Bald editionITT people who don’t take photos or own cameras discuss how the camera they might consider buying later is the reason their theoretical future photos look badLast containment thread >>4525019
>>4525985Last thread Carey laid down a challenge to fix the moire in her photo. The anon who claimed he could fix it in two minutes using Capture One was unable to.Maybe another brave anon is up to the task?https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9601355361/646450https://www.dpreview.com/wp-content/uploads/sample_galleries/L-9601355361/0011530579.arw
>>4525989I might be a bit retarded, but where is moire in this photo?
>>4525990The bricks
>>4525985At least post the real version OP
>>4525993LOL
>>4525993Malding>>4525989Photo thief doe
>>4525993he who edit meme portrayed accurately in first version
>>4525993OP tried way too hard to cover this up
>>4525993Snoyeeds will never recover from this one.
Double mald!
>>4525993TrvkeSnoys malding over this one for all eternity
>>4526005>Snoy trying to gaslight /p/ and pretending hes in with the cool kidsnice try schizo
>>4526005Obvious snoy bait and switch. Truly pathetic
>>4525985This OP really rustled some jimmies
>>4525993>6 (you)s>op got a big fat zero repliesClearly this is the true and correct meme image.
>>4526008That’s how you can tell its correct. When memes are irrelevant, they don’t cause a flood of nonsense, samefagging, butthurt edits, and (you) counting. But when they are on the nose… oh boy.
>>4526010I for one, welcome our new sharty overlords
>>4525985Move Canon over to the right and this is about as accurate as it gets.
>>4526013Counterpoint
>>4526014
>>4526014>>4526015Explain? I don't get the joke, sorry.
>>4526015Accuracy in memes isn't very relevant, fun factor is.>>4526016Not much of a joke, just showing two bald Fuji/Sony shills and a Kodak large format shooter with a full head of hair. Now a Nikon ambassador.
>>4526010Powerful cope, samefag
I buy multiple cameras from multiple brands. Bitching about other brands is gay retard shit for women.
sample size of one, but I shoot Nikon.
>>4526010Trvke>>4526022The N in Nikon stands for Norwood!
>>4526021But I can only afford one brand! It simply must be the best or I HATE you.
>>4525993I can confirm this is the correct one.
>buy 5DII because /p/ said to>dont know how but I learned a few words of japanese in my sleep>suddenly watching vivziepop cartoons>catch myself looking at fountain pens on amazon>woke up to a seiko 5 on the doorstep todayNONO!THIS CANT BE HAPPENINGAM I GOING TO GO BALD?SHINJIRARENAI!!! NANI!
>>4526032>buy 5DIIImagine owning a camera that can only spot meter off the center point
>>4526033I understood what you meant, and got mad, even though no one ever does that… there’s no excuse… didnt they consult a linux user? Does anyone care about options? Where is auto ISO in manual? This is a jokeI just lost a few more hairsIts over
>>4526032Quick, buy a Sony. Its like camera finasteride. It solved my baldness AND gave me some rockin thighs.
Are cameras going into a phase like they did in the 80s where people are perfectly happy with having the same gear for a decade or so? Innovation has slowed down, maybe not so much with lenses, but those are expensive specialist tools anyway.I guess the question is if the consumers are smart enough to realize that you are now able to get a used high end camera that is only marginally worse than the new generation for a third of the price used. Cameras that have more bells and whistles than they will ever be able to master. How will the manufacturers convince consumers to buy new shiny? Some of those cameras on the used market are now priced way lower than what a new and inferior product costs. Yesteryears high end full frame cameras vs new APS-C models etc.
>>4526017So Kodak and Nikon go on the right, while Fuji gets moved to the left. Seems about right.I'm torn about what should be done with Sony. On one hand they're not bald, but I wouldn't call any unironic Snoy shooter a chad, they objectively don't belong on the right. Needs a third category of some kind, I think.Maybe a hot or slightly-more-tepid-than-normal take but I'd probably put Panasonic and Leica in with Snoy in category 3 as well, in my experience they're all the same archetype of person.
>>4526022I can tell>>4526025What a positively revolting specimen of La Creatura Americana
>>4526037Sony, panasonic, and leica are the aryan ayy
>>4526021This is literally me except I own every brand except for Sony.
>>4526037Lanier is bald, he wears a fedora to cover it. He's a massive Sony shill.
>>4526042Why? I thought onions was the best camera ever
>>4526043Yeah but bald isn't really the stereotypical Snoy Guy, you know? Snoys are like, the techbros of the camera world kinda. They just blindly chase muh tech and muh features without considering anything else or even really understanding what any of it actually does, they don't care about whether the camera is actually good they just care that it makes the camera more advanced, more pro, because that's what their identity revolves around, pretending to be more than they really are, so in a roundabout way that's what makes the camera good to them, since it's a reflection of the self ultimately. They're LARPers, basically.Maybe shilling just makes you go bald in general? Someone should do a study on that. Interestingly this would imply the Afro Jew is not actually a shill, or otherwise doesn't shill enough to trigger the baldification. idk what to make of that.
>>4526044Because I'm not brown.
>>4526025Why do they put bodies on display without a lens or even a body cap?
Holy FUCK the voigty 60mm f0.95 for m43 is quite bigger and way way heavier than I expected. Fair warning to m43 users.
>>4526055>30mm f/2>noooo it's so bigReally?
>>4526059>30mm f/2Huh? It's 60mm f0.95.
>>4526014I’m not bald enough to know who these nerds are
>>4526059it's 120mm f1.9 you retard
>>4525989>Maybe another brave anon is up to the task?literally 2 seconds fix, I don't know what you're crying about.muh OLPFmuh OLPFshut up you NERD.you aren't a professional.professional cameras aren't for you.
>>4526062Sorry I had to blend in with the MFTurds
>>4526065Is the fix in the room with us right now, Anon?
>>4525989First things first, when I downloaded "your" photo (you didn't take this, and you've never taken a photo in your life) the exif was incorrect ("Model: MODEL-NAME") and capture one didn't recognize it, so I had to waste 2 minutes using exiftool. After that it was smooth sailing with Capture One's AI masks and moire tool:https://files.catbox.moe/pntcr4.jpgSecond, as opened the moire was barely noticeable unless I pixel peeped. At most viewing and print sizes it doesn't exist:https://files.catbox.moe/rmreu9.jpgThird, this photo would have been just as sharp at f/11 (except for filthy dumb pixel peeping scum analyzing the 1px blades of grass in the corner) and the natural diffraction would have provided the same utility as forcing anti-aliasing filters down competent peoples throats, reinforcing the oft-repeated truism that moire is a skill issue. AA filters were removed because people wanted them removed. Moire is uncommon except for specific subjects and people who spend $2000 on a camera ought to be able to choose if they want to blur their image if at all. Fourth, it's also a terrible photo. Editing could barely salvage it:https://files.catbox.moe/wg3u2s.jpgIf dpreview is your idea of photography you should stop reading dpreview and go to a competent review website like KenRockwell.com.
I want to buy the RF 45mm f/1.2 despite most reviews pointing out it's retarded and has super strong purple fringing.Does any anon have experience with this meme of a lens because f/1.2 for $400~ is kind of tempting.
>>4526065> Anon goes ahead and adds moire to a photo without itThis moire shitposting is getting more and more amusing.
>>4526075go take care of your fat kid, ken
>>4526077the moire was simply enhanced, same patterns are visible in the crop in pic related.SOOC on left and Capture One's AI masks and moire tool corrections from >>4526075 on right.same below but saturation increased to make the subtle color differences more obvious for those using IPS displays.yes C1 reduced the moire, but would I deliver this to clients as a professional architecture photographer? Absolutely not.
>>4526065>I used the moire to destroy the moire
>>4526081If you were a professional photographer you would have shot it at f11-f16 instead of pursuing pixel level sharpness re: blades of grass by dancing around the diffraction limited aperture. Most moire problems are caused by gearfags reading lenstip, opticallimits, dxomark, dpreview etc and considering f4 to f8 (f5.6 on 45mp+) the only acceptable aperture range because sharpness. You could also use a light diffusion filter.
>>4526081>use wrong aperture>zoom in until you can see individual pixels>complainAA filters were removed for people who know what they’re doing, not for dpreview (amazon) to tell normgoys to buy cameras they never needed to begin with.
> inb4 keep your phoneSo I used to have the Panny LX10, loved it, but sold it because of the bad video capabilities (shitty 1.5x or something crop and shitty stabilization). Didn't buy a new camera because of choice paralysis.Bought the Xiaomi 14 Ultra instead with the photography kit and a couple of filters to test out the waters of not carrying a camera. But I've found that I am not really digging that setup all that much.Pictures are fine for a phone after having disabled all the AI-shit and applying some built-in filters. But it's pretty huge for being a phone with the kit + VND - might as well carry a camera by that point. Also navigating the settings via touchscreen fucking sucks.So basically I am looking for some compact or semi-compact camera to sling around my neck on my travels. Not really doing any other photgraphy than snapping everyday pictures for my own amusement. Same applies for video, just to have something to look back on on grey days and later when I'm stuck in the old folks home. I don't enjoy editing RAWs so the SOOC JPEGs has to be decent.Been eyeing the RX100VA, G7 X III as well as some larger cameras that are a "complete" package, i.e., flash, tilting/articulating screen for selfies with the lady and something easy enough for her to use to take photos of my ugly mug standing on some cliff. I am also a bit interested in OM Systems because of the weather sealing, since I always end up in shitty weather for some reason when I'm out hiking. The new OM Pen might be interesting if it doesn't suck for video.So what do you /g/eartards recommend for an actual non-professional?
