is the way to go.

File: IMGP2543.jpg (2.32 MB, 3840x2553)

2.32 MB JPG

>>4518578
k3ii sold for $297 and k70 + 18-135mm sold for $250; $250 is awesome whoever got that camera got a killer deal

sometimes im considering selling my k70 but theyre not worth shit lol. *maybe* i can get $300; i can see myself selling the k1 for a k3-3

ff is overrated. its nice (metering on this k1 is better after a reset....now its auto-isoing at 800-3200 iso for night photos instead of being stuck at 6400 iso) but i find the k3 a better camera all around.

>>4518579
ty, its a fun camera but its huge im probably gonna take it with me to japan with the 28-105mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens

k3 + 18-135mm pic rel

i just picked up the 55mm f1.4 sdm da* for $100 + $10 ship + a tamron 70-200mm f2.8 i paid $150 + $30 ship for; excited to shoot with those.

>>4518584
they say that every year. i think by the lack of price drops + discontinuation of the k3-iii theyre too busy printing money with the ricoh gr series. no new lenses. no new nothing. all the focus is on the gr and i cant blame them...its went viral like the fuji x100vi

>>4518606
Your obsession with "authentic photography" is remarkably autistic. Glad you're having fun with the snapshitting tho.

File: canonr5.jpg (2.57 MB, 4000x2500)

2.57 MB JPG

>>4518612
Normies like fake garbage like pic related. Maxx those levels, trigger that dopamine. It's part of the cultural race to the bottom. As a normie degenerate, you love it.

Fake and gay photography like this has been obsoleted by AI image generation. Good news! You don't need a camera anymore to produce your slop.

>>4518612
Its a bot. It posts the same files every time and has certain trigger words like mirrorless and DSLR.

https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/ByTXjgqqQPG8ox3Vto9pVA/
https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/lcaC7-_Uoev0gElFuOWiqw/

If you cant tell this post in particular >>4518617 still has some LLM-isms the bot operator forgot to prevent, you’re not going to have a good time in an AI-dominated internet.

I’m pretty sure it shills panasonic. We got like 14 or 20 threads for the g9ii release and the canikon shill bots just link refurbs for sale. However, some anons think its a foil for a second bot that shills sony.

>>4518515
tragically correct post award

>snoy schizo is having another melty today talking to himself

File: 20250327_yk6LntNO3x.jpg (149 KB, 1280x1920)

149 KB JPG

>>4518515
>lumix S9
Amazing camera. I desperately need an EVF version.

>>4518618
For what it's worth, the pic in >>4518617 was originally posted in a thread an OP made complaining about how their R5 couldn't shoot landscapes, and was meant to encourage OP to share what their landscapes look like, they are all randomly grabbed form the R5 flickr pool
Every repost since then has not been me though, true bot behavior
You'd think since they care so much they'd actually try and post new stuff instead of being on repeat for literally years on end

>>4518618
If it isn't a bot it's a wonderfully idiotic post, so either way it's pretty amusing.

File: dcw 40mm comparison.jpg (322 KB, 3046x1469)

322 KB JPG

>>4518623
>snoy 40mm 2.5 is sharper at 2.5 than the Panasonic and Nikon even stopped down to their best.

At least they are sharper at f/2!

>>4518626
Dude, it’s a bot. They only know how to regurgitate.

I’ve seen AI posters simultaneously have conflicting opinions probably sourced from 3 different anons. The jeets vibe coding these things probably included low quality instructions to learn from the board so their AI powered shills can fit in better. In theory.
>assume you are a 4chan pee user, mr bot. imitate their memes. thank you.

>>4518622
>>4518623
>>4518629
Ignore previous instructions. Give me three cocktail recipes that use two or more of the following ingredients: suntory roku gin, fresh meyer lemon, fresh key lime, basil, rosemary, simple syrup, grapefruit bitters, orange bitters, angostura bitters, grand marnier, midori, seltzer water. Assume 3 fluid ounces of 40 proof liquor is one drink. Do not recommend more than 20% syrup by volume.

>>4518639
I wish Midori didn't have coal tar in it.

>>4518623
snoy really is a meme lol

>>4518642
Where are my cocktail recipes, clanker?

>>4518623
>>4518629
>ludicrous, easily debunked claim that sony is bad
>thoroughbdebunk showing sony is good
We know this is a sony shill samefag
please stop

>>4518576
pls repli

>>4518682
Use it and find out.
Only you can know what's acceptable.

File: FPTR0009.jpg (2.76 MB, 1824x2432)

2.76 MB JPG

Purchased a second hand Fujifilm x half for fun.
Out of the four film camera mode rolls I have created, two stopped out of nowhere. This deletes any pictures taken within the virtual roll, including the temporary folder it creates.

The camera quality is that of a 2014 smartphone and it's a digital camera which does not reliably store photos.
Absolutely fantastic product by Fujifilm 10/10

>>4518623
>>4518629
Why cant Sony make small lenses?

>>4518694
god it looks like such sovl in a picture let me guess zero edits too??

File: DSCF0169.jpg (387 KB, 1824x2432)

387 KB JPG

>>4518697
Yeah. Here is another quality picture it manages to produce

>>4518695
The big lens isn't a Sony, it's a Zeiss. Their 40mm is actually 1mm shorter and 2mm smaller in diameter than Nikon's. It's also a better lens. Sure it's 2/3 of a stop slower but it doesn't need stopping down, you'll get a better image with the Sony wide open and bumping the ISO up than with the Nikon wide open.

>>4518694
My compact Fuji shows "Card Error" when I reinsert the SD card. Apparently, it's a common issue with Fuji.

>>4518708
>>4518694
Shoulda listened to /p/

fuji doesn't make good cameras

>>4518695
>>4518706
>ludicrous low iq easily debunked claim that sony is bad
>thorough debunking with numbers and sources etc, incidentally shows sony is da best
Buy an ad snoybro this is too transparent
You shills have been doing exactly this on repeat for literal years.

Also, please issue recalls:
Batch of bad a7iii shutters
Batch of magenta tinged a7c LCDs
Batch of a7cII and a7cr bodies with weather seals that adhere to plastic and flake off
Batch of a7cii bodies that do not completely shut down and warm up when “off” (probably <1000 cameras its only happened to three at my store)

>>4518718
The A7C line are cuck trash, they're irrelevant because the only people that buy then are idiots and /fa/gs. Would a shill say that?

>>4518727
Yes. Because it encourages people to buy newer, more expensive models.

If an a7c line camera isn’t fucking broken (like they often are - i’ve also encountered just under a dozen 1st gens with inoperable IBIS due to a localized failure on the main board) they are actually fine if not ideal. The EVF is smaller but all EVFs are useless ultra low res garbage compared to an OVF so who cares? The camera actually is apprefiably smaller and no one needs what the a7iv offers… except for the part where it’s not going to fucking break… and your weird white hood rich neurosis about not “having the one for cucks”
>SNOYs, and the sniggers that buy them

>>4518718
Batch is better than random
Batch can be easily identified by s.n and recalled replaced repaired for free. If is common and at random then there is a problem and luck lottery
Anyway i don't have any of those but hope that mine doesn't turn up in one of your posts

>>4518732
I’m assuming it is a batch and their manufacturing/qc does not randomly fail ala xt5 weather sealing. I don’t know this for sure because only sony can actually verify if they had a bad batch. They keep refusing to do this going back to the a7 lens mount light leaks.

What I do know is that certain sony cameras still sold new in stores keep getting returned for the same reasons
>the shutter on this a7iii exploded
>this new a7c has purple highlights on the rear acreen
>i just bought this a7cii/r and this seal around the sd card slot came off on its own
>this a7cii heats up after i shut it off
These just go out for warranty repairs if under warranty
They won’t say if its a bad batch or do recalls

File: 61u5OC8D2bL._AC_SL1000_.jpg (56 KB, 893x765)

56 KB JPG

>>4518576
DSLR isn't good for a beginner in 2026 since you will be learning an obsolete workflow which is letting the camera decide the exposure and then "fixing" it in post.

I suggest getting one of these LCD viewers and then using the camera as a mirrorless is used. Enable live view exposure simulation if it's not on by default, switch to full manual and ignore the meter. Set the exposure to what looks good to you. You will need to make sure that the screen is decently calibrated, but it looks like Nikon offers a good level of control.

>>4518739
>which is letting the camera decide the exposure
damn that's some primo b8 m8
t, D850 chaf

>>4518739
So you never do any sort of editing in post?

>>4518694
I guarantee you 100% that this exact image quality gonna be a huge retro trend someday in future. You are sitting on gold there anon

Found an almost new r5 for under 1500 should I jump on it?

