Compact fatigue editionQOTT: Do you shoot compacts? Do their shortcomings irk you enough to just bring an ILC instead?previous thread: >>4519845
>>4520738>Do you shoot compacts? Do their shortcomings irk you enough to just bring an ILC instead?I only use them for documentary purposes, unless I'm playing with a vintage model.
I'd be tempted to give them a go if there was some real innovation in the space.
>don't mind me, just being a solid truly compact apsc camera with good optics and a built in flash, which nikon abandoned after just one generation.if they just updated the autofocus and smoothed out the controls and ui, this would give the GR a run for its money
>>4520738This is my backup camera for when I don't carry a camera with me and no phone. I bought it when My Nokia 3310 with no camera was my daily driver.
>>4520745>28mm f/2.8 lensWhat were they thinking?
>>4520766probably the same thing as the designers of the fuji x70 and the gr. something along the lines of 'let's create the ultimate compact camera'
>>4520745>>4520749Putting a prime on a fixie is a cardinal sin.
>>4520738I have a Pentax MX-1 and it is an astonishing little thing except the battery barely lasts a handful of shots. It needs a big pocket and bringing my FF with a pancake lens is not really that much of a difference so I just do that instead.I have been meaning to get a couple of fresh batteries for it but IRL things always get ahead of it. I also don't want to use third party shit batteries so my options are limited.
>>4520768You have brainrot
I'll often take it because I ride a motorbike, I'm going somewhere I don't want a camera hanging round my neck bashing into things or being in the way, or I don't want to attract attention. I took it on my first holiday for those reasons and I think I'd do the same on the next.
>>4520773>Hmm yes let me have precisely ZERO control over framing beyond physically moving closer or farther (or cropping in post or, God forbid, digital "zoom")Fixies benefit more from zoom lenses than ILCs, and compacts benefit more from zooms than any other fixie. You are retarded.
>>4520774Which model is the top one anon
>>4520745Similarly, an updated P7800 with bigger sensor would give Lumix L10 some competition.
>>4520777It's an RX100 IV, I would have liked a V for the better phase detect AF but it was a good deal. That said the contrast detect isn't bad for what I mostly shoot and it tracks pretty well. It's also meant to have better battery life than the V.Bottom is a first gen A7 but that was just for a size comparison, I use an A7R III now
>>4520738I've tried a few compact options, but small mirrorless are already small enough that it's never an issue to EDC with them. Anything less I'd rather just snap on my phone than bother with a whole other camera I won't enjoy using.>>4520773I agree. Fixed primes are perfectly fine. Says a lot about the experience of the other commenter.
>>4520805>I agree. Fixed primes are perfectly fine. Says a lot about the experience of the other commenter.Primes are for studio work or if you are planning to shoot something very specific.EDC you never know what you are going to encounter. A prime in that context just means missed shots.
>>4520806I have to agree with this. Sorry primebros. Missing shots sucks, and so does not being able to frame your subject properly because you didn't plan for it to be where it was and where you were. I was at a drift event not long ago where some guy ate shit and crashed into the sand trap, and it was right by a good spot for ameteur photogs. One poor bastard must have had a prime 600(?)mm or something because it was quite a sight to see him fumble his gear around trying to get a wider lens mounted in time for a good photo. Nfi if he managed or not, but do you really want to be caught off guard when something cool happens and you just aren't prepared?Primes are good for maximising IQ and minimising abberations, falloff, DoF, etc. If you're going to be taking photos that are conducive to using one specific focal length (or two or whatever many primes you're happy to juggle), then it's just a matter of being good enough to work with what you've got. The moment you want to take photos of more than one thing, or things at different distances, or you're moving, or honestly a lot of different things that *could* happen, a zoom makes more sense.
>>4520738How do you guys make money?
>>4520808By having a job
>>4520809Are your jobs /p/-related?
>>4520811No. That would be awful.
>>4520813Ah carry on then.
>>4520813>>4520811That's actually something funny. Almost every photographer I met is generally not content with money they make with it, most outright state that it's not something you can do for a living and yet when I show my photos to family or co-workers, they wonder why I still work in my profession and not in photography.Why trying to turn every hobby into a job? I would grow to hate photography if it would became my job.
The D80 has shit the bed after hibarnating for 5 years. Only gives me r02. Threw a bunch of r07 before I stopped using it 8 years ago. Is $25 a reasonable scrap value?
>>4520820I see. It seems like I have to look for a real job. I'm about to go bankrupt from buying an extremely cheap camera (<$200) and I need to do something with my life anyway. Thanks.
>>4520820the turn your hobby into a profession paradox is a big thingeveryone who does it legitimately ends up hating both
Anyone experience with the Voigtländer Nokton 35mm 1.4 Classic SC? I'm a bit tired of the modern clinical look and what something more """artistic""". Is that Nokton still a beauty open at 1.4 or does it look just awful? There is also the Pergear 35mm 1.4 that seems to have a similar look but costs 4 times less. But looking at lots of samples I feel like the Voigtländer still looks better.
>>4520834most of my film shots have been taken with that lens. i rarely open all the way up tho. still, i can't recall a shot where i thought the lens was ruining it.idk about the pergear, but one of the draws of the sc is that it makes some pretty bold flares when you open up and shoot toward light. if the pergear also does that, then idk i guess it'd come down to whether you value the nicer tactility of the voigt
>>4520836i even got two. >>4520768>>4520776confounding feature plus there's no easier system to zoom with your feet on than a compact. rx1, lecia q, x100, gr. all very sought after
>>4520806>or if you are planning to shoot something very specific.Yes, which is pretty normal.>EDC you never know what you are going to encounter. That doesn't mean you don't have a specific way in mind you intend to capture everything.>A prime in that context just means missed shots.Choosing any particular camera or leans means missed shots. Flexibility-maxxing shouldn't be a goal. People EDC with primes all the time, fixed lens or not.>>4520808Cameras and photo work, with other jobs here and there. Most of my income from the last 5 years has been from weddings.>>4520834Had the 40mm f1.4 for a while. From what I've seen, definitely opt for the II version, which largely fixes issues with focus shift. Had the 35 f1.5 Nokton for a while, but it definitely yields a different look. I mostly use the 35 f1.2 III now, which is definitely more of the retro look, but big and heavy.
So after your recommendations, I went to camera stores and handled every model from the brands within my budget. Fuji felt the most premium by far.Canon R50 felt too plasticky and the kit lenses zoom ring was so sloppy that it was hard to land exactly on the focal length you wanted.Sony ZV-E10 and A6400 both felt very soulless desu.Fuji X-M5 built quality was ass, but I absolutely loved the X-T30 III.None of the local camera stores had the Sony A7C, so I couldn't try it. For a low-budget EDC setup, is there any reason to choose it over the Fuji?
hey guysdo you have any opinions on lightdow and neewer stuff?I'm looking to get some cheap filters for my kit lensmostly want to get a black mist 1/8 to blom the lights a bit in night street photos and flower close upsbrands people say are "cheap" and "budget" cost like my lens.
>>4520840>Flexibility-maxxing shouldn't be a goalWhy not?In the olden days photographers working in fast-paced environments carried multiple bodies with different lenses for maximum flexibility.Now that zoom lenses are good and film rolls aren't a limit there's no good reason to not just use zooms while on the go.
>>4520841If you care about build quality and intended use is EDC, can't go wrong with Olympus/OM.They make cameras with an actual IP rating.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BtUsPLx2dMDifference in photo quality compared with full frame is probably less than you expect.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcK5e_9_mZY
>>4520840How did you get into the wedding photography business?
Opinions on the Sigma 28-70 F2.8? Would be my first zoom lens after years of primes.
>>4520849I started with senior / grad portraits and some converts / events. Then shot an engagement session of a friend couple for cost of dinner. Went well, so I shot their wedding for $500 (lol). That went great, and booked a few weddings from it, then each of those got me more, etc. In one case, got in with a couples group and shot all 5 out 6 of their weddings and engagements. With a wedding client, you can also turn 1 day into like 5 sessions, with engagement, boudoir, wedding, anniversary, maternity, newborn, holiday / family, etc. Never second shot for anyone else, but had been to many weddings before in a previous job, so I knew the general flow real well.>>4520847There are also plenty of examples of photographers working with 1 or 2 particular focal lengths. I also prefer having greater consistency across my body of work. Do you think a wartime photojournalist is an accurate example of typical edc needs?>no good reason to not just use zoomsYou should also only need to use a zoom when the situation calls for it.
>>4520774>yo dawg, i herd you like cams
>>4520738I don't know why it took me so long to consider, but I finally set up wireless tethering for shooting at home. No more dealing with memory card or cable or importing, I just take my camera anywhere within my home wifi range, take a picture, and images right to computer ready to go. Makes me want to expand my wifi setup so I make use of it in the farthest parts of my backyard.
>>4520857>Do you think a wartime photojournalist is an accurate example of typical edc needs?No, it's optimal EDC for that era.>You should also only need to use a zoom when the situation calls for it.I'm not psychic, so I don't know what the situation is going to be.I don't see the marginal benefits of prime as worth the risk of missing once in a lifetime shots.You can leave a zoom at your preferred focal length, but you can't zoom with a prime.
>>4520806>carry a bigger camera thats worse in low light so you can fill the frame every time just like ken rockwellI guess thats ideal for dad-tography 4x6 machines (and so are phones) but photography is called a creative hobby and the art of not pressing the button for a reason.
>>4520848> A ten year old body> An extra grip> An f2.8 zoom (twice as big when extended)Yep, that's m43 time.
>>4520866Also, taping up all the logos to hide the shame
>>4520864>No, it's optimal EDC for that era.Considering there was midrange zoom available for the pictured SLR, why do you think they also opted for primes instead?>I'm not psychic, so I don't know what the situation is going to be.Good thing you don't need every focal length available to cover a situation, you often only need one.>I don't see the marginal benefits of primeAnd I don't see the marginal benefits of taking a zoom over a prime for edc. Focal length maxxing from my experience with others, often means they lack vision, and opt for one-off snapshots over curating a cohesive body of work.
>>4520864>but you can't zoom with a prime.You can crop, which has the same effect at the cost of resolution. How many MP do you need for your edc?
>>4520841>None of the local camera stores had the Sony A7C, so I couldn't try it. For a low-budget EDC setup, is there any reason to choose it over the Fuji?A7c build quality is garbage. And no small lenses exist that make it suitable for a compact edc setup.
>>4520843pls guys help a newfag poorfag outor maybe you know any 24, 28, 35 decently fast manual primes that are cheap (like below a 100) and would fit a Nikon-f DSLR anything I could find is 200-300 or more...
>>4520830B-but side hussle....
Used gh4 for $100 or a 0 shutter count g95 for $200?
>>4520776You are more creative with a fixed lens, you will invent interesting composition to compensate the lack of zooming options
>>4520766they didnt want to make a successful APS-C compact like the Fuji x100 series so they intentionally crippled it with a slow 28mm lens
>>4520738> Do you shoot compacts?I'd like to but prices are bullshit for new and I can't find shit on the used market. Ricoh GRs and Sony RX100s are extremely overpriced even on the used market (if I can even find one). At this rate I'm just going to end up with an APS-C that has no EVF and I'll put a pancake on it.>>4520820>Why trying to turn every hobby into a job? I would grow to hate photography if it would became my job.Lack of creative freedom and ridiculous schedules is what pissed me off the most when I did it as my full time job. There's also other stuff like how certain things MUST be in the photo, no questions. I dealt with someone that absolutely needed to have horse related stuff in literally every photo whether it matched what else was in the photos or not. >>4520830I couldn't stand photography as a result. My personal gear all went to the back of my closet when I was working full time in photography and it took months for me to pick any of it up again after I left the job. I still feel like my creativity is limited because I was forced into only doing certain compositions and following certain rules for so long.
>>4520899Whats with sony detractors and bald faced lies?The a7c is better built than any comparable olympus, fuji or panashitnick and has tons of small lenses like the 35/2.8 za, sigma 90/2.8 and i-series in general, viltrox air series, 26/2.8 pancake, samyang tiny series, sony mini-g trio, and some of the smallest lenses of their kind on full frame
>>4520959I see people say that it's one dedicated autist that got banned on some other camera forum, but my own thought is that it's like the Sony vs Xbox of the photography world or some other weird brand whoring crap.
>>4520959very goodmorning saar!
>>4520848IP ratings are totally meaningless. Olympus does not warranty water damage because their IP rating does not certify any moving parts. They just sell cameras that snap their tripod mounts and suffer button failures while a yuge 24-80 f5.6 (or 24-90 f8) zoom shits out phone quality snapshits. Micro four thirds is fead for a reason. It sucks balls and all of the people who recommend it fucking suck, harder than ken rockwell. As far as cameras are concerned, the free market works. They are tools people have to live with and only the best survive. #1: Canon/Sony#2: Nikon#3: FujifilmIrrelevant: all other brands. for any one irrelevamt brand, all of their bodies are outsold by a single reasonably popular canon/sony lens.
>>4520848They dont make em like they used to
>>4520963tru dat
>>4520865>photography is called a creative hobby and the art of not pressing the button for a reason.>>4520882>from my experience with others, often means they lack vision, and opt for one-off snapshots over curating a cohesive body of work.Please keep using primes for your serious artiste work. I'm talking about EDC for practical photographers (and hybrid shooters) who capture interesting moments/things.
