Only A Sony Is Good Enough™ Last time sony won: >>4522451
Reality check time. Facts don’t care about forced memes.https://www.photoxels.com/sony-strikes-another-5th-news-agency-win-reuters-decides-on-sony-a7s-iii-and-pxw-z280-as-their-journalists-main-shooting-kit/https://www.photoxels.com/britains-pa-media-group-selects-sony-alpha-full-frame-mirrorless-cameras-and-cinema-line-camera-fx3-as-preferred-equipment/https://www.photoxels.com/fourth-win-sony-strikes-deal-with-the-canadian-press-to-be-its-exclusive-image-products-provider/https://www.photoxels.com/gannett-usa-today-selects-sony-as-exclusive-imaging-product-provider-for-their-photographers-and-journalists/https://www.ap.org/media-center/press-releases/2020/ap-to-equip-all-visual-journalists-globally-with-sony-imaging-products/https://petapixel.com/2024/09/18/sony-again-claims-the-1-spot-in-the-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-market/https://amateurphotographer.com/latest/photo-news/sony-dominates-canon-and-nikon-in-the-mirrorless-camera-market-for-the-third-year-running/https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/cameras/mirrorless-cameras/the-sony-a7-v-and-a7r-vi-are-so-popular-sony-now-has-an-even-bigger-chunk-of-the-full-frame-camera-market-but-thats-not-even-whats-breaking-recordshttps://www.sonyalpharumors.com/tony-northrup-color-science-test-sony-beats-nikon-canon-and-fuji/If you want the best full frame camera money can buy, you want a Sony.
>>4523190>>4523191>snoy schizo absolutely seethinglol
>>4523193Does this look like the face of seethe to you?
>>4523195Well yes, this is extremely seethe-like behaviour. Not that a seether would know!
>>4523191Sonybros keep on winning. Up with Sony and Down with AntiSemetic canon...https://www.sonyboomersmagazine.net/article/why-sony-is-the-best-selling-camera-ever/https://www.mumbaimarketmonthly.net/story/youre-next-camera-will-be-sony-sir/https://www.unbaisedsonyrumours.net/whycanonsucksactually/
>>4523197>why yes, i do agree sony makes the best camerasAbout time. Go calm down and walk your dog.
>>4523198>semeticwatch out we got a regular candace owens over here
>>4523200>candace owensbased>ben shapirobasedcharly kirck>baseddonald trump>basedamazing athestbasedTime to enjoy my Sony (tariff free). Antisemetices seething. Lol. Sony doesnt need biggest market share if it has best market share since it made the best camera ever, the A7RII, which is what I have
>>4523190>Only A Sony Is Good Enou-ACK
>>4523202>dpreview is bad at photography as you can see i zoomed in on a playing card with the wrong white balance>this is sony’s fault
>>4523191>mentally ill behavior.
>>4523191As a sony shooter I actually fucking hate this poster so much. He makes all sony users look like neurotic ahdh teenagers...
I have a better chance at actually discussing gear on Reddit than I do on here. This place is so fucked man.
>>4523199Take your meds.
amazing how much bitching and moaning a factual op showing sony cameras are good promptst. neutral third party
Lol. So Much Bitching. Sony is Objectively the Best Brand and has NEVER had a green cast in ANY image. EVER. Full Stop. Period. End. Of. Story. Just hard facts. Sorry!
>>4523202What actually causes this?
Anyways, this is hilarious to me because every brand but canon relies on sony sensors. Curiously, they all seem to actively avoid competing with sony’s photography lineup. Even canon is weirdly deleting the mechanical shutter and viewinder for compact models like they aren’t allowed to directly compete with sony’s de facto stranglehold on the high end compact ILC market. Coincidently blackrock and vanguard own significant portions of both sony and canon and are known for telling the companies they invest in what to do to.At the end of the day all you’re arguing about is which blackrock camera is the best.
>>4523209>>4523211Good moaning sir!
>>4523211As a Neutral Observer, I totally agree! Sonybro are the best!
>NOOOO LEAVE MY FAVORITE MULTI BILLION DOLLAR CAMERA MANUFACTURER ALONE!!! REEEEEEE
What RF lens should I get on a crop body?>Sigma 17-40mm f/1.8>Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8>Sigma 56mm f/1.4 + maybe some other lensI mainly do birds with a different lens, but I need some lenses for family / friends / dog photography while out traveling, hiking, or at parties.I want them to have really nice subject separation and background blur.I don't like the idea of swapping lenses while out on a hike or at a party, asking someone to wait before I take their picture.I'm leaning towards the 17-40mm, unless for some reason 50mm looks a lot better for portraits than 40mm
>>4523217Also I may want to photograph my friends out dancing at a dark country bar, which also makes me think the f/2.8 won't cut it
Sonyobsessed anon is having a nuclear level meltdown. Anyone new that comes here would instantly leave because of his mentally ill and hyper autistic behavior. Now watch him accuse me of being someone I'm not, say it's my fault there are only 5 people that still post here, that I'm an indian fuji shill, and ask me if I own a camera.
>>4523217None of the above. Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS on a Canon EF-EOS R adapter. Buy used. Thank me later.
>>4523213>canon is weirdly deleting the mechanical shutter for compact modelsWhat the fuck
>>4523213ur gunna need more than 10 percent to have any say lol
I have a Sony, Canon and Nikon because I'm not a brandwhore retard and they're all bretty gud.
>>4523225Enlightened take. Use whatever is right for the task at hand, and whatever sparks the brightest joy. Thank you for shining some light on this matter, it was much-needed. Though I fear lesser anons may be blinded by its glorious incandescence.
>>4523231>enlightened>brightest>Shining some light>blinded>incandescencestop that
How is the Canon Powershot V1? I was looking at either a Sony RX100VII or a Canon G7X III but the Powershot V1 looks really good and is a really good price, sitting sort of between the two. I'm after a combo of compact and RAW capability with decent image quality and so far the V1 looks really good unless I'm missing some crucial issue that makes it worse than the other two.
>>4523220Sony shooters and gamers are all mentally ill.
>>4523190What do you call this? One is a relatively new FF release the other is a 5 years old APS-C
Dear /gear/.I got recently Godox V480 flash since my previous one, YN685 was not working correctly with my new Z5 II (TTL was not flashing at all, manual worked fine). When I tested at shop, it obviously flashed in TTL mode but back home I think it flashes too weak - still do but it's barely visible on dark subjects. It's not a problem with flash power since I can adjust +1EV on flash itself and it shoots more properly but still, this is not how TTL was supposed to work. Adjusting +1EV on flash compensation or exposure compensation on camera itself likewise makes flash shoot stronger so I assume it's some problem with TTL itself. At shop I was told that V480 is fully compatible, however.What I could be missing here?
>>4523241You should test the full flash power intensity in manual mode. The way the flash level is controlled is chopping up the full flash discharge. If there is a problem with the flash unit, either discharge or the flash bulb, it could still work by adjusting EV, but not up to full flash.
>>4523239Two things, the Pentax is using noise reduction (represented by the triangles) and photonstophotos doesn't take into account what ISO the cameras are actually shooting at, just what the manufacturer claims. For example you could have a camera that's actually shooting a half stop lower than what it claims, so on their charts it would appear to perform half a stop better than a camera that actually has similar performance. We don't know that is the case here, but we don't know it isn't. I prefer DXO for doing comparisons for this reason but they don't have as many cameras tested and nothing newer than 2023.
>>4523243It's surely can flash much stronger, even 1/64 power at manual mode was much stronger than what it would shoot at TTL mode. But you suggest me to do a series of 1/1, 1/2, 1/4, etc power in same conditions?
>>4523212Sony uses weak color filters on their cameras which trades color accuracy for dynamic range.Since each channel receives more light that should be isolated to other channels, the camera must mathematically infer (guess) what the color is supposed to be.It's actually quite difficult to do, that's why Sony's colors change dramatically from model to model, while always looking somehow off.If you refer to graphs in pic relatedleft = more isolation = better color accuracy = lower dynamic rangeright = more overlap = worse color accuracy = higher dynamic rangeThere's no free lunch unfortunately.
>>4523217Sigma 17-40 for sure, it's been a great lens for me. Mostly replaced my 18mm to 50mm primes.>>4523241HSS will dip the power a bit, but if you're using flash, just use M anyways. TTL is for boomer event togs.
>>4523244Lol that isnot a software post processing, it is a hardware noise reduction. Most of the noise happens during the digital conversion, not the pixel read out. That noise reduction is not a "baked in processing", it is a more advanced way of presenting the raw data.Kinda curious why Sony does not do anything similar since it is a widely known fact of how noise behaves. Even more so that both sensors are made by Sony.
>>4523247So I wasted money on buying flash that should have functional TTL when I already had flash that worked only in manual?
>>4523248I wasn't saying it was anything other than noise reduction, I'm aware they didn't just run it through some software and it's something baked into the camera.
>>4523240Fuck your niggerish camera and sensor sperging that leads nowhere.I have the sony a6700 and widest lens is a sigma 16mm 1.416mm on aspc is 24mm on ffI don t find it wide enoughRecommend me a wider lensLooking at 7artisans coz they are quite cheapWidest rectilinear i found>https://7artisans.store/products/af-10mm-f2-8-aps-c-lens-for-e-fx-z?_pos=3&_sid=6c636605b&_ss=r>https://7artisans.store/products/10mm-f-3-5-aps-c-lens-for-sony-e-fuji-x-nikon-z-panasonic-olympus-m43>Fish eye>https://7artisans.store/products/4mm-f-2-8-aps-c-lens-for-e-eos-m-fx-m43>https://7artisans.store/products/7-5mm-f2-8-mk-ii>https://7artisans.store/products/mf-6mm-f-2-0-aps-c-lens-for-sony-e-fuji-x-eos-r-nikon-z-panasonic-olympus-m43>Watched some reviews on yt and for fish eye you get some circle looking image in a black rectangle so you need to crop like crazy cutting out a lot of the edges. So the end photo wil not be the advertised focal distance . The rectilinear one while greater focal lenght at least i get the image covering whole sensor>Now 10mm on aspc will get me 15mm on ff. Is that wide enough?>Also 2.8 and 3.5 are shit fot astro so i can use them only for street or arhitectural photos which i m not a fan of.>I m looking into the 6mm 2.0 but don t know the actual focal lenght i ll end up with after cropping the circle to a rectangle>Sony 11mm is 2x the priced used
Yt nigger said that fisheye lenses are more for artistic looking pics and you must know what you are doing as framing is almost impossible especially with the 4mm and 6mm that will even get your feet and hands holding the camera in the picture. so you must hold the camera like a phone and hands stretched out.They said that a rectilinear one is what i should be getting if i m a normie that want wide shots. But i kind of want a faster lens to use for astro or lower light photos like museums
>>4523254Put it up your ass. I have 10mm for my APS-C, also a 12-17 fisheye which is actually wider.Try buying a system that doesn't suck.
