The DIY joy of reflex edition, this French madman Denis Mo actually made his own SLR from scratch.Previous: >>4535009
>>4535938
Gearfags would rather make an entire fucking camera from scratch than to take a photo
>>4535943>y do yt ppl climb mountainsthis is how you sound, nigger
>>4535943The guy who made the camera is far cooler and more useful to the world than this gear thread spamming furfag tripfagHow many do we have now? 14? On real boards like /k/ /co/ /g/ etc this general spamming would get the thread subject/title banned, tripfags trip/name/range banned, and the threads continuation relegated to /trash/.
>>4535958>/k/Finally, the projecting furfag confessesNo wonder you had furfag content available on tap
>>4535967I didnt know /k/ was a furry board but apparently you’re more into that stuff than anyone knew
how can you all hate each other when you spend so much time together
>>4535967He-he. It is the most astroturfed, politically correct, glowie-infested board on 4chan.>fug yes I love Ukraine and furries what do you mean 9/11 was an inside job? Are you one of them conspiracy theorists?
Anybody getting any good deals on the used market?
>>4535974Hi point is the sony equivalent on /k/
what does everybody think about the new Sigma FPii?
>>4535978yeah I snagged a 28mm pentax lens for half the market value a couple months ago. haven't bought since.
>>4535995Probably a neat video camera because of its form-factor. I doubt that external EVF will be used in other applications. A tiltable EVF is something I've wanted on full frame and strangely enough it is completely absent. It exists on medium format albeit not widely adopted and not on any current models I believe, but if you go back in time it was quite normal on smaller format cameras. Canon had 2 for their EF-M APS-C cameras. Panasonic, Leica and Olympus had them for APS-C, Micro-four thirds and even some of the digicams. So why is this now something completely absent? Even in the SLR days you had right angle attachments etc. Is a flippy-tilty screen supposed to be a substitute?
>>4535995I am less disappointed than I thought I'd be. I'm still not happy about the chunky side mounted EVF (should've gone on the top) and lack of IBIS but you can't have it all.So whether I get it or not hinges on two things:1. If the LCD is good enough for manual focus with peaking in daylight2. If the sensor works well enough with adapted rangefinder lenses in terms of not having significant color shift.The original fp did have a bit of degradation and color shift with many adapted lenses so there's that. But this one has different sensor tech so I'm not going to make any assumptions yet. The closest to it would be the S1ii but I can't find any reviews or forum posts mentioning such a specific topic. Will have to wait until the boomers on Fred Miranda run some tests.
>>4535968Anyone who's not a newfag on 4chan has heard what happened in their meetups. Furfaggotry and cum brownies.>>4535974They probably think there wasn't anything wrong with fast & furious. I bet that glowie from the hotel Rockwell takes pics of used to post on /k/.>>4535994>zamak slidelmao, truly Sony tierI've seen the sustain block of a cheap Epiphone just disintegrate like a puck of coffee grounds, it was made of zamak. Imagine trusting that on a firearm.>>4535997Swivel screens are superior to tilt screens of course.
>>4535997>Is a flippy-tilty screen supposed to be a substitute?not ideal, but you could use one of these.
>>4535996I got a good deal on some Pentax gear not that long ago where ended up with a ME Super and a 100mm 2.8 for free. Sold a couple of lenses and a winder to break even.
>>4536000>source: furryThanks for keeping us up to date on what your fellow furries get up to
>>4535995The EVF costs the same as Leica's one for the M cameras, wtf?
>>4535998All non-leica L mount cameras have color shift issues. Its safe to assume leica enforces this behind closed doors to protect their brand just like they likely require no one ever beat the Q (which would be easy because the Q is genuinely a piece of inexcusable shit that has no right to cost half as much as it does) or else they dont get to use L mountIt would be stupid easy to make buying ANY leica camera entirely pointless. They are objectively badly priced, terribly specced, and poorly built.