If someone told you they hate women, but still find them beautiful and worthy at least to be photographed (if only to prove to the women and themselves how useless they are aside from their beauty), is the Fuji 90mm F/2 a good lens?I am asking for a friend.
>>4526085> SOOC JPEGs has to be decent.Canon or a Ricoh GR. Micro four thirds only works if you shoot raw. The sensors are too small to work without software fixes and the color science is really fucking bad. M43 is the pro camera workflow without the pro camera quality. Fuji is the same. The jpegs are only okayish at 8mp. But the cameras cost $2000 for THAT. 8mp out of a 40mp sensor unless you process raws on a more powerful computer.
>>4526086>heres your cheap, small and light aps-c bro
I got this at a thrift shop the other day, came with a handful of flash bulbs too. Is it worth trying to get to work? Asking here since his is the only relatively fast thread on this board
>>4526075>smooth sailing with Capture One's AI masks and moire tool:it's interesting what it did with the brick - mortar joints turned from grey to pink. That is color bleed which some people complain about with X-trans, but I can't say I've ever seen it so bad on X-trans.It makes sense since C1 detected the moire on the mortar joints and to get rid of it it blurred the color information.Architects actually select the mortar color. Pink mortar instead of grey is something they would definitely notice. The piss yellow striping is gone, but both outputs are bad. Now if comparing to what is lost due to an OLPF, ~0.5px radius of sharpness (easily recovered with RAW sharpening) the latter is an easy choice.>>4526083>>4526084gonna keep it simple and only use cameras with OLPF, or have Kolari install OLPF in cameras that don't have it.
>>4526089Sure. It takes $14-$19 rolls of rare-ish 127 film and the few labs that will develop it and scan it will charge a bit more than the usual $20 round trip. Sell it on ebay and buy a minolta maxxum 5 or canon rebel film slr.
>>4526090>Use the wrong aperture for the subject>complain when fixing it in post doesn’t look exactly rightListen. If you actually took photos you would ALWAYS shoot architecture at f11 or f16. ALWAYS. The blur you want is an option that YOU have to choose to use. Your argument is basically this:I made my photo too sharpThe camera should have forced it to be blurryIt is the cameras fault i fucked upAll photos should be forced to be blurry so I can’t make this mistakeI can only afford one lens and no filters and use auto modeIts the cameras fault I used it wrongYeah sure. Go get fleeced by kolari. An idiot and his money are soon parted.
Holy shit you "people" are retarded.
>>4526092Oh sorryDisclaimer: you didnt take a photoSome retard on dpreview didConsider “i” to be theoretical
I bought an advanced camera that gives me more control and it made my photos worseCameras must be less advancedStupid peoples photos matter
>>4526093>pros: we want x>camera companies: well we want your business so here’s x>hobbyists: THERES A CONSPIRACY TO MAKE CAMERAS CONFUSING AND HARD TO USE! IM A VICTIM! OLPFS! HEATSINKS! CF CARDS! EVFS! NEW MOUNTS! SPECIALIZATION! REEEEE>camera companies: ok retard heres a retard camera>hobbyists: NO THIS IS FUCKEN APSC I WANTED THE A7RVI BUT WITH ALL THE CHANGES I ASKED FOR>pros: hey im back. can you add more video shit? axe the DR and megapixels if you have to i dont really care. also make it bigger. >camera companies: su->*BANG*>pros: holy shit he shot himself>camera companies: wtf whos going to buy the retard camera now
>>4526076I do. It is an excellent lens for what it is and those criticizing it are snobs who can't seem to understand that in order to make something as fast, light and compact there has to be compromises. It is much sharper wide open in the center than the older EF 50 1.2.. perhaps the bokeh is slightly less busy on the EF. Autofocusing is a bit slow though, but not slower than the EF.
>>4526086https://www.caliallstaring.com/post/capturing-spring-style-xf90mm-f2-wr-fujifilm-x-h2-portraits-a-photoshoot-walkthroughIt works quite well for that. I've really enjoyed my copy. At f2.8 it has very round corner bokeh, and by f4 virtually no vignetting, which make it great for brenizer type shots too.
>>4526099>Autofocusing is a bit slow though, but not slower than the EFDunno about that one chief. The EF one has an ultrasonic motor and the RF one is only a stepper. Assuming you're using a camera good and reliable target aquestion speed like a 1DX or R5, the USM lens should be faster. You're not getting bottlenecked by how fast the camera can find focus, you're getting bottlenecked by how fast the motor in the lens can turn the helicoid and get it to that focus point, which makes a big difference when the camera hunts. The lens, other than maybe the maximum aperture, doesn't make much difference in the speed the camera takes to aquire a target.
>>4526060i think he means ff equivalent, so 30mm ~f2, youd need f0.5 on mft to be ff F1 equivalent
>>4526092well, we're making progresswe went fromthere is no moire, to moire is easily correctable in RAW software, to moire is photographer error.Should fashion photographers also always shoot at f11 or f16?Here we can see a comparison showing the very blurry image that an OLPF generates. So much worse than random rainbows appearing.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd2TyUrVBL8&t=1138
>>4526105>there is no moirecorrect. you had to pixel peep to see it. >to moire is easily correctable in RAW softwareit is. it looks a little different if you pixel peep but thats the cost of correcting a fuck up in post. >to moire is photographer error.it is. cameras with no/weak AA filters are for competent people. people who know how to anticipate this stuff and choose when and how to blur shit instead of forcing it on every photo the camera takes. incompetent people use phones, which use soft optics and AI post processing so every photo is generically acceptable. you are not a competent person. you are a pixel peeping autistic retard bean souping over cameras that working pros have no issues buying and using. these devices genuinely are not meant for you. they are meant for people who shoot for work and really know what they’re doing. you snapshit absent mindedly while walking the dog and seethe that your camera doesnt have guide rails and padded corners to keep you from fucking up. maybe its time for you to admit you should use a phone
>>4526090This could be 100% solved by refining the mask and erasing the areas without moire. That looks like a quick near-global correction. If you were a pro and fucked up and shot with moire, you would 100% spend 10 mins making a more precise mask. Of course you’d already know this if you ever shot for realHe’s also right. Don’t shoot architecture under f11 on a low res camera if you aren’t up to correcting moire. Many patterns still confuse AA filters. Of course you’d know that if you did photography. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/nikon-d750-moire.4086005/Its really best to leave AA filters out and let smart people choose how to blur their images it they blur them at all.
>>4526116You claim the moire is only visible when pixel peeping but actually the piss stripes on the brick are visible even in >>4525989 where the photo is downscaled to less than 1 megapixel.Meanwhile you claim that an OLPF causes significant blurring, while the difference is barely visible even with the most extreme pixel peeping as pic related shows.
BREAKING:Pixel peeping retard that cant use a camera (or read anything that proves his dunning krugerisms wrong) screenshots a test chart from dpreviewMore at 11
>>4526051I unironically see most brownoids with a Fuji, never seen one with a Sony. YouTubers don't count since there's also Indians posting about Canon, Nikon and basically anything on there.
I wasn't sure what thread to ask this in, so this seems reasonable. I got my first camera, and I have an SD card in it with an SD card reader for my computer.How are you supposed to do this, do you always back up everything on the SD card onto your computer first before editing the RAW files? Do you just delete everything on the SD card after doing that? Not really sure how to go about this, was hoping for some insight from those with more experience, as I don't know if there's common/standard practices or not.
How about that new Leica 66mm f2? That's got to be one of the most shameless cashgrabs from that company or what?
>>4526101on paper usm is faster, but the ef uses heavy glass whereas the rf is molded plastics.
>>4526120Camera manufacturers deleted OLPF to reduce manufacturing costs and sold it to oblivious customers as an upgrade. A shill working for the cartel will always deny that deleting OLPF harms image quality even though it's obvious that giant striping patterns are more detrimental to IQ than sub-pixel level blurring.
>>4526127It was because when the d800/e and 5ds/r splits were available everyone went for the ones without AA filtersTest charts at f5.6 != photography>>4526124Copy data only. Never work off a card or delete from the card except in camera. Format (in camera) when full.
>>4526127>i can’t blur my own photos when needed i need my camera to protect me from mistakesBuy an xm5 and stick to shooting blurry ass jpegs>>4526116>>4526119/you.
>>4526129thanks anon, will do as you said
>>4526129>everyone went for the ones without AA filterswow people fell for marketing propaganda? I don't believe it.