>>4523254>fuck you wahhh>do shit for meYou have to be 18 or older to post on this site.
>>4523246You’re literally just making this uphttps://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/optimal-cfa-spectral-response/>>4523248It is the same thing. Noise is noise. Noise reduction can’t go back in time and capture more light. Why would Sony use NR to hide their real capability instead of letting the user choose? Last time they did you called it star eater and threw a fit.
>>4523246Right is fuji cfa options not any specific camerahttps://physics.stackexchange.com/posts/231741/revisions> EDIT: Just to clarify: the three curves are for different thicknesses of the color filters, not (0.7, 0.9, 1.1 μm) wavelengths Camera manufacturers are usually unwilling to release their color filter specifications, unfortunately. You might get lucky if you Google around for your particular model.Fuji makes CFAs and sells them to sensor manufacturers so that image actually shows how little variation there actually isThe left imagehttps://www.researchgate.net/figure/Transmission-curves-of-the-RGB-filter-system-Data-supplied-by-SBIG-Diffraction-Limited_fig1_348379864Is totally unrelated to consumer camerasWhy do you make shit up? Is it autism or schizophrenia?
>>4523259>Is totally unrelated to consumer camerasNTA but the images are obviously for demonstration purposes. He never said they were from any specific camera. Why are you assmad? It's just physics, all of what he said is well known fact. Google it yourself.
>>4523212White balance, external error or adobe camera raw being shit. Dpreview occasionally/often fucks up their test scene, even changes the brightness and color of the lights and uses the worst raw processor ever. A lot of problems just don’t exist outside of dpreviews test scenes original representations.
>>4523260>all of what i said is true! google it! oy vey!https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/optimal-cfa-spectral-response/Sony doesn’t publish their CFA specs and the strenght/weakness theory is gearfag schizo babble like element count and “3d pop”
>>4523249No, that's a good flash with lots of benefits, but if you are serious about using flash, TTL is not really important.
>>4523262>>4523261Thanks. Now i see sony is the best. Why are people lying to try and make people hate sony in every gear thread? Are paid shills actually real?
>>4523256>Try buying a system that doesn't suck.Meaning?
>>4523262The data supports the theory, sony has some of the best dynamic range and objectively the worst colours. If you have a better explanation that doesn't involve posting 5 sponsored articles and base level refuation I'd love to hear it.
>>4523264>>4523262>>4523261thanks SonyBros! Im switch from nikon to Sony For now. It's simply the जुगाड़ solution. Best Price too. Better than all other camera. Sony Bros Just keep Winning!
>>4523264Because its all one autistic loser thats banned from everywhere else. Clive or something. If we had still exif the entire board would be unusable instead of just the gear thread. When we finally give him an aneurysm he’ll leave (due to being dead) so don’t forget to emphatically recommend sony whenever you can. >>4523267NTA but you didnt read the linkNamely that a “weak” CFA is actually better> For optimal SMI performance, the red and green overlap should be larger than we see in most cameras.You also dont have any published CFA specs to back your claims that sony’s are bad. Ken wheeler tier moron. articles that contradict your schizo narrative arent sponsored. You are banned from everywhere else and now your anti-sony narrative only exists on /p/ and a handful of botched reviews. No one else in the wide world of camera autists cares. Its just you, on this board. In reality sony cameras are the best. Everyone should buy a Sony.
>>4523254Dont buy a fisheyeUse a canon adapter to use wider lenses. Sony apsc lenses are neglected because everyone smart enough to use a sony is smart enough to go full frame.
>>4523258>Noise reduction can’t go back in time and capture more lightBut noise masks data. Having lots of noise means you are throwing out light and information along with it. If you are efficient in controlling and mitigating this ADC noise you will have a lot more information to work with. What I said this is not NR processing, this is about controlling the noise while the reading of the digital signal from the sensor happens. This is the real capability. Not having this function means the sensor tech Sony uses has fallen behind. By at least 5 years or more. I'd say more since Pentax had this tech before in their K1 Mk2 and KP i think? Ridiculous naming conventions.Same thing that Canon R5 and R7 sensors have, also in Nikon's newer cameras. Maybe this technology is just too difficult for Sony.
>>4523272And use what cannon wide lenses?
>>4523276Google it, faggot
>>4523275So then how is it that the R5 is outperformed by the A7R V and even the III from 2017? Clearly they're doing something right.
>>4523275Thats a lot of words to say nothingForced noise reduction in hardware does not do the same thing as a better sensorIt does the same thing as a slider in lightroomPentax cameras are built to shoot jpeg and camera hardware cant run the same advanced NR algorithms as PC hardware, so they had to make a chip just for one algorithmUnsurprisingly no one buys pentax because almost everyone shoots raw except for sports journalists. And unsurprisingly this is why pentax is expensive AF. Also unsurprisingly canon does the same thing as pentax, up to having an AI NR chip on the EOS R1. Why? Because canon rules sports journalism. And all sports journalists shoot jpeg. And the A9III does it tooWhy? Its a sports camera. All sports journalists shoot jpeg. Almost no one else does. Raw is the standard. Its better in every way and getting jpegs up to standard balloons the cost of camera hardware with special chips for every algorithm
>>4523262>Sony doesn’t publish their CFA specs and the strenght/weakness theory is gearfag schizo babble like element count and “3d pop”It's the same principle as with LCD monitors.Professional grade LCD monitors with accurate color rendering use strong color filters which pass only a narrow band of light.This requires brighter backlight = more power consumption.Consumer grade monitors with inaccurate color rendering have weak color filters which pass wider/overlapping bands of lightThis can work with a dimmer backlight = less power consumption.As can be seen in the graph on the left, professional cameras have more even channel response and less overlap (crosstalk), while consumer grade cameras on the right like Apple, DJI and Sony have uneven response and more overlap.
>>4523275nikon doesnt use a NR only “accelerator chip” and neither does canon except on the r1they do it in code because their processors are more powerful, using the hardware that does AI autofocus, and if you look at their charts youll notice their NR only brings them back closer to normalityinstead of improving the jpegs of a good sensor like pentax, they are hiding the noise issues of shitty sensors to produce normal image quality (except for people who push shadows in raw) and boost their review scoresthis is because improving readout speed for videography generates more heat and interference
>>4523280Dunning kruger gearfag babble. Refer back to >>4523271> For optimal SMI performance, the red and green overlap should be larger than we see in most cameras.You also dont have any published CFA specs to back your claims that sony’s are bad.You have the 20 year old nikon d200. You are not intelligent enough to discuss thisYou regularly demonstrate massive deficits in logicYour thought process is:>i have negative feelings associated with sony>therefore i must make technobabble claims to make people think sony is scientifically bad>people have to agree because i hate sony>and if no one agrees ILL SAY IT AGAIN>STOP LIKING SONY! INDIANS!!!! STOOOOP!This is why we keep praising sony.
>snoy schizo replying to himself having fake conversations while saying everyone else is the same person????
>>4523282you hit the nail on the head so hes gonna have a meltdown again2 years in and clive hasnt figured out that we glaze sony to piss him off lol >stop liking my least favorite blackrock cameras reeeeeee
>>4523267>sony has some of the best dynamic range and objectively the worst colourstrvke nvke
>>4523282>we>>4523284>we
>>4523285Untrue. https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/tony-northrup-color-science-test-sony-beats-nikon-canon-and-fuji/Its better because of new sensor technologyhttps://www.dpreview.com/articles/1731357282/sony-a7-v-dynamic-range-test-studio-scene/Claims about magic CFAs are unfounded and the principle contradicts the mathematical facts: that an ideal CFA with more accuracy has more overlap AND less noise>>4523262No matter how many times you samefag agreeing with yourself the facts in this thread will stay upYour inability to refute them will still be on displayAnd I will ensure every gear thread glazes the fuck out of sony until you leave
>>4523288>that an ideal CFA with more accuracy has more overlap AND less noiseWhy don't you actually read the shit you post? There is literally a TLDR at the end>"Here are my conclusions from this exercise:">"1: Too much overlap is bad for color accuracy.">"2: Too little overlap is bad for color accuracy."
>>4523271>Namely that a “weak” CFA is actually betterThat's not what the article says. There is an optimal balance in CFA strength, not too weak, not too strong.It seems very likely that Sony weakened their CFA strength out of this zone of balance to gain an edge in dynamic range. I haven't seen a better theory to explain why Sony's colours are so consistently poor.
>>4523286The more you push it, the more pro-sony facts will be on full display, and the dumber you will look for making shit up. If you leave /p/ and stop reposting your usual reposts* and stop making troll OPs, the sony shilling will stop. * https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/sJRLqh9UJ8RELL9awTDPZQ/100% of it is to get you to leave. This is a war you can’t win. You’ve been here 2 years and an increasing number of /p/ users shoot sony. If you fuck off, if we never see your dpreview reposts or live view blinkies or goblinas again, the sony shilling will end. /p/ has never wanted you on it, clive.
>>4523290>>4523289> For optimal SMI performance, the red and green overlap should be larger than we see in most cameras.Everything else you claim is unfounded and based on one fucked up dpreview sample. Here is the dpreview image you hate, opened in a better program with no changeshttps://litter.catbox.moe/ai260e889echsqnw.jpgI dont see a consistent magenta cast, but I do see slight radial contrast shifts and a subtle bit or color scattering (like a glow) because the 55mm f1.8 ZA is kind of a shitty lens for test chart scanning, and the tight pixel pitch of the a6700 magnifies this. Dpreview should not be using this 10 year old lens. Sony used to make pretty bad shit and only really got good recently. It would be better to test the a6700 with the 50mm f1.4 GM. This is the kind of unbiased, critical take we used to have here but as long as you keep being stupid and trying to take over the gear thread with shitty anti-sony propaganda (reposted infinitely) and made up shit about CFAs we’re just going to glaze sony until you leave.