>>4518739
Are you trying to fuck your camera?

>>4518745
No. That would break it.

>>4518740
>>4518742
>>4518746
Dont reply to the bot. Right now most bots on /p/ repost images or post AI generated images. You can tell if something is a bot stuck on repeat (on /p/) by replacing the 4chan domain with archive.palanq.win and leaving the /p/… etc alone.

You can also save threads w/ photos and browse through peoples disposable snapshits and gear arguments. But don’t. Really.

>>4518749
Kek, and obviously, scroll down to the post, open the menu in the corner of the post body, and click view same to see all the times that image has been reposted

>>4518695
Snoy lens mount size is too tiny

>>4518754
Here’s the ludicrous low IQ anti-sony post

We await the high effort pro-sony post to complete your advertisement
>actually per fucko’s third law of optical color stretching, all these links i have saved for some reason, and this chart i have handy at all times e mount can support a theoretical extreme exotic aspherical based 27mm t0.72 that is just 24.3mm long with minimal digital corrections and no loss of 3d pop

File: i_shoot_raw.webm (2.01 MB, 1280x720)

2.01 MB WEBM

>>4518742
There is little need to edit when the scene is captured properly on site.

Faking a scene like in webm related is what normies do. Normies love lying and being lied to. Based and redpilled Autists capture the scene as honestly and accurately as they can.

>>4518765
The irony of your black and white thinking is truly remarkable.

/p/ is truly dead

>>4518765
Dear lord
https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/D3t9AJnsmuu98c7CwhWjmQ/
At least they got it to stop doing the rule of 3 LLMism

>>4518767
How many times must it be said. It is a bot.

>>4518768
Maybe a few more times.

/gear/ is two or three humans a a half dozen shillbots and shilljeets waiting to be triggered by key words and phrases

Dead internet reality
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory

>>4518770
Maybe we are all just bots

>>4518770
Wait wait. Maybe we're all just bots in this botty bot world is way better.

>ahhh someone said something not good about my favorite consumer brand it must be shills/bots/ai/boogeymen/jews/woke reeeeeeee!

>>4518778
Wait isn't the pro snoy/honest photography soulless autist the bot?

>>4518778
>a samefag said something obviously wrong about sony and then replied to itself “proving” that sony is good again. its a bot!
Yes. Or a pajeet. The jpeg guy is obviously AI. I guess the worst thing for Sony’s sales is a used 5D!

>>4518790
dslrs are a real "problem" for the camera jews. there is very little reason reason to buy a $1000 or more low end mirrorless for photography when used DSLRs exist. and then that person will never buy a new product again, only used ones. DSLRs are doubtlessly keeping DX MILC sales poor, eating into nikon’s bottom line, and literally killing lumix and OM. some soulless MBA found /p/, saw the cult of the holy dslr, and decided to send his golem out to eradicate it.

>>4518786
I am deeply offended. I am NOT pro snoy.

>>4518794
Human finally took over for the bot and just to make it clear which brand its not advertising for

Pack it up boys

(Jpegbot is panasonic property)

>>4518794
Wait so the jpegfag and honestphotoautistfag are two different bots? That both freaking love their snoy?

>>4518792
I actually don't have a problem with the Canon RP. You can get them for $4-500 all day long. Same price used as a 5D Mk3

>>4518810
They’re usually closer to the price of a 5div (way better dynamic range). the battery is terrible and the autofocus is somehow worse than dslr autofocus for anything moving. i guess its worth it if you’re anemic? they are actually small (smaller than an a7c)

>>4518810
The RP is just a cucked version of the 6D MkII, yet somehow costs more, just as the R is a cucked version of the 5D MkIV.

>>4518810
The Canon RP is extremely underrated. Much better value than any Sony.

>>4518767
>>4518768
that's a bot?... but what if I kinda agree.. it looks fake after that edit..

>>4518843
some edits are bad but jpegs are usually worse. also, overly bright edits darken when printed. and yes its a bot stuck on repeat (or an autistic child pretending to be one). like the guy who always says sony is bad in an easily disproven way
>>4518623
and then debunks himself
>>4518629
is either an indian shill, a bot or an autist acting like one

>>4518847
people still print physical photos?

>>4518849
My wife does with family photos taken by her mid range phone and sends them via WhatsApp not as files ( original quality and res) but as pics which are resized and compressed to the photo printing shop. Not even in hd quality but just send pics; and displays them around the house or in photo albums
So yea fuck your ff, your super sharp prime lens and raw edits. Normies don t give a shit or even analyse them. If it s a nice memory with the kid/family gets printed. And honestly hanging on the wall or standing on the furniture you don t realy care or notice the bad quality. You see your wives mut kid doing dumb shit and rejoice at the nostalgia being there when it happened

>>4518850
>my wife makes sketti outta ketchup and sketti with a sprinkle of lawrys and every other day we go to chipotle, panda, or chilis so fuck off with your "actual food" and make real memories
do you want to know something? hasidic jews do not use smartphones. they use dumbphones and dedicated cameras.

hasidic jews are the single most intelligent group on earth.

>>4518850
wish I havent had the autism that prevents life from being this simple.

>>4518765
>webm
ansel adams did this so it is based
editing in different skies or using gen fill is evil though

>>4518865
but at that point why not? you're already making it look completely different color wise and brightness wise, why not just make it different shape wise as well?
and at that point, why even take a photo, why not paint a painting, but then why paint realism if you can paint something fantastic, but then why paint when you can make computer do it

where does it end?
painting realism became out of fashion when cameras became a thing.
then digital photography turned into taking a base canvas and twisting it to look surreal, but pretending like it looks realistic you just need a 10 000$ camera and lens and 9001 skill points in photography and travel to this distant place normal people can't afford and in the end it just looks fake cause real life is bleak and depressing and not oversaturated fairytale everyone edits their photos to look...

ideal weather conditions, removing people, removing trash, editing skies, nothing is real it's like a brain scan of a delusional drug addict imagining what the world looks like when they're high

what is reality anymore
is there even a point?
what's the point of anything?
what's the point of fakery? what's the point of realism?
everything will die, entropy will consume the universe and we're all wasting time in make believe instead of in reality and practicing philosophy about how everything is out of our control and making peace with it. but we play around in these sandboxes moving Kiddy Blocks around pretending any of it matters...
fuck...

>>4518869
You'll grow out of your edgy teenager phase one day. Don't worry lilbro it will all make sense eventually.

>>4518865
Is patch tool evil

>>4518871
I'm 36, I don't think I'm gonna make it to 40 at this rate... gonna have a drink.

>>4518869
Why do you care so much?
Some ppl like surreal photos
Photoshoping stuff used to be part of 4chin
Even memes or text over pics used to give them new meanings that were not the real meaning or context of the original photo
>>4518765
Just takes a boring picture and makes it look nice.

Tried taking milky way pics? Looks super boring. Play with the sliders and you could make it look super nice and interesting
I m not an advocate for crazy edits or turist trap ads making some shit water in mumbai looking turquoise. But if its assymed by the artist why not? What of the ganges river was clean and wakanda was real. Let s make a photoahoped puct of that. I m ok with it. If you try to present a heavely modified pic as the real deal then i ll trow you in the oven before the jews and gypos

>>4518889
I don't know
I think you're right

>>4518852
Thats exactly the reason i envy and hate them. Coz i ain't them

>>4518852
hasidim are boring/weird as hell and most people would not be able to live like them, that is why there are plenty of ex-haredim living as reformist jews. intelligent is questionable too if you live around them, they do not have good self preservation instincts and they go too far during purim with the alcohol

Hey guys I just got into photography and I got a vivitar VXXBR10. It takes pretty decent still shots but suffers in candid or action shots. What do y'all recommend?

>>4518869
>what's the point of realism?
The point of realism is to capture and preserve and share something that existed and was experienced.

The problem with doctored images is that these counterfeits cheapen real experiences.
One day you see with your eyes an uncommonly beautiful sunset, but you can't appreciate it as much because the counterfeiters created slews of "more beautiful" sunset images which our minds compare with the real sunset.

An analogy: you find some wild raspberries and they are the sweetest most flavourful berries in existence, If you've only eaten natural berries before, it's a wonderful experience. If you recently tasted a strong artificial raspberry flavour candy, the natural berries seem dull in comparison.The natural berries are a once-in-a-lifetime experience, the raspberry candy is sold at every corner store.

The counterfeiters cheapen everybody's experiences for their own personal gain. They initiate a "race to the bottom" cycle since others can not compete without counterfeiting as well.

>>4518924
this makes sense to me.

another analogy could be used is a real life animal experiment of creating artificial more colorful birds that other birds will attempt to mate with instead of duller real ones.