>>4526136>everything is:>a conspiracy>propaganda>the yakuza>some israeli hunk with a husky that everyone finds inexplicably attractiveOoooor you’re bad at using cameras and so are most reviewersLol
>buy camera without blur filter>use the sharpest lens at its sharpest aperture>take photo of brick wall/chart/basically a grid>HALP MOIRE PLS PUT BLUR FILTER ON MY CAMERA>diffusion filter salesmen: yeah they’re $20>NO ON THE SENSOR ITS A JEWISH REPTILIAN CONSPIRACY WITH THE SONY YAKUZA CARTEL YOU DONT UNDERSTANDIs this guy retarded? And why does he repost the same images over and over?
I went full retard last weekI was shopping for a good every day lens on keh for my pentax and settled on a Tamron 28-200mm 3.8 with excellent ratings on pentax forum. it was only $40, right?but you get free shipping at $75 otherwise it was $20 in shipping, so you know, spend $35 get $20 offso I bought a bargain basement lens for $8, and another for $12, and I mean I needed more to fit the bill so I bought 2 more for $10 and $15. cool, 4 vintage lenses that are all work with my kmount for $75except 3 of them are similar focal range (28-80 and 35-80), plus I already had a 50mm prime 1.8, and 35mm prime 2.4. I really didn't gain anything from the other 3 lenses I bought. now I just have more clutter...
>>4526141It might be shit but you have moire preventing blur to go with your live view blinkiesTest them and only keep the blurriest to save yourself from rainbow nonsense
>>4526127Now they are getting rid of mechanical shutters and in 5-10 years shill will be saying that people didn't want mechanical shutters.
I don't know how you faggots use electronic view finders, that shit gives me a headache
>>4526145Once sensor readouts are over 1/200 mechanical shutters are pointless tbdesu
>>4526146>I don't know how you faggots use electronic view finders, that shit gives me a headache
>>4526150wouldn't it be the inverse? since zoomies are constantly glued to screens
>>4526150Purest aryan DNA. You can tell he shoots sony.
>>4526151Screens yes, but viewfinders makes the camera look more serious and thus it is scary. Just look at the used market for compacts such as the G7XII/III and compare it to the G5X I and II etc. Same sensor and picture quality and the latter is quite advanced yet fetches less than the older G7X II on the used market. The G1X III with an aps-c sensor gets no love whatsoever. The trend is clear, EVFs are redundant for the majority of the new generation of camera buyers.
>>4526161Thats just foid cameras unc. Touch grass.
>>4526123>brown hands typed this
>>4526162Don't assume their gender. It is the they/them gender fluid generation.
I'm gunna write a blog post here about the D700, from the perspective of a lifetime Canon shooter because I have some thoughts and no where else to post them. >StartSo I recently acquired a heavily used D700 for what works out be about $60 USD. Being all-in on EF mount for work, I don't usually look at listing for other camera brands, but this was so cheap it would be stupid to pass it up. >TLCBefore I started using it, I wanted to give it some much needed TLC. As is the case with many Nikon (D)SLRs from this era, it uses soft rubber grips which tend to get sticky and lift up over time. I ordered some new ones and after an ordeal, and trying multiple different double sided tapes, I managed to get a result I was happy with. This was one thing i've never really though about, but it's not an issue I've had with Canons, as they use a much harder, vynil type grip tape, which doesn't really deform or lift with age, but isn't quite as nice to hold either. >ShootingSo now it was time to start shooting. Immediately I found there was a lot to love about this camera. When mounting one of the few AF Nikkors I had left from the film era, a 20mm f/2.8D, I noticed the D700 not only has an alloy body, but also a metal mirror box. Not something which is seen on Canons outside of the EOS 1 series, and it gives the camera a really rigid, weighty weildyness. I'm not totally sure that this means much to the actual function of the camera, but I'd be lying if I didn't like it.
>>4526177>Shooting part 2Firing off some test shots, I noticed the autofocus, compared with the 5D mark II (this cameras closest competitor at the time) is really quite close. Even with the screw drive lens, it's really not bad. I would say the 5D2 is faster on the centre point, but the D700 would be faster on the outer points. The D700 also has more AF points. The other advantage of the D700's autofocus system, is like many Nikon SLRs it comes with the 'fog lamp'; a bright halogen bulb on the front of the camera that functions as a built in autofocus assist lamp. No 5D camera ever came with this, instead, on Canon, you need to mount a flash that has one built in. The other thing I love about the D700 is that it has a pop-up flash, something that no full-frame digital Canon has ever come with. It's not just a compensation prize either, it's a really solid little flash. It covers the whole frame well at 20mm and it's plenty bright, just not quite bright enough for daylight shooting, unfortunately.
>>4526178After taking the camera on a couple outings I did have a couple of complaints, however. First off, I'm not the biggest fan of this sensor or the colour science in this model. Compared to Canons from the same era, I don't find the D700 can recreate what you see though the finder quite as well. Exposures tend suffer from green casts and hue shifts (yellows and greens mostly), especially in artificial lighting. The other glaring difference between this camera and it's Canon counterpart is that it's about nine megapixels short. If the 5D2 were a 30 megapixel camera, this wouldn't be an issue, but it isn't. It's a 21 megapixel camera. Which means the D700 is only 12. Personally, I find this to be a bit short on detail as someone who's used to 20~ megapixel cameras. It's no nail in anyone's coffin, but it definitely makes you consider; "is this really the camera I want to bring on this shoot?". It's not all bad news though. The colours from the Nikon are nice enough in daylight, and it has far better ISO performance and shadow recovery than the Canon. It also has extremely high contrast RAW files, which is not something I was expecting. In this regard, and the megapixels, it almost feels closer to the 5D classic than it does to the 5D2. The slightly shifted colours also lend to this a bit. But there's something else I find it has an even better niche for.
>>4526179>Why actually use it?Because of the reasons I shoot Canon to begin with, the sensors, the colours, the lifelike renditions, I don't find the D700 to be a good fit to replace any of those. I think for some people it definitely would be a better option than a 5D2, but not for me. Where I think this camera shines is doing what it's competitors can't which is:>be really quite well weather sealed>have a pop up flash + af assist beam>effectively being a fixed lens camera due to having a lens ecosystem that's not really worth getting into in 2026Basically how I like to use this camera is like a point and shoot film (or digital) camera. This isn't to say the photos look like film, because they don't. Infact they look more obviously digital than many cameras on sale today. And sure, it's pretty obese compared to even a large point and shoot, but, if you think about it kinda makes sense. What do you do with a point and shoot? You bring it with to shit that doesn't really matter to try and capture fun moments in daily life. They should have a flash and be fun at parties. You should be able to hand them off to your non-photographer friends in auto mode and not have to worry about it. You can bring it to parties, you can bring it urbexing, and you'll get better results than any point and shoot, but also not have the hassle of needing to bring a seperate on camera flash or huge fast lens. You also get the added bonus of it being a DSLR, in that you can use mucher wider lenses, something that point and shoots have always stuggled with. Maybe I have something wrong with me, but after using this camera for a bit, what I see when I look at it, is a big, fat, lovable, point and shoot. For the same reasons, I believe that anyone who enjoys the Fuji Finepix pro cameras, would also love the D700. >blog post over
>>4526032lol im the one who started that meme. cant believe people fell for it
>>4526085>Pictures are fine for a phone after having disabled all the AI-shit and applying some built-in filters. But it's pretty huge for being a phone with the kit + VND - might as well carry a camera by that point.mental illness. it's phone sized and the kit does fuck all anyway
>>4526186> replying without adding anything of valueno surprise really considering this is /p/
anyone know if the minimum focus and magnification numbers on bhphoto are accurate? they have them for every lens so it's pretty convenient or if there's other website with good filters I could use to check them for specific type of lens
>>4526146>I don't know how you faggots use electronic view finders, that shit gives me a headachesome of them flicker worse than others. Which camera(s) did you try?
>>4526129NtaNever delete from the card except in camera. Whats the reasoning for this?The other 2 are more or les obvious but this one is bot.I always crtl+x them
>>4526085Your choice of consumer level canon ie r50/v
>>4526181The D700 is a 12mp toy, but everything you wrote is completely retarded.
>>4526202>Never delete from the card except in camera.Never once has any anon provided anything more than "trust me bro" for this claim.
>>4526149yeah but they aren't really that fast yet, and a lot of the cameras without mech shutter are doing tricks that degrade dynamic range to get faster readout.the shill will say, "oh there were both full frame with mechanical shutter and without mechanical shutter and buyers chose without" well if the one without is a hundred bucks cheaper, most buyers will choose to save $100 and have some degradation to their photos. Same story with OLPFs. pic related has neither (and no EVF) and it doubled Lumix market share in 2 years simply by being the cheapest/smallest full frame.
>>4526205Cheers for the input. If I'm lucky a few more teenagers can chime in with their opinions too.
>>4526181D700 colors are some of the best you can get, especially if you install the D2x profiles I think it was. Seconding the other anon, you write like a fag and your shit's all retarded.
