>filtered editionIn the last episode of guitar general: >>4531957
Do you want 28-85mm F2.8 if it existed?
>>4532916Multiple manufacturers literally make something in the realm of a 28-75 f/2.8. What the fuck are you talking about.No an extra 10-15mm on the long end of a short telephoto is not a meaningful difference.
>>4532916lmao tell me you are a no photo without telling me
Paper is gear. What's your favourite paper?
>>4532950Leuchtturm 120s are the only stationary product I ever buy any more. You can get a whole year out of one if your putting 2 days a page sometimes and occasionally skipping days (206 pages) but it would be really tight
>>4532916Fuji's flagship zoom is 16-55mm which translates into 24-82.5mm full frame field of view.
of course its the tripfag making the 13th same thread in the catalog
>>4532911Just ordered an F80S (the Japan-only version of F80 with exposure and date printing on the film frame).Have been drooling at this for so long.
>>4532967Probably one of the better cameras to get for filmfags who want something durable from the late film era without having to pay stupid money.
I'm usually shooting on film (Nikon F-series), but I want to move on from it. Right now my budget is low but in a few months I can invest more. A lot of people are shilling the Fujifilm X-H1 and I kind of like it. But a Nikon Z5ii might be a better long-term investment and isnβt a decade old. Is the X-H1 worth the $500? Lenses also cost a lot so its more than 500 at the end. Any opinions?
>>4532967Huh. I was happy when my Elan 55 had a quartz date back, but I had no idea there were cameras with exposure setting printing. Neato.
>>4532970Yeah, I already have the F80 base model, and I love it. It has full support for AF-S glass, and even VR works with it.The one I ordered has a broken door hinge, but that is easy to fix. Apart from that weak point they are surprisingly sturdy. I have been using mine in snow and rain without any hiccups.>>4532973Yeah - The F80D only prints the date, but F80S can print shutter speed, f-stop and exposure compensation as well. I think it will come in handy for comparison later, because I always forget what settings I used by the time the roll comes back from the lab.
>>4532971If you just want the most bang for your buck, and you have 500 of said bucks, you should go with D600/D610/D800/D800e/D810.If you are content with APS-C, the Z5 is a decent enough option, and IBIS is a big plus.
>>4532975I'd rather get a gen 1 Z6, though. They have gotten quite cheap lately. With an F to Z adapter you can use your old film glass until you can afford Z stuff.
>>4532971>>4532975>>4532976
>>4532967I almost told you I was sorry to disappoint you that it was unable to imprint 2026 but I misremembered, those were the Elans. This one is good until 2049. The cheap bastards at Canon gave their cameras a 2019 limit.
>>4532971If you look at huskyfag's pics you'll see that Fujis are a downgrade over the D200 so no, don't spend 500 on that crap.
what are some cameras to avoid because they take more than 1 second to boot up
>>4532978Oh, really? I didn't even consider the spooky Y2K bug.But it doesn't really matter to me anyway - It's the exposure print I'm interested in.
>>4532980Basically every single murrorles
>>4532964Well, hardly anyone responds to his bait in /rpt/, so he's naturally back to the nearest gearfag thread even if he has to make one.
>>4532978Same goes for almost all compact film cameras as well as if going from 01-99 would be some sort of monumental technological achievement.>The best I can do is 86-04.I am always shocked when they are still usable with the date function. Interestingly some digicams do have a cutoff as well.
>>4532985They probably didn't trust them to make it in use to this era or worse, it was planned obsolescence meant to make us buy a new model just for the date back
>>4532984What bait? I literally provided keystone correction for free.
>>4532911I have never used black and white filters, but I love it when I purchase old camera lots and they are included because so many hipsters are looking for them.>Buy old SLR kit>Sell yellow, green, orange and blue filters for $15 a pop, reduce cost of gear to 0.Heck, boomers are even paying $30 for first party filters.>Oh wow a Nikon yellow filter? Take my money.Often times they don't even say that they are included in the listing, they are just there in one of the side compartments.Those gimmicky types of diffraction filters from the 80s are also something to be on the lookout for. Take an example photo of the filter in use and some zoomer is sure to buy it.
This thing is much fun.Are there any other super cheap gimmicks that have a high fun factor like this?
>>4532971If you already have lenses that you like that can be easily adapted to the Nikon then get the Nikon.If you want a camera with soul that produces beautiful film like images that very rarely need any editing then get a Fuji but like you said you'll have to get glass for it so it's not a smart financial decision.
>>4533006>beautiful film like images>that very rarely need any editing lol, you have to use Capture One to make them look a bit less shitIf you like worms, bad colors and smeared foliage, get a Fuji.
>>4533018I've never done any editing to my images beyond cropping and leveling in Darktable. They are always straight out of the camera jpgs.So eat a dick nophoto.
>>4533021Such fimic quality, such soul, wow, almost fooled me /s
>>4533023Post photos.
>>4533021What is the focal length here
>>453302833mm on APS-C so FF 50mm equivalent field of view.Lens: XF33 f/1.4 LM WR
>>4533029Cool. Do you have subject distance in your raws?
>>4533027Cunt
>>4533018You dont need capture one unless you use a very old fuji or want to editC1 is industry standard and adobe is garbage anyways>>4532979Huskyfag lied and told you a d200 or 5d2 was a fuji retard its really obvious that was an ancient sensor
>>4533033Nice reach phonesnapper
>>4533035280mm+flash, coper
>>4533034>Huskyfag lied and told you a d200 or 5d2 was a fuji retard its really obvious that was an ancient sensorlololol new fujislug cope just dropped
>>4533031>Do you have subject distance in your raws?I don't think so. Kot was ~5 meters away and this image is very slightly cropped. Why are you asking?
>>4533036>flashbruh I don't think your flash can reach the moon...
>>4533033Frame within a frame.Correctly exposed.BUTNot a Fuji (can tell by the colors) so I can't give it more than snap/10, sorry.
>>4533040just judging how well I'd do with my own snapkots at 56mm apsc
>>4532975>>4533006Thank you. Iβm going to save for a z5ii, and yes, I already have a few good lenses from my F series. I like the Fujifilm style but I still think the z5ii is just better for my current situation
>>4533044If you want a Fuji and a long lens then get yourself the venerable XF90 f/2. It's tack sharp wide open and simply magical. Insanely beautiful lens.
>>4532916For a zoom of that type I would always rather wider than longer, I have a high res sensor and don't need the full res so I can always crop in a little tighter. However there are times when I can't step back any more.
>>4533049Great lens, >>4532806 with the 90
>>4533033Taken on a Canon T3i with a shitty Tamron zoom in 2012.
Is the Canon EOS 5d Mk 3 for a few hundred $ good enough for these purposes:digitizing papers/art, claymation stop motion, taking photos on the ground from a bugs perspective(tilt shift lens?), video/filming(30 fps is fine, but i think camera is 1080p which could be a problem). Articles say mirrorless is way better for video, but not sure whyThe real cost is the lenses right?
I have an A6000 with a 20mm 2.8 lens It feels stupid to shoot when it, ive been think about getting a cheep 35 to experiment with, any recommendations?
>>4533062It will work just fine for those purposes, and it is a good stills camera even today. If you're using it for video and you think you're too restricted on features, there is a custom firmware called MagicLantern that will expand those functions for you (codec/bitrate controls, extra framerates, MUH BLINKIES, etc). EF-mount lenses are plentiful and even many of the cheaper options still give sharp results (most EF lenses can also adapt seamlessly to mirrorless, should you upgrade in that direction).
>>4533076thanks, i looked up magic lantern and an article says the 5d mk 3 can do 3.5k which sounds good enough for me, seems like an amazing time to get into photography desu
>>4533076Put your trip back on cANON>>4533062Don't get that blob, get a Fuji XT3 instead
>>4533081I'm not cANON, I actually take photos (>>4533059, >>4532041, and >>4532064) and can even speak from personal experiences.Whichever camera he goes with, they'll be excellent for what he's using them for.
>>4533087>I'm not cANON>recommends canon blobI get that you prefer to post your better material without your name tainting it but drop the pussy drying unc recs too
>>4533089Believe whatever you want, dude. It ain't worth the arguing.