>>4520966Are you an MBA? Salesman? Because that’s a lot of bullshit words to describe snapshots How about the truth>im talking about taking a gorillion “neat” photos that get looked at once and forgotten>the one view? me on the back screen
>>4520745what is that
LEAVE SONY ALONE
>>4520962This is for schoolchildren. The truth is that whether a camera brand is good or not hinges almost entirely on whether they support Israel, whether they're part of the L-Mount Alliance, and whether they have shills and/or bots on /p/. If yes to any of the above, they're bad.>Canon>Nikon>Panasonic>Fuji>Leica>Sigma>Leitz>DJI>Astrodesign>Samyang>Blackmagic>Sirui>Viltrox>FreeflyAll bad. This is not a guarantee that other brands will be good, but you can count on all of the above being bad.
>>4520972Thanks for the heads up, hasan!
>>4520972wtf im going all in on the Lmount alliance now
>>4520975If you like garbage, go ahead. Between the non-compete clause and Leica enshittification, any possibility for quality is completely destroyed.
>>4520972Thanks I just ordered an R6II
>>4520976>nooooo you need to buy the best cameraI just want to buy the camera that makes commies and hamas supporters seethe the hardest.
>>4520979You're out of luck then, because all they'll do is call you a retard.
>>4520980>nooo stop buying the based cameras dont you know the cringe ones are 5% better at autofocusing on cat buttholes
>>4520965I have noticed that with other cameras as well. The later Sony 4k Handycams are terrible in that regard. They cheaped out using thin plastic that is easily cracked if you over-torque. Just an awful design. Replacement third-party plates in metal are available for the older models from a decade ago, courtesy of our friends in China as they are one easily removable piece, but on the later models from about half a decade ago they made the bottom plate a part of the shell so you will have to remove a much bigger section of the camera, not to mention find a donor if you want to fix it. Worst part is that it looks like it has seams where the part could have been removed, but no, it is one big piece there just to tease you in case you wanted to do an easy DIY.It is obvious that this was a weakness Sony was aware of and should have improved, but no they made it worse instead.
>>4520899The future is now.
>>4520843>>4520943I bought Neweer's black mist diffusion filters off AliExpress. Works for me but I'm not really being critical about colour cast since I'm already altering the scene's look with that particular filter.
24-70 2.8 or two faster primes?
>>4521003>two faster primesThis, or two not that fast primes for smaller size. I always take a 35mm f/2 over a f/1.4 because the size difference is usually more than double.
>>4520962>suck harder than ken rockwellIs this guy really bad or it's just a meme?
>>4521006have you SEEN any of his pics?
>>4521007Well, I only saw his guide for Z5 II and got repulsed by his claims that I should ditch F mount completely, get some wide range Z mount lens with 5.6 aperture because he shoots like this all the time without issues. But I assumed that maybe I don't know shit.
>>4520993
>>4521008I can't argue his artistic tastes, cause that's tastes, but his technical advice is either genius or absolutely retarded
>>4520997does the color cast make it look a bit more like film? cause that's what I'm going for
>>4521011I've never shot film so I don't know what exactly you're looking forBut It's so cheap that even if isn't, you still have a functional black mist filterYou probably don't have AliEx shopping credit but the other coupons are readily available during most sales events
>>4520841>low budget edc setup>low budget>those cameraswhat the fuck is low budget in your world?actual answer is get a small used DX Nikon from D3XXX D5XXX or D7XXX depending on the features you want, and a small DX lens like 35mm F1.8 with it.they're not much bigger than mirrorless and weigh the same.
>>4521014I have like 4 thousand coins though but EU fucked AliExpress so might still be expensive.you have any more aliexpess goodies to rec? maybe cheap cpl or nd or anything?
>>4521010>no one needs 24mpYou wot?
>>4521016The only other photo gear I've bought from AliEx are Viltrox lenses (75mm f1.8 EVO and 56mm f1.2 Pro) and an Ulanzi TreeRoot tripod.None of those are budget; well the AF 75mm EVO is my "budget" but maybe not your "budget". I got real lucky and scored a $50 shopping credit through diamonds/gems when buying that particular lens.
>>4521019howd you get credit?might be enough to offset the EU cucktax
>>4521020Daily reset of shopping credit claimed via diamonds/gemsYou can ask >>>/g/csg about discountmaxxing on AliEx
>>4521009This happens to rubber shit across basically all brands. I recently aquired a nikon dslr and every single rubber part of it is either sticky, lifted or both.
>>4520745I saw a boomer sell one for 30 bucks a while back.>Cellphone has taken over, has not been used for 5 years.It kinda looks like a generic digishit so I can see how they make such mistakes.
>>4521022Late film era Nikons are almost always sticky.
>>4521024This one is a d700. Thankfully they sold enough of them and its enough of an issue that you can get replacements on aliexpress. Will have to wait and see when they get here if they're any good, im skeptical about whether or not theyill properly fit. But it's not like the ones that are on there fit correctly anyway.
does there exist a compact pocketable fixed lens zoom where the image quality doesnt suck ass? I couldnt find any good photos made with stuff like the GR IV. maybe ok for instagram but looking up close its all mushyif not, then im going for a proper big MILK camera, might as well
>>4521022Yeah, rubber gets sticky after a few decades, but its definitely not supposed to break apart just by touching it straight out of the box
>>4520864>I don't see the marginal benefits of a prime as worth the risk of missing one in a lifetime shot.That thought pattern is called Fomo. Fear of missing out on something and perceiving it as a thread.
>>4521008>got repulsed by his claims that I should ditch F mount completelyWhy? If you have Z mount, you should be opting for Z mount glass, and if you really want to adapt, there are better options than f-mount glass.>>4521010He went from Nikon D40 is the greatest consumer DSLR ever made and you should just it over a D300/700. To Nikon sucks because they are below 97-99% accuracy when using all area AF auto mode.
>>4520966>I'm talking about EDC for practical photographers (and hybrid shooters) who capture interesting moments/things.So am I, sorry to hear you are unable to do that without zooming. I wonder how all the people who do that using primes make it work, but you can't?
>>4521037>Le epin reddit buzzwords
>>4521042>knows and cares about what people on reddit say>redditor dedected
Reposting>>4520951>>4520955>>4520973>>4520986
>>4521039> if you really want to adapt, there are better options than f-mount glassLike what? Also, there is a problem with Z mount lenses being so stupidly expensive. For example, why should I ditch my Tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 lens when Nikkor Z mount 24-70 cost equivalent of 2300€ for new and without second hand options? While Nikon refuses to deal with Sigma for whatever reasons? I can understand professionals doing so but this is my hobby, not a job.
>>4521029Unless you’re a fat reddit user with sharp claws for fingernails>>4521046Because ken is a consoooooomer. He has no brain.
>>4521046>being so stupidly expensiveThey're as expensive as new f-mount glass was when it was new, often cheaper if you account for inflation, but you're also getting much better glass in most cases. The 50 1.8 S can be had under $500 new and is leagues ahead of f-mount 50mm options. How much do you think f mount 24-70 f2.8's were? Nikon's were $1700 new in 2007, or $2400 new in 2015, neither accounting for inflation.>I can understand professionals doing so but this is my hobby, not a jobThen you should be perfectly fine using the Tamron made Nikon 28-75 f2.8, for under $1k or the Tamron Z version for $700. Your own G2 launched at $1.2k in 2017, for comparison.You're just used to old used prices lol
>>4520967I hate to break it to you but the only difference between "snapshots" and "fine art" photography is some group of grifters calling their snapshots fine art.>>4521040Advising people to use primes for EDC is as retarded as advising them to use film.You probably do that too.
>>4521063In my experience anyone who uses the term EDC is a fucking moron who doesn’t care about anything but debating that their gear recommendations deserve more upvotes for being betterReturn to reality, please. Most cameras are equipped with a 28mm f16 prime and resolve 5mp-12mp images. A massive zoom is not needed. Any small prime on apsc is leaps and bounds ahead of most cameras. >>4521061>noooo its only cheap because old… BUY NEWSorry consoomer libtard, I only buy canon refurbs because canon supports israel! Everyone else only gets used purchases from me. That’s just how it is. New nikon gear? No thanks. They don’t support israel enough.
>>4521061I started around 2018 or something around that, back then I recall that most expensive lens I got was second hand Sigma telephoto for 2000 PLN aka 400€ back then, new would cost 800€ instead. That Tamron was similar in price, around 2500 PLN, translated into around 600€. Compare that to 2300€ for Nikkor 24-70 2.8 SII (S being only marginally cheaper). I don't expect new gear to cost the same as old but come on.And the most important question is - what exactly would I gain from switching and would that justify 4 times the higher price?
>>4521070All of my gear including the bodies are bought used except my 150-450 telephoto and the bag I am using now. The 150-450 cost almost as much used as a new one at the time and the nearest shop was running a rebate for Pentax gear. I walked in, asked if the rebate applies to the 150-450 and then I bought it and the bag. I just couldn't risk a decentered element shipping a big lens like that plus this was cheaper and I got it new. Original price was around €2200 and I paid €1600 with the bag.I got my Tamron 70-200/2.8 for around €400 in 2016 I think
>>4521037Sure, you can call it FOMO.I started EDC because one day I encountered a rare animal on my way to errands and regretted not bringing my camera.If I had a camera but only brought a gay wide angle prime lens I also would have regretted that.There hasn't been a moment when I wished I didn't have a camera on me or wished that I had a prime lens instead of a zoom.
>>4521050>Touching something means you are fat and have sharp nailswot
>>4521078>I'm still a beginner so I don't know what focal lengths I actually like to useTo be expected when starting out, eventually you'll find what types of pictures you actually like shooting and focus in on thoseSorry to hear your camera is so low resolution you can't crop at all, that is one of the benefits of better gear, good luck on your journey!
Friend sold me his almost new Leica SL3-S for 2k€ because he upgraded to the P. I know nothing about l-mount but I just ordered a used Lumix 50mm 1.8 and see how it goes from there. The 20-60 zoom lens is also dirty cheap with a useful focal length. But I'm afraid it gets a dust collector. I might add that M to SL adapter with some voigtländer. I think the 35mm 1.2 must be nice. Or the 1.4 classic because it's so tiny.
>>4521070>I started around 2018 or something around thatCool, I've been working in camera shops since almost a decade before that.> aka 400€ back then, new would cost 800€ insteadOkay? There are plenty of cheap and expensive Sigma lenses back then, just like there are now. Used gear is cheaper than new.>That Tamron was similar in price, around 2500 PLN, translated into around 600€A used copy on sale, sure. New, they were PLN 5,399. You can see for yourself in this announcement:https://www.optyczne.pl/11197-news-Tamron_SP_24-70_mm_f_2.8_VC_USD_G2.html>And the most important question is - what exactly would I gain from switching and would that justify 4 times the higher price?If you have to ask, nothing. Nicer gear always has diminishing marginal returns, you pay a premium for just a bit more, always been the case. Nice of you to ignore the cheaper (and still better) options I also mentioned. If you really want to see the difference optically,https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1144&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=1436&CameraComp=1212&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0This is with the first Z 24-70 f2.8, the II is even better. You can also compare:https://www.lenstip.com/549.4-Lens_review-Tamron_SP_24-70_mm_f_2.8_VC_USD_G2_Image_resolution.htmlhttps://www.lenstip.com/661.4-Lens_review-Tamron_28-75_mm_f_2.8_Di_III_VXD_G2_Image_resolution.htmlhttps://www.lenstip.com/724.4-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_24-70_mm_f_2.8_S_II_Image_resolution.htmlYou also get a lens that's half a pound lighter, with internal zoom, and a smaller max size. With better coma control, less aberrations, less abrupt vignetting, better build quality and sealing, and better flare control.
>>4521086lol liking or disliking focal lengths is some OCD shit.I use the entire range that my lens provides.
>>4521092>Having a preference in the types of photos you take and what they look like is OCD>Having a preference in the lens you use is OCDInteresting perspective there
>>4521089>camera salesman larper is being a dumb gearfag againHe said he doesnt want to spend thousands to have lenses that are 1" shorter and marginally better on test charts. Pixel peeping scum. Literally anyone can google this lens vs that lens and make their mind up! Forget these half assed imatest based reviews that ignore sample variation, field curvature, oof transitions, and other important things. They are worthless gearfaggotry for pixel peeping retards. When was the last time you posted a good photo (not your dog)? Let me guess, you’re a serious pro, cant be doxxed, and you have a business trip with no cameras allowed…
>>4521100>Literally anyone can google this lens vs that lens and make their mind up!But then how will gearfags feel like they’re good at camera stuff and cherry pick results from shitty review and comparison sites to shill their favorite brand?If people just did that… they’d probably end up going off SAMPLE PHOTOS! :O
is micro 4/3 shit unless you get the modern expensive stuff?talking about old ones like for 100 bucks. is it better to just get an old dslr
anyone ever buy dirt cheap fungused the fuck up vintage lenses to clean and fix? is it worth the effort?
>>4521088Does SL3-S have an optical low-pass filter?If no I would definitely invest in one because the false colour and moire effects can ruin images.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd2TyUrVBL8
>>4521110Haven't bought them specified as such, but I have gotten some in lots. Some are easy to work on and may be worth it, depending on how much you value your time.