>>4526207Pic related is used exclusively for video and as a fashion accessory. 1/30s ish sync is enough for video. Also no one expects a lumix to be good. They are hyundai cameras. MeanwhileThe nikon ZR already syncs faster than many 1970s film SLRs (1/60) and the r5/r6ii are in this ballparkSnoy a1, nikon Z8/Z9 1/200 (mechanical shutter parity)Modern m43 1/125Snoy a9ii 1/160 (efcs parity)Snoy a9iii (global)Shutters days are limited
>>4526210>Shutters days are limitedespecially if you own a sony
>>4526212>indian>broke his sonyhe tried to fuck the lens mount and wont tell us because he’d lose izzat>i thought it looked like it would not fit not deep enough sar
>>4526208>passive aggressiveAre you a woman?
tried out a full size good camera and realized I don't want to carry around a big camera with me all the timethinking of trying to instead get some good deals on 2 separate types of cameras that are pocketable but also provide features that my phone physically cannot do:1. a low light camera so I'm thinking the bigger the sensor the better wih a flat, bright ("fast") lens and a built-in flash2. a compact zoom with at least 200 mm FF equivalenthow realistic is it to get either one on a good deal? could be a 15 year old for all I care, I'm not gonna take use of the newest and the best features anyways
How much money have you spent on this hobby total?
>>4526217Canon 5D II: $40Canon 50mm f1.8 STM: $8032GB CF card: $15Generic intervalometer/trigger for self timer bursts: $40Capture one perpetual: $280 (discount)Tripod: $50Peak design chink ripoff strap: $20
>>4526218Legendary.
>>4526218forgot the hard drive
>>4526207>most buyers will choose to save $100 and have some degradation to their photoswhy do poorfags living paycheck to paycheck buy luxury goods like cameras?
>>4526202With my snoy if I delete them off the card on my computer they still show up in the browser on the camera, but of course no image displays because that data has been deleted (basically it looks like the camera thinks the file is corrupted). Deleting them through the camera actually gets rid of them from the index so it's completely gone.
>>4526220Not really. I got my computer for free. Everything is free if you know where to look, guy
>>4526202The camera and your computer do sector management differently. Specifically, the camera is way fucking dumber than your computer. Only deleting in camera extends card life and makes corrupt files less likely. This might have changed with the latest mirrorless but japanese tech tends to be 10+ years behind
>>4526146Looking through a lens does strain the eyes, you're just unlucky to have it affect you more than others.
These are awesome. You can get a 400 pack of 4x4 sheets for like 30 bucks and they seem to work great for cleaning lenses, glass and film.
>>4526210>Shutters days are limitedThey are, just like fir film cameras. Once the Jap cartel decides to stop production, the technology is lost.
>>4526223>>4526225I've always deleted photos using computer with my GX8never had a memory card or corruption problem in 10+ years.Also, whenever I copy photos to PC I create a TXT file in the folder on the SD card noting that the photos were copied.
>>4526227For lenses, I've been using Kimwipes. They leave a fair bit of lint, but they are inexpensive and I already use them for other hobby work.
>>4526141nothing wrong with that just sell it, you're shooting pentax buddy everything is cheap as long as its not a hd lenspersonally my favorite pentax universal zoom is the 18-135mm for apsc, you can find them for <$100 or buy a whole camera with it for <$150for what its worth the only other zoom i kinda like is the 28-90mm quantaray, its <$20 and pretty good opticallyhttps://www.ebay.com/itm/198619133798$250 k3 w/grip, if i had to sell all my pentax cameras and stick to one it'll probably be this, tempted to sell my k1ii before the resales tank if theres a new one coming out, if there isnt i'll pick up a k3-iii, imo pentax isn't a ff company i fully acknowledge the larger sensor size doesnt make up for the terrible firmware, autofocus, or brick like sizepic rel i took with it + 70-200mm f2.8 tamron
>>4526230I havent had much luck with tissue type wipes. These ones seem to be nearly lint free and a clean cloth removes fingerprints and smudges completely without using alcohol or cleaning fluid. The only problem is the package is not resealable so you need a good container or ziplock to keep them in.
Did I fuck up buying an ep7 when a new pen camera is getting announced in a few days? Bought it and 17mm f1.8 lens for $650ish.
>>4526234if you care about having a viewfinder, yes.if you prefer a tilt-out screen rather than fully articulating, no.
>>4526231>brick like sizeLiterally smaller than a 5D. >not a 1D? I have a 1DWhat would I want a 1D for in this comparison? The 5D is the closest one. Especially when herons catching fish aren't precisely the domain of the admittedly sluggish K-1>quantarayRitz Camera brand, they were rebranded Sigmas most of the time.
>>4526235Can you truly say your camera has a fully articulated screen if it's not a K-1? Truly the Fuso (the Japanese Mercedes) of cameras.
>>4526233Yeah, I think those wipes are for when there are liquids. But you can always breathe on the lens or something.
>>4526237how am I supposed to take selfies with this?>>4526231>terrible firmwarewhat is bad about the firmware? All I know thanks to the BLINKIES autist is that unlike canon and nikon pentax has live view blinkies.
>>4526236>Literally smaller than a 5ddisagree, same size as a 5d mk4, to be fair i like the ergos more. have played with both @ b&h>>4526237it doesnt really flip out though for selfies tbqh but you gotta have mental issues to take selfies with a ff dslr k1ii + 55mm f1.4 sdm (great lens, best $100 i spent)
>>4526241>what is bad about the firmware? likes to fuck up metering and run super high iso indoors or super wide apertures, one point this thing was stuck at iso 100 despite being set to auto iso until i did a hard resetautofocus is fucking terrible annoying to connect to wifi doesnt connect gps fast enough for geolocationi actually feel like my sonys (a58, a68) + pentax k3 are better designed and have stickier (more importantly, more accurate in terms of what to focus on) af k1ii + 55mm f1.8 super takumar (great lens for piss tone pictures)sti in the pic was sold for $17k 2 weeks ago thank god
>>4526242>disagree, same size as a 5d mk4Narrower, a bit shorter, a bit deeper. Smaller overall. Heavier for sure.>picrelWhy do I find "sport sedan" Subarus so lame? Sorry if that's your car but something about it rubs me the wrong way. Maybe it's too eggy for my taste in sedans. I should stick to simping for Italian cars I guess.
>>4526248Correcting myself the Impreza WRX STI from Baby Driver was actually cool. It's most likely the egg shape.
>>4526248its lame because the car got too big to suit japanese boomer and millenial american preferences (the focus group for the va/vb wrx). its large enough to fit a baby seat easily in the backseat but now its the same size as a 2000s legacy both length/width. it definitely drives like it too. its too serious/mature of a car. its definitely faster than the old ones but it lacks playfulness. i replaced it with a 2016 miata im keeping and im going to shop for a yaris/fit/prius c/mirage as a daily. it also is the same design language as a 2010s corolla. a lot of people joked saying it was a corolla with a hoodscoop.k1ii + 70-200mm @ 110mm f2.8, lighting was difficult for this setting and again it insisted on wide open
>>4526254forgot pic
>>4526254>its too serious/mature of a car. its definitely faster than the old ones but it lacks playfulness.I like that kind of car though, even the late 2000s Legacy.>2016 miataThe best looking Miata even though I'm a sucker for popup headlights.>yaris/fit/prius c/mirage Why not a Mazda2? It's cool for being the carlet it is. >>4526256I think the short tail coupled to the tall roof is what ruins it for me.
I drive an audi q8 and shoot sony
>>4526258kek, accuratenu-BMW up there too, especially the crossover "coupe SUVs">Q8 is so soulless they couldn't convince a photographer to shoot the promo material and settled for 3D rendersgrim
How much money have you spent on this hobby in total?
>>4526235Dont need a viewfinder but I assume it's gonna have a ton of new features while being under $1k.
>>4526227not buying your plastic textile chang
>>4526231I shoot K1ii, which apparently is now dead. heres to hoping the k1iii with 60mpix is really on it's way
>>4526262which features are you anticipating?the live-ND feature seems really cool. I don't think ep7 has it.
>>4526207>Makes the best interchangable travel camera with actually small lenses>Doubles market shareOf course it would when they overtake the competition like that
>>4526263>t. Calls dirt on her lens characterSad!
>>4526262>ton of new features while being under $1kLol no, they are going to make it worse than OM-5 on purpose. They already removed a dial from the top just to show poorfags their place.>>4526270I wish OM invested in both in-camera processing and OM Workspace (that's almost abandoned at this point) or at least partnered with devs of some raw editor.Imagine if they added a bunch of in-camera processing options; maybe a fake diffusion filter in addition to fake ND, maybe some good Fuji-like presets, stuff like that. And then you'd be able to also apply it all in post. But it seems they don't give too many fucks about post.
>>4526272Its worse than a snoy a7c and has fewer small lenses. And that’s saying something. L mount doesnt even have a pancake lens. Lumix is sub-snoy. Only good for the kind of vloggoids who pay for LUTs.
>>4526276Agreed. Everything panasonic makes is and always has been garbage. Youtube hype no real results>doubled market share from 0.7% to 1.4%>note: om sold fewer cameras
>>4526276Sorry anon, buying> Snoyis just out of question
>>4526279Even snoy is better than penisonic
>>4526209>shifted colours and casts look le good! its just like le film actually!!!Well now I know I'm right because a triptard disagrees.
>>4526260After the initial purchase perhaps 700 bucks, but I do my own work and hunt for deals. Most expensive part so far was probably the heated mirror and it wasn't too bad. The real problem is fixing the previous fuckups.