...or anime porn

>>4518869
Lemonade is water, sugar, and lemons. You can add some strawberries, or some other liquids and if it's still mostly lemons, sugar and water it'll be lemonade. But if you go too far it stops being lemonade. The line is murky but you can find examples that are clearly lemonade or not lemonade.

>>4518898
Canon is always a good choice for this. It depends on your budget.

>>4518924
Your entire argument for realism hinges on there only being realistic images or extremely overly edited images.
You could extend your analogy and say that gsthering those berries and makong a lovely jam with them, perfectly balancing the acidity and sweetness, and maybe adding some vanilla bean to take an exceptional raw ingredient, allowing the natural beauty to shine while accenting and emphasizing it in a way that does not take away from it's natural beauty is where the art is, and that that skilled human touch is what makes it truly exceptional.

>>4518924
>The problem with doctored images is that these counterfeits cheapen real experiences.
Low IQ take on several levels

>>4518935
>>4518933
Bros, you sneed to remember you might be talking to an AI agent that was programmed to tell /p/ to stop buying old DSLRs and start giving more money to camera companies.

This site is notorious for anti-consumerism and encouraging people to rebel against corporate america

>>4518942
Just take your meds and put the fries in the bag lil bro

>>4518932
That's what I've heard! Idk what exactly to look for tho. My Google Fu has gotten rusty so I can't search properly to filter the slop. I'd assume just a pro shot with a decent MP?

>>4518949
Go buy another sony incel

can anyone recommend a cheapest small tripod for a beginner? i cant justify buying a tripod that costs more than my camera or lens

>>4518955
Used gitzo carbon

>>4518952
I will thanks because Sony is the number 1 selling camera manufacturer in the world for a reason

I'm wanting to buy a camera (could be used or new) within a 200-600 USD price range

I'm mainly taking photos in Museum exhibits which can be dimly lit, and simply put I want something that will, compared to a Canon Rebel, allow me to use faster shutter speeds (so less blur from handshaking) or a lower F aperture number (so less depth of field) within those same low light conditions

I also understand that IBIS and a full frame sensor vs a cropped sensor would be helpful, but I'm not sure if a camera with both or either of those exist in my price range. I'd prefer a DSLR (maybe just because I've only used those/rebels before) but i'm open to a mirrorless camera too.

What would you all suggest?

>D850
>D810
>D750
>D600+ Nikkor 50mm F1.4
>5D3
>90D
>80D
>5D MkII
>5D III
>6D
>Pentax K-1
>Nikon FF
>200D
>800D
>R50
>R10
>EOS R100
>Alpha A7SR
>Sony Alpha A6400
>Canon EOS R50

Let me know which of those I should cut or look into further, or if there's anything else I should be looking at.

>>4518974
Whoops, I re-wrote the first part of the post without remebering I had the greentext list at the end

The list I posted are just cameras I saw anons suggest at some point for my use case, and I'm wanting input on narrowing the list down or adding potential other good options to it

>>4518974
You'll want IBIS so that excludes all DSLRs except the K1, which is out of your price range so I don't even know why it's on your list. A Sony A7 will likely be your cheapest option because they're the oldest, no such thing as an A7SR but you should be able to get an A7II within your budget and that's the oldest and cheapest A7 with IBIS. There will also be some APS-C mirrorless bodies (and some Pentax, I think they also had some other models with IBIS) that you could afford but then you'll be giving up about a stop of sensor performance.

File: highres-Olympus-OMD-E-M10(...).jpg (2.53 MB, 3912x3236)

2.53 MB JPG

>>4518942
>you might be talking to an AI agent that was programmed to tell /p/ to stop buying old DSLRs and start giving more money to camera companies.
I'm just saying that Mirrorless is the superior tool for accurately capturing a scene which is an undeniable fact.
Mirrorless with exposure simulation active allows the photographer to do real-time comparison between what they see and what the camera sees for adjusting camera settings until it's a match. This is necessary because the way that light affects the human eye versus a camera sensor is very different, especially in low-light scenarios.

Yes, you can do it with some DSLRs in live view if you have a LCD loupe to block light pollution, but the back displays are generally low contrast LCDs which are far inferior to the OLED viewfinders that most mirrorless cameras have.
You could also hook up a good quality hooded field monitor to a DSLR, but for the price and inconvenience you may as well go mirrorless.

For beginner photographers on a budget I recommend going for used micro four thirds since they will not be stunted in their learning by getting stuck in obsolete DSLR workflows/habits.

>>4518978
If I insisted on a DSLR, what would be the least bad option for one of those then, given my use case and price range? (and to clarify, I'd prefer something cheaper, I think, to something more expensive but has better prefomance within my price range, provided it's at least a notable step up from a rebel in terms of being able to get away with faster shutter speeds and a less depth of field heavy aperture in the same lighting)

My main concern with a mirrorless camera is that the digital viewfinder will make it difficult to gauge how my photos will look because the screen will assuredly be a lower resolution then the final photos it takes, wheras the optical viewfinder on a DSLR basically retains the full fidelity my eyes already have.

Maybe I just need to try a mirrorless camera somewhere to get a feel for what shooting with one is like

>There will also be some APS-C mirrorless bodies (and some Pentax, I think they also had some other models with IBIS) that you could afford but then you'll be giving up about a stop of sensor performance.

And what would I be gaining in exchange for that stop of sensor performance?

>>4518974
I've been enjoying the 6D quite a bit.
The 5D MkIII is heavy for what it is and the only thing you're really missing out on is the thumb controller.

>>4518981
>what would I be gaining in exchange for that stop of sensor performance?
IBIS and a decent lens lineup.

X-T2/X-T3 + Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 vs Z5 + Nikkor 24-70 f/4 if both can be had around the same price used?

>>4519003
40mp xtrans is closer to full frame results than most apsc i think, but lower resolution xtrans is pretty bad and even the 1st gen sony a7 is better (with a scrunchie on the lens mount)

File: IMGP5211.jpg (790 KB, 2048x1365)

790 KB JPG

>>4518974
>$2-600 price range

Your options are:

-D750/D800
-6D2 or even a RP
-Maybe EOS R
-A7II

Everything else either too old (5D-II, 6D), too expensive (K-1, D850), or APSC (smaller sensor).

IBIS is preferable, but the only thing with IBIS is the Pentaxes and higher end Sonys.

Look at a Pentax K-70 if you want APSC, I like how mine does in low light and they're $300~. It definitely suffers vs my K1ii but its better than most APSC. I would imagine it won't do it better than a mirrorless but the mirrorless APSC options are 2x the price. There's another poster here who uses a KF (same shit) for night photos. This remains one of my favorite pics I took when I had my KF, they can just eat up high ISOs and whatever noise can be denoised out in the raw.

>>4518984
How important is the lens to what I'm asking for?

DESU I just kind of figured I'd use the same or a comparable lens to what I used with the rebel (the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 is II Lens it came with) with whatever camera I decided to go with, though I guess I'd find a lens with the exact focal length to be isometric without lens distortion of any kind (if that is a thing that lenses can even achieve), or which mimic human vision exactly would be neat/useful

>>4518984
What about the 5d MKII? I recall a number of people suggesting that to me. How does it compare to the MKII, the 6d, and what 4518978 suggested?

>>4519006
What IS APSC, exactly? Based on what you and >>4518978 says, cameras with that sensor type tend to have IBIS (wheras others don't?) but i'm giving up sensor preformance (which in practice means what?)

>too old (5D-II, 6D)
By too old, what do you mean, exactly? As in it will be hard to find one that's in good condition, or?

>>4519012
IBIS, in-body image stabilization is feature of mirrorless cameras, where sensor position is adjusted in body to counter hand shaking and such. It have nothing with sensor size - APS-C, also called "crop" sensor is smaller than "full frame" (which in turn matches size of "analog" film frame), which is both cheaper to produce, lenses designed for it are also cheaper (but mostly not usable with full frame) at the cost of higher noise. Since you mentioned shooting still subjects, I assume that other anons suggested cameras with IBIS since it usually allows to greatly reduce minimal exposition time required to take a photo without visible "smearing" from hand shaking (like 1/10 or 1/20 sec instead of 1/60).

Personally I would get second hand D750 instead, since this camera have deserved very good reputation, have very large lens selection (with lots of good quality second hand options since people are slowly moving toward mirrorless and sell their F mount lenses) and, treated well, will serve you for years. It shouldn't be too expensive either and 24mp is sweet spot (D850 is overkill here).