>>4533062Save up and get a canon RP or M5 or something unless you are poor/autistic>>4533037>>4533034>shot out car window>cropped>retard believed it was a fujihahahahahaha
>>4533062>OVF only, low angle shooting>DSLR live view, low angle shootinglolno
>>4533062Mirrorless are basically glorified camcorders so there's one advantage they have for video, you can use the viewfinder. But you wouldn't use the viewfinder to shoot the PoV of an insect, you'd use the rear display.>>4533076Couldn't have said it better myself>>4533079One caveat, 3.5k is cropped and MLRAW format which isn't the most friendly of pipelines. 1080p is basically super16 resolution though so I wouldn't be too concerned about it.There's a whole season of House MD shot on the previous model, the quality is there. Make sure you get a GOOD CF card if shooting MLRAW to avoid dropped frames (Sandisk Ultra Pro, Lexar 1066x).>>4533081Not my post, fujislug shill.
>>4533081Having worms in your pictures is such a miserable experience you want company, isn't that true? Nobody cares what your camera looks like.>>4533087>implying I don't take photos or can't speak from personal xp>Whichever camera he goes with, they'll be excellent for what he's using them for.Fujis overheat https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJCX1IHo6zg>>4533089>implying I'd post stuff here that I'd use elsewhereI don't want my public life associated with 4chan, all I post here are throwaways or nondescript locations.
>>4533093Not talking about that one but the B&W dogsnapFunny that the worm infection is transmitted to Canon RAWs by capture one though
>>4533095Mirrorless are strictly superior to DSLRs. DSLRs are just cheap and disposable cameras for spergs and shekel hoarders.>>4533099It is becoming increasingly apparent you think film grain sims are fuji worms.
>>4533102So much for the industry standard software, your photos look like shit. Lightroom chads win againhee hee hee
>>4533105You're looking at an image viewer downscaling a cropped grain sim added photo with the clarity nuked, you gay gabbagool wannabe.
>>4533106I'm looking at a Fuji file with the EXIF edited to claim it's Canon out of embarrassment. If Ken could get quality files from the 5D2 in 2009 with mediocre zooms you have no excuse.
>>4533107Pic related
>Add fake grain to a DSLR from 2008>Change filename>Tripfag begins to honestly believe it is a fujifilmmy latest and greatest triumph in making cANON look retarded
>>4533109>the explicit simulacrum serves as a cover for the implicit one
>>4533062>Articles say mirrorless is way better for video, but not sure whyMirrorless is better for everything because you can monitor the capture in real time and make corrections/adjustments in real time.OVF means trusting the exposure meter which is only correct when pointed at pic related. EVF you see exactly how the exposure will look with exposure simulation.With mirrorless you can adjust the white balance/tint, tone curves, etc. to match what you see. You can kind of do this with a DSLR's live view mode but when it's not dark you need one of those LCD hoods for it to be useful.
>>4533111>means trusting the exposure meter which is only correct when pointed at pic relatedThat's not true.>you can adjust the white balance/tint, tone curves, etc. to match what you seeThis is irrelevant and no one does it. Shoot raw.
>>4533112trvkemirrorless is better because IBIS is finally on good brands, the lenses are designed more like they would be on leica M mount so they can be better and smaller, the screens flip out for shooting at odd angles, switching between the viewfinder/screen is faster, and live view autofocus is finally usable.exposure preview isn't even that useful. only beginners and incompetent people really care about that stuff.
>>4533113>and live view autofocus is finally usableLiterally the same AF that EOS SL2 has lmao
>>4533109The funny part is he actually fought the realization>no, a cropped photo from a 22mp camera with a blur filter on the sensor, a cheap lens, and a film grain sim couldnt possibly look bad when pixel peeping>only fujifilm cameras can look bad
>>4533062>Is the Canon EOS 5d Mk 3 for a few hundred $ good enough for these purposes:digitizing papers/art, claymation stop motion, taking photos on the ground from a bugs perspective(tilt shift lens?), video/filming(30 fps is fine, but i think camera is 1080p which could be a problem)Yes.You will want a macro lens for digitizing and very likely the claymation. I'm not sure a tilt-shift is necessary but if what you want is to minimize DoF to simulate a smaller world, then that's a classic use. Doing low angle shots will be far easier with a tilting screen which the 5D3 does not have. Only FF Canon DSLR I know of having a tilt screen is the 6D2 which might be a few hundred more dollars.1080p30 is fine for video because every single platform except jewtoob will downscale to phone res and compress the shit out of it regardless. If you're taking video for your own consumption then 4k60 starts to become useful.
Is it worth getting a M645 to RF adapter to mess around with some vintage glass? I'm getting a couple of lenses shortly and one of them is a 145mm soft focus lens.
>>4533122Yea it's fun
>>4533123Never adapted medium format before so I don't know what to expect. Judging by pic related it seems like an 80s bloomfest.
>>4533124You just gotta stop down a lil. The center is usually sharper/better corrected than the sides so adapting to a smaller format will produce a sharper image BUT soft focus lenses will have a stronger effect because the aberration that gives the image its softness will also be enlarged.
Fujifilm's take on the future of photography:βThe spread of smartphones democratized photography. Through social media, people developed a more discerning eye for photos. The demand for cameras among people who care deeply about self-expression has grown, leading to our strong performance. We deploy marketing strategies that allow people to feel the βjoy of photographyβ that smartphones cannot deliver by having them try cameras hands-on at shooting events and retail stores.βThis relies on a foundation of technology cultivated over many years. Finding affection in the tactile, analog feel of turning dials or enjoying the distinct color tones of film photography is only possible thanks to our accumulated camera technologyβ¦ AI can generate images, but only humans possess the subjective sense of feeling, βThis is real.'β
Sony's take on the future of photography:β[Spatial AI] involves capturing the physical world using image sensors to create a digital twin, wherein we can make reality more attractive or simulate different ways of presenting it. That simulation is then turned into content for people to experience back in the physical world,ββThe term originated from the idea that AI should be used not just for operational efficiency or labor savings, but to expand the world of entertainment. Ultimately, we want to reach a point where we can generate content tailored optimally for each individual. Spatial recognition and subject tracking technologies can definitely be leveraged. With Alpha, physical space can be reproduced digitally. At first glance, βAlphaβ appears to be a standalone camera business, but its essence lies in creating value for creators and content consumers.ββAnyone who creates something and inspires emotion is a creator. This includes not only photographers and film directors, but also dancers, musicians, and athletes. We want to utilize Spatial AI to enhance and expand their creativity.β
>>4533139>>4533140Canon and Nikon didn't have anything interesting to say. What are your thoughts on this?Source: https://petapixel.com/2026/10/05/canon-nikon-sony-and-fujifilm-all-see-photographys-future-differently/
>>4533141>What are your thoughts on this?They make tools for pros or would-be ones, they don't need to justify what you do with them or the output
>>4533142If you're talking about Nikon and Canon then their comments were pretty pathetic. I think they reflect the state of those companies pretty well.Nikon sounds like a kid that is always late with his homework trying to justify being behind again, promising that they'll catch up in 5 years. But by that time everyone else will also move forward leaving them once again, in the dust.Canon's take is basically pic related. They want some of Fujis success but they are so out of touch they don't fully understand what made Fuji relevant in the first place.Sony seems to be focused on pushing the technology forward but I'm not sure if I like what that forward is.Fuji seems to understand their target audience well and they are focused on making good cameras that are enjoyable to use. I like the last part of their take the most: "AI can generate images, but only humans possess the subjective sense of feeling, βThis is real.'"Now I regret not making this into a separate thread but whatever. It's not like those 5 active posters here care anyway.
>>4533108the only good thing about this photo is the subject, the location he was in renders it basically impossible to take a totally uninteresting picture. otherwise it looks like a half assed snapshit that couldve been taken by a tourist pointing his iphone at his feet, simply terrible
>>4533146You know it's illegal to criticize other peoples photos without posting your own work, right?
>>4533148since when does it take a baker to judge the taste of bread? what you did is assume that the photographers are the only audience of other photographers' work. and you're mostly correct (a big problem for photographers). but me, I like to look at pictures. I take some too but don't care to share and do not consider myself a photographer, much less a rival for any acknowledged(?) professional(?)
>>4533149That was sarcasm, dude.
>>4533140I can't imagine ever writing something that fucking gay. Jesus Christ.