>>4536033I don't buy this, Leica especially now is dependent on tech from Loomix, so artificially crippling their partners by mandating they make cameras that color shift with legacy lenses 35mm and wider seems a highly schizophrenic theory indeed. Without Panasonic and Sigma propping up their lens ecosystem and providing much needed modern tech for the non-M cameras they'd be fucking nowhere, just a legacy meme brand making toy cameras for richfags. Not that they aren't that already, but at least they're still trying to maintain some facade of normalcy with the L and Q lines.What's more likely is that the stuff with microlenses that Leica does extra for their SL bodies is simply pointless for Panasonic and Sigma to implement themselves because they (at least wishfully, at best rightfully) assume most of their customers won't be using Leica lenses. This is not entirely the case with the bf and fp which are popular cameras for adapting despite everything (the Japanese seem to love this given how much of their marketing shows the fp and bf used in this way, mainly just because it looks cool), and in the case of the fp they did include an option to make your own color shift correction profiles... But I still want to see some tests.
>>4536033Poorfag cope, especially the poorly built part. Sour grapes fox.
>>4536033>>4536034>>4536036Speaking of Leica, does anyone have any sample photos out of a 35mm Summilux FLE v1? Got one on the way but it's been delayed for delivery past the weekend so trying to live vicariously through others til then, can't scratch the itch by shooting. another 35mm because I traded my Summarit towards it.
>>4535995With a flat top, no hotshoe, it seems like a missed opportunity that they did not do a top hinged LCD like in pic related. Unlike the pictured GF-10 the LCD should be fully articulated from that top hinge, allowing reversing the LCD. This makes tilting for portrait orientation possible, also can protect the screen when it's not in use by having it face the body.
fug it im buying a z6iii tomorrow. $2khopefully sell my z5 for ~$600 on ebay.
>>4535968>I didnt know /k/ was a furry boardi've been off 4chan for years and i knew that
>>4536036Google “leica failed”Its worse than sony with 1/1000th the sales>>4536034Lumix is dependent on leica for optics tech and design advice. Lumix has no cameras with no L mount.
>>45360473k+ USD for a lens is reserved for extremely rare vintage lenses or lenses with leaf shutters. Everything else is a scam. Sorry.
new to /p/ and i can only assume this is the appropriate place to pose this question, but this thread does seem rather more concerned with faggotry than photographyi have an olympus OM-2S from like 1988, a Zuiko 50mm lens, and a Quantaray 28-80 zoom/macro lensthe Zuiko is great for portraits and the Quantaray is great for landscape photography and macro photography of things like mushrooms and flowers, but i've been wanting to get into like, birdwatching and there's a lot of complications with shopping for lenses for a 40 year old platform. is anyone familiar with the Olympus OM series, or have any recommendations, for a decent lens with a bit more zoom than i already have? I got the camera and lenses from my parents, and i've been having a lot of fun with the lenses i have, but i've recently been wanting to branch out with what i can do
>>4536034If panasonic were allowed to truly be a rebadged leica, no one would buy a leica. It’s existential for leica’s weak attempt at being more of a professional photography brand (but still an aspirational luxury one). In that case why would leica let them also use leica’s lenses?Agreements like this exist implicitly in the business world and are basically in contracts (cant sue if kicked off L mount)Lumix didnt want to spend to develop an exclusive lens ecosystem and this is the price. Opennness and cooperation are illusions.
>>4536050Ask in the film general.
>>4536053thank you i must have missed it scrolling the catalog
>>4536050https://phillipreeve.net/blog/guide-to-classic-olympus-om-zuiko-lenses-on-film-and-sony-full-frame/
>>4536050Just get closer, zoom is a cope.Look at the cheetah, it looks like shit from afar https://clarkvision.com/articles/exposure-f-ratio-aperture-and-light-collection/
>>4535951You're just proving you're a glowie with connections to the diplomatic quarter>nazi>argentinabaka it's like the Molotov Ribbentrop pact still echoes to this day
>>4536057>Just get closer, zoom is a cope.you forgot to attach your boutique reenactment of gigachad 80mm isn't nothing but it can be pretty difficult to "just get closer" to wild animals
>>4536059Even with more zoom getting closer is always better
>>4536057>Seething this hard because someone told you cropping the shit out of your digital camera looks bad (it does) and you suck at photography>w-well zoom is bad! no one needs a 400m then get closer! I AM SILLY! -uLol
>>4536061I'm seething that you are making cANON look like the reasonable oneMaybe you're cANONNo one could be this stupid
>>4536060well obviouslyhuge zoom is to compensate for the distance you can't close, isn't it?if i see a heron across a pond i can't very well swim to it
>>4536064>doesnt own a waterproof camera>doesn't know how to swimAnd you call yourself a photographer. PATHETIC.