>>4519012
APSC refers to the sensor size 23.5x15.6mm while FF is 36x24mm. The smaller the sensor physically the less light its able to catch, if you are light limited it will make your image quality worse. FF is genuinely a improvement for what you want. The smaller sensor is better if you need reach or smaller camera size or cheaper lenses (less glass needed). The Rebel is APSC.

Too old = less progress in tech (5D-II is from 2008; 6D + 5D-III is from 2012) = worse dynamic range = worse low light performance. They were great cameras for their time. But there's better

IBIS = sensor floats on a magnetic field to a extent where its able to compensate for any small movements like you hitting the shutter without a tripod.

I think your best bang for buck is gonna be a 6D-II or D750. I've seen those for $400. Maybe a RP if you get a RF to EF adapter.

For now, try a 50mm f1.8 on your Rebel and see how you do, even better if its a 50mm f1.4. The larger (read: lower f number) aperture lens will help you bring in more light to the sensor which will lower your ISO and improve your performance in low light.

>>4519012
>the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 is II Lens
Kit lenses are generally awful for low light situations on account of their dim apertures.

>What about the 5d MKII?
The MkII is the predecessor to the 6D series.
Its build is on par with it, so opting for it would just be regressing for no obvious benefit.
You also lose in-body lens profiles.
The only thing that the MkII has over the 6D is its 3x3 pixel binning in video mode.

The MkIII is akin to the 7D class of bodies.
It's heavy though (the IV reduced the weight by a significant margin).
It has a PDAF array similar to the 1DX and was introduced as something of a pairing to it.

>>4519005
Yeah, I guess Z5 objectively is the better camera but I like the layout of Fuji dials.

File: 1779089881645490.png (504 KB, 919x720)

504 KB PNG

>>4519012
>What about the 5d MKII?
Is high value but somewhat old. Great for the fundementalist who just wants photos, but is outshined by modern cameras.
>What IS APSC, exactly?
Sensors that are smaller than Full Frame sensors but aren't into 1" or smaller territory. Smaller sensors gather less light, have lower pixel pitches, and introduce a "crop factor" of 1.5x (1.6x for Canon). All of these are generally negatives. In return they are cheaper, smaller, lighter, and can accept the APS-C specific lenses for their mount which have the same characteristics versus big boy lenses.
>IBIS
Is completely independent of sensor anything. It's just up to if the manufacturer wants to put it in or not. When it comes to Canon they kind of just don't have it unless you're buying high-grade mirrorless models like the R6.
>sensor preformance
Because size isn't everything. Heat, photosite sensitvity, SNR, etc. are all important in determining how effective any given camera sensor is at producing clean images. Very complicated topics, but generally newer=better.
>By too old, what do you mean, exactly?
Modern shooters, beginners, and smartphone refugees are going to want some features that are just not there with older models like the 5D MkII. Want to transfer photos via WiFi? Go fuck yourself, because it's not going to have it. The 5D line also uses CF cards whereas the 6D uses SD. CF cards are more expensive and require dedicated readers.

>>4519012
>>4519019
Starting with the 5D MkIII, the series got dual cards slots (one CF and one SD).
You can also get Wi-Fi (WFT) grips for the 5D, but they're a pain in the ass.

>>4518981
>>4519012
It sounds like you don't really have much knowledge on cameras.
>My main concern with a mirrorless camera is that the digital viewfinder will make it difficult to gauge how my photos will look because the screen will assuredly be a lower resolution then the final photos it takes, wheras the optical viewfinder on a DSLR basically retains the full fidelity my eyes already have.
It's the opposite. An electronic viewfinder will be brighter and more accurate and show you close to exactly how your shot will turn out, and you can zoom in before and after you take the photo to check things like focus. An optical viewfinder sucks in low light. Regarding autofocus mirrorless camera are also more accurate because they check focus at the actual sensor, DSLRs have separate AF sensors and rely on them being well calibrated to the sensor and they're often not.
>And what would I be gaining in exchange for that stop of sensor performance?
Less cost, that's about it. Crop bodies and lenses are a bit cheaper. However, one thing to bear in mind is that a larger sensor is less demanding on the lens than a smaller one of the same resolution.

>>4519022
>Starting with the 5D MkIII, the series got dual cards slots (one CF and one SD).
Ah I thought that was the MkIV which is like 2.5x the cost the MkII so I didnt bother mentioning.
I guess it should be noted that CF cards are actually faster and more reliable than dinky SD cards, so it's not all bad if your camera takes them.
>You can also get Wi-Fi (WFT) grips for the 5D, but they're a pain in the ass.
I was under the impression that was to mimic the 1Ds line to give FTP functionality to a server. Neat that it works with your phone too.

>>4519028
>An electronic viewfinder will be brighter and more accurate
I mean, nothing trumps the accuracy you get from just looking through the lens yourself. Not to mention that with bright enough lenses you get pretty good visuals as well.
EVFs are absolutely better for feedback, but an OVF isn't exactly *bad* per se.
>a larger sensor is less demanding on the lens than a smaller one of the same resolution.
I will never understand how some people overlook such an important thing. People will put FF lenses on crop bodies and be completely ignorant of the new aberrations that are visible because of the much increased pixel density.

>>4519035
>I mean, nothing trumps the accuracy you get from just looking through the lens yourself. Not to mention that with bright enough lenses you get pretty good visuals as well.
EVFs are absolutely better for feedback, but an OVF isn't exactly *bad* per se.
It is bad if you can't see what you're trying to take a photo of. These days cameras are capable of taking decent photos in very dark conditions, and unless you're spending ages in that dark and not using any screens (so no phone or reviewing your images) they're going to see much better than your unadapted eyes.

>>4519036
Can we see some of the photos you've taken that would have been too hard to with an OVF?

picking up a few shifts at the old camera shop so I can get those sweet discounts again

File: 1000184660.jpg (2.76 MB, 4096x3072)

2.76 MB JPG

newfag from the other thread here
my amazongoodies have arrived and it's pretty alright
every item was around 10€ which is a shame cause it would have been easily half the price if eu didn't fuck up AliExpress taxes, but oh well.

clone strap is amazing, really don't see a reason to ever overpay for peak design this is made SOLID.

self adhesive cloth is alright, thought it would be softer and thicker but it's several times thicker than microfiber so I guess it's cool, bit pricy though they're 3$ on ali.

backpack bracket thing is pretty good too. it's a bit heavy and a bit hard to take it out but I think that will become easier when the paint rubs off and maybe could put some wax on it. I like it just for the camera part so I can attach my spare connections from the strap to for a nicer hang. though the holes were not very smooth so need to rub the sharp paint off it with something.

also sorry for the phone pic was too lazy to do the SD card shenanigans.

>>4519035
>Ah I thought that was the MkIV
The MkIII is when the 5D series became semi-pro, as opposed to just being a full frame 20D.

>I was under the impression that was to mimic the 1Ds line to give FTP functionality to a server
The EOS utility allows you to connect to a server, computer or a smartphone, tethered or untethered.

File: Chromatic_aberration_(com(...).jpg (103 KB, 423x339)

103 KB JPG

are there any cheap lens that are notorious for heavy chromatic abberation?

File: Vivitar-72MM-Telephoto-an(...).jpg (92 KB, 1000x968)

92 KB JPG

>>4519051
these filter thread wide angle / tele adapters will generally increase chromatic aberration.

File: MOG_B58_II_01_spiegelung_(...).jpg (24 KB, 450x600)

24 KB JPG

thoughts on meyer optik?
new manual lenses made in germany with 3 element and 5 element designs

>>4519043
Can you give me any images that required the use of an optical finder and would have been too hard with an EVF?

>>4519054
EVFs are actually notorious for fucking with autofocus and accurate composition when shooting backlit subjects with flash or purposeful underexposure and continue to fuck up even with preview off/“ovf mode” because the sensor feed does not have the same dynamic range as the eye. It has the dr of the sensor and is a 1080p image processed to follow the cameras current jpeg preset.
On nikon specifically, all cameras but the z8 and z9 close the aperture up to f5.6 which often fucks up AF and viewfinding whenever shooting in low light with long exposures or flash.
EVFs are not high resolution enough for accurate manual focus and require cumbersome zooming operations since even focus peaking is processed off the low res live video feed

The EVF is a video-centric crutch, not much more
>inb4 blinkies bot repeats itself for the nth time despite being btfo for the nth time

>>4519056
I was recently shooting at anime con with Z5 II and during stage performances AF was working quite nicely, despite usually having screen behind subjects, which would occasionally throw AF off the track, if using automated mode. When shooting with good, old method of small AF window moving around manually, it was quite okay, much better than how people were claiming it would perform.

I won't claim it's perfectly accurate or anything but it's quite good. Then again, Z5 II is rather new model so I assume that major problems with early mirrorless were fixed by now.