2026: Gearfags dont realize >test charts are meant to be worst case scenarios that dont happen IRL and you’re meant to use a diffusion filter or noticeably soft lens if you anticipate aliasing issues (rare)>every camera’s colors are fine, its the ICC profile you open the raw with that matters https://www.cobalt-image.com/tutorials/ccd-vs-cmos/?mc_cid=3a024aa7f1>SOOC jpegs are either tuned for best buy shoppers or ESPN, and aren’t that good>lightroom is not very good and makes fuji files blurry and wormy, but capture ones resolution improvement comes at the cost of more aliasing including for fuji>review sites lie>camera manufacturers tweak things to look better in reviews without improving performance>everything you read on forums about strong CFAs, microcontrast, nanotonal harvesting, 3d pop, and microcolor was made up by some lead poisoned gen Xer who read enough man-mags to think he’s a scientist
>>4523293>Everything else you claim is unfounded and based on one fucked up dpreview sample.Not true at all.Magenta cast on a6700 is well known among professional creators.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3l0HDGh7PM&t=1087
>>4523296>a literally who youtuber used the wrong settings onceLets see how many times you’ve reposted thishttps://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/w9HpsyL0i4rbzGOC60hE5g/Lets be real. Not everyone is qualified to shoot log and color grade. This literally who doesnt know what he’s doing, so he has random issues with random cameras and blames the equipment instead of accepting that he may have made a mistake. If all you have is reposting the same few amateur reviews over and over the gear is fine. On the other hand if you are this fanatically dedicated to smearing sony with literal spam, their cameras must be amazing. Panasonic makes a ton of shitty cameras and no one cares. Why does sony get all the attention from one guy on 4chan and no one else? Because their cameras are good. Why does this guy spam and lie over and over again? The truth doesnt need someone to spam it. There is no other explanation. If you’re here, sony is good, and someone is threatened by that.
>>4523296>plural creators>singular youtube fag no one has heard of shooting snapshit footage of his petssony has the most in depth video color settings. their picture profiles are basically broadcast shit meant to be tweaked by actual w2 filing professionals who have to meet standards set by a manager not youtubes ad metrics. he just fucked up trying to "find a filmic look bruh no cap".
Sony lost
>>4523191>https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/tony-northrup-color-science-test-sony-beats-nikon-canon-and-fuji/>>4523288>https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/tony-northrup-color-science-test-sony-beats-nikon-canon-and-fuji/The fact you post this shows how desperate you are.It's an interesting poll he took, which demonstrates the cult-like thinking of normies when it comes to camera brands.What he pointed out is that people consistently preferred faker images, and yes, Sony was the preferred choice in the blind test.>>4523286that cracked me up as well
>>4523301Most pro journalists outside of sports use sony specifically because of their superior color accuracyThe a7v exemplifies this. Less chroma noise without needing NR (like fuji, which uses chroma NR to hide xtrans false color) means more accurate colors. I would never say this normally but since you’re hereSony is just the best at making cameras. Everyone should buy a sony.
>>4523244>doesn't take into account what ISO the cameras are actually shooting at, just what the manufacturer claims.This doesn't mean anything, because there's no standardized definition of what "100 ISO" means in digital photography.For one sensor 100 ISO may be a 50 mV gain applied to the ADCs, for another it may be 75 mV because it's simply necessary to achieve a specific base DR. The rest of the curve is simply how the circuitry behaves. In the end it doesn't really matter, P2P measures the end result of the full processing pipeline, not the raw performance of the sensor at standardized voltage inputs and gain values. It's "Sony A7 V" vs "Pentax K-3 III" not "Sony IMX7xx BSI-CMOS stacked" vs "Sony IMX571BQR BSI-CMOS" (pentax uses snoy sensors).
>>4523303It can be adjusted forFuji’s ISOs run almost one stop dark in raw and applies a dramatic tone curve in jpeg for example (ISO labels are standardized off jpeg)The actual exposure needed to get so much data recorded doesnt change. The ISO label is just different to trick you. Yes, trick you.
>>4523301read for real. he only changed the white balance. all photos could cone from one camera and you’d fall for it. after exif was removed no one can spot the sonybut people are asking m43 bros what phone they use
>>4523307>jew hater is dumb afRead about it. They dont use a single readout. They read out both gain pathways simultaneously and combine the data so the 1st gain stage gets a massive boost in shadow data, making up the characteristic “step” seen in dual gain sensors SNR plots. The 2nd gain stage gets very little extra besides a sub-stop bump from having a less noisy ADC.Panasonic/towersemi released this tech to the consumer market recently in a slightly inferior form (panasonics g9ii was limited to some shutter speeds - sequential, not simultaneous readout)Sony and canon had already used it and honed it for industrial and security products
>>4523303>This doesn't mean anything, because there's no standardized definition of what "100 ISO" means in digital photography.There literally is, ISO standard 12232:2019The whole point is that t/2 1/60 ISO 100 should result in the same exposure no matter what the camera is, if they all stick to the definition for the ISO value. But they don't, for various reasons. Thus on one camera it could actually be at ISO 83 and another it could be at ISO 122, but they'd both be displaying ISO 100 on the screen. It's basically like doing your 0-60 times based off the speedo reading, and you can just cheat by having your speedo read 10mph high.
>>4523308too bad blackrock exercises control over both sony and canon (10% is enough to have informal leverage when you’re the global financial mafia) and by extension all non-sony brands (if they want sensors - canon wont sell theirs and tower is in the same club. This is why leica is actually going to china sensors. That, and their customers expect and accept a ton of dud cameras)
>>4523308>Read about it. They dont use a single readout. They read out both gain pathways simultaneously and combine the data so the 1st gain stage gets a massive boost in shadow data, making up the characteristic “step” seen in dual gain sensors SNR plots. The 2nd gain stage gets very little extra besides a sub-stop bump from having a less noisy ADC.Hey that's cool. OM's quad-bayer sensors do that too.
>>4523239A camera with noise reduction so strong it gives false readings of its true dynamic range.The dynamic range increase between ISO 100, ISO 200 and ISO 400 is physically impossible on a CMOS sensor unless you have triple base ISO at these values and three different ADC circuitry, which the underlying sony sensor doesn't have anyway. This is noise reduction through and through.The true curve would look like picrel. With the two curves converging as ISO gets into extreme values where circuitry noise overwhelms the signal regardless of sensor size.
>>4523311Guess where they bought the tech? Sony tests things on their downstream brands. Fuji is fielding their next gen aps-c sensors for example. Its very expensive sensor tech. Just to be the same as a typical aps-c for shadow recovery and still have quarter frame’s photon shot noise and absurd pixel magnification (and required optical complexity) fuck everything else up. $2k plus tip. Only worth it to make FF the same as MF since FF PSN is already negligible to ISO 3200 and MF systems cant into autofocus or speed, and have the same pixel density as the a7rv
>>4523247What primes do you still have? I am thinking I will get the 17-40 for now, and then get the 56mm f/1.4 only if I feel like I need it for tighter portraits
>>4523309>There literally is, ISO standard 12232:2019No anon I don't think you understand what this standard is about. This standard doesn't say "ISO 100 should be exactly the same for everyone", it doesn't define one universal meaning of "ISO 100". It defines several, and the manufacturer chooses which to report.The four most important being : - SOS (Standard Output Sensitivity): based on the brightness of the final image (mid-grey output of 118/255 in the resulting JPEG).- REI (Recommended Exposure Index): the manufacturer simply declares the value it thinks yields a good image, with no measurement constraint.- Ssat (Saturation-based speed): based on how much light fills the sensor before clipping highlights (fixed at 78% of the max allowed irradiance at the focal plane)- Snoise (Noise-based speed): based on achieving a specific signal-to-noise ratio.If manufacturer A uses SOS, manufacturer B uses REI and manufacturer C uses Ssat, one camera's ISO 100 measured with SOS could be equal to another camera's 160 ISO with REI or Ssat. You're not solving anything. The standard only imposes that ISO 100 on a camera should be "relatively close" to ISO 100 on another using the same method.In fact camera manufacturers already use these methods.Canon, Sony, Nikon use REIFuji, Pentax, Olympus and Panasonic use SOSCIPA (Camera & Imaging Products Association) imposes all Japanese makers to use ISO 12232:2019 already anon.So no, there is no single standardized definition of ISO 100, but there are multiple standardized METHODS of measuring ISO 100.
>>4523316With REI for example, Sony and Nikon a regularly measured one third to half a stop apart at the same ISO value. Yet they're fully compliant with ISO 12232:2019
>>4523302>Most pro journalists outside of sports use sony specifically because of their superior color accuracyThat's not possible because Sony does not have superior color accuracy.How can it be accurate while also changing radically from model to model, year to year. Think!Probably they selected Sony because of the superior feature set compared to Canon and Nikon, but those are very low bars.
>>4523319>reality is not possible because it contradicts my delusionsmany such cases
>>4523277Spoonfed me. I cannot find any cannon uw lens that is comparable in price focal lenght with the chinese ones
>>4523299>he just fucked up trying to "find a filmic look bruh no cap".that's the default color of a6700 and magenta cast shows up on every image taken at default settings, like DPReview studio scene and DPReview samples.
The thing is this is the new sensor read technology. Pentax uses a separate chip, Nikon and Canon uses their main processor but the result is similar, reduced noise in the higher ISO regions, usually starting at ISO 400-600.Canon, Nikon and Pentax can do this, Snoy can't. Canon, Nikon and strangely Pentax are new and fresh. Snoy is old, tired and stale. Facts.
>>4523325And yet Sony still comes out on top. Funny that
>>4523325>sony doesnt force noise reduction to hide bad sensors because their sensors are good KekSony confirmed for:Best camerasBest sensorsBest colorBest lensesMost FF MILC market sharePreferential treatment in the blackrock camera conspiracySony literally can’t lose. Everyone other than canon is sony property. If you dont like sony, you’re delusional. Go ahead and buy a nikon or fuji — you’re still buying a sony.
Sony is the official camera brand of /p/
Why shouldn't I just buy the lens that gives me the most zoom for wildlife photography?Thinking about getting the OM system 150-600. With 2x teleconverter it gives 300mm-2400mm Full Frame equivalent range. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CS4F5YZPI've never been trying to shoot an animal and thought, damn I wish I had less zoom, quite the opposite. It's hard as fuck to get close to bears and cougars and bobcats and shit.
When should we expect Nikon Z 1, 2, 3, 4 to release?