>>4536050The 400mm F5.6 Tokina SD, not the earlier RMC. It is one of the better third-party vintage telephotos.
>>4536065nigger we have already established that i'm using a camera from the 1980s if you knew how to fucking read i am NOT swimming with this thing it is far too precious to me
>>4536067Wow are you really so poor you cant afford a waterproof body for it? Sad! Truly!
>>4536066>400mm F5.6 Tokina SDfound one for sale with the OM mount and it's in fucking Lviv lmao >>4536068yeah bro i got like three grapes in my bank account
>>4536069I heard on /ck/ that japanese grapes cost over 100 dollars each, so you may be rich.
>>4536070my camera is japanese, not my grapes, sadly
>>4536071As long as your grapes aren't sour I think it's okay.
>>4536063>all zoom is bad because uhhh durrrrr someone said cropping the shit out of a crop canon as a cope looks badWhy do you autists always go straight for first principles like everything is philosophyCropping for "reach" looks bad. that's it.That actually means you do need a longer lens.
>>4536073>That actually means you do need a longer lens.That's not what the stupid cheetah example implies at all.
Noob here.I don't know where to start.I had a Canon D500. Used it for years. Someone advised me to buy a 5D Mark II to get the full frame.I reflected and now I notice I didn't choose my camera according how I wanted to use it, but just asked for a higher model.Now I ask: what camera to take landscapes?Can a camera properly respond to different needs? I guess having different lenses can make it polyvalent, right ?My main goal is to photography landscapes, especially clouds. Picrel is what I could take with my D500 freehand during sunset (it's a cropped detail). Isn't this blurry? More clear-cut is possible, right? I want details. What's the best setup for this ? Tripod? Or do some camera allow you to take neat details freehand?Which type of camera? DSLR? mirrorless? Which brand? Canon? Nikon? Sony? Lumix? Panasonic? Fujifilm? Everybody seems to hate Sony, here.I thought on taking a 5D on a tripod, 18-55mm. How good of a choice is it?If the landscapes are my main discipline, I also plan to take models sometimes. Can a single camera properly do both? I also want to film for YouTube videos. Should I buy a film camera for this? The D500 could film but only in 30fps. No big deal, but I feel some 1080 60fps would be nicer. Videos didn't look bad but 30fps sounds bad, what do you think?
>>4536074>still seethingyou still need a longer lensbut cropping to go even longer will look bad. there is a practical limit after which global IQ is shit and it's a shit photo pixel peeping nerds who literally counting hairs.>look, i can count more hairs! i'm right! MEGAPIXELS! THE 90D! MEGAPIXELS!>-zooming in on a shit photoand in normal photography cropping is still a huge IQ loss. way to turn your $3000 FF camera into micro four thirds to avoid using the right lens.megapixel faggotry is always retarded and unjustifiable. if you know how to take a photo you don't need more than 20mp. 99% of you fags reaching is from rotating and cropping to compose and it shows.
>>4536077NOOOOOO I CANT AFFORD ANOTHER LENS AFTER BUYING ALL THESE MEGAPIXELS
>>4536076mk II is better for videorecording if that's what you wantget a tripod for landscape photography and learn how to use your cameraaperture, shutter speed, and ISO are incredibly important to at least vaguely understand
>>4536076Probably a phase one IQ4 on a technical camera.
>>4536041>upgrades from a perfectly fine camera>continues to take nophotosthe circle of gearfaggotry
>>4536076The softness you're seeing is caused by a shitty lens or missed focus. Impact on image quality:lens > skill > sensor size < camera brand/model
>>4535937I know some basic wood and metal working and was actually planning a little project like this but instead with a brownie box type camera instead of an SLR.
>>4536081>Complains about nophotos>Posts picture of leafsYou could at least include a couple of rocks in your photo.
>>4536089Hi, no photo!
>>453605980mm is fucking nothing when it comes to birding and wildlife. Yes pros can make a use of it, pros also can use a 70-700 but they do this as a living and can prepare accordingly. You, the retard with a camera walking around need the optical reach and this is why in amateur wildlife and birding a 400mm lens or even better a 100-400mm equivalent zoom is a must. There are even pro level alternatives like the RF 100-500L or EF 100-400 II L because these lenses are so versatile and switching lenses out in the wild comes with dirt.So, set that 80mm aside and get a proper telephoto lens, even a zoom one! And don't listen to the autists.