>>4521111What is this bot even advertising forLike everything it posts is photography pseudo-disinfo. Technically correct but practically irrelevant and universally solved by acquiring normal skills, not special gear like panasnoys and kolari OLPFs. Is it not a bot… but a zach?
>>4521120"Gear hobbies" like photography, watch collecting, electric guitar, PC tweaking, cars and motorcycles, etc attract unironic autistic people who only live to obsess over and regurgitate factoids in a way that only someone who doesnt actually do the hobby canEventually they discover magic the gathering and get stuck there
>>4521120>>4521121camera manufacturers deleted OLPF to save unit cost and sold it to consumers as an "improvement".Normie senses are too dull to notice a problem and even most professional camera reviewers are apparently oblivious.The random rainbow pixels are quite obvious to me, in addition to moire, and definitely not acceptable.
>>4521127>zoom in 500%>complainAverage camera fanIts literally one slider. Photos look better overall since most images don’t require moire correction (also, it’s one slider and moire is more likely to appear in raws than their sooc jpeg versions)
>>4521127Oh god its this guyhttps://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4421243/#4423357Why is it always the dogfagsNo wonder you dont post photos. Everyone is tired of dog: different gear the 500th.
>>4520738>QOTT: Do you shoot compacts? Do their shortcomings irk you enough to just bring an ILC instead?I thought I was going to be one of those guys with a big kit and a little kit, but after trying an RX100 IV, a PEN-7, and a Powershot SX, it just never made sense to me. The small kit never took anything my phone wasn't able to. Sure the RX100 had a decent sensor, and obviously had better IQ, but if I'm going through the effort to bring a whole different device then I'm going to bring the gear I use the most and spent a lot of money on.Modern MILCs are just not that big a deal to bring with you, and EDC faggots are insufferable. If you're the kind of guy that needs to bring a camera to the shopping mall then you need to get diagnosed for aspergers. If you bring your camera out a lot just to get you outdoors then that's fine, but ILCs aren't going to make you look any werider than you do with your Cybershot.
>>4521133>Modern MILCs are just not that big a deal to bring with you>but if I'm going through the effort to bring a whole different device then I'm going to bring the gear I use the most and spent a lot of money on.You're contradicting yourself. An RX100 is hardly any effort at all, you just slip it in a pocket and hardly notice it's there. It's smaller than just an APS-C body never mind when you have a comparable lens on there.
>>4521137>You're contradicting yourself.I don't think you know what that word means.If I'm bringing something other than a phone, I'm bringing a proper camera. Nothing worth photographing is going to rely on your gear being a few hundred grams lighter. You can argue semantics all you want, but you'll be arguing with yourself.
>>4521110It can be, if you like tinkering and fixing things. Don't buy a fungal funny or otherwise super grimy lens unless it's dirt cheap though. Start with one that's like $20 or less taxed & shipped to test yourself first, don't worry about whether it's a lens you'll actually use cuz you might end up with a boat anchor. And if you do succeed, then you might be able to sell it for a mild profit if you don't use it.
>>4521138But a compact like the RX100 doesn't take anywhere near as much effort as bringing a MILC. As I said you just slip it into a pocket, like you would a phone, or your wallet. A proper camera isn't going to do that, it's going to be in a bag or dangling from your neck or hanging from a holster, and you're going to be taking care not to bump it into things and finding somewhere to set it down when you sit down. The only way a compact isn't convenient is if you wear skinny trousers or already have a bunch of shit in your pockets and you never wear a jacket.
>>4521142>rx100>300€ usedcan't you just buy an old m43 and a pancake for same small size but better quality
>>4521142NTA but a smartphone slips into a pocket just as well and while the picture quality might not be as good, it's close enough nowdays that I wouldn't bother bringing a compact when I have a perfectly good smartphone in my pocket. If I care enough about taking good photos to use something other than a smartphone, then I will bring my actual camera that takes actually good photos, not a compact digishit.Note that this doesn't actually apply in my case since I'm a flipfag and don't have a smartphone. I still don't own a compact though, I don't carry a camera very often and I don't mind lugging around a bigger camera in exchange for better photos when I do.>But anon, don't you want to be able to carry a camera 24/7 so you'll never miss out on a good photo opportunity?No, I never used my smartphone like that back when I had one and the marginally better image quality that a good compact can deliver won't change that. Not for me, anyways.
>>4521145> I have a perfectly good smartphone in my pocket.> [I] don't have a smartphone.Yep, that's an average gear poster. I wonder how many posters here don'tbhave any photo gear at all.
>>4521146>RetardedThe average gear poster is (You)
>>4521143>old m43 and a pancakeStill not as slim and the RX100 would probably still have better image quality, depending on how old we're talking (better than something like an EP3 for example). At that point the 4/3 setup is no better than a half decent phone, well at least the phone wouldn't be limited to a single focal length.>>4521145>while the picture quality might not be as good, it's close enough nowdays that I wouldn't bother bringing a compact when I have a perfectly good smartphone in my pocketWell that depends entirely on the phone. Mine is 6 years old, unless I wanted a better camera there isn't really any need to upgrade it. My RX100 does produce noticeably better images. Even with the latest and greatest phones there are still advantages to having the larger sensor and faster higher quality lens in the RX100, it's just physics and there's no way around that. It's why phones have to fake a shallow depth of field and do all sorts of processing on the image. Then there's physical stuff like having an EVF and tilting screen, better controls including an actual shutter button with a half press for focussing, a xenon flash instead of a dinky LED, a zoom lens instead of distinct focal lengths, an easily removable memory card, and just having a separate device that won't be interrupted by phone calls and notifications and has its own power source.
>>4521100>He said he doesnt want to spend thousands to have lenses that are 1" shorter and marginally better on test chartsWhich is why I suggest lenses that are cheaper than the one he has been using that are even better. It's interesting for both you and him completely ignore that whole part.>When was the last time you posted a good photoWell I post non-dog stuff in the RPTs all the time, so you tell me. When was yours, where can I see your photos?
>>4521111I bought the SL specifically because it has no low-pass filter. I prefer sharpness
>>4521078You do this because it suits your emotional needs. I never regretted bringing no camera while seeing a cool and rare animal. If it happens it's ok. If it doesn't, its ok too. I just enjoyed watching the animal and not caring about shooting pfotos.
>>4521133Trvth nvke. >>4521137No. He did not contradict himself. You are described in this post >>4521121You have something called aspergers. Its a mental disability and chief among your deficits is the inability to interpret context, so you take everything literally and think “normies” language is contradictory. Allow me to help you, autistic “EDC” gearfag (the EDC fags are literally a bunch of aspies nearly arranging the contents of their ideal pockets. fucking seriously.)> Modern MILCs are just not that big a deal to bring with you [to do photography in a cool place or with cool people] <-you never do either because you are a cringing asocial dweeb btw> but if I'm going through the effort to bring a whole different device [than my phone that equals a pns] then I'm going to bring the gear I use the most and spent a lot of money on [because its better than a pns]Now regale us with your tales about not owning a smartphone because its not kosher
EDC fas are gross autists that take a flashlight, a leatherman, a lighter, two guns, a spare clip, a knife, and a SNOY RX100 virginity machine to walmart so they can look disgusting while they zoom in on stacy’s yoga pantsChads just leave the camera at home and take the CANON (they use those at NFL games yano) out when they go camping or their girl wants some new sexy pictures takenEDC = der untermensch snapschitter ov judeaIts a hobby = DAS ARYAN ÜBERSNAPPER OV HYPERBOREA
>>4521153no way ep3 would be worse than a phone... right?should I just use my phone for when I don't want to carry my DSLR then?
>>4521173Modern non-iPhone cameras are very good and iOS while once good got jeeted so yeah, just buy a decent android phone and keep a shitty iphone se as a second number if some holdout refuses to use a wifi messaging app
>>4521175guess I'll use my poco then.only issue I have with my phone is that fine detail gets processed into painterly smoothed lines or shapes. especially jarring on asphalt or far grass. I haven't tried shooting raw on it cause then pixel binning doesn't work, and that's like the biggest thing about these sensors.
>>4521142I'm going to put this plainly. For me, bringing any extra device is the effort. Be it an MP3 player, a digitshit, a kindle etc. The moment my phone becomes ancillary to something else, it's effort.The volume of effort between bringing an RX100 and my 70D and 24-70 f/4 is the same. The size and weight are not, but they are not something I concern myself with. I am not weak. I can stomach the weight. I also do not care if I have to bring a small pack or my backpack because they are not inconveniences.I'm not even saying this to dunk on you or anyone else for that matter. I simply either bring the R6 I own or I use my phone. The phone does fine.>>4521145>I don't carry a camera very often and I don't mind lugging around a bigger camera in exchange for better photos when I do.My entire mantra basically boils down to this (but I carry a camera with me probably 2-4 times a month).>>4521145>>But anon, don't you want to be able to carry a camera 24/7 so you'll never miss out on a good photo opportunity?>No, I never used my smartphone like that Neither. I have my phone on me all the time outside my house and I don't think I've ever gotten it out on a whim to take photos while I do my daily rigamarole.I don't write this blogpost to discourage anyone. I'm answering the fucking thread question, and the answer is why the hell would I bother.
>>4521176I’m gonna slip you the redpillOnly the ricoh grs come close to 0-effort carry and phone beating quality and only if you’re over 6ft like me. Big guys make all devices relatively small. If you’re a gangly nerd just get a nicer phone and a nicer dslr. All other compacts are the same as a phone camera.
>>4521178But how will you provide /rpt/ with dog walk snaps and generate nondoxxable throwaways for gear arguments without an eedeesee?
>>4521159just checked rpt, its just months old dog snapshots. turned on my neuralink, used grok to scan for your filename pattern (260*, yymmdd###). its all pretty bad its always the most pixel peepy, test sharting gear queers with the worst photos. and always a dog. zooming in on dog fur must drive people like you (autistic furries) insane. try not being a specs reading gearfag for a month and see how your life changes. knowledge of mtf charts is antimatter to good photography.
Ah yes, the phone copers enter the thread.> I cannot take my DSLR and bazooka zoom when I walk my dog, because they are to big and unwieldy> But no, they are not unwieldy, I'm very big and very fat and in comparison to me everything looks small.> But I don't like taking my DSLR and bazooka zoom with me, so I take photos on my phone.
>>4521182>zero reading comprehension enters the threadThis sums it up for you>>4521168
>>4521181Oh dear lawd put down the hypersharp mirrorless and learn what a flattering angle is>SHARP LENS BETTER LOOK AT THIS CHART -ur mind>picrel -the fruit you bearPerhaps it is true. Sharp lenses are worse.
>>4521183Do you think I'm going to read word by word all the drivel in this thread? It's enough for me to know that people giving gear advice on /p don't use their gear.
>>4521181dogs are just low hanging fruits and the fur is a good stress test for gearfagsthey wouldn't shoot a squirrel because that requires finding it
>>4521192Traditionally it was cats and brick walls, but we got invaded by some sort of /an/ related discord circlejerk that’s probably actually 3 feds who pal'ed up after being assigned to shill against nazi occupied /p/, so now its dogsThe government must pay really well. They have some nice cameras.
>>4521194This is mental illness
>>4521197Someone else made that picture (99% one of the discord dogfags)You cant deny that /p/ was invaded. One day we had peace. The next day, we had dogs. /m43/ was destroyed. The resident neonazis were driven out and one was gaslit into insanity. Now pro-zionist talking points exist where we used to have people whining about jews being too good at photography and we have sensor size supremacy where we used to have sovl and vibes.
>>4521198Also to be clear some of this is a long term positive as long as the nazis, moop, etc dont return. nazi /p/ was anti-photography, but these guys are horrid photographers with bad gear opinions based on their own bad photographic taste and their job is done
>>4521128it's a 100% crop.The false colour is visible even in this shrunken preview.
>>4521161loss of sharpness is negligible.money saved by the manufacturer isn't since good OLPFs are expensive.
>>4521198I meant your post is mental illness
>>4521201That is fringing at the high contrast edges, lens quality issue. And some CA, also a lens quality issue.
>>4521204You can’t deny that /p/ was invaded and purposefully reshaped. A decade old general doesn’t get raided and then wiped forever by a janny all of a sudden because nothing changed. Prevailing antisemitic narratives on this board are just gone. Good riddance? Sure. But it was sudden and violent. Call them feds or groypers or whatever you want, but it’s the same 3 gearfags and their dogs every time. Their job is done. I’d be glad if they either left, or got over the excitement of their shiny toys and learned to do photography instead of pixel peeping, gear autism, and price perfomance anal ysis
>>4521206You have mental illness.
>>4521205uh huh, here are some more "lens quality issues".https://www.dpreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/5863043706-L1001173.ACR-adjusted.jpeg
>>4521207The discord dog fags executed one of our longest running generals and ran off five tripfags.
>>4521207>stupid gear drama is always the exact shit husky fucker, corgi molester, and dirty negs dogfag always post>it always turns out to be them>its painfully obvious husky fucker trolled cANON and cinefag to try and make them leave and scared off others in the process>husky fucker and dirty negs fag raided /m43/ repeatedly and ruined it>noticing this is mental illnessDont you have a dog snapshit/photo of a tree in the dog park to post
>>4521208>im so mad at cameras inc they made it harder to pixel peep my husky’s fur and zoom in 1000% on tree branchesGo take a good photo for once
>>4521207Ive found that the few people that post on /p/ have extreme mental illness and unhealthy autistic obsessions. Over camera brands out of all things. I wonder if other boards on 4chan are like this.