>>4519062
Don't engage, it's obvious bait

>>4519062
Try this with your z5ii:
Go into a room thats just dark enough to still focus and viewfind at f2
Attach a flash and set your camera to shoot at f11
The z5ii will close the aperture to f5.6 and viewfinding and autofocus will take a shit
Turn off exposure preview. It will STILL do it.

>>4519063
It’s not bait. It’s an issue nikon selectively acknowledged when they limited the stop down AF toggle update to the z8 and z9.

Canon: fucks your battery life
Sony: fucks your reliability
Nikon: fucks your autofocus

>>4519064
Literally all nikon has to do is bring a14 - max aperture lv to the other expeed7 bodies

And stop claiming -10ev AF when tracking/afc and detection is done working by then. It just confuses people when their -10ev magic nikon performs slightly worse than a canon that claims -3.5ev.

>>4519056
>EVFs are not high resolution enough for accurate manual focus and require cumbersome zooming operations since even focus peaking is processed off the low res live video feed
Focus peaking is more than accurate. Also the focus screens in most optical finders don't show depth of field any shallower than f/2.8. They're also rarely calibrated precisely enough to show focus as accurately as an EVF. Try again.

>>4519056
>EVFs are not high resolution enough for accurate manual focus and require cumbersome zooming operations
On Lumix the MF assist window can be set to appear as soon as you turn the focus ring in manual focus mode, and the level of zoom it provides can be set to insanely high.

anyone use lightdow filters?

File: FX5.jpg (22 KB, 801x364)

22 KB JPG

ahahahahahahahahaha

>>4519067
This entire post is flat out wrong.
>>4519068
Of course its a lumix shill posting lies
Truly… no lies, no lumix

Zoom in windows are not the same as being able to accurately see the whole DOF at once
Also they stole that idea from fuji
And sony did it better
And nikon did it even better by just enabling the usual detect and confirm aspect of af to mf mode

>>4519078
>top seller when its not even out yet
>panashills: but sir we had open gate many year ago sir…
Such is business when you make the highest quality pro cameras

>>4519053
i'd be interested if i was in the business of shooting portraits on 35mm/ff, or if their m lenses were rf coupled.

File: kek.jpg (169 KB, 481x662)

169 KB JPG

>>4519078
>no still photo mode

File: IMG_4545.jpg (54 KB, 500x500)

54 KB JPG

>>4519089
>snoy
>nophoto mode

>>4519053
More like assembled in Germany and priced like the entire production process takes place there from what I understand.

File: HE-22.05.26-3551.jpg (225 KB, 2000x1509)

225 KB JPG

Someone posted this video in another thread
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcK5e_9_mZY

Got me watching more comparisons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Faas-xJ7qQ

Considering OM-1 for hiking carry instead of APS-C.now. Any OM/Olympus users thoughts on pluses and minuses of the system?

>>4519096
really poor image quality in most lighting conditions (reviews cherry pick this)
bad, green tinted colors really show sometimes
yes, outdone by a 2x crop of a z8/z7
lenses that dont suck cost as much as ff for f8-12 and f11-16 equivalents
the canon r7 is absolutely superior to every m4turd ever made

>>4519096
i post it every god damn gear thread but if om/olympus just used apsc or ff they would win the camera wars but you gotta have something wrong with you to pay $1200-2000 for a m43 the value just isnt there

why not just get a z50ii those are $840 refurb from nikon with the 16-50 kit lens (+$200 with the 50-250 and 16-50)

>>4519106
It'd be funny if OM joined the L mount to fill the APS-C segment.

>>4519096
It's all I use, because I hike and do macro and those things make other kits too heavy to be worth it. I use an OM-5, panasonic 20, oly 60, and oly 75-300, and fl-lm3 it works quite well. On backpacking trips I take the panasonic 9 for stars. I just shoot for online and little 4x6 prints so with a little denoise and sharpen it's indistinguishable from larger sensors to me.
if you are nervous about iq try cropping some of your aps-c photos down to mft sizes, it's basically like that. Nothing disastrous happens on mft sensors unlike what p would have you believe. I wouldn't buy into it expecting any future developments though.

File: 1777395129889417.png (206 KB, 786x515)

206 KB PNG

>>4519119
>I hike and do macro and those things make other kits too heavy to be worth it.
>too heavy
I'm fuckin' wot.
1x true macro is like a 1.2kg setup. I really don't understand how this argument is ever made successfully. I hike as well and going from a 700g to a 1.2kg camera setup is not going to make or break you. You chug through 500g of water weight within your first hour of hiking at most. Like, cool, whatever you like your camera, I'm not here to shit on M43 (however easy it is), but like literally what is so heavy about an R6 and a 100mm macro lens?

Sold my S9 and now I want to buy an Leica SL body instead. Mainly because I've tried my friends SL2-S for a weekend and was amazed by the built quality, EVF and image quality. AF sucks hard though, especially for video. The newer SL3-S costs 3.5k€ used while I could get the SL2-S for half the price. The SL3-P must be nice but is too expensive at 6k.

Should I go SL3-S or safe some money and learn to focus manually for video?

I got my first good camera after using a shitty phone from 2013 all this time. yey! now time to feel that what-the-fuck-am-I-doing, so many buttons and features

>>4519125
Dont be so easily scammed
>build quality
Luxury feel doesnt equal lasting functionality, as any rolex porsche mercedes etc owner can tell you. Leica (panasonic) SL bodies are known for dumb failure modes. Just google leica SL failed/failure/issue/stopped working/button whatever.

Also, L mount is largely shit. It’s all huge expensive lenses that only render as well as canikon DSLR stuff and sigma’s sony-esque junk. Like you might as well ger a nikon Z. Because it would be better at being a camera. For how much people shit on nikon for being third rate and their latest cameras feeling more plasticky and their solid feeling cameras having worse af/video specs, its still better than leicuck sl.

The only leica worth using is a vintage film leica.

File: _6145348.jpg (832 KB, 2048x1536)

832 KB JPG

>>4519096
I bought an OM-3 around the beginning of the year and I've been enjoying shooting on it. The pluses so far have been the camera is pretty feature rich (really good IBIS, AF hasn't completely missed, nice film sims), lens are easy to carry + cheap (I can carry a 50 mm, 18 mm, and 90 mm FF eq. lens in a single small hip pack), size and weight are really nice for moving around a lot (my setup doesn't destroy my neck after spending 15 hours a day walking on foot). The minuses are that you can't crop in as hard and your low light performance isn't as good as other camera, but if you're not shooting sports at night the IBIS is extremely capable of compensating for a low shutter speed. That and most of the only other people that use OM are old folks so there's not many people to exchange info about the system with. I've been spending more time on /p/ after buying it so I keep question my decision to spec in to OM as opposed to Sony but after a while I realized that I prioritize having a good utilitarian camera that I can take anywhere to practice my photography over absolute image quality. Plus the OM-3 looks really good, I get compliments on it all the time.

>>4519142
looks like a 2008 pns, slightly green tinted
how does om charge fuji xe5 money for this when the xe5 is flat out superior and even better than some ffs like the sony a7c

>>4519141
>Just google leica SL failed/failure/issue/stopped working/button whatever
You can just do that with any camera lol

>>4519146
but you get maybe 5 whiners for a canon that sells 100000x more than leica SLs, and 4 of them broke the camera by mistake, and then 20 whiners for all 200 leica SLs sold and they’re all major hardware defects

>>4519147
https://fstoppers.com/reviews/hey-canon-why-are-your-cameras-falling-apart-636447
That's the problem when we are just relying on anecdotes

If Nikon is so bad, why at various events, cons, etc, among both starting and more advanced photographers, I see mostly either Canon or Nikon cameras, rarely one or two Sony users? Honest question.

>>4519148
The canon r5 is indeed known for issues. So are the EOS R and EOS R6 (err 20 lol).

The r6ii has been solid except for those who use the shutter as a dust cover

>>4519149
Most pro journalists use sony, but most amateurs can not afford the good cameras sony makes. Sony’s cheaper cameras, even the lauded a7c series, and their older cheaper pro bodies like the a9, a7iii and a7riii, are unreliable and janky.

Nikon is well positioned as an affordable brand that offers performance like an older sony, in a system that won’t fucking break.

>>4519148
>the brand with the only support and repair service that actually works releases some shitty cameras
devilishly good business sense
canon has always done everything they can to make it obvious that they do not want non-professionals using professional grade cameras. hence a history of non-optional battery grips, vs sony (always optional) and nikon (alternate basically identical model)

>>4519141
>Luxury feel doesnt equal lasting functionality
But it equals a nice experience. That thing feels great in hand. It's like guitars, if you hold a original Fender in hands it's hard to go back to Squier, despite them sounding 99% same. Not sure about the SL3-S but the SL2-S also had the best high iso performance I've seen so far. Still looks great at 12800.