>>4536029You could have made a relevant accusation or used some unavoidable reality against me but you had to double down instead on the furfag bullshit claims. I guess it's all someone who was taught "'nazi' is the the ultimate insult" has left after seeing it's a compliment to me. >>4536034He regularly makes up these absurd explanations and presents them as gospel. Same as some cameras having their sensor design defects exacerbated on non-C1 software supposedly being evidence of canikon collusion with Adobe to keep others down. A confident bullshitter is all he is. >>4536043He lives in a post-truth world and believes he can effectively control other people's perception of reality with his delusions. >>4536047>Lumix has no cameras with no L mount.Half the lineup is MFT, stop spouting retardation. >>4536058Case in point. A fried brain.
>>4536076There is no such thing as a Canon D500.You want a Nikon D800 with the AF-S 14-24mm F2.8 for landscapemaxing at a reasonable budget.
>>4536094>>4536076And a basic tripod
>>4536050Is this bait? If not Olympus Zuiko 85-250mm F/5 or 300mm f/4.5. >>4536052Some Leicas are rebadged Panasonics. L mount alliance doesn't mean sharing every trade secret. >>4536057lmao>>4536059It's the "just zoom with your feet" bullshit from a guy who got btfo, and this guy is obviously ridiculing him. >>4536060Wrong, lenses have a minimum focal distance and it also changes the composition. Long reach gives you that creamy compression on distant scenes. It flattens space.
>>4536063I was sleeping>>4536064Do you shoot a lot of herons catching fish?>>4536067He's shitposting and I hope you too are. >>4536069>it's in fucking Lviv lmao No refunds! Your generous contribution will go to Volodymyr's suit fund and the local Piggie pound!>>4536073Sometimes the results are the same and the price difference favors changing the body instead of the lens. Full frame sensors are generally suboptimal for long distance. There's a reason the broadcast cameras for the most expensive events in the world use both a long zoom lens and a dense crop sensor. We're taking 52MP super 35 (APS-C) at its biggest here. Sometimes they use 2/3" 3-CMOS instead. These are million dollar events like the World Cup or F1 where extreme closeups are demanded by the audience. If anyone is an autist going for first principles (and ignoring the rest) here that's you. You are desperate to not admit in some cases a crop camera might give better results than the one you spent your neet life savings on.
>>4536093Micro four thirds is a dead system, crop coping autistic furry.
>cropping looks like shit>NOOOO *triple essay posts*All furfags are lolcows
>>4536074The cheetah example was a platitude he mistook for a gotcha. Or maybe he knew but wanted my attention and now has what he craved. Daddy issues. >>4536077Anon, if you have a 400mm and can't put 32MP on your target with FF the 90D already offers an image quality boost. Even without cropping. For less than half the price of a 100-400mm. Your real problem aren't the megapixels, it's the mirror. If it were a M6 ii POS with the same sensor you'd say it's based like the consoomer cattle you are.
>>4536103>muh megapixelsAre all furries this snoybrained?
>>4536082It's bait, he cropped the out of focus edge or something. The camera model gives it away too (Canon D500). It doesn't exist. Then he brings up 60fps video which is for brainrot action or slow motion. Everyone knows 24fps is the video that matters.
>>4536101>>4536102>>4536105>more furry bullshit allegationsDaddy issues confirmed. Did your daddy neglect you to go gambling with the lads?https://youtube.com/watch?v=1wdJ_q4_7kc
I don't even understand how there is an argument for this topic.Focal length between 20-100mm are meant to be chosen primarily for how tight or wide you want the perspective to be.Greater focal lengths used to take long-distance shots look like shit. That's simple reality. Fighting against this is like a tardie fighting against his meds.The proper use-case for longer focal lengths is for smaller subjects, and for when closing the gap is simply not possible. This is your Birding, Motorsport, Deep Sky Astro, and oh fuck there's a lake in my way type photographs.>inb4 getting closer changes the photoYes, getting closer changes the perspective and background compression. This is rarely more important than increasing your subject's definition, contrast, and sharpness. In order to disagree you must append your melty with a photo you've taken that was ruined from being too close.