Last thread I asked about camera for my mother. Today I was showing her section with second hand gear from trusted shop and she noticed Sony A6300 (30k photos shutter count) with 16-70 Zeiss f/4 lens (so something like 26-110 on that camera). Pretty good price, too. But camera model is quite old (2016), I wouldn't be so worried with normal one but this is mirrorless. She got her mind pretty set on that, however. I guess she won't mind APS-C (since she was using compact cameras so far, which have smaller sensors anyway and I highly doubt she would make use of FF advantages) and would actually enjoy small weight. But I don't know anything about Sony cameras.What do you guys think? Is it good camera or something to avoid?
I've been EDC a GR IV for a few months, and I'll agree that fixed can be tough and I've missed shots, but I also appreciate how I have to actually think and move now. I've been able to take this lil baby mountain climbing and into concerts with "no lensed cameras allowed". I'd post a few sample photos but they'd get compressed and >>4521028 look mushy. Planning to make a few bigger prints for a local show in a few months, maybe it'll look like shit who knows.
>>4521159I appreciate your suggestions but this is something I can do in next year or two, this year I bought that Z5 II, which was already expensive purchase, and don't really see the point of replacing my existing lens right now. Selling gear always means losing money compared to what you paid before.
>pees on your sensorlet thread>btfos the resident nazi>tells you to buy a nikon and install capture one>refuses to explain further>leaves>your life is somehow basically ruined by this
>>4521218>leaves*starts taking pictures of a different dog after pissing everyone off
>>4521215It's a decent camera, not really lacking in anything. They haven't really advanced much in the last ten years especially with APS-C (full frame has been slowly increasing in resolution) except for AF performance (the A6300 is still very good, and I doubt your mum is going to be shooting sports or something like that) and video features.
>>4521168Canon supports Israel btw
How would a camera and lens handle being carried in a bag on a hike and bike? Especially the gear with image stabilization, apparently IBIS is always loose when powered off? How would it handle being in a front bicycle basket
>>4521223Obvious antisemite. Israel and Sony have been notified.
>>4521221Alright, sounds good. Hope she won't mind lack of touch screen. The only alternatives from Sony I see, in similar price, are A7 III and A7R II but don't know about those either.
>>4521223>>4521225Keep this shit up and I'm havin you put on the bad goy list>>4521215Older sony is kind of sketchy and the jpeg color leaves a lot to be desired. I used an a7c for a year and while it was a lot better than anything made before it, it still left a lot to be desired. Your mother has plenty of purse space and could definitely use a nikon z50ii. Don't forget to teach her how to use capture one to get the most out of her photos.
>>4521213The irony here is that the noise generated by lack of OLPF is often an order of magnitude greater than the noise difference between full frame and four thirds which /p/ posters constantly sperg about.If you are actually able to independently assess image quality you will see that this is a significant problem.
>>4521231They're right you're retarded.Debunking bullshit takes 400% more effort than posting it. Ergo you're just retarded.
>>4521215Avoid Sony if you can, especially their APS-C range.
>>4521236Do you think this building has horizontal window bars painted purple and green?https://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_a6700/sample_images/sony_a6700_45.jpg
>>4521242I think you're using other peoples sample photos made with substandard raw processing to make a point you've never personally experienced and have no actual clue about.Post an actual photo you took that exhibits this problem and also upload the raw file.You probably won't because it's equally common on DSLRs as long as sharp lenses are used, equally rare on mirrorless as long as softer lenses are used, and you don't own a camera anyways.
>>4521242>>4521231I don't get what the issue is. Just shoot canon or any older camera if you want an OLPF. On full frame it seems like most people prefer now OLPF. The 5Ds-R outsold and holds value better than the 5Ds.
I've never owned my own camera and I've been thinking about getting a compact for travel. Goals:>having the "real" camera experience>better IQ and resolution than smartphone>small and convenientI'm sure I'm in the same position as a lot of people. It seems genuinely difficult to accomplish meaningful IQ improvements while keeping things compact. The compromise I'm currently contemplating is, since my smartphone is pretty alright at 24mm and 70mm, getting primes that fill the gaps in my smartphone range. So, 35mm and ~135mm (FF equiv). And then the camera would be Fujifilm X-E5 (small, IBIS, APS-C, 40MP) and the lenses would be adapted from M-mount, because then there are very sharp and very small options. The biggest issues with my plan are the high price for M-mount lenses and the lack of autofocus.
>>4521249Use your phone and get a grip attachement from amazon.ORBuy some POS MFTurd off ebay for too much money and then complain that it's no better than your phone.
>>4521249>>better IQ and resolution than smartphoneThe biggest thing holding back smartphone are the shitty tiny ass lenses they have and all the computational photography (processing) that goes on in order to correct it, and also the processing they throw in there just for the fuck of it. This bar honestly isnt that high if by better you mean more honest images. However smartphones do have pretty good dynamic range now, so beating that without slop processing of hdr stacks isnt that cheap. >Fujifilm X-E5If this is your standard for the sort of size you want, you have a lot of options. Pretty much every company makes or has made some sort of small APS-C sensored mirrorless camera. Sony has the A7C which has a larger full frame sensor, that will get you sharper, less noisy images, but as a trade off most of your lens options will be larger. There's a couple of small lenses for the sony but they're not great. Pretty much all of the others have small lenses available for them, even better if you're ok with using primes. I added the G1x mark II in there too as it's also a pretty good option. Sensor a bit smaller than APSC and a bit bigger than m43. You can also adapt manual focus lenses to any of these, except the G1X which is a fixed lens compact.
>>4521251>There's a couple of small lenses for the sony but they're not great.It's the opposite. The small lenses for sony are great, first and third party, and preferable to canon, lumix and nikon's selection of small lenses. Sony has the best lens selection overall since they stole all their optics expertise from minolta and zeiss (purchase and industrial espionage, respectively). It's the bodies that aren't made well.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpbtsYajeHshttps://www.reddit.com/r/SonyAlpha/comments/jth9bu/my_a7cs_monitor_has_a_horrible_magentatint_and/https://www.reddit.com/r/SonyAlpha/comments/1ehckii/a7cr_rubber_sealing_gasket_by_card_slot_begins_to/https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/a7cr-rubber-sealing-gasket-by-card-reader-begins-to-crumble.4762824/
>>4521254Derranged. Ignore this poster.
>>4521254I should also mention>Sony lenses aren't just for sonyYes, that's right. Even if you don't buy a sony, you can still use sony lenses. How?Buy a Nikon, and a megadap etz21proSimple as.
>>4521255Everything I posted is verifiably true.
Help me find a DKL to Canon RF adapter please. I don't want to go the DKL-EF-RF route.
>>4521249>Compact ILC for travel, lenses for 35mm and 135mm FF equivalentIf I was buying for myself I'd get an Olympus E-M10 Mark IV, the 14-42 M.Zuiko pancake zoom, and the 40-150 M.Zuiko tele. No futzing around with adapters and a lot cheaper than the Fuji. Less megapixels but that's not as important as most gearfags will tell you. The body itself is also a bit lighter, don't know about the lenses but shouldn't be any bigger or heavier than Fuji equivalents especially if you're not actually using Fuji lenses and have to factor in an adapter. Just my two cents.
>>4521260Micro four thirds image quality is quite bad in the majority of situations. Basically like a nicer android phone. Especially with f7-11.2 zoom lenses. It's not appreciably better than 1" since once sensors get that small everything but base ISO maybe +1 looks kind of like a phone.
>>4520970coolpix a>>4521023it does look like a digicam but then you pick it up and realize it has a metal body and buttons. nikon also made it quite difficult to ID with such a generic name
>>4521262Again, not as relevant as people think. I have an old Olympus C-8080 which is an even smaller 2/3" sensor and only 8MP but the pics still look better overall than any phone camera I've seen.No, MFT isn't AS good as a bigger formats. But this is the price of compactness. I can accept that in exchange for smaller size and lighter weight.
>>4521266>I can't tell brono it's really bad except on 1920x1080 poverty screens. just imagine shooting a shitty full frame with a small aperture kit lens at iso 800 in broad daylight. the cameras are the same size as aps-c and kind of snoy-like in quality, especially below the em1/om1. i'd rather pay extra for a fujifilm or forego the retro larp and buy a canon r10/r7. for weather sealing, pentax is superior (+glorious OVF, sovl). micro four turds and its f11 zooms belong in the dustbin of history.
>>4521269Say Christ is Lord
>>4521269>Full frame is bad because it collects less light?
>>4521273>i can't readMicro four thirds is nearly phone tier and way too big to keep in a pocket.Meanwhile full frame and APS-C are the same size now and have better everything.
>>4521240Why?
>>4520834It is nice if you know shortcomings. On Snoys a7 @ F1.4 gives shitty corners due to sensor design (thick stack) - works better on film or LeicaZ.From F2.0 it is better across whole frame.
>>4521274The difference between apsc and m43 is nothing. Get full frame or get digicam quality pics. Pretty simple.
>>4521279I have FF and APS-C, the difference is literally a crop. Use a focal length, close to the FF equivalent (~1.5-1.6x of lens focal length) and compose. APS-C and even MFT is perfectly fine for everyday, hobbyist and travel photography. It is even preferred for travel due to smaller size and weight.Suggesting an f/1.4 lens on a FF body for hobby is mental illness. And let's face it, pro photographers do not come here, at all.
>>4521269>just imagine shooting a shitty full frame with a small aperture kit lens at iso 800 in broad daylight.Brother a modern FF camera with these settings and gear would still look better when downscaled to 2.1MP. It would largely look similar but the small details would be factors better. Not to mention you'd still get a decent looking DoF and cleanliness.>>4521274>Micro four thirds is nearly phone tier and way too big to keep in a pocket.+1. This. Came here to comment le this. Etc. M43 is pretty pathetic outside of using CHUDPRO f/8 PROPRO lenses that cost more than a Cannikon flagship body.>>4521279>>4521285What's it like llving as a legally blind man? Even a semi decent crop lens on a crop body completely BTFOs M43.Like fuck me, the R10/R50/R100/R50V with the 28mm pancake would destroy M43 kits that cost 3x as much.
>>4521286Nice moving goalposts.Go to therapy and take your meds.
>>4521286Full frame is 61~% bigger than APS-C. APS-C is only 31~% bigger than M43. Try again, retard.
>>4521286I had the R7 with the 28 and it was sharp corner to corner. One of those rare instances where a full frame lens performs better on crop sensor.
>>4521290>One of those rare instances where a full frame lens performs better on crop sensorThe corner sharpness on APS-C is always going to be better with the same lens than on full frame, because on APSC the corners of your image are no way near the edge of the actual optical elements. It would be like saying you can improve the corner sharpness on full frame by cropping the corners of your image off.
>>4521288>Nice moving goalposts.My goalposts have always been the same. M43 is bad and APS-C has a purpose, but FF is king (of digital, get a medium format film camera if you actually care about photography).>>4521289>31% is nothing but 61% is everythingAh you're one of those retards I see.
>>4521291Theoretically, yes, but not in reality. A lot of full-frame lenses perform noticeably worse. The pixel density on the R7 is brutal so it magnifies flaws.
>>4521286>>4521292womp womp
>>452129261 is a significantly larger number than 31 yes. By a factor of two, almost.
>>4521249If you have an APS-C on you, why shoot with smartphone at all? X-E5 is chunky enough so you can put the 16-50 zoom on it and commit to taking photos.
>>4521292Take your meds
>>4521249>>452129616-50 zoom is not bad but from my experience with my FF DSLR choosing a normal enough prime will do you for 95%-99% of the time. Something like a fast 35mm or 28mm prime or inbetween.35mm is 50mm equivalent, 28 is 43mm equivalent. It doesn't seem much difference but for me it was. Somehow on my FF 50mm felt too constrained and 35mm too wide, always included more context than needed. Opting for 40mm seemed like the sweet spot, feels a lot more natural. You will figure it out for yourself.
>>4521260>Olympus E-M10 Mark IV, the 14-42 M.Zuiko pancake zoom, and the 40-150 M.Zuiko teleThe issue with this kit is that if you will want to upgrade in future, Olympus gear would be sunk cost. Both lenses are meh and the body is discontinued. Once you want better glass and better body, you are looking at same size and price as APS-C gear.
>>4521301For "travel" as in city walks or hikes, I find that a zoom is good and while swapping primes is a drag. For example, on my last vacation, I used 16mm when visting a historical apartment/museum, 23mm to take outdoor candids of my friends, and also 35mm when I wanted to slow down and frame a shot. On a hike, maybe a superzoom would be good, but I don't have one.
Anybody have suggestions for real cameras>better than a Samsung Galaxy A15 smartphone>able to take a 64 GB MicroSD card>below 1K in price>WON'T KEEP TAKING BLURRY IMAGES NO MATTER THE ZOOM OR STILLNESSMy last cameras were>Minolta MN12ZHorrible zoom, horrible quality, pixellated to fuck, horrible battery life, horrible in every way>Kodak EasyShare C143Ancient but sadly my old faithful no longer works with modern PCs
>>4521304>>better than a Samsung Galaxy A15 smartphoneWould be quicker to list the cameras that are worse.>>WON'T KEEP TAKING BLURRY IMAGES NO MATTER THE ZOOM OR STILLNESSAll cameras take blurry pictures when you shake them around. In fact, larger sensor cameras that take better pictures often suffer from this more because they have less aggressive sensor stabilisation or none at all.