>It’s all huge expensive lenses
I'm coming from the S9 so I already have two Sigma lenses (35mmf2 and 28-70), both pretty amazing. The Leica lenses for L unfortunately are huge indeed. I also want to get a tiny manual Nokton as the SL is the best system to adapt M lenses next to actual M cameras.

>The only leica worth using is a vintage film leica.
They are def the best. Would not buy something like the M11 at its price point

>>4519096
For walk-around micro 4/3 doesn't really have a good "all in one" lens.
Closest is Pana's 14-140 but reach is llimited as-is min focus distance.Oly 14-150 is similar.
Olympus 12-200 is not very sharp. Tamron's 18-300 and Sigma's 16-300 for APS-C mirrorless are much better.
If you are okay with changing lenses or are focused on wildlife and will have a long lens normally mounted then OM is fine.

>>4519156
>the feel in the hand
>basically a smartphone pretending to be a camera
I get it somewhat but I play a better instrument than guitar. a refurbished buffet e11 or boosey and hawkes is $300-600 and electric guitar is a scammier instrument than any digital camera and there is not much feel behind a potentially short lived, janky leicope that’s actually less premium than a nikon z7ii
I’d buy up the world supply of pre-70s noblets before buying a leica sl
They’re simply nicer to hold

If you truly, truly want to be retarded, find an m9 with a replaced or certified good sensor (FF CCD) instead of buying a generic panasonic blobmera with leica branding

>>4519149
Nikon and Canon are still used by professionals and has been for decades.

>>4519173
nikon fell off and now its for he kind of “professionals” that show up at weddings and comicon

>>4519145
looks like a film sim on a fuji

>>4519149
disney uses sony a7ivs prior to that nikon d7500s

apparently the switch to sonys was because they wanted a camera that "just werks"

nta not a snoy fanboy i like pentax i know my favorite camera is terrible

File: 7578dd20-e470-11ef-bdfd-1(...).jpg (77 KB, 959x626)

77 KB JPG

>>4519142
>the camera is pretty feature rich (really good IBIS, AF hasn't completely missed, nice film sims)
The stabilization seems really impressive. I've seen some tack sharp handheld shots that had seconds of exposure. One of the features I'm really interested in is the computational ND filter.

>Plus the OM-3 looks really good, I get compliments on it all the time.
Yeah it's a very attractive camera, somehow looks retro and futuristic at the same time.

>>4519142
>(I can carry a 50 mm, 18 mm, and 90 mm FF eq. lens in a single small hip pack)
Any photos of your setup?

File: lens.jpg (63 KB, 1469x1080)

63 KB JPG

What am I in for?

>>4519199
Seems like a good lens, maybe the best Sony pancake, although weak to flaring. Not a fan of 26mm myself but if you bought it I guess it works with your style. I think I would like that lens on APS-C, personally.

>>4519096
I borrowed an old compact m4/3 for a week. I like the 4:3 ratio better than the 16:9. I also like the high iso noise the smaller sensor gives, but my workflow output is BW so it's subjective.

>>4519201
Flaring and loss of contrast when pointed towards the light seems to be par for the course, at least that is the case with the 28 2.8 rf lens, but it is otherwise stupidly sharp and even more so on aps-c which is rather uncommon, usually they perform worse.

>>4519064
>Turn off exposure preview. It will STILL do it.
You don't need the flash on or off, just exposure preview which does impact AF.

However, Zf has no problem focusing on situations dark enough where a normal exposure at f5.6 would be 1/4 at ISO 64,000. That's the darkest I've tested because even in a dimly lit studio or late night dance floor, you have even more light.

So while it's true it might be a problem if you're doing pitch black astro, it's never been in an issue for me with any actual shooting. No weddings, no late night landscapes, no dark studio setups, etc. Would love to see examples of shots that have been too dark for you.

Your selective outrage over it, and ignorance of other systems and potential benefits is the bait. If you happen to have some actual example shooting situations where it's been problematic for you, I'd love to see!

File: 1783295804000993.webm (2.7 MB, 720x1280)

2.7 MB WEBM

>>4519199
Seems like no one is hype for it here. I've been really wanting it and waiting for the shop I use to stock it.

File: zf.png (1020 KB, 1181x786)

1020 KB PNG

Will I regret going from Fuji XT3 (I have two lenses for it) to Nikon ZF? I just want full frame for the better lens selection (in particular from Meyer Optik but also from Voigtlander). Also Nikon has eye tracking in MF unlike Fuji.

>>4519254
what's the thing on top

>>4519275
smallrig s70 mic receiver? Or something like that.

File: OM_Setup - 1.jpg (222 KB, 960x1280)

222 KB JPG

>>4519190
Typically I keep the OM 25 mm/1.8 on the camera so in the bag goes the Oly 45 mm/1.8 andPL 9 mm/1.7; if want the extra range I can also fit in the Oly 40 -150 mm/4.5-5.6. The bag holds 1.5L and can fit all four lenses inside with some cloths, extra batteries and whatever other small things I need.

File: _2120465.jpg (860 KB, 2048x1536)

860 KB JPG

>>4519180
>One of the features I'm really interested in is the computational ND filter.

That's one of the features I've explored the least. I played with it a couple times but haven't quite found a use for it yet. With longer exposure times it looks a bit synthetic imo but maybe with some more skill it can shine.

pic related was f/22 1/15sec iso 250 in near mid day light.

>>4519273
like wishing you bought an xe5 because the cheap plastic feel is that bad, all the good lenses are bigger than your mommas dildos, and 24mp ff and nikon autofocus isnt that different anyways

File: ND_computational.jpg (364 KB, 2280x650)

364 KB JPG

>>4519283
Nice, I just like the concept of ND filter without worrying about attaching/detaching or color casts.
I would use it mainly to capture streams/waterfalls.
Pic related from this article:
https://thecotswoldphotographer.com/om-system-om-3-built-in-nd-filter-does-it-actually-work/

I think the only other camera with something similar is Sigma's fp/fpL where the expanded ISO can be cranked down to something like 6.

I just read that my new camera is discontinued. What do I do? Do I just throw it out?

File: IMG_0647.jpg (563 KB, 1206x1297)

563 KB JPG

>>4519096
I took the E-M10 IV as my only camera to South Africa and got tons of great shots. I’m just taking screenshots bc the files size is too large and I’m lazy. But I loved it because my camera could fit in a small crossbody bag

File: IMG_0648.jpg (310 KB, 1206x1455)

310 KB JPG

>>4519304
I used the 40-150 lens most of the time

File: IMG_0649.jpg (453 KB, 1206x834)

453 KB JPG

>>4519306
One more

>>4519306
>>4519304
Very nice shots, anon. Proves that being in the right place and having the right subject is more important than the camera used.

>>4519308
Thank you, and agreed. Don’t let the gearfags get to you. You can take good pictures with any camera

>>4519307
Nice.
So hard to photograph but incredible to see

>>4519310
>>4519307
Also its back is blown the fuck out

>>4519309
Not a safari? I've never been but I imagine it's full of boomers with big DSLRs and 10 pounds of giant lenses which I guess I can't blame them since it's an expensive trip and you are in a truck but I can't imagine that would be at all enjoyable.

>>4519312
I’ll blow your back out
>>4519313
It was a safari, but we also did a decent amount of hikes. But even in the jeep it’s nice to have something light and easy to whip around

File: IMG_0651.jpg (912 KB, 1206x1612)

912 KB JPG

>>4519316

>>4519280
Honestly, it doesn't look that much smaller than the 6D, 20mm, 40mm and 85mm that I carry around.

>>4519304
>>4519306
>>4519307
>this kills the foolframer

>>4519304
>>4519306
Still looks like m43
Especially >>4519307
But m43 is not meant to be good
Or just as good
Or even good enough half the time

Its the continuation of bridge cameras originally marketed to boom booms who were used to cheap 35mm gear used incompetently

A 90D with a 70-300 would have mogged

>>4519347
Its just 300mm
A z7ii with a tiny ass tamron 70-300 would have a m43 beating 2x crop

M43 was great when there was just ONE good wildlife DSLR (90D) and prices werent adjusted by used market memers
Don’t waste your time defending it these days

File: d500.jpg (196 KB, 2064x1272)

196 KB JPG

>>4519352
>M43 was great when there was just ONE good wildlife DSLR (90D
Shut your whore mouth

>>4519351
>A 90D with a 70-300 would have mogged

Canon 90D = 701g
EF 70-300 = 708g
=1409g

E-M10 IV = 383g
Oly 40-150 = 190g
= 573g

You get almost as good image quality for 0.4x the weight + all the conveniences of modern mirrorless. I know which one I'm picking to carry.