>>4526296I said nothing about film. The D700 differentiates shades other cameras refuse to, must be the stronger CFA.
>>4526298>I said nothing about film>also I don't know what a CFA is or what it doesYou may as well have. No one who glazes the D700 says the colours are accurate. Even redditors aren't that retarded. And it shifts colours and looks like shit.
>>4526303Cope
>>4526296He's kinda right, Nikon had official JPG profiles and the D2X one is pretty damn good as it makes the D700's strong CFA and color discriminator (actual name) try to emulate the CCD sensor of that APS-C camera.Not very successfully but it looks pretty good.>just like le film actually!!!It's notorious for not being blotchy, which is a valid positive trait. It has heavy banding at high ISOs which is the negative counterpart. >12mp is badSkill issue unless you want to print something big that wasn't perfectly in focus, which is understandable but you have to admit that's a fairly niche situation in which skill is half the issue and acquisition availability is the other.
Going to muh Japan trip in winter and bring my SL with M-Adapter. Thinking of fully manual mode with my Nokton 35mm 1.4 SC classic. Do you think it's a good idea to buy the Voigtlander APO-Skopar 75mm 2.8 over there as well? It's quite cheap, very sharp and compact. But I'm afraid with 2.8 a tiny bit too slow or what do you think
>>4526276
>>4526275>I wish OM invested in both in-camera processing and OM Workspace (that's almost abandoned at this point) or at least partnered with devs of some raw editor.Same. Pic related on the left is what their JPEG engine does with sharpening in-camera and in OM workspace. Newest flagship camera, by the way! I got the output on the right using an online RAW converter.https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/3632672590/658811
>>4526276>L mount doesnt even have a pancake lens.
>>4526328>mft aperture>soft 40mm>not pancakes>>4526334>literally who chinkshit>not a panake>no shutter>no hot shoe>no viewfinderL mount has no pancakes kek
>it doesnt even have a hot shoeWhy bother with full frame if you have to use a high ISO all the time and get the same noise as apsc? Lumix…cameras for retards
>>4526336>Snoy version wide end starts at 28mm>Snoy version is f/2.5 and cost $900
I bought the (MFT) 100-300 for long distance wildlife photography/videography. I also want a lens I can shoot macro and a lens I can do landscape photography and basically anything wider than the 100-300 will allow for. I have an olympus camera that can do bracketing/focus stacking but only with the right lens. Am I better off>A) buying a cheap 12mm manual focus lens for landscapes and a buying dedicated macro lens that can do focus stacking (probably the olmpus 60mm f/2.8)>B) buying 12-40 f/2.8 pro and some extension tubes and trying to use this for landscapes and macro>C) just buying some extension tubes for 100-300 for macro and a cheap manual focus 12mm lens for landscapesOption C would be the cheapest but I don't even know if extension tubes would work with a zoom lens that long and if bracketing/focus stacking would work with that. Option B I think would be more likely to work for macro because of the shorter focal distance and higher magnification to start on the 12-40 lens, should also work with focus stacking. I also like the versatility the 12-40 range gives me, but IDK if these assumptions are correct. Option A would probably cover my bases well, but would be the most expensive and I wouldn't get the versatility of the 12-40.What do you think would be the best, or is there another option I am overlooking that would be better? I'm leaning towards B but I'm not sure I will be able to get enough magnification with the extension tubes to take the kind of macro shots that I love that really show more detail than you can see with the naked eye.
>>4526336Crazy how it took them like 15 years to get this pancake on emount and its still fucking garbage compared to a 50$ ef 40mm pancake. This is what happens when your 'camera company' is run by indians lol. Weaponized incompetance.
>>4526336
>buy high resolution interchangeable lens full frame camera>affix shitty chink slow glass to it with no intentions of ever using anything good insteadJust buy a Ricoh GR.
>>4526338>its worse for vlogging!!!Who cares? Both lenses are shit. >its f2.5!And sharper at f2.8 than the loomix is at f8. A slight difference in max aperture doesnt matter. LIGHT does. FF only surpasses APS-C at ISO 100 classically and 100/640 or 64/400 on new sensors. You need a flash to really deserve a full frame camera. The S9 can't even use godox’s smallest flash so its basically worse than m43. >but thats hard!Full frame is for serious photography. The kind you make. Not the kind you take. For snapshitting use aps-c.>>4526343Its comparable to nikons 26mm but with more even rendering instead of a hypersharp center butting up against soft af edges. >>4526345This one is a phone lens toy. The aperture cant even change.
>>4526357Actually the a7v and a7rvi are 2 stops ahead of aps-cSony winning so hard is why /p/ hates it>noooo panafujilympus has to be better and full frame can only be blobs so you have to buy the panafujilympus reeee
>>4526336>L mount has no pancakes kek
>>4526360>literally $2000 for a 28mm f4.2 equivalent with no aperture ringHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAIs this why the sony hater is so obsessed with the official MSRP of the 40mm f2.5 (that everyone buys used or on sale for $500/$600)?Every accusation really is a confession
>>4526363It's a Leica, a luxury item. Enjoy your chink glass.
>>4526364>”leica”>made in japanAh japan. Prestigious manufacturing known for such gems as tamron and sigma lenses and all the shitty canon ef primes that indirectly kept nikon alive. Japan is literally china tier but you like anime, video games and cartoon child porn which china lacks/despises and japan exports in abundance so here we areImagine paying $2000 for an asian made 28mm f4.2 because the manufacturer (tampon or penisonic probably) wrote leica on it lol
>>4526365>no autofocus>f4>literally who brand asian toyShitty lenses like this are on every mount which is why no one caresImagine buying a $1000-$2000 FF camera and not putting a good lens on or giving the sensor the extra light it can handleStick to cheap aps-c cams kiddo
>>4526366>Japan is literally china tier but you like anime, video games and cartoon child porn What did you just say about every accusation being a confession?Nikon is Japanese BTW you idiot otaku pedo bingbingwahooer.
>>4526368I’m not accusing you I’m just stating the facts. You far right antisemites are arrested for sick shit as often as trannies. >nikon isEffectively a thai camera company with offices in japan. Snarky ladyboy cameras > beta pedo cameras.
>>4526367>Imagine buying a $1000-$2000 FF camera and not putting a good lens on or giving the sensor the extra light it can handleWow we agree on something. Now why are we talking about shitty pancake toys when it's obvious a prime that has a max aperture above f/2 might as well be a zoom?
>>4526343No one fucking cars man. All pancakes are shit, some just less than others, and there's absolutely no point putting such a short lens on a still thick body.
>>4526369>ThaiHoly cope. >right wingI'm a third positionist. >>4526372I've been saying it for years. These morons think of cameras as fashion accessories and then go for models meant for function instead of fashion.
>>4526369Also denounce Leo Frank
>>4526370Max aperture is only relevant in that it must be wide enough to stop down a few times before hitting the diffraction zone, giving the photographer the choice to use imperfect rendering with vignetting, clinical rendering, and the slightly diffracted and even stopped down look.>BUT ZOOMS ARE LE F2They also have more field curvature issues and harsher bokeh transitions which remain an issue even at f8 with a close subject at 35-50mm, and less even rendering when stopped down. They are also costlier. They are also bigger. The correct way to get light onto the sensor is to get light onto the subject. The aperture is just a lens rendering modulator. This is why having an exposure system that syncs close enough to 1/200 and a hot shoe or sync port matter for making a photograph. The 1/160th sync on EFCS cameras is barely acceptable, ass for working with fill flash and typically cant work 100% reliably with third party HSS. Shutterless cameras under 1/200th sync are useless for real photography and can only do a longer exposure to cope.
speaking of pancakes, why is there no wide pancake for F mount? I'm using DX and currently mainly use this 35mm for a 50mm equivalent, i'd love a prime around a 24-35 equivalent to compliment it (so 16-24ish) but there are NO DX lenses for that, and the FX lenses that fit the bill are either the size of a telephoto or manual focus lenses from the bronze age. i don't like zooms.
>>4526373A decent pancake and a small flash are indispensable for higher forms of art such as street photography. Effectively, directing a movie on the fly.You don’t know this but 99% of street is staged. But if you did know this you went from hating street because you thought it was random snapshits to hating street because it’s fake, while praising fucking landscapes (lol)
>>4526375Why do you care about lens size and price so much? Trying to rig a crash camera? Just get a gopro. Diffraction is a meme outside of niches like macro and art reproduction. Wide open aperture matters because once you stop down enough, FF stops having a meaningful advantage over APS-C save for ultrawide lens availability. All your scenarios are an exercise in futility and by replying to you you've succeeded in making me waste my time. Congratulations I guess.
>>4526376because f mount is too deep and narrow to host those lens designs
>>4526378I see everything I said went over your head>broooo full frame can only shoot with available light at f1.4No. Thats just how retards like you snapshit their dogs. You are wrong about how to use FF but you’re right that you should stick to crop
>>4526377Staged photography on the street isn't street so-called-photography, which is not photography nor art but mere journalism of the mundane. For staged photography, there's no need for any of what you mentioned. And for your voyeuristic pursuits a small flash and a pancake lens don't make your camera discreet enough.