>>4521249Just get Sigma 18-50 for travel and call it a dayYou are overthinking this
>>4521306>Would be quicker to list the cameras that are worse.Are you serious? This phone camera still takes pixellated as fuck photos and can't capture detail I want due to its autistic focus issues and the stupid auto-filter that I cannot disable over it. In another thread somebody mentioned Lightroom app but that requires an account so I passed on it. They also mentioned GCam and OpenCamera, and I've yet to really try out the latter and didn't get the former. My previous phone could focus and could take detailed shots like I liked, but the auto-zoom actually made things worse and worked to undo the clear focus in the process. I had to time my inputs right to have the phone take the shot right as the focus was clear, otherwise it was default blurry and it seemed to think that was OK.>when you shake them aroundMy hands aren't the type to really sit still>arger sensor cameras that take better pictures often suffer from this more because they have less aggressive sensor stabilisation or none at allWow, so am I fucked? I've been looking at Facebook Marketplace for better cameras, and the one time I did buy something cheap it was an absurd chink scamera exactly like the one in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiH4Ay7YezE
>>4521301>>4521303In the end everyone has preferences, I just find it counterproductive to buy expensive gear like X-E5 and then let it sit in a bag.
>>4521304Anon the whole thread is full of exact camera models people are using. Look them up.
>>4521310>read the threadOK got it
>>4521181> its just months old dog snapshotsOdd, I post far more non-dog shots. Just going through the last 3 RPTs, we have 1 dog shot and 22 other shots.>>4521184You should try contributing in the editing threads next time, since you kike my edit so much
>>4521289It's not just the size, it's the technology. APS-C and FF have actually advanced where as 4/3 has stagnated because the manufacturers know they don't need to improve and the copers will keep buying up the same old shit.
>>4521308you can do what I did and buy an older used Nikon DX DSLR with a VR (stabilisation) lensI got a d3200 for 150 and Nikkor AF-S (important) DX 18-55 3.5-5.6 G2 VR for 80 in prestine condition on Kamerastore. could save saved 50 if I took a more used one.low light performance could be better... but otherwise it's pretty good. you could easily get some older or newer one too depending on what you want, DX nikons are said to be pretty small compared to bigger dslrs, but it's still a DSLR so you're never going to fit it in your pocket. if that's a problem for you I seen people shill RX100 point and shoots. honestly after having to use my phone for years for photography, having a DSLR with an optical viewfinder, settings I could tweak, actually control, RAW files... yeah it's big but the tradeoff is insane. you can get a wide peakdesign clean strap for it for 10 bucks and just wear it.I think it's a decent entry into photography.
>>4521318>clean strapclone strap*real one asks 80 and that's insane. clone one isn't even worse.
>>4521318>>4521319Checking Facebook Marketplace in my area and searching Nikkor, I see...>Nikon D5000 Camera W/ Nikkor 50mm 1.8 lens>Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED Lens>Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D prime lens>Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1.4 G ED Lens>NOS-Nikkor 70-300mm/f1:4-5.6 AF-D-ED lens for Nikon camera>Nikon Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D AF Lens – With Original BoxThe other Nikon stuff I see so far are>Nikon D3300 Camera>Nikon D5300 DSLR Camera Bundle>Nikon d3500 body and dx 70-300mm lens>Nikon D90 camera bundle (Af-s nikkor 18-55m lens)>Nikon D60 Camera, two lenses (15-55 mm, 55-200 mm>Nikon D200 (Nikon AF-S 18-55mm lens)>Nikon 70-200 F2.8 Vr>Nikon D780>Nikon d3500>Nikon DX3100 (DX VR 18-55mm lens, DX VR 55-300mm lens)>Nikon D60 starter kit>Nikon D600 w/ Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens>Nikon D3300 DSLR portrait bundle (50mm portrait lens, 85mm portrait lens)Might be more in there if I search deeper, but that's what I see at a quick glance. They're all below 500 bucks too, seems very affordable. Go for which one?
>>4521279>>4521289Cope posts.>>4521285Also a cope post.>How dare you have a nice _____ those are only for professionals>YOU CANT APPRECIATE ITWhere did this shitty culture come from? Musical instruments, where the difference is better intonation a lesser player can't even achieve? Cameras aren't musical instruments. They're hardware, in the same category as knives, cars, wrenches, and drills. It's like telling someone that they are mentally ill for wanting a cadillac instead of a lada or a decent sharp knife instead of a poorly serrated one made of chinese pot metal. If it came from anywhere it must have come from marxism (highest kill count of any ideology) or jobless losers trying to spread their misery to everyone else (same thing as marxism).Faggot.
>>4521303The trick of a normal prime is you don't start swapping it every time. Standing in place and using the zoom to compose is zoomer mentality. You are already taking a walk, walk over to your subject and snap. A prime is smaller and lighter than a zoom lens, much better for city walks and travel.
>>4521322Take your meds
>>4521309It is up to you to use that camera and not let it sit around
>>4521324Using this reply against sane takes just makes you look like a newfag slinging buzzwords. Go back.
>>4521323>JUST ZOOM WITH YOUR FEET. ZOOM ZOOM, ZOOMS MAKE NO SENSE WHEN I HAVE FEET.Nigga have you ever heard of perspective distortion or background compression? You can't just walk forward and get the same photo a 200mm lens would take.
>>4521323As much as I like 50mm equivalent, there are limits of zooming with legs. Indoors, you cannot make a wider shot (on a museum visit, there was a dude carrying an x100 and making phone snaps). And outdoors you cannot zoom on something from a vantage point.
>>4521324Can you explain why a nice camera can not be used for a hobby and hobbyists must have grainier photos with less rich/accurate colors, worse sharpness, etc or they are mentally ill?Is being able to notice details and have standards mental illness? I thought it was just a sign of a high IQ score, which is why more intelligent societies tend to make more sophisticated art and technology and prefer higher quality equipment.
>>4521323Zoom with tour feet niggerCan t you just walk over there or what? Lazy niggers on god fr
>>4521309If you only take good photos, you won't use your camera at all most of the time.>It's so expensive to sitIf you feel the need to "justify" something by using it pointlessly you're just subconsciously admitting that you can't afford it. But if>If you only take good photos, you won't use your camera most of the timeIs true, you don't need the $1700-$2000 cutesy "EDC street photography lifestyle" camera anyways. A $1000 sony a7c+28-60 kit zoom has better IQ, build and autofocus than a $1700 fuji xe5 kit. A nikon Z6+24-70 f4 kit has marginally worse autofocus and marginally more size but much, much, much better build quality than a sony a7c and actually has better image quality (better sensor, full shutter less prone to motion distortion, can use all of the same lenses as an a7c) as well.Fuji sells what you want other people to see you with, not what you need to take the nicest photo you can for posterity. They sell vanity. Their entire brand is vanity, not photography. They're fashion cameras.Just buy a Nikon and install capture one. It's that simple. Gear was already solved.
>>4521334> LLM was configured to shill Nikon, but accidenatlly shilled Snoy>>4521334
>>4521336>Don't mention sony or it's shillingSony isn't good. They're just better than fujifilm. I tried using sony cameras for 2.5 years and the bodies are actual garbage. The a7cII actually feels more plasticky than the nikon zf.I'm merely obligated to mention them because it drives you insane.
>Huskyfaggot is back (he never left)/p/ is ruinedNikons third rate thai junk and capture one is overpriced for 1/2 of what adobe suite can do. Dont listen to that faggot. He never posts photos because they’re all of his fucking dog. Most pros use sony and canon. Most influencers use fuji. Everyone uses adobe. Who do you trust, them, or the dog snapshitter?
>>4521321it all depends on their condition. I'm just starting so that's I went with Kamerastore. they certify their stuff and show what's wrong with it if anything, also have warranty. when you buy from people you don't know and no one takes proper photos of optics to show what's wrong with them since you're trying to get rid of it anyway.you can save money but there could be hidden faults and especially in the lenses there could be mold or haze. scratches. cameras themselves might have faults or very high shutter counts.improperly stored lenses (humidity above 30% I think) are likely to have mood growing inside of it.I'd rather spend a little more and get it on kamerastore of some similar marketplace.even if you are still going to try buying on facebook, go to Kamerastore, put in those names and see the prices. also see the listings with faults like "not passed" and look at the pictures (they photo every bit they sell to show everything). you'll begin to understand what is worth spending more and what isn't.also APS-C dslrs are "crop sensors" so you will have to multiply focal length listed on the lenses by x1.5 so a 55-200 turns into 82-300 and that's pretty far, especially compared to smartphones which do ultrawide like 14-18 and 35 or 50. 50 is more or less your "normal" view. you can look in your photos from your phone it might say what effective focal length the photos were taken.also DX lenses are made specifically for crop cameras so they are smaller and cheaper.lenses are also not completely compatible, so for example some bodies have a focus motor inside some don't. my d3200 only works with AF-S lenses but not with AF-P. you have to check it. you can just ask Google ai or chatgpt really.
>>4521321and like glancing at thoseif d5300 aps-c bundle has lens and it's not too long range could be alright depending in price and state. cause it has enough features already.d600 is full frame so larger sensor (better low light) but will be bigger and heavier and the lens too. 3 number cameras are usually more professional and 2 number ones I think even more so? 4 numbers are entry/budget. you need to research these things cause you really don't know what you want to buy cause you don't know anything. ive been in the same boat only couple weeks ago but you only learn with actually experiencing it. really you can just put that list into ai, ask it to summarize and tell you the differences. I've been using Google ai to figure things out and it's been mostly okay. when it comes to just pulling up stats and comparing it doesn't make much mistakes, it can look at forums too for more opinion based stuff.
>>4521334Micro four thirds and old apsc dslrs are good enough for snapshitting dogfag gearfags like you>inb4 i promise i secretly have good photos that arent five years old and im a pro but you cant see proof cuz youd dox me
>>4521323>Standing in place and using the zoom to compose is zoomer mentality.Ah, yes, because when I have stage in front of me and audience two meter away, I'm going to keep "zooming with feet". Perhaps by standing on someone's shoulders? And it will totally feel the same to take 50mm at very high angle and 120mm from the distance and much lower angle.
>>4521341D5300 cant use af-d and is generally gimpedD600 is prone to getting oil all over its own sensorPlease don't buy less than a d7### or d750/d800. If you can't find a <$300 d7500, you live around scammers, but any d7### is fine for an ultra-budget poverty machine.@4521342@4521339>The huskies... they're in my walls... they're in tunnels... i can hear them... they're everywhereMost mentally stable crop coper
> Most pros use sony and canon. Most influencers use fuji.>Most youtubers sell adobe preset packs>uhhh DOGShahahahaha
>>4521340Oh nice, now we have reseller shills.
>>4521341also you don't won't it to be too old. like 2013 is alright. but some of the ones you listed like d60 and d90 are from 2008 and that's a bit old.there's also features like wifi and gps. my d3200 doesn't have them, a d5300 has both and I think also articulating screen for example.megapixels is self explanatory. I think 24 is the most you should be looking at. 12 could also probably be alright? depending on what you want to do really. but below that I think it's really outdated. not that you can't make good photos with 8 or 4 but it's harder especially if you're starting.sensor tech and processors change over the years so newer processors in newer models allow better ISO performance with less noise.but honestly you just need a good balance of features price and performance, so you won't be worried about breaking it or have regret and force yourself to use it, also so you can just take it everywhere with you, but it won't feel clunky cause it's too old.lens has more impact on image quality than the camera is also what people usually say. but buying lenses is for when you understand why you want another lens. same with most other additional things.>>4521344you can nitpick things to infinity but it's not that bad. like I got d3200 and other than low light performance and some control quirks im pretty satisfied. and especially since it wasn't too expensive and I understand not more due to experiencing it, I know what I could buy later and which features I'd want improved.>d7### ultra budget poverty machineagain the issue is you think that's a "budget" camera when for example d7200 costs 450€ compared to d3200 100-150€ in decent condition.45p is not budget by any normal stretch, it's only budget when you're a consumerist or a pro, and even then it would be better spent on a lens probably. people can make fantastic photos on d40 and the like, but they already know how to use everything.
>>4521321also batteries could be worn out and some cams need reflsshing cracked firmware that allows third party batteries (not hard). first Party batteries can cost like 60€ compared to 20 for something like patona.>>4521346film friend recommended it as a reputable store and I'd definitely fuck up trying to buy a used camera off of someone was n the usual places with thout knowing literally anything about cameras. you get proper photos and description and a warranty. I'll shill it every time to people that want to buy their first camera on Facebook cause people like you entrenches in the hobby don't realize how overwhelming the amount of information is needed to even buy a camera.
>>4521347>nitpick>its not that badIt can't use half of nikons best lenses. And the D600 literally becomes unusable over time.>45p is not budget by any normal stretch, it's only budget when you're a consumerist or a proCommie babble. Why are europeans so retarded? Your choice to be broke does not make being more successful than you "wrong". It's not even that bad in your dystopian caliphate. Just put in some extra work for a week or two and save your money.