>>4533141>By comparison, Sony seems to be interested in focusing the business entirely differently. Specifically, Tanaka sees βSpatial AIβ as the future of its Alphas series cameras.>β[Spatial AI] involves capturing the physical world using image sensors to create a digital twin, wherein we can make reality more attractive or simulate different ways of presenting it. That simulation is then turned into content for people to experience back in the physical world,β he explains.>βThe term originated from the idea that AI should be used not just for operational efficiency or labor savings, but to expand the world of entertainment. Ultimately, we want to reach a point where we can generate content tailored optimally for each individual. Spatial recognition and subject tracking technologies can definitely be leveraged. With Alpha, physical space can be reproduced digitally. At first glance, βAlphaβ appears to be a standalone camera business, but its essence lies in creating value for creators and content consumers.β>Basically, Sony sees its Alpha division as a part of its overarching entertainment goals, not as a standalone business that props itself up through its own initiatives. As a result, Sony sees βcreatorsβ as not just photographers and filmmakers. >βAnyone who creates something and inspires emotion is a creator. This includes not only photographers and film directors, but also dancers, musicians, and athletes. We want to utilize Spatial AI to enhance and expand their creativity.βAPOLOGIZEThis is them merely peeling the veil off their optional stuff to conceal it's all compromised, enjoy your Apollo 11 landing site "photos" I guess. The optical viewfinder is the last stand of implicit photographic integrity.
>>4533152>Snoy adds AI to their cameras to please the shareholders>Somehow, this is evidence that the moon landings were le fakeWow, you really are delusional.
>>4533152>>4533140>capturing the physical world using image sensors to create a digital twin, wherein we can make reality more attractive or simulate different ways of presenting it It makes complete sense that the digital camera industry would see AI art and think "we want that in the cameras". They are litteraly creating the camera that generates AI pictures but unironically. Digital camera hoarders will love it.>we want to reach a point where we can generate content tailored optimally for each individualThat is utterly terrifying.>Anyone who creates something and inspires emotion is a creator. This includes not only photographers and film directors, but also dancers, musicians, and athletes. ... but we think it would be better if what they did was AI generated instead. Anyone who's interested in art understand the gaslighting that's happening here, but as always the irony is lost on digital shooters.
>>4533152>Snoy shooters need AI to take good photos
>>4533154Stop replying to him. You're only making things worse.I'm an AI skeptic myself but that dude is just off the rails. I bet he uses autocorrect on his smart device not realizing that the underlying technology that makes it work is basically the same as what makes chatbots work. Nothing wrong with running AI noise reduction because it's just an algorithm that is great with patterns. Nothing wrong with AI autocorrect. Nothing wrong with AI auto focus that runs a small LLM that recognizes patterns. What's wrong is trying to sell that tech as the next coming of jesus and push for mass firings to make stakeholders more money at the cost of the quality of their products, employee well being and future of global economy.Guns don't kill people. Same with LLMs. It's just math.if you want to hate someone/something then hate the rich. >>4533155Analog only shooters are vegans of the photographic community. Intelligent people shoot both and have a problem with neither.
>>4533150My bad. not a regular
>article with distressing news>cANON still comes away with the worst take
>>4533145>But by that time everyone else will also move forward leaving them once againI don't know man, Z9 and the pricing on the Z line all are a leap on their ownAlthough i would like to say Sony does have massive leaps that aren't even attempted by others, like the global FF shutter or the 61mp sensor.>Fuji seems to understand their target audience well and they are focused on making good cameras that are enjoyable to useI do agree their know their audience but i wouldn't call them good cameras or enjoyable to use for someone who actually works with a camera in a run-n-shoot setup.
>>4533163>I have the reaction time of a sloth
>>4533163>wouldn't call them good cameras or enjoyable to use for someone who actually works with a camera in a run-n-shoot setupIf you're talking about Fujis sucky AF-C then sure, there are better cameras for that. Maybe they'll be able to catch up with the X-T6 so I have something nice to upgrade to in ~2 years.
>>4533163What cameras do you use?
@4533152While sony's news is distressing your issue with it falls apart fastA DSLR could already take a fake photo. Yes, you saw a tiny, fresnel blurred take from the viewfinder. You could have also opened your other eye. In any case you're going to view the full size photo on a real screen later and accept it as truth. The largest OVF is still too small compared to a cheap pair of binoculars and doesn't show you the very fine details AI would later fuck with unless you zoom in from 400mm to 1200mm before taking the picture.Even your precious "reach" is just you trusting the screen over the OVF.You should have always been toting around some 10x25s and looking for a decent dobsonian telescope (you couldn't even get a rcognizable photo of saturn fag). Hey, binoculars and a slim mirrorless would be more portable than an SLR!
>>4533167>Fujis sucky AF-CFunny thing is that when you look at the RPT and most threads here, there's hardly ever images that would even necessitate leaving AF-S, let alone require a AF-C better than what Fuji already offers
>>4533171Shut up and post your dog instead of acting like a fag>>4533145But it's marketing. Imagine giving a shit about how a company sounds to you."Oh, fuji wrote poetry, I want their camera now"I don't even care if their dials are popular with kids. They're fake, and they're bad tech we as a civilization replaced ASAP in the 80s. Their cameras are mediocre and expensive, and I'd rather grab a nikon.>but nikons marketing statement didnt impress me!Good thing they saved that effort for their cameras then.
>>4533174>you caught me, I don't even own a cameraSad truth
>>4533175https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/text/%22What%20cameras%20do%20you%20use%22/Fag
>>4533172ThisFILM was the last stand of photographic integrity period>but i have... a viewfinder... plato or something...
>>4533173>No one needs better anything than my favorite brand offers because they dont post it on 4chan.oh my god he did the memehe's autisticoh no
>>4533176Asking what cameras people using in gear thread when they talk about gear is bad? Seems more like the fag thing is to not answer a simple and direct questionWhy do you think people, like yourself, have to keep what cameras they use a mystery? Do you work for the CIA or something?
>>4533179t. photoless homosexual
>>4533178Awesome, what kind of action shots do you take and where can we see them? What cmares models do you use for them?
>>4533180Got more cameras and pictures than you here bbNeat part of my job too is that I get to try out all kinds of different bodies, like the R8II in the last gear thread, always happy to actually talk gear. I hope you can get a camera yourself one day
>outside of 4chan>1: fuji autofocus kinda sucks>2: yeah i dont even try taking photos of birds and shit, i have a canon for that. tf was i supposed to get for a small camera, a sony? lol>1: lol @ sony>4chan>1: fuji autofocus kinda sucks>2: picrel>1: lol @ oyu
>>4533181>cmares>sea maresHorse detected
>>4533183>outside of 4chan>Fuji autofocus is good enough for most people in most situations, but not top tier
>>4533185>l-leave fuji alone!Yeshua on a skewer, you're worse than sony fanboys.
>>4533186Because I have practical real world experience with all the brands and talk to actual photographers who use all brands all the time?I'm just being honest, Sony is awesome, and Fuji isn't anywhere near as bad as people here claimWhat brands and models do you like?
>>4533187Idk why you're on some big "leave fuji alone spiel" just because people aren't impressed with their dial centric marketing babbleDials aren't good tech. They're a fragile, unergonomic complication and don't make looking at a tiny TV feel any realer. They don't even place them where they make sense. They place them where engineering and cost cutting constraints placed them on shitty vintage SLRs. Really, really good SLRs had the shutter speed dial around the lens mount or on the left side with a WLVF.
>>4533189you dont understand how zoomers thinkthey think in slogans. they have been educated entirely on slogans.if you tell them the dials make it realer they repeat thatthey dont believe it because they dont have an inner narrativebut they repeat it and then it spreads like parrots all learning to say "nigger"
>>4533187You have a reddit like urge to attach identifying traits to anonymous posters>hold on, anonymous, post your desk before I engage with you
I should get a Fujifilm just because of this tripfag autistic retard
>>4533173>AF-SExactly as good as on Canikony. It's instant and never misses. Idk if anything could be improved here.>AF-CI think is ok but I never really tested it without subject detection.>AF-C + subject detectionOh boy, just thinking about this makes me angry. The problem with Fuji subject detection is not that it doesn't work because it works fine like 99% of the time. The problem is that sometimes it will just fail without a reason and you will only notice when you're reviewing your photos at home. This can be really annoying. Imagine you're shooting portraits with eye detect on and out of 10 shots one is out of focus for absolutely no good reason and it's the one shot you like the most. Subject detection on Fuji is mostly fine but unreliable. I just don't trust it anymore.Still great cameras though.