>>4526380I have no dog and fast lenses don't mean not playing with light.
>>4526372>All pancakes are shitLol the sony mentality everyone. Point and laugh at this cuck. The EF 40mm pancake is sharpert than most gmasters lol.
Reminder: cANON’s photography>actually you see this is the proper use for full frame because i used an 85mm f1.8 and aps-c would require a hard to get 56mm f1.2 to equal this artful photo of my dog sitting 69 feet from a porch light>-cANON
>the life of cANON be like>luna come inside>loonie loo>where the fuck are you>LUNA!>you know what? I’m going to go cope about cameras on 4chan >several hours later>the fat husky decides to move >/p/ is safe for now
>>4526385Shit aperture and shit focal length. I once had the EFS 24mm, came with a camera. Never cared for it either. >>4526386Not my photo. You could post stuff I've taken but it would defeat your strawman.
>>4526388>disowning your photosKekHere’s another one of your masterpieces>i had to shoot at f1.2 to use a lower ISO and justify my fool frame>lighting? whazzat?>LUNA STOP DIGGING THERE>LUNA NO>*canine screaming in the distance*>LUNA SHUT IM TRYING TO TELL PEE ABOUT EQUIVALENCE>-cANON
cANON never uses flash because his derpy looking dog daughter yells at him if he does jej
>>4526379is there just no nope for me to have a compact carry with this camera then? i'm considering waiting for an x100vi to become available and abandon interchangable lens bullshit altogether
>>4526391X-E5 + 23mm f2.8 kit lens
Is the canon 6d mii + nifty fifty still capable in this day and age? Or would you upgrade to something newer?Cant afford even looking at 2000+usd cameras on the internet. Thats batshit crazy
>>4526391Yeah but only because no one else wants to make a camera with a built in flash and a leaf shutter anymoreThe x100v is also solid. Just dont get them wet or expect the autofocus to keep up with your cat.
>>4526393the canon 5DII and 5DIV are the only good ones desu>soul>utility but still more soul than mirrorlessThe 5DIII is an awkward middle child with modern autofocus and a flatter tone curve applied to the same lacking DR of the 5DII (old canon raws border on being jpegs so color/contrast in raw is a thing)
>>4526388Damn dude your photos (see here: >>4526386) fuckin suck. Even a dpreviewer would lose their job for uploading that as a test shot lol.
>>4526396*and the 6DII is awkward af too>OVF autofocus worse than the 5DIII>somehow center point AF and dynamic range got worse than the 6D>more modern/nikon-like image rendering than the 5Ds>no joystick>just a fat canon RP
>>4526392looks to be about the same size, slightly bigger?
>>4526397Thats way better than an average dpreview test shot. He managed to avoid moire after allHe is ironically a dpreview test shotter
>>4526389You literally see the glow of flash there you filthy dog, also I used a 2X TC for it.
>>4526402>you filthy dogWoah there. Are you coming on to me? I identify as a cat. You’re out of luck, bucko.
>>4526397>>4526401None of that is mine. Not the dog, not the house, not the camera and certainly not the photo.
>>4526405just post some of your actual photos to shut them up. the arguing is deeply homosexual
>>4526402>finally, luna isnt here to yell at me>i can use flash to take a picture>*shoots at f1.2 anyways*>of this leaf>*fat husky screaming in the distance*>LUNA LET ME HAVE HOBBIESYour life is a riot
>antisemitic jew>bald>cant use flash because his canine daughter yells at him>rarely goes outside when the sun is up>says FF is only worth it if you shoot at f1.2 all the time>malds at street photographers because they get to see daylight more often than he doeshahahahahaha
>>4526403Look up the meaning of dog as an insult, I even said filthy dog. I know westoids have come to worship them and treat them almost as fellow humans, but the rest of the world isn't part of your sickness.
>>4526410you stupid faggot just post a picture
>>4526411This. Fuckin tripfags are so retarded man.
>>4526409>trying to use his subtropical life as a flexKek, no wonder you settle for mirrorless.
>>4526410I must have touched a nerve for your inner pharisee to come out like thisYes we’re aware that dog ownership is a white european thing and your people traditionally disliked them. Thats ok. You dont have enough water in the middle east to give them regular baths anyways. And yet you own one because your host country allows it. Heh.
>>4526411Why, when anons do it for me? See >>4526389
>>4526415are we supposed to judge your photography on a VGA sized thumbnail?
>>4526414>implying middle easternlol, lmao even>>4526416I wasn't aware this was a photography contest thread
>>4526417i am trying to help you retard. watching you get bullied on a dead 4chan board is depressing
>>4526386This is still better than half of /rpt/.
>>4526417Stfu and go shoot some palestinians or somethingOn film or otherwise
>>4526420>least deranged jewIt was funny to read about the one in Florida the other day, thought they were Palestinians and shot two of his fellow yids
>>4526421You’re more deranged than most jews, actually.
>>4526422>n-no u!
cANON is basically a cautionary tale to not get irony poisoned, not be a zigger and not go to the sharty
>>4526330Pic on left looks better. Are you sure you didn't get that backwards?
>>4526426>prefers worms to gravellet me guess, you shoot fuji?
>>4526410>Westoids>Dog haterOhnononononnooooo hahahahahahaTripfags, everyone.
>>4526430No I shoot an Olympus from like 2004My ancient 8MP relic digishit could do better than right, it's just blurry and green, like someone smeared Vasoline all over the lens or something. Left looks better, period, especially if you can stop being a faggot for two seconds and refrain from zooming in to like 300%+ and analysing every individual pixel like an autist. You're not a scientist, stop LARPing as one.Dogshit takes like yours are why /gg/ is a containment thread.
im about to get the z8, should i risk it and get the silver cf express or shell out on gold ones? and yes im interested in bursts, planespotting (jets and helis), motorsports and wildlife. gold ones should get me around 5x longer burst shooting @ 20fps raw according to my calculations
>>4526431I don't necessarily hate dogs, but to deny they're filthy just shows you're one of the westoids (brainwashed onions-chugging westerners) I was talking about. Like, take a look outside the longhouse, broken man.
>>4526424Okay, I'll bite. /qa/ won btw >>4444444.
>>4526443>onionssøy
>>4526429Not even snoyboys coped with lenses this shitty. Why even shoot FF at this point?>>4526443Dogs are the cleanest pet. Just don’t get a shitty drooling water dog breed. Cats, on the other hand, are so dirty and destructive that keeping them outdoors is mandatory and they are not intelligent enough to be trained out of it, and its a rare and likely heavily conditioned cat that will tolerate a bath. Their spit just aint enough, rabbi. In terms of how clean the owners home isDogs (triple digit IQ owner) > fish > cats > birds > dogs (double digit IQ owner) > rabbits > pitbulls and other abominations
>>4526448I'd rather have a mini pig than a dog.Everyone has understood dogs are filthy for centuries. Call someone a пёc in any Slavic country and watch out for the punches.
>>4526451>you should care what the africa of europe thinks about your petWhat do they say about external validation, and how hard does it hit when you extend your consensus group to snowy zimbabwe?People have the dogs they breed and raise. Better people have better dogs.
>>4526454You can wash the dog but it stays a dog. Also it's a recent phenomenon in the west to treat them as basically humans. It's sick, modern "people" sit them in their tables to eat.
>>4526451Based. Ive been thinking of keeping an indoor pig. The only problem with pigs is that they are absurdly food motivated and very very strong. You have to pig proof everything. Mature mini pigs can reach 200lbs+ also.
>>4526455Yeah sure, the self hating neonazi repeats himself and the argument is won. Your rambling is disconnected from the reality in civilization. You get all your info from twitter and /pol/ ragebait. You are also by far the least intelligent poster here. Its a shame that poor dog is trapped with you.
>>4525993Snoy bois not like this
>>4526451Other way around. Slavs and Balkaners loathe and abuse dogs because they are subhuman psychopaths practically incapable of empathy. To call one a dog is a deep insult to them not because dogs are abhorrent, but because it hits too close to the truth - that they are no better than animals. The westoid does not fear or feel such an insult, because we know it is untrue. Indeed, we wouldn't even think to call someone a dog as an insult, unlike (You). It simply does not register.>>4526455Yes indeed, it stays a dog. An animal that has been fine-tuned by over 10,000 years of selective breeding to be the perfect companion and counterpart to man. The modern dog is a product of the indomitable human spirit, and must be treated with the respect and care appropriate for such an exceptional and valuable thing, just as one would an expensive and high-quality tool. Those that forsake this wisdom find in short order that the dog reflects its environment - running as wild and rabid as the (((people))) that surround it.It's not the dog, cANON. It's (You).
>>4526443I'm not really following this conversation but have a (you) for speaking the uncomfortable truth about dogs that people refuse to accept, probably because they were primarily raised on le talking animal cartoons.