Sony feathers successfully rustled lol
>my post about looking for compact p&s camera recommendations gets lost because of that sony hating schizo derailing againi hate these threads
>>4523334Two potential issues. That's already a fairly slow lens, slap the teleconverter on it and you're at f/13. Not only will that mean cranking your ISO really high on an already poorly performing sensor it's also going to have an impact on your AF. The second is how well a setup can actually resolve detail, would you be getting any benefit over say just cropping in a sharper faster prime (I've not looked up price comparisons but I've heard Olympus lenses can be quite expensive for what they are). You might end up needing to stop down to get decent results and throwing away even more light.
When should we expect Canon R 4, 12, 20, 49, 99.98, 103 to release?
New Pentax FF DSLR currently in production, soon to be announced. 61 MP, 4K 60p video, IBIS, 2x CFexpress cards
>>4523334Long lenses in wildlife are not for long distance focus, it is for filling the frame with small subjects. You won't need a TC for that lens, it will already be a very long focal length. You would benefit more from something like a 50-200 or 75-300. if your subject is too far away you will be dealing with atmospheric effects magnified by the lens.
>>4523338Sorry, chum, these threads are mainly for milking the Snoy lolcow.It's a mutually rewarding experience where we get lols and he gets some fraction of a USD per post.>>4523236If this is your question I would recommend staying away from both Canon and Sony. Canon's firmware is rather crippled and lacks features while Sony's functionality seems untested, probably because Sony devs don't actually own or use cameras.Look into Lumix compacts. They have RAW capability and the 1" and 4/3 sensor models have great image quality + superior feature set.
>>4523344>1" and 4/3 sensor models have great image qualityDoubt
>>4523342It would be cool if they figured out some hybrid viewfinder thing. to have the best of both worlds optical and EVF.
>>4523344Lens produce great image quality.Sensors fix the lower and upper bound of what you can achieve.
>>4523351As far as I know they already use the viewfinder LRGB lightmeter to assist the AF but an EVF/OVF would be counterproductive. Just use the new AF from the K-3 Mk3 in OVF and in liveview give us dual pixel AF with tracking, it would be great for wildlife and tripod shooting.
>>4523353Which is funny considering lenses can contribute to color just as much as sensors do, but the same people whining never bring that up
>>4523344>Sony's functionality seems untestedElaborate
>>4523295Holy trvke
>>4523358Did you ever use the DPReview site before they changed it a few weeks ago?The new site "works" like Sony cameras.The old site worked like Lumix cameras.
>>4523379I dont use dpreview because i am not a retarded gearfag and they have never provided unbiased, reliable, useful objective data besides the official manufacturer spec sheet. You’re definitely in their target audience tho
>>4523358He’s just shilling.
>>4523344>Look into Lumix compactsI did and the reviews aren't great, with most people calling them vlog cameras and not really good for stills. It's disappointing since they have a good price point and size, but that's perhaps part of why they're negatively reviewed.>>4523379I honestly don't bother with DPreview anymore.
>>4523379And I'll ask again, elaborate on how exactly Sony's functionality seems "untested" to you.
>>4523384I found thishttps://watermanatwork.com/blog/panasonic-lumix-cameras-fail/
>>4523291>/p/ has never wanted you on it, clive.Who the fuck is Clive?
>>4523432From what I've pieced together over the last few months from other anons, he's some autist that got banned on some camera forum site over his Snoy hate campaign and would get banned whenever he returned to that forum, so now he posts here since he doesn't have to make a new account every time he wants to post. Two different reasons I've seen is that he's a Panasonic fan and that makes him hate Sony (how Sony relates to anything Panasonic is beyond my understanding) or that he's actually a Sony fan and is trying to use his hate campaign as a way to make them put in changes he wants (though nobody knows what those changes are). Either way, he's unhinged and reminiscent of some /g/ schizos. He gets banned here sometimes and the Snoy posting stops for a while but he comes back again eventually with the same posts as always.
Maybe instead of sperging here like retards you should call sony on actual fuckups and lacking stuffhttps://youtu.be/VwGrWG3QwUc
>>4523441>unironically linking a Northcuck shill video
>the snoy is now going schizo over imaginary boogeymen
After some research for my first proper camera, I'm thinking of getting a Nikon Z5II with Nikkor Z 24–120mm f/4 SFor the general purposes of shooting everything and getting a decent sharp image while being portable and not outrageously expensiveLater on I plan to get either one of these brighter lenses for low light situations. >Nikkor Z 50mm f/1.8 S>Nikkor Z 85mm f/1.8 SIdk yet which focal length would suit me better so I'll decide after shooting some more
The only thing that makes me worry with this setup is that I will miss out on the longer focal ranges. And I don't know whether I need really them.
>>4523380>full size sample JPEGs and RAWs aren't useful objective data
>>4523468Well, use your 24-120 at either of those FL for a while and see which you prefer I'd find 50 far more versatile, but the 85 better if you specifically want to do portraits>>4523469Just try different stuff out and see what you end up liking. I've owned 3 different 70-200 2.8s, but now the farthest I ever shoot is 135mm, and 90% of my shooting is just between 28mm to 80ish mm.Don't fall into the trap of thinking "if I had x lens, I'd shoot more y subject". Sometimes that's true, but more often than not, if you weren't trying to get "y" shots with what you have already, you're getting it for the novelty of a new lens rather improving what you actually want to do.
I wish mentioning DPReview, posting pictures from DPReview, and linking to posts from DPReview resulted in a ban. I'd happily get banned for a few weeks for this post.
>>4523502>I wish mentioning DPReview, posting pictures from DPReview, and linking to posts from DPReview resulted in a ban. I'd happily get banned for a few weeks for this post.Where do you go to see sample photos from different cameras?
>>4523510I often find DPreview is missing samples from random ILC cameras, so I go to wikimedia commons, sort by camera manufacters, then camera model. They're generally unedited, but you can have a flick through and get a general idea of what kind of jpegs you can expect. Also quite good for compact cameras, since there are so many and dpreview has samples from almost none of them except the very high end models. For film cameras and lenses, lomography can be good.https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photographs_by_camera_manufacturer
>>4523510Flickr
>>4523343Exactly how do you think it makes a small object larger without magnification? The whole point is to focus in on a tiny spot far away and literally magnify that light so it hits a larger portion of the sensor. You can then use the full resolution of the sensor to photograph the same subject thus needing less of a crop. With good quality lenses you get a much sharper image. All this is basically just another way of saying you get to zoom in real far. IDK what about this is confusing to you. Also "atmospheric effects"? Just how far away do you think I'm going to be shooting? I'm shooting cats not the moon.
>>4523511>https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photographs_by_camera_manufacturerThat's cool, I did not realize it could be filtered by camera/lens. Already found some good samples.>>4523512>FlickrThe site is a bloated as hell and crashes my shit. Also most photos have insane/awful editing and few allow full-size downloads with exif.
What is the deal with the OM-D E-M1X? All I can find are glowing reviews online but somehow it's only $500 used? Is there some sort of catch or is it just that women and effeminate men (ie the majority of people into photography) find it too heavy to hold?
too many choices, too many compromises when choosing gear. You're never getting perfection unless you shit money. As a person who's bad at making any kind of decision, this is a real excercise choosing my first camera
>>4523522>small sensor in a big bodyI like Olympus/OM cameras but I don't see the appeal in this.
>>4523532I think the up to date m43 cope is that with enough AI "noise reduction", all sensor sizes look the same.
>>4523514You are wrong.
>>4523530>You're never getting perfection unless you shit moneyYou're never getting perfection even if you do shit money.>As a person who's bad at making any kind of decision, this is a real excercise choosing my first cameraIf you don't have experience with a camera in the first place it's difficult to know what's going to be important for you.My first camera was a hand-me-down bridge camera.From there I learned that I liked having a long zoom but did not like motorized zooms.I learned that I did not like having a single control dial because I liked manual mode which is slow with single dial.I learned that it's important to have fast start-up time - nothing worse than waiting for the camera to boot while your photo moment escapes.I learned that shooting one-handed is regularly necessary, so a substantial grip that fingers alone can grip is useful.
>>4523530Unironically just use your phone camera. These people that have overpriced dedicated gear dont even take photos anyway.
>>4523550I hate my phone camera. It's a flagship from a few years ago yet the quality is pure dogshit even before the baked-in AI image processing is applied
>>4523550> I am a big fat guy and need a big fat camera> I take pictures with my phone because my Canikon is too big to carryI remember you anon. Enjoying your Z8?
>>4523552you niggars are always so unspecific, like, whats ur budget, do you want to edc or size/weight doesnt matter? do you want some sort of VF (evf/ovf/rangefinder) or just screen?
>>4523561>do you want some sort of VF (evf/ovf/rangefinder) or just screenAnother anon. When I was getting my first camera, I thought I didn't want a viewfinder. I was wrong.
>>4523556>schizo post
>>4523561I'm this guy >>4523468 I'm just having 2nd thoughts
>>4523597I would advise the Z50 if Nikon had an established APS-C lineup like in its DSLR lineup, but it doesn't so it seems like a good choice. I could also put there the Canon R6, maybe R10 as the APS-C alternative.You could also just go with the budget route if you just want it for hobby and get a used DSLR and get lenses from the used market, like the Canon 6D Mk2, 90D, 7D Mk2, Nikon D750, D810, D7200, D500, and the longer zoom kit lenses. You can upgrade to some nice primes later on.
>>4523609>so it seems like a good choiceI meant your choice of the Z5II seems a good choice.
my niggas, is the a6300 with 16-50 kit good enuff to get started or should I get a hassleblad before I even leave my house to dare shoot shit
>>4523609I dont want to buy used I want a warranty and no risk of mechanical fatigue and random flaws that I wouldnt be able to notice
>>4523618Then the Z5II will be good for you.Mind you, you can get as much lemons from buying new then buying used. Photographers generally baby their gear and take good care of them. I got all of my gear used except for one lens. None of them are having any issues.
>>4523627Also in this sense, someone more knowledgeable already tested the gear for you thoroughly so you don't have to worry about things you might not notice.
>>4523597IDK why you chose that camera in particular. It seems to have terrible resolution of fine detail according to the sample shots on DPReview. Just look at the text it's all yellow and blue in weird places all over. Personally if I had that budget and were forced to buy new (which I would never do), I would get the Olympus OM-3. It has much better fine detail resolution and the lenses are smaller and cheaper while providing the same or better image quality. It's also completely weather sealed and has better IBIS. A used OM-1 or OM-1 II would be even better value for your money.