>>4536106Yes thank you poindexter you are very smart. You may return to your home thread of /hmofa/ now.
>>4536109Some furfag with autism spent all her money on megapixels to avoid buying lenses and has been on a years long meltie/tantrum over it because people keep telling her cropping looks like shitHer only two photos are blurry cows and a 25x25px yellow dot that is allegedly saturnShe literally can not resist replying with essay length cope laden schizo posts and quadruple-posted tryhard shit so she will never stop being baited
>>4536109>Greater focal lengths used to take long-distance shots look like shit. That's simple reality. Fighting against this is like a tardie fighting against his meds.That's simply not the case. Eggy's work alone is testament to the desirability of the long lens look. 400mm is sometimes used in editorial shoots. >This is your Birding, Motorsport, Deep Sky Astro, and oh fuck there's a lake in my way type photographs.That's only a few cases where it's the only choice, and in Astro's case it doesn't even have to be deep sky (cue Saturn's rings).
>>4536076>(it's a cropped detail). Isn't this blurry?yes, it's rather blurry>Or do some camera allow you to take neat details freehand?>Which type of camera? DSLR? mirrorless? For freehand you need stabilization, either OIS in the lens or IBIS in the body.OIS is more effective at telephoto, IBIS is more effective at wide end.For landscape more shots are at wide, so probably you want IBIS.The only DSLRs with IBIS are Pentax.The IBIS in OM System and Panasonic Mirrorless cameras make several seconds handheld sharp possible. Fujifilm's IBIS is good too. Canon, Nikon, Sony mirrorless IBIS might be good too but I can't recommend these brands for their poor user experience or limited feature set.>Can a single camera properly do both?A DSLR doesn't allow filming video while using the viewfinder.Lumix cameras have excellent photo and video capability. They have every video option you could possibly want. If size is no concern I would go with a Lumix S1 or S5.The worst thing about Lumix (and most modern cameras) is that they don't have an optical low-pass filter resulting in false colour with sharp lenses like in pic related which is a 100% crop.
>>4536110What is that, some homosuck thread you frequent? Maybe you should take your own advice and go back to /co/mblr. >>4536112Nice fanfic. I don't even have a 90D, my camera runs Magic Lantern as God intended.
>>4536115>The worst thing about Lumix (and most modern cameras) is that they don't have an optical low-pass filter resulting in false colour with sharp lenses like in pic related which is a 100% crop.Kolari makes drop-in OLPF for Lumix and some other brands, which I would definitely invest in for landscape photography.
>>4536115>and most modern camerasDon't lie asperger. Lumix is the only brand that doesn't have OLPFs on low resolution cameras.Also, sharp lenses like sony G masters can trigger moire even with OLPFs.>>4536117They only make these for lumix and it's an extra $500 you don't need to spend when every other brand already 1: has one installed 2: has a worthwhile lens mount 3: has working autofocus 4: is actually reliable
>>4536114>furry says something retardedare you ALL chris chan tier autists?editorial shooters don't crop their cropped crop for reach
>>4536118>Don't lie asperger. Lumix is the only brand that doesn't have OLPFs on low resolution cameras.some cameras have OLPF on paper, but it doesn't actually do anything (sony)https://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_a6700/sample_images/sony_a6700_45.jpg
>>4536118>every other brand already 1: has one installedmodern cameras don't have them
>>4536123The a6700 doesn't have an OLPF because sony didn't expect people to put G master lenses on a low end beginners camera, anon.Thankfully, this isn't an issue in real life. Only certain aperture ranges (up to f8) trigger aliasing, and only sharp lenses like the 50mm f1.4 G master (used in the photo you stole like the thief you are). Softer lenses provide the same effect as an OLPF, but superior. Most OLPFs except for the ones in the canon 1D series blur detail asymmetrically which looks unnatural and digital. Lenses blur detail radially, just like canon's very expensive 16 point AA filter. You're not actually meant to use the sharpest possible lens for everything. Ultra sharp lenses are specialty tools for professional portrait photography. They were not meant to be used by amateurs taking photos of brick walls for "camera reviews".>>4536124The nikon Z5 and Z6 series, the canon R6 and R5 series, the sony a7c, a7iii, a7iv, and a7v, all have OLPFs. All nikon and canon DX cameras have OLPFs.The only standouts are the a6700 (which is because it was meant to be used with blurrier APS-C lenses) and lumix (because lumix doesnt know how to make cameras)
>>4536125>Ultra sharp lenses are specialty tools for professional portrait photography. They were not meant to be used by amateurs taking photos of brick walls for "camera reviews".very true, they were literally designed to shoot wide open, but consoomers just think muh sharpness charts=the best lens and consider them the default to "get the most out of the camera" and use them for their f8 building cornersan excessively sharp lens WILL cause moire even if you have an OLPF
>>4536118>3: has working autofocusLumix has among the best single autofocus which is what a landscape photographer is going to use.