>>4533119>6D2can i overcome not having a tilt screen with the 5dmk3 by having a small external screen/smartphone that I wireless or wired connect to? The 6d2 is stuck at 1080p video and I like the idea of high res, in the end with it being cropped on the 5d3, im not sure if it will end up msttering though
>>4533177>he doesn't know about Zapruder>he thinks movies are realReminder that implicit integrity is that of the medium, not of the photographer. Digital and film are equal in that regard. >>4533158>nothing wrong with a little fun, what could go wrong?>my precious little fun, nobody has to knowCattle proudly entering the slaughterhouse, lol
>>4533174Based alert
>>4533198nvm , i asked ai and it said I can use a smrtphone as external monitor.
>>4533189Dangerously based post, absolute trvke
>>4533193>The problem is that sometimes it will just fail without a reason and you will only notice when you're reviewing your photos at homeEVF and its consequences...
>>4533189name 1 good camera without any dials
>>4533199Yeah isn't it amazing how there just happened to be a Jew with a camera at the right place. Same with 9/11. It just happened to be lots of Jews there with cameras. Fairly certain that the "Babushka lady" was part of the cell that was there to "document the event" in the case of Kennedy, but yes, fake and gay has been a thing throughout all of human history, it is not something that started in the digital era, but lately with all the social media influencers getting exposed, people trying to present AI as the real thing and such has led to people to a larger degree questioning reality. Perhaps all types of imagery is a sort of magick if you will.
I bought a Tougodo Mirroflex from a fleamarket for 35 eurobucks. Apparently the cable release for the old Japanese cameras is, as pictured, quite different from the mechanical cable releases I have. Does anyone know where to get an adapter screw?
>>4533204Minolta Maxxum 7000
>>4533193>Exactly as good as on Canikony. It's instant and never misses. Idk if anything could be improved here.testing shows otherwise and I can personally confirm Fuji random misses on AF-S.
>>4533222But that's for a GFX. I'm yet to see AF-S miss focus on my APS-C Fuji but if other brands somehow perform even better then I'm happy for them. It's really only the AF-C + subject tracking that sucks enough to be problematic in real world situations.
>>4533112>This is irrelevant and no one does it. Shoot raw.Shooting RAW is for old people with old cameras.Mirrorless obsoleted post-processing GET OVER IT
>>4533112>This is irrelevant and no one does it.I do it so I don't have to edit all of my photos.>>4533234>Mirrorless obsoleted post-processingThat's just not true though. I always try to get my shot right in the camera but there are limits to that.
>>4533234Everyone competent shoots raw. Jpeg is for blind boomers.
>>4533234ok boomer. still havent upgraded from your dell core 2 duo and 100gb hard drive? modern computers fly through raws. theres no reason not to. >>4533222this is literally the only source that puts canon autofocus below panasonic and you keep reposting it. its probably a botched test with bad methodology by one of the many (non photographer) hobbyist gearfags that plague photography.
Time's up. Canon has abandonned us birders in favor of jeet vloggers. What's the best alternative system?No micro four turds.
>>4533248Pentax.
>>4533231>But that's for a GFX.>>4533242>this is literally the only source that puts canon autofocus below panasonic and you keep reposting it.If you know a site that does better quantifiable autofocus testing, link it.https://www.optyczne.pl/501.3-Test_aparatu-Fujifilm_X-T5_U%C5%BCytkowanie_i_ergonomia.html
>>4533250NTA but that spread is extremely odd. >If you know a site that does better quantifiable autofocus testing, link it.Many reviewers already do that, they take series of photos in reproducible conditions with different systems and compare how many are in focus and out. It's the first time I see the R7 perform worse than every other comparable systems.I've had the X-T4 and X-T5 before switching to the R7 for birding, so I'm extremely surprised by these results. The R7 does jump and miss focus more than canon's FF cameras, but it's clearly ahead of fuji in AF-C, far beyond what a margin of error could ever explain.Also give us a fucking translation
>>4533251>it's clearly ahead of fuji in AF-Cit's an AF-S test>Also give us a fucking translationx axis: deviation from sharpest photo in seriesy axis: number of photos"Typically, in an autofocus accuracy test, we take a series of 40 shots in a studio. We set the lens aperture to f2.8 and capture a resolution chart, refocusing each time. The results are presented as a histogram, which shows the percentage of deviation from the best MTF50 measurement in the series."Also for each camera they do one test in LED light, one in incandescent.
>>4533250Not bad considering they're using a lens with a much worse AF motor>>4533234More boomers shoot JPG
Two schools of thought in photography:The Rockwellian Jpeg enjoyer and the Jared Froknowsphotokowski Raw shooter.
>>4533250It's always interesting when they don't mention the actual testing protocol
>>4533250>>4533257In all of their tests they compare wildly different systemsLike fast 35mm primes vs slower 100mm zooms to test autofocus performances. Based on that I wouldn't trust their testing protocol, even if it's unlikely to be the reason for these results. If you want to test autofocus, make it the single variable, use comparable lenses for each system.What's next, fisheye vs 600mm prime to compare AF-S on two cameras?
>>4533018Honestly yeah that's what most great photos look like. Daido Moriyama is the ideal. If your shooting landscape might as well go medium format film. Fuji is pretty good for digital.
>>4533251It is odd. And it's poles. The dumbest and least honest people in europe. And it's the one and only source where canon is worse than panasonic.The one and only source where panasonic isn't shit, really.>>4533254Sounds like they're bumping the camera. One and only test that makes these claims. And it's poles. Scammy plumbers.You can be safely ignored until someone intelligent and trustworthy like jim kasson does these tests.
>>4533255>More boomers shoot JPGboomers don't do it the current way which is loading LUTs with the desired look before shooting.
>>4533266Nobody wastes their time using garbage like panasonic cameras for stills tbf
>>4533266>panasonic featureno thanks i like well made cameras with working autofocus, good lenses, and good colors and i'd rather shoot raw than play with a sony flavored fuji and its sony flavored film sims kthx
>>4533268https://www.reddit.com/r/Lumix/comments/1wvz7b0/lumix_s9_sensor_broken_out_of_nowhere/Wow these cameras are quite badEven though canon sold a bajillion cameras i've never seen one with a failed sensor
>>4533267>No boomers use panasonic cameras for stills tbfcorrect.Pic related is too complicated for boomers. Boomers only understand mashing a shutter button and then spending hours in Lightroom getting a worse result than the Lumix could do in seconds.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xti6t0zgemo
The lumix shills have been particularly active lately>>4533270Boomers don't shoot raw. Boomers shoot jpeg and load custom "picture profiles" because they still think computers take hours to do anything. Most fuji shooters who aren't women are 40y/o boomer men. The only people who use lumix for anything but video nerdery are old men too. That's why the #1 lumix shill is a fat chick.
Panasonic screens are very inaccurate. Since there's no way to truly calibrate any cameras LCDs, I wouldn't waste time trying to fix lumix's shitty colors. I'd rather shoot raw and make my own calibrated profile.PC based raw converters like capture one have better demosaicing with finer detail and less moire anyways.
>>4533269In Panasonic's defense, it has to be said that this is a redditor and when the redditor says out of nowhere it probably means after he dropped it to the floor because he wasn't paying attention while farming upvotes in a thread about trans rights.
>>4533277I drop my canon every day while defending israel and telling palestine supporters arabs lied to them about being native, and yet the sensor has never failed. Perhaps it failed because he cursed israel?
>>4533276>>4533269>>4533268Wow. I am never buying a panasonic. Fuji for jpeg beginners, Nikon for experienced raw users. Simple as.
>>4533273>Boomers don't shoot rawyes they do.boomers love raw because it's a surrogate for working on film in the darkroom. They find comfort in the familiar but obsolete concept of photos being finished later.boomers can't comprehend the concept of seeing the finished image in the viewfinder because for the majority of their life they trained themselves to not see the viewfinder image as an actual representation of the photo. Boomers get their first mirrorless camera ask how to turn off the exposure simulation because it's confusing lol.
>>4533287Boomers shoot jpeg because much like you they dont know how to use a computer
>>4533276>>4533269omg lumix is shit. they barely sell any cameras. just one broken lumix is like 500 broken canons.