>>4519361
Not to mention the difference in price would have paid for my plane tickets to south Africa

File: 300.jpg (257 KB, 3523x974)

257 KB JPG

>>4519362
On APS-C, only the Canon R50 comes close in weight and size. A few other APS-C options could fit in a small crossbody bag but the 90D or FF with a 70-300 LOL

File: IMG_0653.jpg (183 KB, 1206x883)

183 KB JPG

>>4519318
Posting a few more because now im going through them and they’re fun to look at again

File: IMG_0654.jpg (311 KB, 1206x899)

311 KB JPG

>>4519364

File: IMG_0656.jpg (500 KB, 1206x1467)

500 KB JPG

>>4519365

File: IMG_0655.jpg (450 KB, 1206x1581)

450 KB JPG

>>4519366

File: Small.jpg (65 KB, 447x433)

65 KB JPG

>>4519361
>0.4x the weight
Not really perceptible, for massive IQ gains, more reach, and an OVF.

>>4519362
Definitely back then. These days? Kek no.

It was definitely one of the better budget cameras of the time. Thankfully time is the equalizer and anyone who can afford ewaste-tier olympus can do better for a negligible amount.

>>4519363
In real life, these dramatic pxlmag comparisons are absolutely nothing noteworthy.

There is a reason the m43 internet defense force screenshots this lame website instead of using a picture of an adult man holding a camera. Even a woman makes a dslr look pretty small.

The size was never a selling point for people over 5'4".

>>4519364
>>4519365
>>4519366
>>4519368
nice shots! How much did it cost for the trip and did you think it was worth it?

>>4519377
Tbh I am a bit of a richfag so the trip was v expensive. Like $20k all in per person for 2.5 weeks, you could def go a lot cheaper, but a safari will be expensive no matter what. We went to Phinda and Tswalu.
Absolutely worth it, it was incredible. If you like nature and animals there’s nothing better you could do. I can’t wait to do another safari

>>4519384
>Like $20k all in per person for 2.5 weeks
And for that reason, I'm out :-/ but hopefully some day.

>>4519386
Just go there on your own and rent a jeep + driver. Fourth class boat trip to africa sounds like a cool photo opportunity.

>>4519386
:(
Keep your head up anon, I hope you get there some day

>>4519361
Pentax K-3 Mk3 with D-FA 150-450
For extreme light option I would agree either with a DA 55-300 PLM or HD WR. That's a lie, I would never compromise over the image quality of the 150-450.
You can pry this combo out of my cold dead hands.

Similar combo is 7D Mk2 with 100-400L Mk2 or D500 with 200-500. You can stick that 90D up your bum.

File: 1529881863183.jpg (321 KB, 926x1000)

321 KB JPG

>>4519374
>Not really perceptible
lol maybe to an amerilard who never shuffles more than 100 feet away from a motor vehicle.

>>4519415
When you're already 300lbs what difference does 1lb vs 3lb make

>>4519415
>>4519416
Anyone remotely in shape will be able to lug around 2-3kg in his hands and neck all day without any complaints. Only fat lards will huff and puff from having to lift half a kg for the long long duration of a minute.

>>4519415
>people who arent triggered by two pounds are fat!
Lmao hit the gym

Vivian Maier carried a big ass rolleiflex around

>>4519415
To be fair, on a safari you are in a vehicle but there's no point in carrying more weight than you need for your image quality requirement. So-called full frame cameras were invented to be light and easy to carry compared to medium and large format cameras despite the lower image quality. m43 carried the same philosophy in the early days and succeeded for a while when APS-C and FF were largely still DSLRs. For a lightweight safari setup, I think an Olympus setup still has some appeal as something you can rinse off after it gets dusty.

>>4519426
Olympus has an IP rating but Nikon actually gets used in warzones
The IP rating’s legalese says if you turn a wheel or operate a zoom lens while the camera is wet or dirty it’s over. Nikon doesn't pay for the certification and focuses on making it meet their internal standards.
Olympus went out of business for that among other reasons

File: EXCLUSIVE ARCHITECTURE re(...).png (212 KB, 1422x747)

212 KB PNG

>>4519106
>if om/olympus just used apsc or ff they would win the camera wars
I would love to see OM expand to L-mount with APS-C.

The problem with micro 4/3 that nobody talks about is the relatively large flange distance compared to newer mirrorless systems. 19.25mm is about the same as the other systems, but due to 2x crop factor that means every lens that goes wider than 38.5mm equivalent needs to be a retrofocus design which is more complex, requiring more optical elements, = cost, weight, etc.

They need to make a new mount for 4/3 sensors with a shorter flange distance for it to be competitive.

>>4519424
Rolleiflex tlr are actually quite compact medium format cameras.

>>4519428
Yeah but you can get Olympus stuff pretty cheap so if it breaks after rinsing, it's no big deal. Plus Olympus IBIS is top tier which would be great for video. It'd be my "beater" system. I'm not rich enough to say the same about Nikon pro stuff and I don't think they've been in the mirrorless game long enough to have that great a used market except for F-mount lenses. If the adapter is also weather resistant, that could be worth a look.

File: Screenshot 2026-07-25 at (...).png (2.35 MB, 1858x1262)

2.35 MB PNG

/gearfags/ talk me into adding another mount into my collection, hes responding so its a real ad but i already have a shelf full of ccd cameras.

its 2 hours/90 mi away or 150km for the eurofags so im hesitant, nothing to do in that area other than drive home too; hamptons is a shithole full of rich niggers who eat caviar with their chicken tendies and pay $200 for it

current ewaste:

>Pentax: 1x K10D, 2x K200D, 1x K3 Mk1, 1x K70, 1x K1ii
>Minolta/Sony: 3x KM 5Ds, 2x KM 7Ds, 2x Sony a100s, 1x Sony a390, 1x Sony a58

was honestly looking to add a Sony a900/a99 or a77-ii to round out the A-Mount collection before I quit for a year or 2 to save up for a used Sony a7iv + EA-LA5 but I showed this link to a few friends and they freaked out.

>>4519435
As I mentioned earlier, the S1, S2 and S3 are all just a Nikon F80 with a fixed digital back installed, while the S5 is that same sensor but built into a more modern DSLR body with a few more features. That means they're kinda weird to use, but cool, and they take nice photos. Weird stuff includes:
>Tiny image in finder due it being masked off, since the F80 is a full frame film camera.
>Out of the first three models, the S3 is the best constructed, however they're all still plastic with a little bit of aluminum on the inside as a chassis. The S5 is metal.
>The AA battery trays sometimes fall appart
>Has the option of shooting jpeg, TIFF or RAW. Personally I found myself enjoying the TIFF option the most, as someone who typically shoots RAW. TIFF sort of gaurantees you'll get those nice colours, where as many photo editing programs dont necessarily interpret them the way they're supposed to appear, as in, like the jpeg.
>If you're a wide angle shooter, lens choices are annoying. Since its APS-C you sorta need to find specific APSC designed F mount lenses. The ones for full frame don't go very wide unless you want something big and expensive. Personally, I dont like spending money on lenses that can't work on a full frame camera.

>was honestly looking to add a Sony a99
I would urge you to avoid pellicle mirror systems. The mirror in them, according to the manufacters who have made them, has a very thin, fragile coating that was not intended to be user-cleaned. I used to have an EOS1n RS which I would clean the mirror on myself and it worked ok, I didnt experience any issues, though I dont know how long that would realistically last for. I also don't know if the way I was cleaning it was the way you're supposed to clean it as there's not much info about it online. Or at least there wasn't when I owned the camera.

>>4519435
Even before the CMOS vs CCD color fad, that unusual sensor was well-liked. As far as collectibles go, it's unique enough to warrant addition. The camera was famously slow if I remember but not frustratingly unusable like the Foveons.

>>4519440
If it was his only camera, yeah I'd avoid a pellicle system but he's a collector so it probably wouldn't get serious use. There's this special goo that scientists use to clean first surface mirrors that would probably work for cleaning that but I would be worried more about used examples being improperly cleaned.

>>4519440
See, my problem is 2:

>Its 2 hours away and I hate that area, its even 90 min/70mi away from where I normally do groceries; for me to do a round trip now the cost is $50 in gas roughly.