>>4521348Well, ok, they don't scam buyers all that much, only sellers.
>>4521333Take your meds
>>4521349>can't use half of nikons beat lensesyou realize this means literally nothing to someone starting out? and "best lenses" are usually a lot more expensive.having only the 18-55 kit, other than some time where I wish I had more reach I really don't know what I would want on my level for example. it seems sharp, has no aberrations or distortion, has stabilisation... what else do you need? f1.4? useless for a beginner and will only get you confused. and 35mm DX F1.8 is a 100$ in case you need it.>d600 becomes unusableyeah that's useful information. >broke it's about not spending too much on things you don't need or don't know if you need or won't use much.overpaying and consumerism is being irresponsible with your money.there's no reason to do that no matter how much you have.entering a hobby with something too good for a beginning also seems pointless.
>>4521348You don't need to know anything but>If a nikon's multi-digit model number doesn't start with D7 or D8 its probably shit>Don't buy a sony>Don't buy a fuji>Don't buy micro four thirds>Canon DSLRs have nice colors and bad shadow recovery
>>4521352You are unbelievably fucking stupid. No, AF-D lenses are not a lot more expensive.>f1.4? uselessAre you dumb>overpaying and consumerism is being irresponsible with your money.Money is worked for and spent. If you want nicer things, you do more work, and you have more money. Do you think an ancient $300 DSLR is "irresponsible"? No. You are fucking poor. Go back to work. I'm done with you.We work in this country. Those who don't work, fail. Clearly that's for a reason. People who don't understand that everything you can place your hands on is a reward for work have something wrong with their brains. You don't earn or deserve something by being somehow special and elite. You earn it by doing work and then you can have what you want. That's it.
>>4521352fucking seriously you're polluting the world with this bullshit ideology>Its just your first kitchen knife, so buy a chinesium POS that has to saw through an onion to not lop off part of a finger since you're just a beginner.Basically marxism>To each according to his need, determined by the need expertsvs capitalism/the natural economy>To each what he's worked for and chosen for himself, and if you're a good person you'll share some tooCommissars and czars gb2 >>>/northkorea/Better cameras are better and it's relatively little work to earn something better than a shitty d3200.
>>4521350they do? I'm assuming they low ball you if you sell to them?where should you sell your gear otherwise?>>4521353my d3200 seems alright.other than noise which is mostly me not exposing well (also can be motivated in post), not having extras like wifi and articulating screen (I use viewfinder anyway and don't need wifi), not having weather sealing (I think you don't want your camera in the rain regardless?), also would be nice to have a second wheel or dial and a top screen but that's extras, I don't see anything wrong with it.now that I'm looking into other lenses only issue is flange distance but I'd need mirrorless for that.oh also people say that it has bad focus cause only the middle point is X point, but I havent had any issues, and I'm looking into manual lenses anyway so it doesn't matter.>>4521354okay I don't know anything about af-d, but usually better is more expenses be even if it's 50 years old and people flock to it and crank the prices.>are you dumbmaybe? but if you're a beginner it's not going to be so useful to you and shallow dof will be hard to use compared to kit lens. I want to get a faster lens for night stuff either way but that's still down the line.>money is worked for and spentyes but you don't buy a ferrari to go to the grocery store, and you don't gift one to a teenager who only ever rode a bicycle.things cost more for a reason, and often that reason is not "it's nicer". I'm not short on money but that doesn't mean I want to overspend on something I don't need. I don't have a car because I'm not american, for example. it's not needed for me. if I needed it is buy one. if I needed it to go to work and to the grocery store, I'd buy one fit with price and performance for the task. if I was going to race, I would buy one that was fit for racing. it's not complicated.
>>4521354> Dear gaijin, kindly work more to buy things we sell.No, go away shill.
>>4521354you seem very upset, so I suggest you to meditate about why.if your work is so insufferable that if you don't buy shiny things for yourself you're unhappy - you should change your work to something more enjoyable. materialism and external things can't make you happy.>>4521355a chinesium kitchen knife would be a point and shoot or disposable camera, but more directly - a smartphone.anon wants to upgrade to something better. there is nothing wrong with buying an older entry level DSLR for the sake of entering the bobby on a budget. it's what they're made for.>according to the expertsare you the expert?I've seen many professional photographers recommend old entry dslra exactly for the reasons I'm saying.>shitty d3200if it won't be enough to me, I'll sell it and buy something else. it's not difficult.why do I need professional tier gear when I'm not a professional and I don't have the skill to utilize it? great photos can be taken with a lot of cameras and good photographer will be able to use shitty gear better than a shitty photographer using great gear.there no need for pointless consumerism. ironic in a gear thread but still.buy things you actually need, as you need them. and you don't actually need much.and if you're working with it, you know what you need better.
>>4521340>KamerastoreI checked D5300 there and it seems to be about the same price this Facebook seller is selling the set for or cheaper, except the Facebook seller has other stuff with it>Nikon D5300 Camera Body>Nikon 18-55mm Lens>UV Filter Installed>Original Nikon Battery>Battery Charger>Nikon Carrying Bag>USB Cable>TV/Video Connection Cables>ViewNX2 Software CD>Owner's Manual & CD Manual>Nikon Photography Tips DVDI assume most of the stuff on Kamerastore doesn't come with all this, right? Just charger and battery and camera itself or maybe an extra lens?>>4521341>if d5300 aps-c bundle has lens and it's not too long range could be alright depending in price and stateSeems decent condition?>put that list into ai, ask it to summarize and tell you the differences. I've been using Google ai to figure things out and it's been mostly okay. when it comes to just pulling up stats and comparing it doesn't make much mistakesI really don't like the idea of having to use AI though
>>4521356>okay I don't know anythingClearly>Comparing a moderately nicer camera to an italian sportscarCommunists are retarded.Good cameras aren't that expensive. They are not "too advanced". They don't represent that much work. Paint a fence, undercut the whole market, for half a day of your hilariously long life you have a D750 and are much better fit to share photos with others in many more situations that shitty cameras just can't handle and have far fewer excuses to make for why you can't take a better photo than a phone user. If you work, you will have, and if you have, you can share. And if you have, you can work some more, and have some more, and share some more. So long as you are matter you are bound by the rules of material. You must sacrifice energy to defeat entropy and make your life better.You are either a commie or at best a horribly lazy person masking their sloth with fake ascetism, and I know such a person would be fake, because an ascetic would not be on 4chan justifying their purchase history. Begone.
>>4521359Please don't listen to this idiot communist >>4521358These low end nikon DSLRs are junk. You'll be buying twice shortly and struggling to get what you paid out of the ewaste you got conned into because very few people want one.Do some extra work, save some money, and get a nikon starting with D7 or D8, full frame if you can put in the work to earn the money for one (and it isn't much). They are better overall, better made, longer lasting, and can use more (and ironically, cheaper) lenses.
>>4521359I can message the seller for more photos if needed. Doesn't seem dubious at all and the price lines up with what I'm seeing elsewhere
>>4521358>If you have a problem with me trying to con people into buying junk and constantly deriding anyone who is more successful than me, something in your life is making you unhappyIt's you that makes me unhappy. It's people like you who build up fake ascetism while sitting in their welfare flat shitposting on 4chan instead of working, because imagining that there is something wrong with successful people who worked enough to have, share, and work some more is so much easier than becoming one of them.I'm sure you wish the government would swoop in and make sure those "consumerists" have no more than they "need".
>>4521361Well so far from a brief look at Facebook Marketplace>Nikon D800 Full Frame DSLR – 110K Shutter (Vivitar 28mm f/2.8 manual lens)>Nikon D600 w/ Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens Bundle>NIKON D780 DSLR 24.5MP FX FULL-FRAME CAMERA BODY (24.5 MP full-frame (FX-format) BSI CMOS sensor, Shutter count is 11000)>Nikon D70s>Nikon D750 + Sigma 35mm Lens
>>4521356Just ask a quote for your own gear and see. They all do that.> Give a quote for 50% market price> If you agree, ding it or just lie that it was dinged to lower the price further.> List it for twice what they paid you.
>>4521359Kamerastore only sells what's in the pics on each listing. and they sell body and lens separately. my body only came with strap charger and battery. lens came with a hood and bag.it's pretty much the same lens I have and it's been good for me. only issue is manual focus ring is small but you'll probably just autofocus anyway. if everything like VR works well.the only way I know to see if lens is decently maintained is when you shine a light through it and see if there are scratches haze or fungus. you could ask the seller to make a photo like that and if it's clean then it should be okay.body seems alright too at first glance, hard to tell in these pics. you should ask about shutter count, it's not super important but if it's huge you can estimate how used it actually is.could be a good entry.>don't like aiunderstandable, it just saves a lot of time googling all the individual cameras and lenses and making a comparison yourself. hours instead of minutes potentially. I think this is where ai should actually be used, as a search helper not generative or giving you some weird opinions. just a aggregator of factual information or opinions from real people and reviews with citations and links to the actual posts so you could check yourself.>>4521360I'm not a communist.I'm just not in the habit of spending unnecessarily, for no reason.you are not going to tell the difference between a 3200 and a 7500 if they had the same lens, and we're properly exposed in a decent light.most people can't tell the difference between full frame and APS-C or even micro 4/3 of you print the picture either. no one will be zooming in 100% to pixel peep your snapshots, and you won't be uploading 24mp photos to Facebook or whatever website to share them.composition and vision are more important.>>4521361same issue with most hobbies is people are allergic to entry level things. it's okay to have a cheap entry level thing and upgrade after.
>>4521364The D750 and D800 are great cameras, and among the best you can buy before jumping into the four figure mirrorless market. The D780 is the DSLR version of the Z6 and is kind of a meme. Buy one if you can, but remember, they're kind of big and were always meant to be brought out for special occasions, not walks in the park. The latter is what the D7#00s were sold for.You shouldn't limit yourself to facebook market and being able to buy something right now. You should go out, do some work and save some money while learning about what's out there on your own, and maybe borrow a proper camera for a few days if you want to use one sooner.Don't jump into this on the advice of some communist who didn't even know what an AF-D lens was and buy a janky ewaste d5300 that doesn't even have a front control dial and can't use a large chunk of nikons lens catalog. For how much the commie up there talks about fiscal responsibility he's totally ignorant of how quickly lens costs can add up. Nikon AF-D lenses are 1/2 price vs AF-S lenses and while not optically perfect, have vintage character that's aesthetically pleasing and unique enough for significantly more expensive new production lenses to try and copy it. Furthermore, a weather sealed camera is less likely to spontaneously fail. Weather sealing also keeps out the accidents, humidity, grime and dirt accumulated over normal existence so internal parts are less likely to get gunked up or corroded.
>>4521363it's not junk and you haven't engaged with me with actual arguments or anything about why it would be junk. you're just sitting there getting mad and calling me poor and a communist and something with welfare. >>4521365alright that is shitty. guess I'll look to sell elsewhere when it comes to that. maybe just gift it to someone or sell to a beginner that wants to get in the hobby. better than letting resellers farm you.
>>4521366>More commie babbleGet a fucking jobYour entire philosophy here is >no one cares about me. i'm an unimportant loser and i dont deserve to have nice things. but also its ok buy everything twice and maybe three times as one levels up their eliteness and deservedness!>and that also means no one cares about YOU! you're an unimportant loser and don't deserve to have nice things!You're a retarded, beaten down marxist brainwashed by years of living in leftist europe. Your ideology is evil. Sorry. Just the way it is.Things are worked for and shared, not deserved.
>>4521367I see. I have money if I need to use it, but what I'm aiming for is a camera that can use the 64 GB MicroSD card I have so it doesn't go to waste, as well as being a camera that's good for travel.>brought out for special occasions, not walks in the parkThe only time I will ever be taking this camera out of its box is for when I am going to travel somewhere else entirely, so it'll be safe 9/10 times. I'd like it to not be too big to help ease of use when out somewhere else.>The latter is what the D7#00s were sold for.I don't see D7X00s on Facebook Marketplace>You shouldn't limit yourself to facebook market and being able to buy something right nowI want to buy one soon because I plan to travel next year in July, so I want to get a camera now so I don't have to worry about rushing to get one later and being pressed/stressed for time/money>You should go out, do some work and save some moneyAlready doing all of this>borrow a proper camera for a few days if you want to use one soonerNot an option
>>4521368>creaky plastic with nothing to keep dirt, grime, dust, sand, and moisture out>can't use af-d>no front control dial>gimped firmware>to save a fraction of what can be earned by helping an old man clean his yard or somethingYeah that's retardedJust do some work and buy a nicer camera instead of ewaste that's old enough to vote. Nikon made these lower end cameras assuming they would be broken or disappoint people so badly they'd have to buy another nikon because they already had nikon lenses and batteries.
>>4521367Forgive me but why is lacking AF-D support such a big problem? When I was starting 8 or something years ago, exactly with D5300, it was already old stuff and price difference was not that big between AF-S lenses and D. "Vintage feel" sound like very odd argument. Ultimately went to D750 three years later but I still use D5300 and find no issues with it.