>>4536076On the off-chance this isn't bait:1) learn to use what you have, if the lens has stabilization make sure it's on when handheld2) for low light conditions like these, a tripod is best3) in case it's a Nikon D500 then a 5D2 is a downgrade in every way but MPs but even then they're so close the D500 may still have an edge. 5) if it's a 500D then a 5D2 would be an upgrade but there's no reason to get a 5D2 when better cameras exist for little more money6) either of those cameras produce better results than what you posted if used properly, learn how depth of field worksI have no camera recommendations because it's obviously a technique issue. Focal lengths? Depends on the type of landscape you shoot, the misconception that all landscape should be on ultrawides is common.
>>4536127According to a polish guy bumping the camera every time he hits the AF-ON button>Every single source on earth: canon has better autofocus than lumix in all situations bar none. there is no reason to buy a lumix over a canon unless you're poor and yet still a gearfaggot.>Some polish guy: I BUMPED THE CAMERA EVERY TIME I RE-FOCUSED ON A TEST CHART
>>4536128Here's this posters landscapes btw
>>4536125>The nikon Z5 and Z6 series, the canon R6 and R5 series, the sony a7c, a7iii, a7iv, and a7v, all have OLPFs.>All nikon and canon DX cameras have OLPFs.>The only standouts are the a6700 (which is because it was meant to be used with blurrier APS-C lenses) and lumix (because lumix doesnt know how to make cameras)Sony a6700 and a7V look the same - bad.
>>4536130And for years, he's been using the excuse that uploading any other photos would get him doxxed. He'll invent anything on the fly.
>>4536131>Sony a6700 and a7V look the same - bad.Even without a Kolari OLPF the Lumix results are still better.
>>4536131an excessively sharp lens WILL cause moire even if you have an OLPF. this happened to people who used sharp nikkor AF-S G lenses on the D750 as well.Especially if you use bad software, like adone lightroom (generative AI junk that's not industry standard) or worthless freeware (which at least beats lightroom by a hair). >>4536134Lumix lenses are inferior, so using the sharpest lumix L mount lens is like having an AA filter. This is because lumix isn't really a camera company, they're a toaster company, so they rely on outside sources for lens design and can't manufacture them as well as sony, nikon, and canon. On lumix, the choice to use an excessively sharp lens that would cause moire is simply less available. It's similar to sony's decision to omit the OLPF from the a6700. They didn't think there were enough sharp lenses in the average APS-C shooters bag. Sony underestimated gearfags.Lumix just isn't good enough at making cameras and lenses to give gearfags the chance to abuse lens sharpness on test charts and brick walls.
>>4536132>upload the good photos you've submitted to contests with your name on
Reminder, dpreview test scenes are unrealistic and bad science>They have been caught exposing cameras differently to skew the noise results, for example, exposing nikon cameras brighter and fujifilm cameras darker>They have been caught using colored lighting with different cameras to change the color science, for example, exposing olympus cameras under a heavily green tinted light source>The software they use to generate their previews, adobe camera raw, is not industry standard, and has notoriously poor support for fuji .RAF and sony .ARW files because fuji and sony directly partner with their superior competitor, capture one (the industry standard). However, if you use nikon, adobe will get great results because adobe and nikon are corporate partners.>Dpreview typically tries to use sharp lenses at their sharpest aperture, but often fails to do this consistently so one camera will be tested with a sony G master, another will be tested with a shitty sony-zeiss, and DSLRs for which the sharpest lenses were sigma ART and zeiss primes will be tested with an inferior first party prime
>>4536137Nice nervous breakdown psycho
>>4536137Trvth nvke. Imagine using an amazon marketing page's skewed resolution tests to form serious thoughts.Dpreview's "reviewers" aren't even photographers and their sample galleries are worse than /rpt/
>>4536130And here's the proof that cANON is actually a Fujifilm JPEG enjoyer and can't tell Foveon from heavily downscaled X-Trans V files.