I have my GFX50SII with several lenses that I enjoy a lot. Now I've saved up enough to buy one of those. What you do it and which one? >Ricoh GRIV>Ricoh GRIV Monochrome>... or wait for the GRIVx (mono)I know it's a small sensor, not the best build quality and way overpriced. But the main purpose for me is to leave my GFX at home sometimes and still have a snapshitter that is better than my iphone. I'm kind of leaning towards waiting until the 40mm x variant comes out because I think that focal length is a bit more unique compared to the 28mm phone look. But who knows if and when they release it. Monochrome sensor would be nice too because it's more usable at night and offers something more unique compared to the GFX. I love taking B&W photos. I don't shoot anything professional. It's mainly to capture moments, edit them a bit in LR, send them to my family, receive an "cool, nice photos" reply and then look at them after a few years for the feelz.
>>4523678>the om-3 has more resolutiom than the z5ii. i pixel peeped it on dpreview!No one who actually owns and uses a camera could be this fucking stupid. Then again, only the biggest morons go to that useless, crooked review site. Its amazon reviews. They cook the previews to lie to you depending on who last gave them money. Lots of anons here have btfo dpreview faggots by DLing dpreviews own raws and showing that they look completely different in lightroom and capture one (ie: some are darker or brighter, most have less aliasing, fuji has more aliasing and is slightly sharper)
>>4523678I want to be able to easily upgrade all my gear to top quality if I end up liking photography enough
>>4523687Pay no mind to the delusional retardDpreview combines adobe camera raw (an inferior program) with test charts meant to force cameras to fuck up and has a lot of consistency and lens selection issues with their tests. It’s not particularly useful information. Additionally they have been seen lying, underexposing or overexposing some cameras raw samples to alter perceived noise levels. Experienced photographers are the only people who can 100% correctly interpret dpreviews studio scene tests and most of the smarter ones come to the conclusion that they are useless pixel peeping and you’d be better off asking fredmiranda users. You should also avoid lenstip, opticallimits, and the-digital-picture. These are inaccurate amateur lens review sites that neglect to cover major topics like sample variation, field curvature, hard/soft focus falloff (unrelated to bokeh balls and a major contributor to the “3d pop” illusion) and color rendition… and all are ran by bad photographers who can’t show what a lens is capable of. Major photography protip: all mainstream reviews are borderline worthless, amateur reviews tend towards mistaking user error for camera quality. rent gear if you’re genuinely interested.
>>4523686>Lots of anons here have btfo dpreview faggots by DLing dpreviews own raws and showing that they look completely different in lightroom and capture oneBabby's first time using RAW? Every RAW editor interprets RAW data differently.DPReview has a standard development process for their studio scene using Adobe Camera RAW that they apply to every camera, which is exactly why the site is so valuable to compare cameras.
>>4523691Except they lie, game the tests in all the ways they can, and no one fucking uses adobe camera raw because it’s garbage. It doesn’t even support fuji raws correctly and blurs them. In real use fuji is sharper than dpreview.
>>4523689are you saying there aren't any good sites for comparing camera image quality?
>>4523628I wouldn't really put too much trust a place like MPB, out of three lenses I got from them, one had a scratch on the front element, just hard to see with the naked eye. "Excellent" condition btw.Then if the camera that anon wants is currently in production, chances are, a new kit is cheaper than the body and lens separately from a reseller.
>>4523678> OM-3 over Z5IIThis must be bait.
>>4523697OM-3 is basically an OM-1 in a retro body.The performance compared to full frame is no joke.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcK5e_9_mZY
>>4523691Which is not that useful if you are not using ACR yourself.
>>452369916:26 flat rendering manifest, the nikon file preserves shading21:32 blurry bird vs sharp bird, ignores and zooms in on BG noise. This isn’t how SNR works! The color fidelity and resolution loss are the tells of the OMs worse SNR. Background grain is irrelevant and I honestly believe he cranked the NR slider for the olympus here hence the severe blur. 23:32 he flip flops and finds 2x cropped z8 is equal to or better than the om1IIIN SHORTInvalid reviewDid you watch this before posting it?
>>4523695Yeah most camera reviews are idiotic>>4523699>>4523702Case in point. If you nerd out you can get objective data from dxomark, photonstophotos, lensrentals, and jim kasson. But you have to speaka their language to get anything useful and accurate from it all and even then opinions slip in and you must think for yourself (ie: kasson goes noiseblind when evaluating the z7ii vs the z6ii shadow recovery/high ISO because he loves his z7iic but the dxo sports score doesnt lie).
>>4523696All of my gear was bought on ebay where I could look up the seller or a local site where I could arrange in person meeting to look at the stuff before buying. All of them are in the EU of course, no third world markets like USA
>>4523704Third world just means free and usable for finding gay sex>be american>meet up to buy a canon 5DIV with a 24-105 f4 L>find out it was a euphemism for his penis>leave and buy a nikon off ebay
>>4523699Sorry anon, I'm not spending $10000 on m43 gear to take photos of my neighbour undressing.
>>4523708>>4523702kek shillanon didnt even watch the video he linked
>>4523709Maybe he just forgot. It was circulating on m43 discussion boards a few months back and I think it's supposed to be overall negative towards m43. I think OM bought another wildlife shooter, who was much more positive, I think saying that after you crop FF photos, they aren't much better than m43.
>>4523708>>4523709>>4523710>ignores conclusion
>>4523702>23:32 he flip flops and finds 2x cropped z8 is equal to or better than the om1IIThis just supports the argument that the OM-3 is better than the Z5II considering they have to go up to a camera with a 45 MP stacked CMOS sensor to get essentially equal image quality to the point where this guy is flopping back and forth. The Z5II with almost half the resolution and no stacked CMOS is going to be nowhere close.
>>4523712No. It doesnt. Nothing you wrote in this turd of a post is logical. You dont know shit about photography and are wildly guessing based off /v/ console war rules. It doesn’t warrant an explanation. Go home raj you’re indian.
>>4523711oh figures they pay shills and cant even get them to stick around>>4523712thanks i bought the z5ii
>>4523708Far better comparison would have been with the 200 f/2.8. which is like a $2k lens with the exact same equivalent focal length as the 400mm. He chose literally the most expensive lens and compared a prime lens to a zoom lens. What a surprise the prime lens is better.
>>4523713If you really think a 2x crop on a 24.5MP BSI sensor is going to look as good as a 2x crop on a 45MP stacked sensor you are a drooling retard. The additional resolution is the only reason that they were able to get comparable results in the first place. Then you have to consider that the physical length of the lens you need to get the same shot is literally double for the nikon. You literally can't go to the same maximum focal length as you can get on the olympus system because it would require an absurdly large and expensive lens that no one could even hold.
>>4523711Hardly a tie in ISO and DR. Also not really comparable setups, why not slap the 100-400mm or 180-600mm on the Nikon along with a TC and bring the weight and cost down?
>>4523713You are right there is no reason for m43 to exist.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Faas-xJ7qQ
I have to say I do feel tempted about the high megapickels Sony sensor. Problem is that I am heavily invested in RF and have very little EF glass I can adapt. Plus retail pricing is a bit crazy in this part of the world.
>>4523715He had to shill whatever OM paid him for.
>>4523712Where can we see some of your Olympus wildlife photos posted?
>>4523716Irrelevant BSYou aren’t getting a 12-60 f2 zoom on foolturds. Or ISOs under 800 sony equiv. Vs nikon sensor performance mft base ISO = nikon ISO 1000!He only cropped because a 2x cropped nikon 400mm f4.whatever is close enough to a foolturds “400mm” (800mm) “f4” (f8)A 2x crop with nikons kit zoom is a 240mm f8. And most importantly our bro isnt cropping 2x to take wikipedia ID photos of fucking sparrows. You are brainless. Go away.
>>4523716Anon, I'm an amateur, with whatever system I'll be carrying a much cheaper prime or zoom and crop the same amount to compensate for lack of skill. Yes, any day I'll take a 10MP FF or APS-C shot (more with new Fuji sensor) over a 10MP m43 shot.
>>4523710>>4523719Yep, that's the more positive shill video I meant.
>>4523732>If you appreciate the real practical benefits of m43 like no need for a tripod and close focus distance you are a shill.hand-held shots, btw.
looking to make e waste, what are some good cameras for e waste beginners
>>4523734It's all cool, but do I really have to buy an expensive camera with bad IQ? Something tells me, it's stacking and can be done in post if you take a burst.
>>4523734>MUH IBIS>Posts boring, drab, underexposed, shit-in-the-way, CPL-free photo of a river to prove his pointFurther proving that being a gearfag does not make you take better photos. M43 BTFO
>>4523679Good morning sir!
>>4523735SonyPanasonicCanon, but be careful you don't buy one of the handful that are actually somewhat well made
>>4523734While the concept must be the sickest shit ever to a gaming PC tier computer autist thats taken to sperging out over cameras, the photos look flat, bad, and unnatural. And that’s before the phonelike fake long exposure effect.
>>4523734If it's so neat, why do you have any of your own shots using it?
When are the chinks like Viltrox going to release a crop telephoto zoom?
>>4523743just 900 more posts and he’ll be paid enough rupees for a $50 nikon d200 missing all the rubber
>>4523190I'd like to do human and animal portraits in my dark basement, so no flash and shitty light. I'm pretty much broke. Used gear will do, FF seems to be a must, and let's keep it to one zoom lens. I have no idea what's good. What's the way to go? Z6 + Nikon Z 28-75mm 2.8?>pic unrelated
>>4523783Stupid post. If you want to do portraits be ready to shell out on lighting and other studio equipment as much as you do on your camera. Portraits are about controlling light and you can't do photography without light
>>4523191>buy snoy>green skin tones, magenta and moire everywhereno thanks!
>>4523783lmao I got so triggered by my aversion to mongoloids that it filtered me out of appreciating the retro ad. I find her to be offensively ugly. The stupid expressions and haircut probably take it up a notch, I don't usually have such a strong reaction against them.
>>4523794You're right but put your trip back on cinefag. That way the thread can be fully derailed.