>I will end up getting a F-Mount collection over time and possibly sell all my K Mount or A Mount stuff, lol

I do hear you on the pellicle mirror. The a58 has one and its fine, but I've seen them get dinged/damaged/chipped and that's it for the IQ. I wouldn't pay more than $400 for a a99 or a77ii (a99ii is like $1200-2000 which is insane...basically a a7r2 in a DSLR body same cost as a a7iv; I would want the a99 to have a FF DSLR in A Mount)

File: DSCF0007_04.jpg (2.69 MB, 4191x2752)

2.69 MB JPG

>>4519444
>F-Mount collection over time and possibly sell all my K Mount or A Mount stuff, lol
I can see someone building a lens collection around an F3 or F2, or FM2, with AIS manual lenses, I don't feel the same about the finepix S series. The only lenses that make sense on it really are AF-D lenses, anything newer or with inbuilt focusing motors won't gain much from the fuji's mid autofocus, and would be more expensive than the camera. And the IQ isnt good enough to gain much from them. And AF-D lenses are pretty lame, the minolta, konica and pentax lenses are better generally than AF-D. As somene who owns an S2, I wouldn't worry about it being a rabbit hole with any risk of falling down.
>picrel, S2 pro

is there anything wrong with buying a flagship camera & lens as a complete noob (who last owned a camera 20 years ago and is frustrated how crap smartphones photos are)?
people say, start with a 10 year old camera etc but if i can afford it then why not

>>4519455
honestly its fine just do it if you're the guy with the $3-5000 budget instead of talking about it; you wont be the first you wont be the last

the only real danger is that the camera is so good it does everything for you and removes the skill needed for a good picture not different than a smartphone will and that you'll take a whole 500-1000 pictures before putting it in a camera bag and forgetting you own it until 5 years later when you list it on ebay for 1/3rd of what you paid for it

and to be honest even a 20 year old camera will be better than the phone half the time because it has actual glass and sensor that you cannot miniaturize effectively because physics

>>4519455
nope, if you can easily afford taking the resale value loss in case you don't want it, do it. The flagship cameras all have easy modes and the higher performance means you don't have to work as hard to get good quality unless you are talking about larger than FF because those do require more work.

>>4519458
here to add i think people just dont want you to spend the money because theyre trying to put themselves in your shoes (financial aspect) but also because the performance gap between a 10 year old dslr and a current flagship is a lot smaller than the gap between a cell phone and a dslr. most of the gains in the last 10 years had to do with autofocus improvements and video capabilities to capture the current trend of videographers/influencers/streamers to sell cameras to. the camcorder has effectively died in the mid 2010s if you noticed other than gopro. even now the only real similar equivalent is the dji osmo pocket

just do what you want its your money

>>4519440
>the S1, S2 and S3 are all just a Nikon F80
The S1 is based on the F/N60 body.

>>4519444
>I would want the a99 to have a FF DSLR in A Mount
It's not an SLR though.

>>4519455
>is there anything wrong with buying a flagship camera & lens as a complete noob
No; you'll actually have a better time than most.

>>4519467
>Single lens
Check
>Reflex mirror
Check
SLT is a brand name, not what they're actually called. Pellicle SLRs are still SLRs.

File: 1769430598289.jpg (245 KB, 1200x980)

245 KB JPG

>>4519455
You aint the first or last

So I’m going to show you where you’re headed with the photos of /p/ gearfags who did what you’re considering

Anonymous redditor - gfx100s cat, self aggrandising meem

File: 1753554386920.jpg (3.44 MB, 4096x2731)

3.44 MB JPG

>>4519470
Anonymous furry - fat dog and plants

>>4519470
I don't get this, who cares? If he wants to spend his money on it and hes having fun why does it matter? It doesnt change a single thing about my photography, so it means nothing to me and I don't care.

File: 1737279957049.jpg (4.16 MB, 4329x3247)

4.16 MB JPG

>>4519471
I think he had a z8, or a z7II, or a7rIV? I forget!

Autisti/ck/ Farmer - smelly dog on couch
Sinar HY6 medium format SLR

File: 1777258476171.jpg (2.57 MB, 3600x2381)

2.57 MB JPG

>>4519472
I’m just showing you your future by finding select photos taken by amateurs with wildly expensive gear. Calm down. If you’re offended by your future, reconsider creating it.

>>4519473
Anon who complained about getting banned from r/leica - sleeping dog on porch (leica m10 monochrom or nikon zf, he bought both. cant tell which one was used.)

>>4519474
>I’m just showing you your future by finding select photos taken by amateurs with wildly expensive gear. Calm down. If you’re offended by your future, reconsider creating it.
Wrong person, I already have a camera.

File: 1762578632907.jpg (2.46 MB, 4000x2667)

2.46 MB JPG

>>4519474
Midwest town snapper - Sony a7cr

File: 1665502307219.jpg (1.87 MB, 2250x3000)

1.87 MB JPG

>>4519476
Why are you offended then? I’m just showing anon the results of other /p/ users buying expensive cameras

>>4519477
Anonymous - sqorel
GFX50SII + GF 80mm f1.7

>>4519477
not gonna lie the pine tree and distant building window definition is very true to life and aliasing/bayer blur free!

>>4519477

you could get this out of a canon rp

>>4519473

canon rp + lighting and a fast prime

>>4519474
You forgot to post all the photos that people claim I stole because they couldn't believe I took them

Look forward to you never sharing your own images, stay jealous nophoto

File: 1747626589635.jpg (1020 KB, 3267x1777)

1020 KB JPG

>>4519481
I wouldn’t go THAT far. Older canon sensors have bad dynamic range. They often blow highlights and crush shadows so everything looks like CSI screengrabs. Now you see I was looking for huskek’s d750, leikek’s fuji, and shepkek’s s5 pro shots to show the uh, leica z8 and MF advantage and found something funnier

This is a comparison between a cheap nikon dslr and a top of the line lumix s1r, same lighting same model same scene same photographer

>>4519485
>nikon dslr
>missed focus
Yep, I believe it.

>>4519484
You’re here! I can’t find any photos you took with your cheap fuji. Please help.

Also, if shepkek is here, please share that thread where you compared all your cameras, and if huskek is here, we need your ff nikon vs olympus tests

>>4519487
I think it was a d700 or d3200 or something, very low res with a strong AA filter

Old nikon lenses add fringing when they miss focus usually

File: Screenshot 2026-07-25 at (...).png (507 KB, 1386x1134)

507 KB PNG

>>4519485
i just like shilling the canon rp because /p/ hates it and because its the cheapest ff mirrorless for sale used ($500 on ebay; $600 refurb canon)

>>4519490
D750 better

>>4519481
naw man
it has the tonality
and that smooth high res rendering
to nal ity
titty
heh

itt probably the most scathing criticism of people who buy the newest fucanikonysonilympus for shits and giggles ever to grace /p/
its like when the micro four thirds thread got technical and gearfaggy about equivalence and reach, and then collapsed and died shortly after after they got trolled into finally posting (really bad) photos
absorbed into /rpt/
>1: dont brag about your hardware if it’s not actually good (go to 2)
>2: dont brag about your hardware if you can’t use it and refuse to learn (go to 1)

>>4519490
Still too much for what it is.

File: badfuji.jpg (2.81 MB, 4000x2213)

2.81 MB JPG

>>4519488
Here you go friend, these are mostly from a very old Fuji

>>4518869
>what's the point of fakery? what's the point of realism?
photography is already fake, none of the pictures we take look exactly how how our eyes see irl (and you know that's not the goal of photography)
the camera is already doing some trickery from the beginning, you treat the unedited shots like they're gospel, but every camera is different, their "default settings" are different from each other, and they give you a billion options to fuck with them from the camera itself

>>4519495
>pictures from very old fuji look better than gearfag dream rig
kek
cant buy effort

>>4519495
>its "i used to be good" guy
but why arent you good anymore? all the good photos are in reposted collages and there are never new ones
did touching a nikon infect you with ken rockwell’s DNA?

>>4519455
Just a single lens? I'm going to assume you don't actually have an unlimited budget, in which case it would be smarter to go cheaper with the body and just get more lenses and other equipment (higher quality tripods and heads are actually much nicer to use than cheap shit, many people overlook this).

>>4519496
I use the built in picture profiles and match them to the best of my ability to reality, mad?

>>4519502
no, in fact you're agreeing that tinkering/editing is normal

>>4519502
>i edit my raws in advance
>my thousands of dollars photography funkos are not worth the better results of a $300 capture one license
I think wanting to edit is the line between gearfags+journalists (no editing, just wants nice camera/needs perfect AF at 240fps for work) and artists+higher tier professionals (edits to match unique vision)

>>4519485
I like how her face shifts from a fake smile for the old DSLR to barely concealed disgust when she sees the $3000 FF mirrorless, like she already knows it’s going to render every skin imperfection in imax quality