>cANON thinks a 5D2 is a fuji>a fuji is a sigma>and a sony a7iv is a canon 5DIVThere you have it. Gear doesn't matter.
These two cameras have been used to convince /p/ they were looking at the output of over 15 unrelated models and brandsA better camera is just more versatile at imitating lesser cameras
>>4536100>Do you shoot a lot of herons catching fish?Not well, they're very skittish and I only have an 80mm lens
>>4536092>80mm is fucking nothing when it comes to birdingDo you think, from the photo i posted of God's tiniest mockingbird, that I am unaware of this?It's a fine lens for what it's capable of, but I am literally asking for advice on lenses that are good for wildlife photography >>4536096>Is this baitNo, i actually don't know that much about equipment All the local camera shops were dead by the time I was old enough to appreciate the hobby and technology had moved on to the point no place that still sold any camera equipment sold anything OM-compatible >Olympus Zuiko 85-250mm F/5Thanks that looks like probably the best option for me, decent size and affordable
>>4536155OM has a 400mm f6.3 for $180Just be warned lenses like this on film need to be shot from a tripod/monopod and are a bitch to focusIf you want to keep at this, sell out of OM entirely and go to minolta A mount (lots of cheap lenses digislugs dont want because its not a legendary LARP-friendly brand). They have a cheap 500mm f8 catadiatropic lens that autofocuses and is very high quality once the mirrors are aligned and A mount autofocus zooms are basically free
>>4535946>abused damaged unitit had 5k shutters and looked like this when i got it, pentaxes are supposed to be unkillable/durable right? mine doesnt even leave the house outside of vacations and shoots. its nicer than 90% of the ones for sale currently, it was upgraded from mk1 to mk2 in 2017-18. i took pics of it before i put the skin on, it still looks mint, they're on my phone>>4535947yeah a good camera is supposed to make retards take good photos and make good photographers take excellent photos, not different than a good car making bad drivers look good a good tool works with you and helps you finish the job you want>>4535912honestly a a900 is closer to a 5dm2/d700, so like $4-500 for one used. not a great deal, but not a bad one given how rare it is. i have a lead on a $90 inop a700 from roberts photo on ebay and a $80 a700 back cover w/display from canada>>4536157a-mount is excellent, and you're wrong about that. i sell my a-mount stuff wayyyyy faster than my k-mount stuff. the sony adapters + good sony dslr sales = lots of potential buyers minolta just sold really well in the 80s-90s too. they were the first autofocus SLRs iirc and sold the best. i also feel like their lenses for the period are better. i will not give up my 35-70mm f/4 maxxum af kit lens...its my favorite minolta lens bar none. the pentax-f 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 isnt as good imo. >>4535978i also got a 11-18mm sony a-mount lens for $60 irl and a a900 w/a broken screen for $190 shipped in the last thread. was trying to snag a 16-50mm f2.8 ssm sony for $80 but i think the seller got cold feet and claimed he lost it (was listed for $120 for a long time)a few months ago i missed on a 24-70mm f2.8 zeiss + sony a99 kit listed as "sony dslr" on fbm for $500...was so mad because someone beat me to it by a few hours.
>>4535946My K1 with the glitchy meter, shitty AF, and failing mode dial was not damaged. It was near mint.Pentax simply did not make the K1 well. They are out of business because their cameras suck and all of their FF lenses were optically mediocre, big and overpriced, or just rebranded tamron zooms and their entire APS-C lineup was just DX nikon from 5 years ago
>>4536137>>They have been caught exposing cameras differently to skew the noise results>They have been caught using colored lighting with different cameras to change the color scienceReview sites like DPReview have nothing to gain and everything to lose by fucking with their tests on purpose. They are simply incompetent.>>4536140>their sample galleries are worse than /rpt/kek that's true>>4536089>Posts picture of leafsYeah, what about it?>>4536150Based. How's that GFX? Do you ever take it with you outside?