>>4533270>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xti6t0zgemowtf I'm paying Adobe to do this
>>4533292Thats the cost of using an accurate screen to set your colors and having more control. All serious photographers shoot RAW.
>>4533250>XF35 f/1.4. Lens known for its dogshit AF.>Canon worse than Fuji>Wildly different lens types and focal lengths.I'm starting to suspect those tests are totally meaningless. Good to know optyczne is a shit site that I should never be taking seriously.
>>4533273>Most fuji shooters who aren't women are 40y/o boomer men.According to market data Fuji has the youngest customer base out of all camera manufacturers. It's Nikon and Canon that are the most popular with boomers. Boomers buy those nasty bulbous monstrosities with a zoom the size of a portable rocket launcher and then leave them on a shelf to rot. Typical nophoto behavior.
>>4533270Fujifilm cameras have customizable tone curves as well. There are no tone curve presets but there are 7 custom modes that one can use for their tone curve settings and more.
>>4533287>>4533288Or maybe it's not actually a generational thing, and some boomers (probably the more tech-literate ones) like shooting RAWs for more control over the final product, while others appreciate the convenience of shooting JPEG? You know, just out of personal preference, not related to being oldfags?
>>4533308Or maybe intelligent people of various ages shoot JPG + RAW so they can have most of their photos ready straight out of the camera and still retain the ability to edit their photographs later if needed...It's almost like most arguing on this website is done by complete morons only seeking to spread their ignorance and hatefulness as far as they can with very little interest in actual subject matter.Say A, and it's almost guaranteed that some schizo/tripfag will reply only to say A is retarded and it's B that is correct.
Everyone keeps telling me that I dont need and 800mm to take pictures of birds and 400 Is enough buy how Is that possibile? How would 800mm not helped me take a better picture here?
>>4533313Is this already cropped?
>>4533276>the image look different on my calibrated monitor than on the camera screen, that means the camera screen is innacurateThe fact that the image looks different on a camera screen and on a calibrated matte monitor 5-10x bigger has nothing to do with the camera screen being bad. The camera screen is meant to be easy in outdoor lighting despite its small size. The computer calibrated screen is meant to display the widest possible range of colors and brightness so subtle differences in images are visible. The smaller size alone makes picture necessary more contrasty as a gradient that would span over 1cm on your screen has to be compressed in a very small area on the camera screen. These are valid concerns to investigate for a beginner, but it's concerning you consider this random fb post a justification instead of doing 1 google search to understand the nature of the issue.>there's no way to truly calibrate any cameras LCDs, I wouldn't waste time trying to fix lumix's shitty colors. I'd rather shoot raw and make my own calibrated profile.This makes absolutely no sense. The quality of the camera screen has nothing to do with the (valid) choice of shooting raw. Calibrating your screen doesn't change your camera's output, so it should be a completely independent concern from shooting raw or JPG. You demonstrate 0 understanding of what factors comes in displaying an image, and what is the difference between what is displayed on the screen and what information the file contains, jpg or raw. That's fine, we all have stuff to learn. But blaming the cameras before you even have a 101 understanding of image processing is preventing you from learning.
>>4533316the camera screen is meant to be easy to read**
>>4533314No
>>4533321Then no, 800mm would not helped you take a better picture. If only light was better and you weren't shooting from eye level like an absolute noob that you are then it would be a pretty nice pic.Try making the white balance a tiny bit warmer and crop it to put the birds in the middle like pic related.
>>4533316Camera screens are cheap garbage compared to what they put in even entry level smartphones. The screen on my ancient iPhone is closer to my reference monitor and higher resolution than the screen on brand fucking new mirrorless. The camera screen is meant to be cheap and you're meant to put up with it because they have always been like that, just like many other aspects of japanese camera engineering.>Calibrating your screen doesn't change your camera's output,If you want to be a jpeg only shooter, you have to have a calibrated screen on camera to set your colors right the first time, otherwise no adjustments you make will ever translate to calibrated screens and the vast majority of apple products are within 90% of reference monitors so this is a bigger problem than when 9/10 viewers were 15" 1920x1080 TN panels.There is zero way to calibrate any cameras screen by creating an icc profile for it, only a way to make broad adjustments to color shifts.
>>4533325The light is fine. The contrast and tones are there to pretty it up, but it's been edited with neutral snapshot grade colors more typical of journal articles and textbook insets than photography.Most film photos you think were shot in awesome light were basically re-lit in the darkroom and digital is no different today - except the computer lets you adjust masks and gradients and whatnot live. Photography has always been and always will be inherently fake.
>>4533327this is true and its why literally every jpeg shooter makes their profiles as stylized and fucky as possible>fuji piss filter>make everything teal>crush the shadowswhy bother when you cant actually see what you're doing? a lot of camera screens dont even have the DR of phone screens
Zoomers are even less tech literate and even lower IQ than boomers. That is why they are obsessed with jpg shooting like the low IQ boomers.
>>4533328Light is never fine. It's great or not great.
>>4533327>>4533329What is 5.76 million dot, 0.80x magnification, OLED EVF. You'd know if you weren't some lonely, bitter 5D MK II nophoto incels. >>4533333Nice digits.
>>4533329>literally every jpeg shooter makes their profiles as stylized and fucky as possibleStop going to Reddit so much.>why bother when you cant actually see what you're doingThis is your brain on DSLR cope. Never try DSLR cope kids . It can turn you into a pathetic and angry nophoto.
>>4533331The gen-z trend with digicams revealed that most of them are absolutely clueless. A question that comes up very often whenever I sell them a camera is:>How can I transfer the photos to my phone or the computer?I even got asked that IRL my by cousin's son when I was carrying my camera. The act of using the camera is less of a concern.
Someone made the fujisnapshitter upset again. Watch out guys he will spam this thread with zero effort snapshits now. He has 40 thousand 3/10 pictures he can post to totally BTFO you. Dont you know? Better watch out with those opinions of yours!(5d classic in moderately competent hands would absolutely destroy fujisnapper. Fact.)
>>4533339>5d classic in moderately competent handsThank god your hands are not even moderately competent. I'm safe.Fuck off and stop shitting up this board with your deranged schizoposting.
>>4533341>stop speaking the truth!Nope. Nice seethe, cope, and projection tho lol.
>>4533334>What is 5.76 million dot, 0.80x magnification, OLED EVF.>You'd know if you weren't some lonely, bitter 5D MK II nophoto incels.kekEVF what's that?It's hilarious when the DSLR boomers try to explain mirrorless photography when they have no idea how to use a mirrorless camera.
>>4533339>(5d classic in moderately competent hands would absolutely destroy fujisnapper. Fact.)5d and a computer and a lightroom subscription and hours processing time? If you had to deliver photos on site you would shit your pants. Fact.Fujiking's photos are great. Mirrorless is better. Mirrorless won. GET OVER IT.
>>4533327You are both right. Camera screens and EVFs are meant to be cheap (future e-waste anyway) and are meant for composing and evaluating overall exposure. Not for editing images. It's kinda implied by the tools that cameras have: screen brightness boost (to compose dark scenes), focus peaking (otherwise the resolution is too low to focus manually), stuff like that.
>>4533352>hours of processing timeTech illiterate zoomerboomer cope skill issue kek
>>4533352It's all good, but this is an amateur board. Most of us don't really have to deliver anything at any point.
>>4533353>It's kinda implied by the tools that cameras havecolour balance and brightness settings to ensure accurate picture, because in-camera JPEG and Video settings requires accurate picturehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExezMA2yJq8
>>4533358Thee are not acceptable calibration tools. Theyβre for correcting damage from bad manufacturing, age and overheating βwell enoughβ. And panasonics are big on bad manufacturing. Unless you used a colorimeter to make an icc profile you didnt calibrate shit.
>>4533352>hoursCapture one on an ipadAlso fujisnappers 8mp jpegs are so blurry he might as well use a 5D. 40mp $2000 camera produces blurry shit 8mp jpegs. Lmao.
>>4533361>$2000Kek. You just can't get over it. I'm sorry I spent equivalent of your yearly income on a camera. Now leave.
>>4533361Don't forget about the 3k in lenses that make those blurry snappies possible!