>>4523783A bad camera with good lighting will be better than a good camera with poor lighting, good lighting also means you can use worse lensesGo older used DSLR if you're that much of budget
>>4523798ThisLights>lenses>bodies
>>4523191Every reply to this (except me) is one seething retard who got trolled by a 2 year old trvthnvke pastaPowerful
>>4523783Canon 5DII + 50mm f1.8 and 100mm f2, and eventually 135mm f2.8 soft
>>4523741>ask 4chan which cameras are bad>get good cameras and panasonic7/10
>>4523794>>4523796It's basically street photography in my basement:>cat does facial expression>grab camera>take pictureIt's still a portrait even if it doesn't adhere to your rigid autistic definition of a portrait. I hope you get it now.>>4523801>>4523798Thanks to you both. Of course you are right about light control. But light control is out due to time constraints, as well as primes.I will look into the 5DII, but only one wheel ;_; Do you have an opinion about the Canon EF 24-70mm 2.8? How does noise of a 2008 FF camera to a contemporary MFT cam?
>>4523805Even a 2008 dslr is better than micro four turds, especially in terms of rendering and tonalityIt has two wheels btw. Top and back.
>>4523805>But light control is out due to time constraints, as well as primes.What does this even mean?Do you think you can't take quick snapshots when using a light?>street photography in my basementDo you think no street photogs use flash?Why are you going for an f2.8 lens if you want to use basement natural light?
>>4523809Thanks, noted.>>4523814>Do you think you can't take quick snapshots when using a light?Did you ever flash a cat repeatedly?f 2.8 is the fastest zoom with constant aperture. There's no time to zoom with my feet. It's all about the cat really.
>>4523809I found a couple of autumn photos on the memory card included on a E-PL1. I was quite impressed with the colors desu. They seemed very life-like and vibrant on what was undoubtedly the auto-setting used by the normie that had it before me. I only bought it because it was cheap, I saw the possibility to make a few shekels so I didn't really play around with it.In good light you can probably produce bangers with even an antiquated micro four turds.
>>4523824Newer OMs have this neat color wheel feature to tweak colors in real time. I wish more cameras had this.
>>4523805>How does noise of a 2008 FF camera to a contemporary MFT camsee for yourself:https://www.dpreview.com/image-comparison/
Asked in /bird/, reposting:>Should I get a V60 or V90 card for the R7? Does V90 make sense because burst shooting fills the buffer quickly?
>>4523847I would save the money, hell I'd probably even go for the V30 at half the price. You've got over 6 seconds of buffer at 15fps so you're not going to be filling it very often, and it's not like sports for example where you could be shooting bursts in quick succession.
>>45238445dII ISO 3200 wb 7669 (shade)OM-3 ISO 3200 wb 6158 (shade)Capture one defaults, prostandard profiles, default curveTint corrections removed (people have a right to know how green tinted their color science really is).Dpreview does us all a great disservice by baking in tint corrections. No camera ever should lean noticeably green under a standard illuminant, especially not in capture one, which provides every camera with a calibrated profile courtesy of the global leaders in color photography (phaseone). And no camera reviewer should be using a green tinted light source. So which is it? Is the OM3 egregiously green or are dpreviews lights? Does anyone know?Some sony and nikon mirrorless do this too but not canon. Is dpreview using green lights for cameras they dont like or are the cameras/lenses green?
>>4523850My OM5 is green tinted by default in both lightroom and capture one. Micro four thirds just has bad color science.
Is nikon ZF a good camera for someone interested in Japanese photography?By this I mean, beautiful pale women dressed modestly and/or traditionally, clean streets, unpolluted nature, little to no obesity.
>>4523851Mine works fine. User issue, pretty simple.
>>4523855>Japanese photographyNo you need something that will blow out highlights extremely easily, like slide film or a 5D classic.
>>4523850every camera is green tinted because bayer has 2x more green pixels.
>>4523858And yet canon isnt
>>4523863Turn off demosaicing and show us what it looks like.What you are whining about is entirely software based.Canon does all their tint correction at a deeper level where you can't disable it.OM does some of their tint correction at a shallower level where you can disable it.
>>4523867>duhh but if you use your camera wrong then its just as shit as ours!Damn, it must really suck not being on team Canon lol
>>4523867sure anon every camera is green and it just so happens the 5dII is less green than the $2000 top of the line om3 because canon and capture one conspired to fuck olympus overOr maybe smaller sensor = less light = less naturally accurate color
>>4523868>>4523870Man I've heard about being disingenuous but I didn't know it was possible to make yourself actually retarded on purpose
>>4523870>because canon and capture one conspired to fuck olympus overNo it's because some genius disabled the tint corrections which are supposed to be enabled. It's like when somebody disables lens corrections to show how "bad" a lens is when actually the corrections are an engineered part of the lens.If OM/Olympus baked the tint corrections deeper in the file you would not be able to disable them and then magically the problem disappears. There's a reason why DPReview leaves them on, because that's part of the color science.>>4523870>Or maybe smaller sensor = less light = less naturally accurate color4/3 sensor is about a quarter the area of FF. 4/3 is receiving exactly the same light that that quarter of the FF sensor receives at the same f stop (f stop indicates light intensity per area unit)If what you are saying is true, using crop mode on a full frame camera would change the color tint. Does it?
>>4523878Capture one using pro here. I buy and ditch cameras when I get bored. NO cameras have ever needed a tint in good light for me except:Z7IIZ8A7RIIIA7IIEM5IIIOM-5IIA7CRSome cameras and lenses are just green. Tints “magenta poison” naturally green and brown objects too.
>>4523879You can add D700 to that list. I got once recently and the green cast is horrible, especially in artificial lighting.
>m4turds: snoy green lel>also m4turds: NOOO ITS MEANT TO BE GREEN THE +3 MAGENTA IS SUPPOSED TO BE REQUIRED
>>4523878Smaller sensors are different from crops. Since the real measurement device is smaller it has less quantum certainty.
best [mirrorless] camera and lens brand for someone who likes vignette, softness, chromatic abberations, lens flares and hates ultra sharp photos?
>>4523886also i don't like or use autofocus
>>4523887>>4523886Panasonic micro four thirds
>>4523883The performance of a crop is nearly identical to performance of a sensor matching the crop size, exactly because quantum randomness is the main source of noise rather than the sensor.See the demos on this page:https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/the-effect-of-pixel-and-sensor-sizes-on-noise/
>>4523850Photos were taken 10 years apart. One is incadescent lighting, another is a green Chink led, yes.
>>4523897Why would a photography site use walmart LEDs instead of flash or a video light? Sure they fuck up exposure and use dumb lenses and sometimes miss focus on the corners (lmao f5.6 obsession), and ACR sucks, but using green lights is too farMaybe olympus cameras are just green tinted
Accuse others of that which you are guilty>sony is green -olympus shills>canon cameras break -fuji shills>everyone that takes photos of their dog fucks it -cinefag
>>4523902No matter how hard you feebly attempt to shift the narrative, Sony is NEVER beating the green allegations. It's simply too severe a problem, that's gone on far too long.
>>4523904>source: julia trotti fucking up and 5 google results from 2016
>>4523850I just did this and yes its actually twice as green as canon. Wtf? Why is olympus so green?
>>4523906>source?!?!>explain this claim!!>here's six sponsored articles i didnt read further than the title!!!
>>4523902I never accused anyone of fucking their dog for merely taking photos of it, kike
>>4523918yes you did i saw it
>>4523902I accused you of being a zoophile because you are one. Simple as.
I’ve got fomo. The need to upgrade from a base z5 to a z6iiiHow worth it is that
>>4523942I think you mean GAS
>>4523900>Why would a photography site use walmart LEDsBecause that's what they can get without paying.
>>4523920He did, to several people, and then he went on a rant defending bestiality as moral as long as the animal tops lmfao>average nazi
>>4523907>Wtf? Why is olympus so green?Because you disabled the tint corrections which are part of the colour science.
>>4523950>Actually, it’s meant to be green tinted. It’s part of how the color science works. Canon isnt not green they’re just hiding their green. No i cant prove it. Keeeeeek
>>4523950I have owned multiple olympus cameras, and the issue with them is not the colour. The colours are pretty good, the issue is moreso lack of detail, pretty crazy ISO noise, and except on ultra-bright lenses the aperture setting barely affects the look of the photo.
>>4523950>Phone lenses are super dooper sharp if you keep the AI auto corrections enabled and never actually look at the raw output because that's verboten
>>4523952Yes, most people prefer green tinted cameras actually
https://www.ebay.com/itm/336749474813Good price for a Pentax K-3II if you want to get into K-Mount. The lens its coming with is $250 at the minimum (15mm HD Limited) leaving the K3II $300 roughly. Otherwise K70s are $3-400 all day long. I like the K3 more honestly. Feels better with better metering/autofocus even though the K70 has a better sensor
>>4523957A whole ass D7500 is $200 cheaper than the starting bid and the lenses havent been memed into the stratosphere
>>4523958Is a D7500 including a $250 prime in the starting bid? The whole point is that it's $350 without the lens, lol. I wouldn't get into a expensive Pentax (KP/K3-III/K-1II) unless you're a delusional pentaxian, fuck I might unload my K1ii before the values crater
>>4523958Don't bother saneanon. Trendy anons want to be special and buy into inferior gear just to be contrarian and different. Most people would be better off with a 6D or D700 etc. and cheap, effective lenses, but noooooo.
is a used canon eos m3 + kit lens + ef/ef-s adapter + 55–250mm f/4–5.6 IS (not the STM version) worth $400?t. nophotos looking for a more or less affordable option for some hobby and travel stuffI know I could get some used dslr for much cheaper but I dislike how fucking bulky they all look like and this looks like one of the cheapest mirrorless options I could find in my regionI dont really give a shit about all the "x is better than y for z reason" gear talk, I just need a workhorse that hopefully isnt actually shit and isnt at risk of becoming e-waste for some while
>>4523960Sure buy it at $600+additional bids+shipping and tax, probably spend $700 at the least, then sell the lens on ebayYou’ll wait a month at $250, drop it to $200, and ebay will pay you $180. Enjoy your shitty $520 pentax that gets turbo mogged by a d7200 and soul mogged by a 7DII, to say nothing of cheap full frame (a $500 d750 is more than feasible and 5dIVs are getting there)And that’s just DSLRs
>>4523962Canon EOS Ms are plasticky and failure prone. They were built to a price point and poor environmental sealing causes them to degrade faster. I bought 2 M6IIs and an M5 and returned all 3 for dials/buttons that didnt work and one m6ii had a dead internal battery (not replaceable)They will all be ewaste soonSony aps-c and olympus micro four thirds are shit for anyone who cares about photography but they’re at least built as well as real cameras. There’s also the sony A7II and nikon Z5 and Z6 (the first gens). They’re pretty small with their 35/40mm chink lenses.