>>4526465>Samefagging thirdie thinks every animal is like the abused semi feral ones in his native corner of the middle east
>>4526455>My fellow white people, we never actually liked dogs. it says right here in the mishnah to… King James Bible that dogs are accursed. Ask any Russian!>-some “fellow nazi” on a photography board (who owns and fawns over a dog)You are the worst agent mossad has ever hired fr
>>4526472>mfw reading this drivel
>>4526472I thought canon was actually ken rockwell
>>4526475He’s some wannabe JIDF flunkie that can only do fake internet jobs because he’s retarded or something>>4526476Behold, panasonics smartest and most honest shill
>gearfags (/p/): actually the sony is worse because its f2.5! You have to shoot wide open because if you stop down you have to raise the iso and then full frame is pointless! dont you know about EQUIVALENCE? Let me link you the pertinent dpreview article, pleb. >photographers (with jobs): I will take the sony. Thanks. I already have vintage primes.
>>4526257Mazda2s are hard to find in manual. They didn't sell a lot of them brand new. I actually love them but everytime I find them in manual they're rusty or clapped. Its really whatever I find in the best condition...I'm shopping for a <$5000 15 year old economy car to street park in NYC. Most of what I'm finding is auto...200k+ miles...or rusted out unless I fly down to Orlando and drive something up (but cars in FL are a little pricier + more miles + usually auto). >>4526265I'm considering selling my K1ii w/grip and 2 batteries for $1000 on eBay before the resales tank; basically what I paid for it. It has a camo skin but its clean underneath, was a K1 that was upgraded to Mk2 spec by Ricoh. Worst case I'll pick up a K3-III if they don't make a K1 Mark 3. The better AF and metering is going to be more useful to me than improved IQ from the larger sensor and will lead to more keepers + sharper photos imo. I like most of my Pentax lenses and I have a collection of lenses. I have a K3 ($200-250 used) and K70 ($300-400) that are both not worth selling and my 2 most expensive lenses (35mm f2 HD, $200-250)+ 70-200mm f2.8 Tamron, $250-300) still have me less in my collection than any other lens mount other than A-Mount. I could also pick up a A7IV and LA-EA5 and K Mount Monster Adapter for a modern mirrorless FF but eh. I probably have $2500-3000 in all my K Mount and $1000 in my A Mount stuff. Overall a cheap hobby when it lets me record memories. Should buy this shirt but I'll just look gay kek
>>4526345I think primes are dumb outside of studios, but I can see the appeal in having one of these as a backup for situations when maximum compactness is needed.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZW_kknMfR4
>>4526483>I think primes are dumb outside of studios
>>4526476LMAO
>>4526484Why are you reiterating his point?
>>4526483What if your camera doesn't have any zoomers? Like large format film or most medium format cameras???
Okay, what I understood from the thread.> Amateurs should not use professional equipment.> Snoy makes equipment for professionals.Meaning, I should not buy Snoy.
>>4526515>snoyshill trying this hard
>>4526218>Canon 5D II: $40>Capture one perpetual: $280 (discount)
>>4526519Aside from the le funny prices, it's also a bit silly to use captureone with Canon. C1 doesn't support any in-camera profiles for canon, maybe it does for other manufacters but not canon. And the default import is akin to adobe colour standard nastyness. If you really wanna do it on the cheap, try pirating lightroom or using DPP4 (pretty mid but if you're only a hobbyist its fine). and unfortunately with genp being dead, adobe pirating is looking pretty grim right now.
>>4526519Capture One pricing ia a fucking scam.> 391 Euro on their website> 280 in a photo gear shop> Probably 200-ish during "black friday".They are just trying to charge as much as they possibly can.
>>4526522It's the "fuck you" pricing. They would rather have subscriptions (as would practically any buisness model), so the "perpetual" ""license"" is designed to milk you.30 dingo dollars gets you a month of sub, so you pay roughly two years of sub fees upfront with the promise that you'll stop getting updates in half that time, but can use that version """forever""".In reality, there's a good chance about 3-4 years in you'll want their updates for some reason, so you'll need another """"license"""" anyway.
why wouldnt you pirate your editing software anon?
>>4526525Because you can't pirate free (as in freedom) software.
>>4526524Ok, I can understand matching the price of perpetual and a certain period of subscription. But I find it insulting that it's cheaper to buy a license key from a reseller than from C1's own website.
What do anon think of the new OM PEN?
>>4526519>>4526218just pirate it.or pirate lightroom classic.giving these companies money is retarded.
>>4526531what do you mean? that's why resellers exist.
>>4526521>>4526522>>4526524>>4526531And the software isn't even that good. Don't give these dogass companies or their resellers a penny. They don't give a shit about us.
>>4526538I like c1. It makes my images look a lot better than LR.
>>4526522The duality of proles>I want higher fucking pay you greedy assholes. Where is my fucking raise?>OHHH NOOOOOOOOOOO it costs MONEY to pay people to maintain and improve software IM BEING RIPPED OFF and I can't just buy shit on impulse if I want to save my money! I'd have to WAIT. This is horribleJust buy a perpetual license when it goes on sale. You don't need a subscription unless you consoom the new shiny on a yearly basis.>>4526521That's not right at all? Who even uses the in-camera jpegs? Instagram?
>>4526533I genuinely don't know what the use case is. What does it do that, say, an OM-3 can't? Or an OM-5, or an E-M10? Is it just a different body?
>>4526536Why do we need resellers for digital goods? The whole idea is very suspicious economically for a bunch of reasons, from that they get keys at a discount that's seems much steeper than loan interest rates, to that reseller pricing devalues subscriptions.
>>4526549>Micro four thirds>Use caseOlympus is a lifestyle brand. They sell a $2000 camera with a phone sized sensor full of gimmicks of little use in photography and of great interest to camera gear nerds. They never shut up about an IEC IP rating when the legalese definition of the IP rating is "it doesn't actually do anything and the warranty doesn't cover water damage" and other brands own internal testing is as good or better. Just don't try to make sense of them beyond the aesthetics of the gear because that's all that actually matters to them.>>4526550>Complaining because you have the option to buy a software license for lessWhy do we need you to be this autistic? You're like the kind of retard that sees capitalism and communism as opposing ethical imperatives and not ephemeral political responses to abundance and scarcity that can be applied to different economic sectors simultaneously.You "need" (get) resellers for "digital goods" (subsidizing a software project) because phaseone is making enough money to offer the donation price tier and the bare minimum profit margin price tier. They're being nice to you. God forbid.
>>4526533Lol of course they had to remove a top dial, because they will rather run the company into the ground than have a "cheap" camera ($1000 for a phone sensor is not cheap) with good ergonomics.Now the elephant in the room is that it's rumored to have OM-5 level specs while being cheaper, so we can start guessing what is the other ridiculous way they crippled it. I vote for EFCS-only.
>>4526549Basically a different body of the OM-5, but with the OM-3 processing capabilities. As someone who is looking for a small(er) camera to sling around my neck I'm quite intrigued. No built-in flash is a bit of a letdown, though. Looks like the X100VI is still the most feature packed small(er) camera available, if you can stand 35mm.Not really sure what to get to be honest. Rather not look like this when traveling >>4526484
>>4526547Fuck off retard.
>>4526554>i want all my software for free. it's so dumb i have to pay for things. people should work for free because i don't have a job.>wtf why does darktable suck?
>>4526552It's a fashion accessory that takes phone pics without the AIStop being autisticThe serious cameras are over there>>>/sony/ >>>/nikon/ >>>/canon/
I'm so fucking envious that m43tards get a 75mm f1.8 (150mm f3.6 full frame equiv) that is so small. There isn't anything equivalent on Fuji which is what I currently shoot because Fuji made the xf90 f/2 unnecessarily large.Anyone tried this lens? Is it worth picking up a M43 camera if even for this lens alone? Bright ~135mm equiv lenses are my favorite type of lenses and the fact that this thing is tiny makes it just seem so perfect.
>>4526432>My ancient 8MP relic digishit could do better than right, it's just blurry and green, like someone smeared Vasoline all over the lens or somethingyeah the RAW conversion was pretty bad because no lens correction were applied. Here is a better one. I hope you can see how OM's processing flattened the stones into some worms bullshit resembling late 90s video game texture.
>>4526555Jesus Christ you piss me off so much. I'm just asking that a company selling a fucking digital download maintains consistent pricing without trying to trick people into patlying more for something that is being sold for less. DxO faggots do the same btw, they have a cheaper version, but the link to it is hidden, so you need to go to its shop page from Google.
>>4526557it seems fun until you realize the sensor behind it is basically the equivalent of a sony a7c that can't go lower than ISO 800, and then you find out most olympus lenses have an inherent greenish tint.The fuji 16-80 f4 is close enough. Slightly larger but either way you go, it looks dorky. Just keep the camera you have.
>>4526551Forgetting how ridiculous OM-3 is at its price, filter emulation, stacking and all that shit is not that bad of an idea is it? Both X100 and GR cameras come with one (okay, real) filter, so I guess people like them?
>>4526432>it's blurry and greenthat's exactly what micro four thirds looks like without extensive corrections
>>4526567the in-camera gimmicks are like when cameras started coming with an HDR mode for jpeg, and it always sucked more and messed up more often than just bracketing and combining photos yourself (and still does)
>>4526569Then they could have made it easy to take a series of shots for stacking and have OM Workspace perform stacking itself.
fuck all y'all, I'm going Medium Format
>>4526573BASED.