>>4521370A year is a long time, and honestly, you're better off buying on ebay.Facebook marketplace has no return policy. The shipping and tax you pay online comes with a full month to test what you bought and make sure it won't break. If you buy off facebook and two days later find out something doesn't work right after a night of confusion and googling, you're just fucked. If you bought it off ebay, open a return for item not as described, take a picture or a video of the thing not working and you'll get 100% of your money back.
>>4521369I have a job.>your philosophyno, my philosophy is buy the right tool for the job, and enjoy the process.your argument is cheap means junk, and you must get expensive camera to share things.no normal person that wants to see interesting or beautiful photos is going to zoom in and pixel peep.that's only for gearfags, or for pros. and no matter how much gear cost it won't make a boring shot good.>>4521370any camera released in the past 15 years will use a 64gb SD card with or without an adapter.but you're looking at it a bit wrong, cameras usually want faster SD cards, at least v30, if you're planning to burst fire and shoot raw especially, cause it takes a while to write from the buffer onto an SD card.a decently fast as card doesn't cost that much. 15-30$. SanDisk are usually pretty good.>next yearyou can buy a camera on any platform in the world and have it within the week. check ebay too they can have decent sellers as well.>>4521371these are decently valid points at least.except mine doesn't creek, feels sturdy so no problem with the build.I'm not planning to roll around in the mud with it, if I get in the rain I'll put a twin cover on it, dust could be a problem but I'm planning to get some cleaning tools when I get other lenses, and no matter your camera dust can get into it when you swap lenses.having more dials would be nice, but I decided not to pay x3 the price just for that, and it's not that inconvenient to use a modifier button for aperture, maybe if I was shooting fast action in very variable light it could have been more of a problem.firmware seems alright. not sure what you mean by that.>to save fractionagain, your issue with money makes no sense.having money doesn't mean overspend.and cheaper things don't automatically mean ewaste, especially when it comes to older stuff that was still made to last at least for a bit compared to modern actual ewaste.and can always look for reviews, data like dxo, photonstopixels
>>4521372You talk about fiscal responsibility. AF-D lenses are fiscal responsibility.At typical rates:24mm f2.8: $15050mm f1.4: $10085mm f1.8: $150Holy trinity of primes for the cost of one AF-S 24mm f1.8. AF-S lenses are definitely sharper at wide apertures, but the majority of good photos requiring sharpness are not taken at wide apertures (who shoots landscapes at f1.8? f2.8?) and softness wide open makes the contrast between an in-focus subject and the bokeh less harsh (and more flattering especially for women). AF-D lenses are VERY sharp stopped down, where it matters. They're just cheap. They're just good. So good, the camera market eventually went back to using lenses like them and called it character. Leica charges thousands for lenses that are merely... the same.As a massive bonus they're all really small and light because the AF motor is already in the body.
>>4521374Cheap does mean junk. Yes, the D5300 is junk. Why did nikon make a normal camera (d7300) and then a massively downgraded one (d5300) to save $15 in parts? Because the D5300 was designed to make people regret buying a D5300, and buy a D7300 because they already had nikon accessories. Hence all your mental gymnastics justifying getting conned by a corporate committee from a decade ago.>no normal person that wants to see interesting or beautiful photos is going to zoom in and pixel peep.They do. Normal people do zoom in, they do display larger photos, they do crop, and they do want nicer photos taken in darker environments without flash, and autofocus that can grab onto moving things. That's why cameras got better. Or else no one would buy them."Overspend, overspend, overspend" holy fucking scrooge, money is MEANT to be spent so other people can have it. You work, you spend. God forbid the sacred dollar be spent. You do not have to have the cheapest possible everything. Are you hoarding money or are you not working enough? Or are you just dumb and insane, like your "but no one cares about me or you" post revealed?
>>452137535mm AF-S DX f1.8 is $100 50mm f1.8 toobut why even buy FF lenses when you don't have a FF body
>>4521376>Cheap *often does mean junkThanks to planned obsolescence and upgrade path scams.Not always. Sometimes cheap just means it's still good, but a large section of the market sold it off because their needs were always different, or changed (ie: they needed to do video or cater to the tastes of clients in corporate/commercial photography market).Notice lenses like AF-Ds never actually went away, and if it weren't for logistics issues DSLRs would still be around for people who prefer a nicer viewfinder to nicer video codecs.
>>4521377Why not? A lens is a lens. It's just glass. The 35mm 1.8 DX and 35mm f2 take different looking photos, with different color and detail rendition due to differing optical designs. The 35mm f2 can be more pleasing in some situations, the 35mm f1.8 is more modern looking at f1.8. It doesn't really matter than the 35mm f2 D is an FF lens if it still works.Except if you do get a full frame camera later - or a film camera - it will still work.And it will always work because it does not contain a focus motor.
I tried my dad's Canon 600D recently. IQ is a bit worse than m43.
>>4521376>D5300 is junkplenty of people disagree with this assessment.>it's designed...it's designed to strip some features to make an entry level camera. it's not a new concept.also as far as I know Nikon didn't make a D7300, they went from 7200 to 7500.you have a lot of money related hangups so I'm not going to engage with that part of your post.
>>4521379cause DX is cheaper, smaller and weighs less. people buy m4/3 for that but a small DSLR is nicer.it's what you want to get out of it. I don't think beginners will appreciate or be able to tell the difference in subtleties of different glass.compatibility angle is legit though. but again that's investing in the future you don't know you'll have or want.
>>4521375I actually don't, I'm different person. In fact, I'm comparing myself to that other guy and my own early experiences. And I simply still don't see the point, from that perspective. You talk about obviously "vintage" features someone starting would see no value in (I still don't myself). You talk about different primes when someone starting can be just fine with 35mm (on crop) or 50mm (on FF) and some "universal" variable like 24-120 or 70-200 telephoto if they would actually need it. The price difference won't be that high, not anymore, hell, it was low even those years ago. At this point AF-D is archaic technology. I don't even see it at second hand photo stores myself, maybe US is different but in Europe these are reserved for small percentage of people who pursue "vintage" aesthetics.Yeah, I'm not professional photographer or true artist, I just shoot cosplay, cons, events, trips, scale models, that sort of things, since those 8 years. No truly artistic B&W portraits or street art, with all due respect for people doing that. I agree that D750 still kicks even to this day and I would keep using it if mirror mechanisms wouldn't start randomly locking itself. But I will still object to calling D5300 garbage. Lack of weather sealing doesn't mean it will randomly stop working, mine still runs. Second control dial only matters with manual mode and if you really need to quickly adjust both aperture and shutter on the fly and it's still about holding second button. Meanwhile it's sensor is still ahead of others from similar time and camera itself light, handy and does the job.
>>4521381Imagine a merchant is selling two knives. They look similar. They cost him about the same amount of everything to make. He also sells knife handles and accessories with a proprietary attachment.The cheaper knife dulls quickly and breaks. The nicer knife lasts.he says>buy the cheaper one, its entry level, its all you should have until you et better>oh, and don't forget these accessories that only work with my knivesDo you not see the con here? So you buy the cheap knife and accessories, and come back later needing his nicer one because you already bought the shit that goes with his knife brand. He's herded his poor customer into a trap - like cattle. He could have always sold the nicer knife for the same price as the lesser one. But he wanted to make more money than that. Every company acts like this now. >plenty of people disagree with this assessment.Plenty of people being a few clueless people like you>you have a lot of money related hangupsThe hangup is you and the hangups you brought to the table first, whining about "consumerists" who DARE think $300 is cheap. "Don't overspend don't overspend you're unimportant and no one cares if you have nice things". I hate beaten down leftists slaves like you. You are always the first to take from others who worked because they think>EXCESS! UNDESERVED! CONSUMERISM! MATERIALISM!The truest servant of money is the one that gives it such sacred, moral value. Money is just proof of work. To say someone overspent, is like calling someone an overworker for building a nicer shed in their backyard.
>>4521382>in the future you don't know you'll have or want.Then plan.>Cheaper, smallerThe 35mm f1.8 DX is larger than the 35mm f2 D.Why are commies so dumb
>>4521384complete hyperbole and false equivalence.it would be like comparing two knives out of the same material but the handle on one is nicer.sensor the same, processor is the same. >leftists like youwhy are americans so obsessed with this garbage.I'm not a leftist and I don't care about your politics.leave it out of the conversation next time.
>>4521383hey, d3200 fag hereis d5300 decent in low light, noise wise? asking cause opted for d3200 cause don't need wifi or spinning screen, and it was half the cost. didn't notice it had a better processor (ex4 vs 3) but not sure how much real word difference that makes.also does full frame have a way better low light than crop? since you have both.
>>4521386>Why do americans give names to groups of ideasSo when your ideas are stupid they can be more easily dismissed. The idea that anything nice is overspending, having more than you should, is an absurdity that is at the root of all leftism going back to marx "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" which is actually just repackaged feudalism (from the peasants work to the lords riches, and from the lords riches the peasants may gratefully receive what they deserve). Hence why it's such a purulent infection among the europeans who did not flee the tyrants.>can't use af-d>no front control dial>inferior build, more likely to fail or be destroyed>all to save a fraction of a day's work when buying a decade+ old camera>"It's all I deserve. No one cares about me. It would be overspending for me to work to buy a nicer camera. Anyone who has something nicer is either among the elite, or they don't deserve it either."Incorrect mentality.
>>4521243>I think you're using other peoples sample photos made with substandard raw processingNo, there isn't better RAW processing that can make the problem go away because the problem is caused by wrong information in the sensor readout.Purple stripe = red and blue photosites triggered disproportionatelyLime green stripe = red and green photosites triggered disproportionatelyOn the other hand, the sub-pixel level blurring that an OLPF causes is easily undone using capture sharpening, which is why there is barely a sharpness difference between photos taken on sensor with OLPF and without.
>>4521389right, cause marxism is about working class giving money to the lords. lol.whatever, hamurger, I'm done. also Wurst is better.
>>4521387Full frame will always have better performance in low light due to sheer difference in size of the sensor itself. From what I noticed, difference between D750 and D5300 was around 2 stops as in D5300 at 1600 had similar noise level to D750 at 400 but it might be my memory messing with me so anyone else, feel free to correct me if I say bullshit. D750 sensor was also exceptional for that time (if I recall correctly, it was outsourced to Sony). That being said, advance in technology means that newest APS-C sensors have significantly better low light performance than old ones. As to say if D5300 had good low light performance, I would have to get different crop camera, do test photos and properly compare. But from my experience, it had rather good quality at ISO 1600, above that it started to get "grainy" while with D750 I could easily get to 6400 before noise started to get really bad.Again, that's just my experience and I'm not professional.
so i guess this board gets this question all the fucking time butDSLR or mirrorless?seems like a tough choice to make>mirrorless is more compact and lighter>mirrorless is more expensive>mirrorless has potentially better tech which makes it easier to take good photos>DSLR is better for battery life and rough outdoors >optical viewfinder feels nice>optical viewfinder doesn't show you the actual final picture while shootingmy hunch is to get DSLR now to get started and buy a mirrorless down the line when they perfected all the tech.but the biggest thing is still the form factor. i like the idea of being able to put it in my pocket or backpack easily. that's a huge plus for mirrorless. and the optical viewfinder isn't that much of a plus.
>>4521391>right, cause marxism is about working class giving money to the lords.Every time it is tried, it is literally just that.>I promise guys this is just the beginning just keep giving everything to the lords for fair redistribution (because they follow the principles of the philosophy i have laid out) and eventually you'll learn to live in harmony and have real communism and the lords will just evaporate because their job is doneTruly, das kapital is a godless gospel. There is no market but the market, the government does naught but govern, and people earn the world they work for, including through the work of sacrifice and sharing of their own volition. Fuck marx for taking sharing, giving, and helping and turning them into the basis for tyranny. If you have a copy of his manifesto, shred it and throw it in a compost bin. It will mark the first time marx has brought food to anyone's table. >>4521390>Post an actual photo you took that exhibits this problem and also upload the raw file.>Takes a screenshot from dpreview insteadYou failed to follow instructions. Do you know why? Because if you did, you would prove yourself wrong.>No, there isn't better RAW processing that can make the problem go away because the problem is caused by wrong information in the sensor readout.You have no idea what you're talking about. Moire is equally common and rare, depending on your choice of lens.You do not own a camera.You have never used a camera.You are not a photographer.You read about cameras on the internet, look at test charts, and then argue about them.This is why everything you say is false.
>>4521394The only reasons to get a DSLR these days is a lower budget, you want something absolutely bulletproof like a 1D or D4/5/6 (comparable mirrorless do exist but you're looking at a lot of money), or you're after a specific feature like the focus stacking on some of the Nikons. Mirrorless is just so much better in many ways and used stuff isn't really that expensive.