>>4523961>D700I can't speak for all nikons, but I do own one of these and that thing is dogshit. They wasted money putting a metal mirror box in there when they made the rest of the camera out of the most short-lived rubber, including the command dials which require a full disassembly to replace. Furthermore, the photos are greener than any snoy and auto WB just gives up the moment you're indoors. Unironically the best part of the camera is the pop up flash, since so few full frames have them. Its very bright and goes very wide.
>>4523961>>4523964you're splitting the difference over $100 bucks on a 10 year old dslr and min/maxing their performance, not me. d7200 is the same price/performance and the next cheapest d7500 that doesn't have 100k+ shutter counts is $550 just buy it because its enjoyable to use. i would spend $3-400 on a k3ii all day long. i shoot pentax because its fun not because its good. if i wanted good i would tell you to buy a snoy a7iii/a7c like every other post in /gg/
>>4523966>Canon EOS Ms are plasticky and failure proneThe original EOS M is extremely well made, and because you can put magic lantern on it, it's a great camera, especially for video. It also has a pretty comprehensive metal chassis.
>>4523968Every DSLR feels the same to use except for shitty "mom camera" ones missing controls. Want soul? You missed an $87 5DII+50mm f1.8 from human-i-t because you were too busy stalking pentax auctions. Now some absolute chad is out there enjoying superior full frame with classic color science and retro sovl for $90 while you’re coping in a nikon vs pentax argument. Better luck next time. Life advice: pentax is too modern and speccy. sell that shit, buy a sovlful d200 or 10D/60D, own no more than 1 camera and 3 lenses, and get another hobby so you’re not just filling the gaps between photography sessions with browsing ebay like snappiness without the lucrative youtube grift
>>4523967>I can't speak for all nikons, but I do own one of these and that thing is dogshitAh alright fair. Never owned a Nikon but the base logic is the same. Whatever 10 year old FF model fits from Cannikon.>>4523968>you're splitting the difference over $100 bucks on a 10 year old dslrWhen people are betting on $150 cameras because they're poor, making sure you get the best tech you can afford matters. $100 saved on a $400 purchase is a 20% delta. To people who aren't poor your point is valid, but to the poors that 20% is very worth.>>4523966EOS-M is fine. Nfi why you think they're failure prone.
>>4523971>10DLowk slept on fr fr. I prefer it to any CCD meme cam
>>4523973Because they fucking areMaybe the original wasnt as shitty, but busted dials, dying articulating screens, and dead clock batteries later on are very real. They weren’t made to last for decades like a DSLR.
>>4523973>to people who arent poorhey guy you think i got this rich by blowing my money just to tell 4chan i dont care? ngmifrom the first $10K i got as a gift when i was 13 (whole family chipped in, we do it for every boy) i’ve refused to spend a penny on bad ROI until it was $100K. then i finally bought my dream camera: a used DSLR missing some of port covers and half its paint. git gud.
>>4523971but i dont want your life advice and i like how my pentaxes feel in hand, i like the lenses too.i dont even hate the 5d lol >>4523973photography is my cheap hobby everything else i do costs 10x the amount
>>4523980NTA but since you have the K1, I would skip the 5D
>>4523951>Canon isnt not green they’re just hiding their green. No i cant prove it.I don't know why this is so hard for you to grasp.Every Bayer camera is tinted green at capture because it captures 2x more green than other colors.What matters is output rendering. Disabling the corrections that the engineers intended to have active in their output invalidates your output as something useful for comparing color science.
>>4523942>>4523943Yes. They’re offering $500 for my z5 and then selling a new z6iii after trade in etc for $1530. I could probably do better attempting to sell it in fb and buying the camera for $1900 since it’s often on sale for that but I hate dealing with people
>>4523987Nope. You never said this in defense of snoy because you know its wrong and cameras are never ever meant to output a green raw except in an autists “mathematically objective” darktable settings. After demosaicing there should be no green tint under a balanced light source. None. Nada. Never. This is a hard and fast rule. If the light is not green tinted, and the lens is not green tinted, the camera should NEVER EVER EVER be green tinted. If the user has to add a global tint it doesn’t just cancel out green. It fucks with other colors in a way that a lower level, local process where one green pixel contributes more luminance than color would not. Green tint equals improperly demosaiced, unforgivably bad CFA specs, or lens cast. Its highly unlikely dpreview is using a green light source. So either the ORF format is poorly designed and green biased, olympus uses weaker green filters to cope with sensor size, or the lens they used has a heavy green cast. green, blue, and yellow casts were common with film era optics and continue with chink lenses so it is entirely likely that the scammy m43 lens is the green contributor. Micro four thirds has always had really bad, unnatural colors and i’ve experienced widely varying lens tints as something nearly universal to the system (ie: panaleica 45mm is cool, om 45mm f1.8 is green) so I’m leaning towards the overengineered yet cheap lenses being shit myself. Regardless, micro four thirds just does not meet the standards it aims to and barely anyone buys it except cultist gearfags for this exact reason.
>>4523992OM system was never meant to make real cameras. They make utility cameras. Comparing them to real camera is like comparing leathermans to japanese kitchen knives. Sadly the geeks do exactly this>you dont need that high carbon gyuto the blade on my leatherman wave+ is just as good especially when i zoom in 1000x on the edge and cut printer paper>-micro four thirds fans, basically
Okay let's repeat the experiment.> Independently developed Free Software.> Canon 5DII, based retard's favourite camera> WB as selected by the based retard (Shade ~7K)Warm yellow tint.
> Nikon Z5II, best camera to film your dog or gf (whichever you have)> Shade WB
>>4523953Canon uses tint correction as well but it's buried in their RAW format where you can't change it.It's the same with lens corrections - some manufacturers embed lens corrections and don't allow disabling while others allow.What you are doing is analogous to disabling the lens correction on the camera that allows it and comparing it to the camera that does not allow it to demonstrate how bad the camera that allows it is.
>>4523997>>4523996>use bad program>get bad resultsAlthough the canon actually looks good, the z5ii’s format is obviously unsupported. But capture one has a magenta issue. Again this should never occur with good light, a good lens, and a good camera in capture one. We can only wonder why. Is mirrorless getting worse? Is dpreview intentionally using bad lighting? Or is it the camera?I’m not upgrading from my ancient copy of c1 (literally the last update after z5ii support) until I buy a new work camera. Anyone else with the new version?We need to consider the possibility that dprevuew fucks with their lighting as well. The only reason I say olympus is green is because i’ve used green tinted lenses on olympus.
>>4523998>canon has a global tint buried i swearOr their raw format is just better which is why they got better colors than nikon/sony sensor cameras out of less dynamic range
>>4523999So now WB is up to software and not the camera? Cope. Raw the Pee is actually the best editor to verify the camera's own performance, because they don't have built-in per-camera profiles (fake science).
>>4523999>the z5ii’s format is obviously unsupported.what? but I thought that after demosaicing there should be no green tint under a balanced light source. None. Nada. Never. This is a hard and fast rule. If the light is not green tinted, and the lens is not green tinted, the camera should NEVER EVER EVER be green tinted.
>>4524006Bad demosaicing can cause tints. When its that extreme the format isnt even supported. >>4524005It actually is up to software to display raws correctly.
>>4524013The file format is completely supported, retard-kun; with in-camera WB, it looks exactly like it should. Your method of arbitrarily setting outdoor color balance for shit indoor lights just does not work.
>>4523952you have to make up for it with longer exposures which you can do because of the IBIS.
>>4524015and then, its not at all due to base iso of 200, aps-c iso 100 is the bare minimum acceptable iq for handheld bright daytime conditions
>>4524015At the price of OM-5, other sensors come with IBIS as well.
>>4524014Good cameras dont need huge tint adjustments with good lights and lenses in capture oneI always knew I disliked the Z5IIs color (and nikon color in general) and now there’s a possible hint why
>>4523997>>45240145.12 came out a month after Z5II release, you should be using 5.13 lol
>>4523999This is also a retard poster lol
>>4523191>just get so(n)y bro the 35 y/old jewrnalists say its better according to LE SCIENCEwhen sony makes a camera that doesn't feel absolutely terrible in my hand I'll maybe give it a go. Don't want to babysit the equipment, don't need hand cramps
>>4524019Good cameras don't need third party RAW software and can generate the result you want in JPEG.Either straight to JPEG by adjusting tone curves and other picture settings in real time (scary, i know), or recording a RAW and using in-camera processing to generate the JPEG.Either result in pic related is possible using only the camera, if it's a good camera.
>>4524031Good cameras dont even assume the photographer is going to use jpeg because good photographers simply dont settle for fiddling with cameras pre-capture or inferior, hastily generated results. Unlike sony. Half of sony’s firmware menu is just their jpeg engine.Raw = photographyJpeg = the journalists that shoot sony>Its HONEST bro i have heccin INTEGRITY my sony’s colors are SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE dude raw is like just like AI generate it bro buy a SONY and shoot JPEG!No fucking thank you. You can keep your “i menu” full of “d range opt” “hdr” “nr level” “picture profile” “creative style” and other randomly named 2012 tier boomer adjustments that ken rockwell uses. I shoot raw.
>>4524031>anon take the photo>not yet honey i haven’t set my tone curve right>Do it later!>excuse me but i am not going to spend hours on a computer like a boomer>IT TAKES 30 SECONDS>you should read kenrockwell.com’s article on raw vs jpeg its very enlightening>First you cheap on on my engagement ring to buy a panasony, and now this? I’m leaving you>but it wont be accurate… photogra…phy…>Sup shiska. >Oh hello handsome. Let’s ditch this loser.
The whinging about in-camera versus post-editing has led me conclude that I have the superior approach:>Take RAWs>Use first-party software in post to perform demosiacing and lens corrections>Use preffered software (C1, LR, DT, RT) to do bulk of editing>Use PS (GIMP if poor) for more major editsWorkflow might be a bit longer but it just werks. You get first-party "color" ""science"" while retaining the superior toolkit of the paid software.
>>4524034>fighting the autism with more autism
>>4523988Meh, I would just stick with what you have. If you really need to spend money, try a higher end used body or some lenses.