>>4533362I make $70,000 post tax. You are low on financial responsibility. Didnt you say it was your whole months pay? For those blurry photos? Jfc return it and buy a used xt4
>>4533358Is there something you want to tell us, blinkies autist/jpeg autist/panashit shill?Jeet videos literally never appear in my recommended or search results. Because I am not a pajeet.
>>4533360Nigga wtf are you talking about lmao. What colorimeter, what ICC nigga are you retarded? You don't even get exposure preview in your 5D MK II blob and somehow EVFs need professional calibration to be good? Do you even read the shit you type you absolute imbecile? I mean you idiots can be entertaining sometimes but too much is just too much. You keep making a fool out of yourself and you keep getting told off and you just keep coming back like a bitch taking more shit from anyone with half a brain. Have some fucking self respect, jesus. Are you also acting like a worthless whore irl too? Does anyone respect you when you don't even respect yourself? Get the fuck out of here you brainless schizo. I'm sure you can find some friends on /pol/ you fucking child.
>>4533367You sound incredibly angry.
>>4533360>βwell enoughβthat's all that's needed. A couple % points here or there won't make or break an image.
>>4533364>I make $70,000 post taxI make $300, 000 post tax. Proof? Just trust me bro.
>>4533372Oh yeah? Well I make $3,000,000 post tax. Yuo're all suhc poorfags...
>>4533367>You don't even get exposure preview in your 5D MK II blobWhy are mirrorlesstoddlers so confidently wrong? You got psyopped hard by marketing telling you basic shit is somehow a great technological leap.
>>4533353>Not for editing images.That is not true I am always shoot and edit RAW with the nikon.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBNl5jiEGSs
>>4533353Optical viewfinders are meant to be cheap (future e-waste anyway) and are meant for composing. Not for overall exposure or for editing images.
>>4533374liar
>>4533374Oh yeah? Well I make $30,000,001 post tax. (You)'re all sucha poorfags...
>>4533378Good morning sir!
>>4533375>Why are mirrorlesstoddlers so confidently wrong? You got psyopped hard by marketing telling you basic shit is somehow a great technological leap.Even a perfectly calibrated screen is worthless if it has glare/reflections.With a DSLR you need one of pic related to have some of the functionality of mirrorless. Even then it's nowhere near as good since the crappy rear LCDs can not compete with a modern OLED EVF in terms of contrast and color rendition.
imagine if camera dials had e-ink displays on topthat way, you could have them dynamically update, change to different functions, be able to instantly reset their position, change view type, customize them
like you could have dials for PASM / ISO / EV / SS / aperture / focus / drive mode and change them to whatever suits your need
>>4533387Sounds great until it breaks, which will happen exactly 1 day after the warranty expires.
>>4533391we have the technology to make it happen. but this industry is ran by japanese people who hate innovationno reason it'd break as quickly as you think. but just thought of a quick fix, if the e-ink screen completely fails then you can also just glue a printed disc on top and continue as normal
>>4532992i love push pull zooming the fuck out of my 24 70it makes people hate me but i can one handed zoom with my thighs if im hand holding a flash
>>4532992try a mirror lens as a compact tele option
neat to play around with, but it's pretty big
>>4533021This is a good pic man. Only crituque is it should have been tightened up and probably a square format.
>>4533386>>4533387displays arent really needed if you customize your bindings and memorize them, quit looking at your camera and look at the scene
>>4533371Well enough.... for what screens are meant for. No one is meant to pre-edit on camera and expect accurate, realistic colors. Even contrast is fucked. Shooting jpeg for anything but surprising film sims is a horrible waste of time.There is a reason every competent photographer shoots ra....>>4533366OHOHHOLY FUCKING SHITHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHATHIS IS WHY HE'S BEEN SAYING THE SAME THINGS OVER AND OVER FOR MONTHSHE'S INDIANAVERAGE IQ 72PFAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>4533425I don't think that's moire/blinkies autist
>>4533406it looks like the metrocop pistol from halflife 2 that sounds like someone playing handball
>>4533362> Spent $2000 on gear to take photos of Poland.
>>4533379Was anyone arguing otherwise?
>>4533362Cope to english:>I'm sorry I spent my yearly income on gear just to take blurry 8mp jpegs of poland
>>4533430>>4533432Polska gurom
>>4533434Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©Φ°ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·Χ
>>4533387Nikon and canon figured out the ideal camera 40 years ago, fooljislug.
>>4533334>muh dotsIn use these pieces of shit are blurry as all fuck (it's the data going to the screen, not the screen) and have weird color shifts like cheap gaming monitors
>>4533445>>4533441Trvkenvke
>>4533445Same. I bought a zf expecting an amazing evf but it was always really kind of shit, waxy, not sharp detail like an ovf, just 1080p footage on a 4k display. Jpegs always looked different on my phone and pc vs the camera too. Less contrast and different greens and reds. EVFs are still shit. Nips refuse to improve battery design over old DSLR power packs and cant supply enough power to provide a true 4k live sensor feed.
>>4533406Looks cheap. Like something I'd get from aliexpress.>>4533414Thanks for appreciating my snaps bro.
>>4533448>3.69 million dots and limited to 60HzThat's too low res to be any good. You should have bought a better camera.
>>4533453He has a point. It doesn't matter how hard the obfuscate the actual resolution of the display if the actual video playing off the sensor isn't that high resolution. Literally zero cameras I have ever used have been able to deliver 1:1 EVF resolution. It always looks like low resolution video footage playing on a high resolution screen. EVFs don't get higher resolution and approach OVFs, they just minimize the pixelated choppy experience. If you have to buy an FF sized ASPC blobmera with a sensor designed for jpeg beginners blurry snaps or an FF flagship to make EVF mirrorless worth using, and it still sucks even then, perhaps EVF mirrorless isn't worth using.
>>4533453>"dots"Why can't they just say ####x####px? What are they hiding?The embarrassing fact the nicest EVF on the market isn't even 4k? Why don't they specify the resolution of the actual image displayed? It often looks worse than 720p when it's moving
>>45334733.79 million dots sounds more impressive than 3.8MP or 2367x1592. It's just the marketing team's choice. Same goes for No Added Sugars, or 99% Fat Free when you're talking about selling spring water.
>>4533472>>4533473shut up saars shut up this is not a good thing ovf is dated ok you now mirrorless if you shoot raw you're doing it wrong mirrorless lets you shoot jpeg only boomers shoot raw ARRRR i am ANGRY by vishnu I am AMDI will NOT BUY THE CAPTURE ONE SAARBUY EVF CAMERA FROM PANASONIC AND SHOOT THE JPEG BENCHOD BASTERD
>>4533441>muh dialsYou only need one unmarked dial.You're using a lens with an aperture ring, right? (if not, KYS)Set aperture manually on lens, manual or auto ISO with limit in menu and forget, and use the one dial for shutter speed or exposure comp. That's literally all you need. Few understand this.
>>4533476>>4533387Meant to reply to this faggot.
>>4533476This is how fooljis snapshit a million noisy photos with randomly blown highlights. The important part isn't the photos though, it's how they look and feel like a retro photojournalist with their left hand turning a clicky thing on the lens and their other occasionally walking up to turn something on top of the camera. Whenever they hear those clicky noises, they can just imagine themselves wearing bell bottom jeans and cheering on the martin luther king protest they're taking historically significant photographs of as they take the days 50th photo of someone walking on the other side of the street. Using a modern camera makes them feel like dexter and start fearing that someone is going to beat them up.
>>4533305Fujifilm also has "dynamic range" and "dynamic range priority" which help in capturing scenes with extreme light and dark differences.
>>4533482You mean it shoots at a lower ISO than you set then boosts the shadows a bunch to compensate?Yeah my Canon has that too.
>>4533441>>4533476I'm not a fuji fanboy. If I were then I'd keep using all their cameras happily. this is just a funny little idea for people who love customization>You're using a lens with an aperture ring, right? (if not, KYS)kill me yourself, coward.
>>4533472>Literally zero cameras I have ever used have been able to deliver 1:1 EVF resolutionI think my camera is able to display full res on my 5.76 md EVF. Live view and image review modes have the same image quality, at least to my eye. 5.76 md is already very sharp and doesn't look pixelated unless you start looking hard at small details like tiny fonts etc.>EVFs don't get higher resolution and approach OVFs, they just minimize the pixelated choppy experience.Top tier Sony cams have almost 10 million dot EVFs at 240FPS. The lowest tier model with that EVF does drop resolution when taking pictures but the better models are able to deliver full res at all times. At 10 md I believe we've approached a point where you would struggle to see any pixelation with a naked eye. EVFs are the future and they are only going to get better. In a couple of years those 10 million dot EVFs are going to trickle down to lesser models and at that point there will be nothing that a classic OVF could do better.