>>4521399would you rec a mirrorless for someone who hasn't had a proper camera for like 15 years? basically a casual beginner but also wants to learn to make the most of it
>>4521394>mirrorless is easy and convenient, can autofocus on anything anywhere in the frame, and does video>EVFs can be frustrating in high contrast and for manual focus and critical compositions because they show you a low res preview of the current jpeg setting limited by the bit depth of the video feed, not the actual breadth of the data the camera is taking one>DSLRs are robust, fun, have viewfinders that are as good as real life, and can use lots of cheap glass that's conducive to uniquely good looking photos>DSLRs are clunky, have very little autofocus coverage, aren't that great or easy to use for videography, have marginally worse sensors often with mandatory blur (strong OLPF) and very little access to small, ultra sharp lenses and modern marvels like the state of zooms and macros so they can be worse for scanning film, macro photography, landscapes, and commercial work
going to shoot my car before i sell it in pic:pentax k1 mark iipentax 55mm f1.4 sdm da*55mm f1.8 takumar (gives nice warm soft pics) pentax 35mm f2 hd tamron 70-200mm f2.8 2 cpls (49->52mm kenko and 58mm tiffen) pentax af540fgz pttl strobeonly bad thing is its 70% cloud cover rn (no point in waiting for golden hour imo)...tomorrow its gonna rain i think
>>4521400i dont think theres that much harm in spending $1-200 on a used 10 year old dslr unlike a lot of the people here who will swear its e-wasteyou can get great pictures from old kit. this is my mx5 i picked up this weekend. i shot it with a k10d (that needed a serious microadjustment before) and a pentax-a 35-105mm f3.5at the bare minimum it'll get you used to the workflow and let you experiment with different glass/focal length. the new stuff is better without argument but the old stuff has a pleasant look and requires more effort on your part.
>>4521392I appreciate it, thanks anon
>>4521405I'm the one opposed to ewaste/"scameras" and I unironically value old stuff like the D700, 5D/5DII, k10d, d200, and s5 pro more than any newer crippled camera.It's almost no money for an incredibly well made camera that renders photos like no other on the market and is made well enough to survive two decades and two more. It's like buying an old challenger instead of a new dodge dart. It adds a little inspiration to the world, instead of just reinforcing economic strata through the destruction of soul.
>>4521395>You have no idea what you're talking about. Moire is equally common and rare, depending on your choice of lens.Again, it is not just moire but false colour effects.as seen in>>4521127>>4521208Another one in pic related.from https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1472824674/panasonic-s9-sample-gallery-production/661339
>>4521408This is just you zooming in on poorly processed samples from dpreview.>Post an actual photo you took that exhibits this problem and also upload the raw file.>Post an actual photo you took that exhibits this problem and also upload the raw file.>Post an actual photo you took that exhibits this problem and also upload the raw file.Do it now or shut up forever.
>>4521407for what it's worth the extension of your thought is people who believe those older cameras are ewaste. i would encourage op to pick up a d200 ($100) and some older lenses and have fun with the workflow and just the physical act of shooting, carrying the camera, swapping lenses, etc. if he likes it he can step up to a d750/d810 or even a mirrorless ff like a z6ii/z5ii. my bigger issue imo is recommending something with lenses that work on both mirrorless and dslrs.
>>4521408So you are saying you have no idea what purple fringing and CA are. Hint: both are lens related and has nothing to do with the sensor
>>4521413A camera can't age into being ewaste, except according to the chief peddlers of ewaste who would prefer a world where everything more than one upgrade cycle behind automatically becomes unusable. Ewaste is about intent.>recommending something with lenses that work on both mirrorless and dslrs.Canon did this really well, followed by sony (didn't add full minolta support until the a6600 and a7riv) and nobody really wants to use a sony. Nikon's AF-D abandonment is just shameful.>we'll gimp our tech to keep the same mount forever!>nvm>you can have uh, manual focus confirmation
>>4521414He doesn't even own a camera! If it offends him so much surely it happened to him, but no, not even a crop of a real photo. His hobby is zooming in on random shit on fucking dpreview.
>>4521400It all depends on your budget. If you can afford one of the A6x00 series with an EVF then go for it, you probably won't find a crop DSLR that's better outside of the professional level and even then it's going to be in things like build quality and weather sealing. You could maybe get a decent FF DSLR for the same price but you're looking at marginal gains in image quality, all while losing the niceties of mirrorless and locking yourself out of a lock of lens choices.
>>4521417>If you can afford one of the *snoy*How to drive someone to DSLRs in one very expensive step
>>4521418i'm the anon he's replying to why are you saying this? a quick look suggests those "A6X00" cameras aren't that expensive? comparable to DSLR as far as i can see?are they just horrible in performance or what?
>>4521419Sony cameras are infamously poorly made and only begin to meet standards in the flagship a1, a9, a7 and a7r (not c) lines after the IVs and a9ii (where the AP began buying sony cameras en masse).Their jpeg color was also really nasty for a long time.usable, non-scam a6000 listings start at $300 which is enough to buy better DSLRsThe d3xxx/d5xxx cameras being called ewaste are actually slightly better made than snoys. Sony got away with this because mirrorless wasn't a standard yet. They lost customers to micro four thirds of all things because the sensor size just didn't make up for the low quality body, or how bad sony's APS-C lens selection is - lots of low quality and oversized shit in there. Only their FF lens selection is any good. It's like they literally don't know how to make lenses besides using the full frame specific knowledge they bought/stole from minolta and zeiss.
>>4521414Please explain the lens defect that causes colour striping.https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6037658348/600942
>>4521421well ok, do you have any opinions on what to buy then? Canon R10 any good?
>>4521218>>4521344yjk>You're a communist if you buy a cheaper camera>Implying a communist would buy anything the state didn't provideAlso communists don't actually buy cheap shit, they ironically buy expensive shit in hopes that it won't break after 2 years (it will usually still break because expensive shit is still shit these days)
>>4521423>zooming in on dpreviewNocamera nophoto notphotog.Please explain why your problem just vanished here >>4521395>>4521424Ironically even micro four thirds is a bit better than a snoy, since a working camera with usable jpegs is better than the opposite.>>4521425>Gross furfag>Doesn't get itCommunist is a state of mind, thinking that accomplishment is inherently unfair and immoral, and that accomplished people have more than they should and they would not be harmed if it were taken from them and given to someone else. They're all talk-talk and dog-shock about the overspending, materialist bourgeosie and still have an iphone until communism actually happens then they're just in gulags.>won't break after 2 years (it will usually still break because expensive shit is still shit these days)#SonyProblems
>>4521427>Sony good!>Micro four thirds bad!>Actually sony bad!I hope your inbred dog eats a xylitol sausage
>>4521427I'm not a furfag, retardI'm calling the huskyfucker a gross furfag>Has no idea how modern-day communists actually thinkCommunists will happily buy expensive shit IF they think it will last a lot longer than a cheaper version of the same thing, commies are all-in on the meme of Soviet products being built like tank (ignoring that Soviet tanks were also shit, they don't know that because their only contact with Soviet anything is War Thunder)Get with the program + take your adderall
>>4521419>>4521424He's trolling you, it's a meme on here to shit on Sony
>>4521432>Sees a random husky>"I bet someone is fucking that sexy ass dog. Anyways, let me tell you about the real communism that hasn't been tried yet.">-YouMental illness.>>4521431Sony and micro four thirds are both kind of shit, but if you need a purse camera, sony can't deliver anything decent while used E-M5 II and E-M1 IIs are the best deals in crop sensor mirrorless today and only overshadowed by crop DSLRs like the D7500/90D (that give up all the gimmicks) and higher end full frame products. The next best mirrorless (R10, Z50II) are double the price and give up a few gimmicks. Only the $1300 EOS R7 is a complete mog. Nikon hasn't released a serious crop mirrorless yet.
>>4521435I know what you are>>Anyways, let me tell you about the real communism that hasn't been tried yet.Not what I said, furfag lying and making shit up as usual. Many such cases!
Today's mail delivery: A minty Minolta 505 Si Super with a pristine Sigma 24-70 f2.8 in its original packaging, also included is a Sigma 28mm F1.8 Aspherical II plus a stack of filters and a couple of rolls of film. 120 bucks shipped.
>>4521308>Are you serious? This phone camera still takes pixellated as fuck photosAnon, saying it's easier to list the cameras that are worse than your phone means there a few cameras worse than your phone. Reading before typing, please.
>>4521322>you're coping because *I* can't afford full frame and *I* have built my whole personality around cope sensor cameras and being "skeptical" of full frame
>>4521407>D700, 5D/5DII, k10d, d200, and s5 pro more than any newer crippled cameraI mean, its sort of easy to say this in hindsight. These cameras are already proven to be classic workhorses that produce good results.
>>4521437>I know what you areHalf-dead and wearing two different limb braces?>Bro the champagne socialists on discord have iPhonesThe majority of people that end up being actual ground troops for gommunism are just retards that want to whack tall poppies and get bothered when they see someone commuting in a sportscar or living in a larger house.>you're dog is too sexy for me you must be a furryNoted. Please stay away from animals.
>>4521446>More delusional nonsenseYou do realise everyone can just read what I posted and see that you're making shit up, right?Or perhaps I've got it all wrong, that other anon was right about Mossad psyops, and these are actually AI hallucinations? I wouldn't be surprised if Mossad replaced their human agents with clankers.
>>4521447>Mossad AI bots are discrediting communism and making it look bad!No, the stupidity of actual communists, being a bunch of clueless starbucks patrons and common thieves, is enough. Time and time again they're manipulated into just stealing everything so the government can take it all with false promises of fair redistribution, and the only time they saved themselves from feudalism 2.0 was by returning to... an intelligently governed market. And pretending it was still communism because they paid respect to a picture of a dead german.And I actually am too busted to go out and do anything right now.Anyways, cameras? YesNikon > Canon > A nice DSLR > The newest most expensive snoy > Micro four thirds > Fuji > Snoy
>>4521427>Please explain why your problem just vanished herewowee problem solved
>>4521449>>Mossad AI bots are discrediting communism and making it look bad!Again, not what I said. Nice blog post tho. Stay mad forever.>Tier listlol, lmaoAs if anyone would take a dogsnapper's opinion seriously
>>4521450>Still hasn't uploaded a photo he took with the problem>>4521451>I don't like dogs and everything is a mossad bot so, buy a sony.The state of /p/. Antisemitic conspiracies and sony shilling. Shame.
>>4521452I challenge you to make a post without inventing quotes that nobody ever saidAmazing what being mad at getting called out will do to a mf, bro is absolutely seething
>>4521454>I'm gayNoted. What did you call out again? What do you think of the 5DII's nonexistent autofocus performance? This one is going back on ebay to fund another D200. Old nikon autofocus really is a lot snappier.Dog snappier.
>>4521457>Quote that nobody said + cheap gotcha that doesn't work (whoa, that's a two-for-one!)>Blatant lie about a cameraLike clockwork. Truly an incredible specimen. Thank you for demonstrating.
>>4521460What the fuck? Every time you buy a sony with its kit lens, you put it up there? Seriously? How long have you been doing this? How many sony kit zooms on ebay are ass lenses by now? You sick bastard. I have as much disdain for snoy as any sensible person but that's just going too far. People like you belong in prison.
>>4521427>communism is thinking that accomplishment is inherently unfair and immoralman, the joke about americans being completely out of touch retards in their own bubble turns out not to be a joke.
>>4521243>>4521395>>4521412>>4521452>who hurt you?kek
>>4521463that is communism. private wealth, and private enterprise, are to be eliminated because they create hierarchy which marx says is the root of all evil. in practice, because the people using the communists want that for themselves (they promise they'll follow ~the principles~ and share it fairly! promise!)communism is nothing more than a bunch of retarded animals killing and stealing until they run out of people to rob, and then they have to admit defeat and make an intentional return to a governed market or collapse and return to a (much poorer and less functional) governed market even if they don't want to.the market is the marketgovernments governyou have the world you work for, not the one you "deserve" (there is no deserve in this world, your life itself is a gift)communism remains the deadliest ideology in human history
>>4521465>i got proven wrong and couldn't prove my own point>who hurt you? you hit ctrl+v twice you must be fumingNo, just fatigued from interacting with something that seems to be a lesser form of life.It's a photography board. I asked you for a photo proving your claims because you keep claiming all modern cameras but fuji are bad and your only proof is deep crops of random shit from an incompetent amazon-owned review site. I even showed you that it was a processing issue, with hard proof. Still no photo.Do you own a camera?
>>4521468nta but all cameras besides fuji X-T5(4/3/2/1) are bad because they don't have shutter + exposure comp + ISO dialsidc about image quality because it's all a wash anyways
>>4521469Thanks, but I didn't want to know about the size of your dildo collection.
>>4521466your ignorance is just fascinating. it's like looking at a train wreck in slow motion but also crashing completely predictably and the operator thinks theyre perfectly on track.
>>4521367I see D7100s are about the same price as that D5300 I saw. $300-$400 is still affordable to me, and I like that they're all below $500. I do still need to go get an actual lens for it if it doesn't already come with one, right? I see you guys mention there's AF-D and AF-S; I take it something like a D7100 can use both?
>>4521497commies always insist everyone gets them wrong but whenever they get any real power it is immediately obvious that everyone got them right
>let's see what /p/eople are saying about compact cameras>bottom third of thread is shit flinging about communism and ad homs Checks out.
>>4521519https://youtu.be/HvcwFfcw-xo
>>4521519https://youtu.be/KTSkqZmaQlA
>>4521519there is nikon dslr with toshiba imaging sensor anon do you want one in your collection
>>4521730I just want a camera that'll last me the next decade of travel without worry and can take decent photos and isn't total shit.>>4521680I'm a newfag to /p/ but even I can tell it is literally one schizo faggot doing it. It's always one guy.>>4521695>>4521698Will watch these, thank you. This might be what I needed to see
What is considered an "entry level" price range for shooting 4k wildlife video with super telephoto lens? Used, not new.