What memory cards do you use? What brand, size, speed? What and how do you shoot? How do you use the 2 slots in your camera, one for jpegs one for raws, or duplicate raws on both?
asking because I'm a new getting my first 24 MP camera with dual SD slots that I'll be using for photo not video 99% of the time and don't know what to choose other than full-size card only from established brands in reputable shops to not get a fake
>>4524035To fight monsters we must create monsters of our own
>>4524037>What memory cards do you use?>What brand, size, speed?Whatever CF cards came with the camera, most of mine are sandisk ultra. Most are 16 or 32 GB.>What and how do you shoot?Real estate for work, street, nature landscapes, cars, whatever, for fun.>How do you use the 2 slots in your camera, one for jpegs one for raws, or duplicate raws on both?Duplicate RAWs to both for work, for fun stuff I use auto switch when full.
I wonder if other camera manufacturers will respond to Sony in the megapickles race.
>>4524050>respondSony makes the sensors for pretty much everyone else so it's controlled opposition at best, unless Canon somehow catches up. If Sony really wants to have the mostest megapickles they can just not sell their best silicon to other manufacturers.
>>4523957That lens is great but you will want a normal zoom or a 35mm along with it. The K-3II is not bad but apart from the built in GPS it is identical to the original K-3 you can get even cheaper. I would rather look for a K-3III or KP instead DESU, preferably with a 20-40 Limited zoom.
>>4523957>>4524053Hey I just came to the thread to ask which is the best Pentax DSLR/mirrorless with K mount for video. Thinking of K-1 Mk II or K-3 Mk III. Or maybe KP or K-70. Need to make short art films with it, so gonna focus more on buying proper lighting rigs and rails and tripods so the camera doesn’t have to be the best of the best for resolution, but anything that is good enough for short films would be appreciated.
>>4524054Troll post or completely clueless. If you want video just stick to your phone or get a Blackmagic
>>4524055Memes. You know DSLRs were being used to shoot films all throughout the 2010s?
>>4524054None, Pentax is ass for video. K-3 III is the least bad option and still terrible, even the K01 is shit.If you have K mount glass you want to shoot film with, you'll have more luck looking into adapters.
>>4524056Troll then.
>>4524037SD + CFExpress BSanDisk, Delkin, AngelbirdWhatever was fastest at the time I bought it, 32gb up to 512gb.Weddings, portraits, everyday stuff.Photo/video on my hybrid cam, backup when doing paid stuff, overflow for normal stuff.
>>4524051Thinkin' about how Snoy could massively disrupt the market by just refusing to sell sensors to third parties by policyThey could literally just get away with it, couldn't they? There aren't any laws that could actually stop them?
Why do I need/want full frame if APS-C already offers absurdly shallow DOF (e.g. eyes in focus but nose and ears not in focus) with the right lens?I am not a pro but the impression I get is that the advent of IBIS letting you shoot at ≥3 stops of ISO/SS lower was more than enough to make up the difference in sensor size which was probably more important back in the day.>t. fuji user suffering from GAS and trying to stop myself from going ff
>>4524079The photos look better. Superior tonality/color is immediately obvious to anyone who saw the subject IRL and has a reference. If you dodge snoyshit tier lenses you get better focus falloff and sharper performance because bigger pixels are less hard on simple double gauss designs. Most crop lenses are overcorrected. Fuji has like, one “magic lens” made FOR it that doesnt just look like a lensbaby toy. FF has hundreds. And modern fuji has made their singular “magic” lens look worse with too many pixels. No fujiworms or xtrans zombie people.If all you care about is zooming in on background noise and calculating background blur all gear is meaningless. Use your phone. If you have a good eye, know what things should look like, everyone uses ff/mf for an obvious reason. If you care about how you feel about your photos however you want to view them, but dont care how some internet loser who has never seen the photographed scene feels about them at 840x600, everyone uses ff/mf for an obvious reason. If your purpose in life is getting likes and follows from LLMs and indians on instagram downgrade to a PNS.
>>4524079>sensor size? meaningless. i only take photos of brick walls so i can shoot everything at 10 seconds! IBIS FTW!kek mirrorlessbabbies
>>4524079>if APS-C already offers absurdly shallow DOFIt doesn't though. Anytime you're not right next to your subject you get very little background separation. If you wanna shoot anything wide angle with shallow DOF? Forget it. I don't even know why croppies let you change the aperture on the lens when basically every non-telephoto lens looks f/11 the whole way through its aperture range
>>4524085FF chads buy vintage f1.4s and only shoot them at f16, ISO 100, ETTR maxxed
>>4524086FF chads shoot macro at f/16 and still get only 2mm of acceptable focus
>>4524087Right because the 3mm at f32 would make a difference. Maybe on 35mm film shots destined to be 2" insets in magazines and textbooks, which was critical macro photography for most of history. Artistic macro was typically LF with significant use of movements. Macro means flat subject or stacking in post these days. Flash freeze your bug and buy a $25 rail. No fancy Z8 needed.
>>4524085>croppies"full frame" is a crop sensor.
>>4524067Not the same company. Any slight collusion and the industry will go down hard on Snoy's ass
>>4524090Classic cope.>IM short? Well you might he 6’2” but someone else is 7’2” you midget!>You’re four feet tall. >>4524091>snoycopeIt is the same company. Every sony venture is the same company. Sony semiconductor is sony imaging. Only the financial structure is any different but unofficially they are all centrally controlled. Japan is not very well regulated and is highly corrupt (their government is still yakuza property despite PR claims to the contrary). Sony DOES play games. Its how they got big while selling half broken dogshit. Additionally, sony absolutely colludes with vanguard and blackrock (two fronts for the israeli mafia), who have enough of a stake in both sony and canon to make off the books some decisions. To say otherwise would be saying sony cares more about being morally right per honor, respect, dignity, and goodness than they care about being filthy fucking rich. And they don’t. No japanese company does. It is an absurdly corrupt country full of pedophiles and self conscious amoral degenerates. It was the original epstein island. Every camera brand except canon exists because sony lets them. None of them are allowed to directly compete with sony if they want to buy sensors. Canon does not sell their sensors to other camera brands. This is the actual reason nikon went flat broke buying RED when they’re non-competitive and nikon totally lacks the expertise to do anything with RED. RED has the rights to non-sony sensor technology and already has non-sony supply contracts. Nikon is trying to break free from sony. This is the reason leica switched to a chinese sensor company. Sony already had the A7V and A7RVIs sensor tech in non-consumer products. Sony has next gen curved medium format sensors and they wont let anyone have them until they milk what they let trickle out and eventually finish milking those too. They wouldn’t let leica buy anything better than the A7RVs chip.
>>4524092Completely and utterly delusional. There are anti trust and anti cartel laws in the western world, something a third world chud (USA) would not understand.
>>4524090Today I will remind them...
>>4524092>snoy makes all the sensors for the green brandslol
>>4524094>no way japan is corrupt. that would be illegal. They raised their ages of consent to 18 but still have millions of 14 year old prostitutes selling themselves on the clearnet. They have no law against bestiality. We have tried to make the ban child pornography dozens of times and all we got was an end to public sales of CP magazines. Crime rates drop near yakuza strongholds and increase elsewhere. Election sanctity has never been verified by non-japanese. Their justice system is notorious for caring more about placating crowds and frightening would-bes than punishing the guilty. Police ignore illegal activity if the lw it runs afoul of originates with western culture, ie: domestic violence. Japan is a third world country with neon lights and anime. They are not and will never be western. They just got very good at maintaining their public image.They are corrupt as fuck and the enshittification of their industry is a direct consequence.
>>4524097no one is going to cut ties with one of japans richest multinationals because they exercise a little chutzpah in japans domestic camera industry. the digital camera industry is wholly irrelevant to the wider world. every single brand other than sony and canon combined makes a bit less revenue than the latest FF sony or canon, and a fraction of the money made by the latest apple or samsung smartphone. >oh no, sony told panasonic that if they make a direct a7c competitor they’re getting their sensors somewhere else>a whopping 1500 reddit nerds were affected by this>quick take a massive chunk out of our economy
>>4524098Take your meds
>>4524103>not my precious japerinos!Japan is a shitty criminal pedophile island in steep decline.Get over it
>>4524032it's not hardyou set your apertureyou set your shutter speedyou set your ISOyou set your white balanceyou set your tone curveGood cameras have a few custom modes on the dial which you set up beforehand for different scenariosBright scenery, Dark scenery, moving subject, etc. I can tell you aren't good with computers but there are lots of tutorials on youtube you can watch.
>>4524108>buy a sony and shoot jpeg, sirnoraw is the second rate standard for actual photography. negative film is the first rate standard. neither is a jpeg. >but all these journalists shoot snoy! jpeg is journalist integrity sir! you can keep your 120fps green tinted hyper sharp snoy.>snoy is good cameras sir it had 1 2 3 jpeg modes on dial!no. phaseones are good cameras. snoys are green tinted sterile shit for newspaper photographers who spam at 60fps and crop to compose. good camera for a photographer != good camera for an underpaid newspaper intern
There is no real reason to choose a dedicated camera over a phone if you’re shooting jpeg other than looking more like a professional so people dont realize you’re a college dropout that couldnt pass a drug test and score a real job.
>>4524103But everything he said is factual. Japan is a legitimately terrible country compared to places like taiwan and singapore.
>>4524107Take your meds
>>4524115>nooo muh heccin lolicon countryShut up weeb50% of anime is child pornography btw
>>4524119Dark trvke. Weebs are a plague.
>>4524119You are the one who started raving on about CP you disgusting filth. No one else was bringing it up.Take your meds.
>>4524110>negative film is the first rate standardNegative = amateur. Slide film = Pro.
>>4524079Because you're f/1.2 on APS-C only requires f/1.8 on FF. Not only will that image quality likely be much better, I don't think there's a single f/1.2 lens that looks any good wide open plus the greater pixel density of crop is far more demanding, the extra cost of that super fast lens will diminish if not completely eliminate the extra cost of a full frame body (more so if you consider the cost of other lenses).I used to be so concerned with trying to get decent lenses on crop without spending too much, switching to ff almost feels like cheating with how much better everything looks.
>>4524079desu, depth of frame is just a preference and more is not always better despite what anyone might tell you.
>>4524111>other than looking more like a professional so people dont realize you’re a college dropout that couldnt pass a drug test and score a real job.you say that as if that isn't a major benefit
>>4524090135 format film double frame: 36x24mmFull-frame sensor, which was designed and specified specifically to match the above: 36x24mmAre you retarded?
>>4524110>Phase OneMassively overpriced pretentious nonsense. More so than usual, that is.
>>4524169lol clueless retard