>>4526533like that it has a viiewfinderlike that it has 2 control dialslike the power stills video S&Q switchdislike only 2 custom modes on the mode dialmeh for color/mono switch, I hope it can be reassigned
>>4526553It's an X-Tranny sensor and it's a fixed-lens camera with no optical zoom so I'm afraid it sucks by definition, sorry. Fooljis will never be good unfortunately.
>>4526578>micro fool turds trying to argue with fooljislugs about whose fashion camera is better
>>4526524where can i get a license key for dxo photolabits the only photo editing software i found more intuitive and better/faster than lightroom
I am shooting a 40mm on my fool frame and my big bazooka supertele zoom on my APS-C and none of you can stop me!
>>4526533Already mogs the snoy7c with giant lenses. We are so fucking back olympus chads!
>>4526578> X-Tranny sensorWhat's so wrong with that? It produces pleasant looking pictures. Who even pixel peeps photos that are created for the purpose of memory keeping?> fixed-lens cameraSure, that's a drawback, no denying that.> no optical zoomI guess primes are bad by definition then? In any case, 50mm and 70mm crop on 40mp suffice for non-professional photography.
>>4526566>f/4>Close enough>More than 2 stops slowerAre you retarded?>>4526557If you don't mind third-party Chinkshit, Meike has an 85mm f/1.8 which is pretty close. There's also the Viltrox 90mm f/2.2 and Kipon Iberit 90mm f/2.4, which are a little less close, though the Kipon is actually lighter than the Oly. IDK how the glass is on any of those. Probably fine but not as good as Fuji I guess.
>>4526585X-Trans makes everything green and blurry and wormy. The RAWs are a PITA to make look decent and the JPEGs always look overcooked with bloomed-out highlights, smeared detail, waxy skin, and zombie eyes & lips. It's bad.>I guess primes are bad by definition then?No, fixed primes specifically are bad. On interchangeable-lens cameras, be it an SLR or DSLR or MILC, primes are great. The problem comes when you get permanently stuck with one and only one focal length.
>>4526589> green and blurry and wormySounds eerily familiar to anons description of m43...Tell me anon, which cameras do not create green and wormy photos?
>>4526586The fourturds lense is a 150mm f3.5 on an ISO 800 sensorThe fujichad lense is a 120mm f5.6 on an ISO 200 sensor and 40mp xtrans can theoretically produce a sharper 20mp image and lose a half stop or so of noise in the processI don't think it's ever worth buying another (worse) camera just for 30mm of zoom and a little bit of aperture no one will ever notice or care about.>>4526589>green and blurry>the raws are A PITA>the jpegs are always overcooked>blown highlights>smeared detail>zombie peopleYou're describing micro four thirds.-Sent from my OM-5
>>4526585The real issue with Fuji is the autofocus simulation: it is full of bugs that will make you miss focus even in AF-S every now and then and you will never know why.>>4526589You'd just generating empty buzzwords like an LLM. Same Snoy sensor as in every other camera, and if you don't like one look, just start with another "film simulation".
>>4526559Now this is what I call pixel peepingIt's a fashion camera sold for people to print shitty 4x6s and post on instagram with grow tf up. No one who takes image quality that seriously is paying for these literal toys.
>>4526592>The real issue with Fuji is the autofocus simulation: it is full of bugs that will make you miss focus even in AF-S every now and then and you will never know why.Read this with an indian accent
>>4526590As far as I'm personally aware, it's just Fuji and Olympus. Haven't heard of this being endemic with other brands, though it's possible some specific models may suffer from the same issues. But I also don't know everything, I'm not a walking photography encyclopedia, so take that with a couple grains of salt.
>>4526595>ESL babbleOh my god you're all indians
>>4526591Okay? I don't recall ever saying mfturds was good? I'm still right btw.
>>4526596English is the only language I've ever known. Try again.
>>4526594Enjoy having to take every photo at least three times.
>>4526597Skill issue.
>>4526593As usual here, it was taken from DPReview without context. The context is that Olympus sharpening in camera and in OM Workspace is bad. And it is. Whatever money you save buying a smaller sensor, you have to spend on third party software.
>>4526601Everyone who cares buys capture one anywaysFree software has never been as good>inb4 i bought the first download link i saw reeeee
>>4526591> 1 of 76Now post the other 75 shots of your dog napping.
>>4526602With Fuji at least you get a free version of C1 that is usable (unlike OM Workspace).
>>4526603Why yes, all 75 photos are of my dog napping. How could you tell?
>>4526603>Dogsnapping? No. Dog napping.This is a new low even for dogsnappers. And they were already pretty damn low. Shameful.
>>4526605>>4526603Based and best photos posted in the last 20 gear threads.
>>4526547>That's not right at all? Who even uses the in-camera jpegs? Instagram?The in camera profiles are really good. Most brands, at least Canon and Nikon do this, embed a bit of data into the makersnotes of your RAW file that include which camera profile it was shot with. CaptureOne ignores this data and uses its own per camera profile. Lightroom has all the camera profiles built in to the software, so it will select whichever one you had selected in camera, but you can also switch through them, so long as you shot it in RAW. More useful for some cameras than others, but personally I think the Canon profiles are leaps and bounds ahead of the default adobe interpretation or the default C1 import. This is the biggest thing stopping me from switching to C1. That and the masking being no way near as good as LRc. Everything else on C1 is good.
>>4526127>>4526136The weird thing is that OM's recent cameras also don't have OLPF but I can't find hideous moire examples like this with OM.
>>4526609>samefagging this hardMy 400mm leaf is better and it's not even particularly good.
>>4526612Canon, I'm dissapointed in you. I only thought you were half schizo. Your incorrect samefagging accusation has placed you squarely in the full blown schizo category. Sad!
>>4526613To be fair, some other guy was accused of being me samefagging in this same thread. Just because he agreed with me about the nature of dogs.
>>4526410>I know westoids have come to worship them and treat them almost as fellow humans, but the rest of the world isn't part of your sickness.third worlders don't understand that the difference between our dogs and their dogs is the same as the difference between our people and their people.
>>4526615>this copesame as how dodging shit in San Francisco isn't the same as in India, lolthe absolute stateI won't bother confirming nor denying your claims done in bad faith for datamining/doxing purposes though
>>4526611That's because micro four thirds pixels are too tiny for their lenses huge aberrations, and the poor signal/noise ratio further reduces resolution.All moire on test charts indicates is high resolution, especially since dpreview always shoots their charts at f5.6 (the sharpest aperture on nearly every lens). It's not a problem IRL if you know what you're doing.>>4526614>/p/ has more than one thirdieOh NO
>>4526616>brings up literally mexicoThirdie, the difference between your country and our country is you lose 10,000+ people to rabies deaths yearly and we lose 30 mexicans and 5 liberals to their own pitbulls yearly.
>>4526614It was pretty funny that another schizo thought you were huskyfag.
Snoy shills are still crying huh
>>4526620It never stops. Thats why they need proper weather sealing on their cameras.
>>4526618>implying pajeetlol>>4526619huskyfag attempted to falseflag as me a while ago and it stuckI guess picturing me as a "dog daddy" was funny enough for it to stick
>>4526619They're both namefags so they're basically the same anyways.
>>4526623It is kinda funny you old dog.>>4526626I thought there was a difference between someone picking their own name and earning a nickname.
>>4526627>earning a nickname.Through avatarfagging? Same thing
>>4526633>taking photos of a dog is now avatarfaggingAnd what do you take photos of? Can we call you buildingcornerfag?
>>4526627"Dogfucker" isn't really a nickname.
>>4526640It's avatarfagging if you consistently do it every time you post even when unneeded and almost never post anything else. It's "soft" avatarfagging I suppose, or avatarfagging with plausible deniability if you prefer, but it's faggotry all the same.
>>4526642No one here fucks dogsExcept for cinefag
>>4526646Who do you think you're talking to? You're way too obsessed with a random person who posted their dog a few times.
know who I miss, that pentax faggot who used to take candid pics of ugly people on the street
>>4526649You're being transparent in your insecurity huskyfag
>>4526649This. It's pretty funny at least.
>>4526651Which one?
>>4526653This. Very very feminine to be so obsessed with other people's posting. Especially to the point of bringing them up constantly.
It's diabolical that people are selling ricoh gr iiis over $1k secondhand right now. Legit like 3 years ago I could get them for about $800, with lower shuttercount too. Fuck this fucking hobby, idk why I waited for gr iv to come out thinking prices would go down.
>>4526655Consider film.
>>4526655Some used prices are complete nonsense.> New GR IV - 1450 Euro> Used GR IV on MPB - 1350 EuroWhat's even the point.
>>4526533>>4526577looks like they're making both black and silver versions.
>>4526662kek, cost is basically the only reason to go digital over film
>>4526666For me, it's black and silver gelatin)))
>>4526559Right still looks kinda blurred, but less so, and colour is better. I think I prefer it but I'd have to see the whole image instead of pixel peeping. I'd be happy with either.>>4526568Are we going to pretend that colour correction is bad, actually? Is that where we're at now?>But anon wouldn't it be better if it didn't need colour correction at all?Yes but that's not always practical. It's not like it matters that much for digital since you can in fact just correct it. Digital colour is not and never will be real, fundamentally.