>>4533473>Why can't they just say ####x####px?Marketing. That 3.something million dot EVF on Nikon Zf is basically a tiny 1280x900 panel and "barely more than 720p doesn't sound good. That's a resolution of a cheap laptop from 2015. At 5.76 million dots the red is like 1600x1200 and now when blown up to a size of a PC monitor it looks quite good. At almost 10 million dots you will no longer be able to smell the pixels.
>>4533482That feature is kinda gay desu. Dynamic Range 200% is fine as it basically underexposed by approximately 1 stop and boosts shadow by approximately one stop. DR 400% can look noisy in the shadows. DR Priority does underexposure and boost with additional tone curve fuckery and it looks terrible. Unnatural colors and fucks up your RAWs. I only do DR 200% sometimes but if you really want the most dynamic range possible from your camera then you should be shooting with DR 100% (basically off) and lowest ISO possible, then expose for highlights and boost shadows in post. More control that way and with masking you can get much better results. Fuji RAWs are very good and you would be surprised how much dynamic range you can recover from them.
Test
>>4533491>there will be nothing that a classic OVF could do better.there is always going to be a few milliseconds of lag from sensor to processor to display, so OVF will always hold the advantage there. It only really makes a difference when tracking fast subjects like birds in flight. Similarly, even a 240 FPS display, unless doing some kind of fancy scanning/strobing, will cause eye tracking motion blur which OVF at infinity FPS can not have.
Same fucking bs discussion.You fucking subsaharian niggers.Istead of making a new thread i will ask here.Post your workstation for editing pics.I m trying to see what everybody uses to make up my mind of there is a reason to upgrade my shitbox.I'll startDell optiplex 3060I5 850020gb ramSsd + a lot of hddsRtx 3050. Got the shitbox out my company.s trashcan after they upgraded all pcs. Just added 16gb ram and the rtx. limited by my 260w psuI.m quite happy with it but lrc kind of shits itslef with creating previews when importing thousands of photos and is kind of slow. After that i have no issues. I m exporting a dozen of pics and ia quite fast. When denoising and usin ai masks has some hickups.
>>4533510>I m trying to see what everybody uses to make up my mind of there is a reason to upgrade my shitbox.I upgraded my workstation with a monitor. Highly recommended for photo viewing/editing.
>>4533509>few milliseconds of lag from sensor to processor to displayFujifilm cameras can capture multiple frames per second with electronic shutter and save the last 10 or so the moment you press the shutter button. X-H2 can do like 20 captures/second in that mode and that 40MP sensor is painfully slow. Newer, faster sensors will only do better than that.>>4533510Thinkpad with 11th gen i5 and 16GB of RAM. No GPU. Thunderbolt dock.27" 1440p gaming monitor.NAS with 16TB HDD pool and 4TB SSD pool.I don't edit much so I don't care. I never bothered to learn anything beyond exposure adjustment and tone curve.
>>4533515>Fujifilm cameras can capture multiple frames per second with electronic shutter and save the last 10 or so the moment you press the shutter button. X-H2 can do like 20 captures/second in that mode and that 40MP sensor is painfully slow. Newer, faster sensors will only do better than that.Same crutch as the Panasonic GH6 but idk what it has to do with viewfinder lag
>>4533511I m using my 4k tv as monitor
>>4533517I export to CR2, copy it to a CF and edit on a 1DX, can't beat that Canon color science.
>>4533516>idk what it has to do with viewfinder lagIt's a workaround that eliminates the negative effects of lag in mirrorless cameras (and human brains).Even if your EVF has some lag and even if there is additional delay between the moment you press the shutter button and actual capture, you will not miss your shot. The downside is having to sift through all those captures to pick that one shot you like.
>>4533524A cope, in other words
>>4533525There is some processing lag in every camera and there is even more lag in human brains. This feature is fucking fantastic for anyone who shoots fast action or wildlife. Don't start with your shit again, please. Just try to be normal. This board is already dead as it is. Scaring new users away benefits no one.
>I didn't saw shit when taking the picture but the camera swears and pinky promises it was there so it must have been!
>>4533529
>>4533528DSLR boomer: just hold down the shutter button in continuous burst on the perched bird, hoping it will take off before your buffer fills. Oh it didn't take off? Just delete hundreds of files. Capture just the last few seconds before you pressed the shutter? That's a crutch! That's a cope!
>>4533517Please tell us about your TV and how you calibrated it.
>>4533509>unless doing some kind of fancy scanning/strobingGentlemen, I present to you the next evolution in EVF technology: the CRT viewfinder.
>>4533542Never said i did.Why should i?I m an amateur, i don't make money out of itI send my pics to people that will view them on different devices oled/led/lcd with different colour and brightness settings,Hdr/sdr, etc I ve send my pics to my wife and she opened them on her shitty work laptop with lcd screen with some fucked up colour settings that makes even ken photos desaturated. So i don't see the point. If i would make prints and want the prints to look more or less how they look on my screen than it would make sense. But i rarely print and i m at the mercy of the printing studio printing machine settings and colour accuracy
>>4533270>>4533305Sigma also has this.
>>4533270Why the fuck would I waste my time pre-editing jpegs on a poorly made camera with an inaccurate screen and bad autofocus? What am I, a boomer?>Set your picture profile and white balance to bla bla bla there is no reason to use raws jpegs are good enough -ken rockwell, using an e-waste nikonEveryone shoots rawIf you cant afford or know how to use a computer dont even do photography>muh lumixYeah, those POS barely count as cameras. They're low budget camcorders for video nerds that spend actual hours in davinci resolve fixing their log gamma.
>>4533541>>4533270You are indian>>4533366>>4533366>>4533366Pipe down, pajeet. Your veggie fed brain is too small to understand photography (also, your $0.01/day wage is too low to afford photography).
>>4533554>ken rockwelldamn, I didn't realize this guy is giga based.>Today mirrorless cameras can show us live images from the sensor, making mirrors, ground glass, Fresnel lenses, prisms and DSLRs all obsolete. Mirrors were only needed in olden days when we had no way other than ground glass to see what came through our lens until we developed our film.>Electronic finders are a huge advantage because mirrorless cameras show us exactly how our camera will render the final image (exposure, white balance, distortion correction, highlights, shadows, color balance and saturation, contrast, etc.) as we're shooting, while DSLRs couldn't show us any of that through their funky old optical finders. >Hitting the PLAY button to see what you're getting after you've shot is so film era. Finally mirrorless lets us see, correct and optimize what we're doing while we're doing it. Having to stop and look at your developed film or a digital playback means you're living in the past (pun intended) and missing what's going on around you and missing great shots. With mirrorless you're always live and getting the shots the old-timers are missing while looking at their LCDs for yesterday's news.https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mirrorless-vs-dslr.htm
It is a shame that longer fast telephotos are out of reach (pun not intended) for more casual photographers.
>>4533559He really struggles with exposure settings after all those years of using and testing cameras? Kinda sad, really...
>>4533559Boomers are terrible at using computers. No wonder boomer camera companies went mirrorless.
>>4533563when you always shoot with training wheels on (raw) it's easy to forget how difficult it is to get things right in the moment.
>>4533567>thinks exposure preview and "blinkies" are an advanced technique Mirrorlesscucks confirmed retarded. All digital is training wheels for when you grow up and finally shoot film lil bro. Dont get twisted.
>>4533567You are indian. IQ 72.>>4533366
Vibe coders just killed lightroom and darktablehttps://github.com/storytold/lightcraft
>>4533541Buffer never fills. Camera keeps X number of shots in the buffer at all times so you can keep half pressing the shutter until the battery dies. It saves the last few to memory card as soon as you fully press the shutter button. So for every shutter press you get like 10 shots saved to your memory card.>>4533509>unless doing some kind of fancy scanning/strobingMy EVF has goes up to 240FPS with black frame insertion. 120FPS without it. With BFI it's pretty smooth but a tiny bit darker.
>>4533547>Why should i?Based.These days most monitors come with a factory calibrated sRGB mode anyway. It's not good enough for professional work but for a hobbyist should be fine.
>>4533568>All digital is training wheels for when you grow up and finally shoot film lil broWhat if I started with film and switched to digital later on? Am I regressing? Film is fun but good luck shooting 10k photos a year and not going bankrupt.
>>4533570It's pretty sad since all Darktable needs is a better interface. Tokens wasted on this vibe coded monstrosities could have been spent forking and improving an already good project.Now watch this ball of vibe coded spaghetti code get dropped as soon as there is a need to fix some bugs.
is getting the f mount af-s 14-24 f2.8 + ftz a decent idea when i dont want to pig out on the z mount 14-24? or theres some more cons to it except that af-s 14-24 is like 1kg
>>4533585Good luck shooting 10k "photos" a year and getting any keepers, snapshitter
>>4533589You can't learn something without doing something repeatedly. If you buy a film camera as your first camera then you will never get good at photography because you won't be able to afford it.
>>4533585>>4533591If you're fujifag aka 40ksnapshitsfag you probably never did any sort of real photograpjy to begin with so switching to digital just makes sense in your case. Your fujisnapper is just a glorified and oversized phone camera.40ksnapshitsfag is the perfect example of why the 10k photos thing is extremely retarded. His finger is undoubtedly stronger from pressing a button so many times but his photographic skill is still at beginner-intermediate level. It should really be 10k hours making photos and that can be achieved with one high effort photograph a day.
Got banned for posting a snapshot just to show some anon what the camera zoom quality is. He asked for this. Meanwhile trolls and copy pasta gearfag spergs run wildSad
>>4533600Post photos.
>>4533601Fuji poster here. Recently my home IP got flagged "due to abuse". I only post on /p/. I have a static IP so it's not like ISP assigned me some spammer's old IP. I'm starting to wonder if this place has any future. It's sad because I truly believe that the imageboard format is absolutely perfect for a photography forum. This place could be great if it was moderated by inteligent people. I even considered hosting my own imageboard but that costs money and time and I have neither.
>>4533604I counted 23 instagram accounts in the insta thread plus the guys like me with no insta or social media posts.Too bad gear threads are always about same shit, opl, efv, moire, blinkies, dslr vs mirrorless and other bs.Funny enough if you ask questions about gear in other threads like moon astro or bird you actually get non botlike and spergie copypasta answers
>>4533602>not an argument Concession accepted. You first.
>>4533604>I'm starting to wonder if this place has any future. It's sad because I truly believe that the imageboard format is absolutely perfect for a photography forum.Mainstream forums being highly censored means that anon imageboards get a concentration of nasty people who enjoy putting others down. It doesn't matter how good the photo is (yours are excellent) one of them will usually insult it for their own entertainment. This discourages photo posting and board participation dwindles.
>>4533586>All the laggy program that crashes all the time needs is a better UIIt needs a total rewrite>scene referred is better maffs!>compile your color science from source its not our job fork it yourself
>>4533582>Buffer never fills. Camera keeps X number of shots in the buffer at all times so you can keep half pressing the shutter until the battery dies. It saves the last few to memory card as soon as you fully press the shutter button. So for every shutter press you get like 10 shots saved to your memory card.Sounds totally useless unless you're a $17/hr intern with the associated press
Why does Nikon pretend to care about APS-C at all. Their lineup is so poor. Might as well focus all resources on full frame
>>4533624He never would have been insulted if he could have kept his mouth shut about gearfagging. Even if it was a joke, a lot of people are stupid enough to genuinely believe all the shit he does because they mindlessly repeat it after watching youtube and reading gearfag forums/brand-rumors blog comment sections.>durrr you dont need full frame you're not a professional>aps-c is good enough>the xh2 is a good camera>you dont need ff its too big heavy and expensive>-sent from my $5000 4lb camera kit^Literally the entire populace of mu-43 and half of dpreview>forums are highly censoredThey're censored with bias, so gearfags can talk smack in one direction but not the other, ie: dpreview locks threads and bans people for pointing out fuji autofocus is shit but you're free to say sony weather sealing is shit.
>>4533604Entire third world IP and mobile IP ranges get flagged regularly because they're used by the expensive residential proxy services shills use for their bot spamBuyu passu
>>4533628APS-C is what sells the most, it's also cheaper to bring technical innovations to APS-C sized sensors, yet nipshits don't want to and gatekeep stuff that's been around for over a quarter of a century, like BSI for Canon. Stacked sensor in general for all of them, DGO and LOFIC that Sony & friends shill as if it were something new in 2026.Smaller American and Chinese industrial imaging manufacturers have been making their own APS-C sized 100MP+ global shutter sensors for a couple of years now, with barely less dynamic range than current year cameras.People aren't going to stop buying expensive prime lenses if they switch to APS-C, so why won't they give us what we want?Having a Japanese-led monopoly over camera manufacturing was a big mistake.
>>4533629https://www.dpreview.com/articles/full-frame-but-not-the-whole-picture-there-isnt-a-one-size-fits-all-format/
>>4533629>aps-c is good enoughIt is, doughbeit, depending on your type of photography,
>>4533636>APS-C is what sells the mostI'm almost certain that's just because of the price.
>>4533629hot off the presshttps://www.dpreview.com/opinion/with-the-right-lenses-all-formats-can-shine/
>>4533639No shit.Give an APS-C the same tech as a full frame, it'll still be cheaper.
>>4533624>imageboards get a concentration of nasty people who enjoy putting others downImageboards don't need to pretend to be "anonymous" and with some decent moderation a photography oriented imageboard could thrive. >yours are excellentNigga don't make me blush.
>>4533626>crashes all the timeYeah I guess it can crash sometimes.>>4533627It's very useful for anyone who does wildlife or sport photography. You just hold the shutter half pressed and wait for a moment.
>>4533629>could have kept his mouth shut about gearfaggingIt's a gear thread. I'm gonna post about gear here. And I stand by what I said: APS-C is good enough for most people and allows you to put more money towards good glass which is undeniably more important than sensor size. Look at my images and tell me this glass ain't beautiful.
>>4533643>cANON got a job writing for dpreviewGrim
>>4533666>implying I'd say something as foolish as "APS-C digital offers the same quality as 35mm filmNot even crop medium format manages
>>4533639Difference in glass size can be significant. For people who carry their cameras outside it can be more important than slightly better ISO performance.
>>4533669>"APS-C digital offers the same quality as 35mm filmYeah it offers much better quality than that.
>>4533604It also requires people to go there, you'd simply have an echo chamber. Do you really want the hassle of maintaining an imageboard to talk to yourself?
>>4533669Shooting film is like shooting jpeg.
>>4533672Delusional. Velvia can do up to 160lp/mm. That is roughly the pixel pitch of the EOS 90D. You'd need that pixel pitch on full frame Foveon to match Velvia. It's like 80MP without interpolation. Before you name monochrome cameras like the K-3 III remember monochrome film is even higher resolution.
>>4533674>you'd simply have an echo chamberSo just like /p/?
>>4533675No, one hour photo labs are like shooting JPEG
>>4533677>VelviaDiscontinued in 2005. Pleasant but unrealistic color reproduction. Limited to ISO 50 if you want that fine grain. Realistic detail when scanned with top tier hardware: 20 to 30 MP. Truly incredible. You people are beyond delusional. Film is awesome but digital cameras improved a lot in the last 10 years.
New thread, don't get your panties in a bunch >>4533681
>>4533683cANON once again came to ruin the day. Next time wait until the current gear thread hits the page 2 at the very least.
>>4533684I can bump this thread down to page 2 if you want
>>4533664You spent $2000 on a shitty oversized camera to produce blurry jpegs of dog buttholes lmfaono one is taking your crop cope unless you put your money back where your mouth is, because right now it's in fuji's revenue stream. you can't use a "good enough" camera. you need crutches and expensive glass to prop up your bad photography.>>4533643>just spend $1500 on a lens to cope with your micro fool turds bro it says to on DPREVIEW (literally amazon)lmfaotiny sensor tiny brain>i-its good enoughfor what, 1mp jpegs? lmfao. nice to know you have no intrinsic motivation or personal standards NPC.
>>4533796With a good light exposure, how much would you say you can crop a full frame photo before quality becomes unacceptable?