>>4536148>>4536149>>4536150I actually knew you'd expose yourself lolI only posted that because the filename gave it away. It looks good but not foveon. Foveon has this pixel art quality to it when pixel peeped on. Even at 100MP your image doesn't. You'd have to come up with some special algorithm to resemble it when peeped but it'd look bad when looking at the whole most likely.
>>4536173Stopposting.Nigga you're mentally retarded. Get help. I'm sure even in Belarus there are psychiatrists that can help you.
I am sorry for venting a little bit here:A couple of years ago I had a really nice digital setup (D850 and some nice lenses like 70-200mm. I sold everything and bought an M6 with a lens. I’ve been really happy shooting just film for the past couple of years, but just today, I saw a huge flock of swans just chilling in a lake, and I really wanted to take photos and videos of them. It was like first time in three years I feel regret with my decision. Man, I really wish I graduate and find a job soon so I can start saving up money for some gear and shoot some wildlife next spring.Maybe R7 with a 100-400mm F5.6-8 could be enough for that kind of work.
>>4536178>bought an M6 with a lensI'm so sorry.
>>4536152I was just referencing an old meme from a bad show lolhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=paJqHPHLExo
>>4536183furry uncs crashing out fr
>>4536179I know, life is very hard. But really, I had to do it because I decided to go back to university. I would not have been able to graduate if I would have kept my camera gear.Owning just a film camera made me shoot little bit less.
>>4536150Outreached by a 90D with the same lens
>>4536184I only hope he doesn't off himself at the end of this mental breakdown. He might be a retarded gay furry nazi faggot from Belarus but even retarded gay furry nazi faggots from Belarus deserve to live (in a psychiatric hospital).
>>4536157>Just be warned lenses like this on film need to be shot from a tripod/monopod and are a bitch to focusyeah i've already had my share of troubles figuring out how to get a good focus on the lenses i have, because before i got the OM-2S i was more used to disposable film cameras and point/shoot compact digital >If you want to keep at this, sell out of OM entirelyunfortunately i have the "object attachment" kind of autism so while i'm not opposed to getting a more modern dslr i am unable to divest myself of the camera that photographed my childhood >OM has a 400mm f6.3 for $180i'm having difficulty finding these lenses for that price but i am seeing a lot of suspiciously low prices on some website called "keh.com" are they... trustworthy? or are the more damaged lenses really bad enough to sell so cheaply?>>4536183ah i seei was unaware of this show entirely but i do love watching herons
>>4536186I only hope you will find a job and buy yourself a new digital camera soon. Just don't be stupid twice and don't sell that M6 to fund your new gear.
>>4536190Keh is really good despite the kosher part
>>4536178>Maybe R7 with a 100-400mm F5.6-8 could be enough for that kind of work.I don't recommend Canon, they have fallen behind in mirrorless.For the price of a new R7 you can get a used full frame Lumix which has better stabilization and features.For example Lumix has in-camera cropping which is great for extra reach when photographing and video recording wildlife.If you record 1080p video you can have the camera crop into the middle 1920x1080 pixels of the sensor which gives tremendous reach.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm4uk76aTtE
>>4536184I initially thought he was making the same reference so I shared it so that he could too be in the joke
>>4536189thats a man, 0/10 wouldnt shag
>>4536203Lumix cameras are unreliable, have bad AF-C, and worse lenses.Who the fuck cares if fiddling with the camera controls enables in-camera cropping when shooting raw and editing later is the standardAnd who the fuck cares if it's a lumix, with an innacurate back screen and EVF, poor reliability, and just the general shittiness you'd expect of a brand with 1% market share? Lumix is basically last year's snoy running magic lantern.
>>4536203Canon mirrorless is garbage but the ironic shilling isn't funny. If I had to cuck myself into going mirrorless I'd probably buy a Panasonic or Nikon though. >If you record 1080p video you can have the camera crop into the middle 1920x1080 pixels of the sensor which gives tremendous reach.I like that it's optional. The RP does the same when shooting 4k but you have no control over it, it's just gimped lol
>>4536207>more autistic shilling from the other sideThere's just two brands to avoid: Sony and Fuji (unless you want 100MP on a tight budget)
>>4536200i mean i'm looking at a difference of 100$ for the same lens on keh and ebay but the one on keh is listed at shit quality and the one on ebay has one picture of it looking dusty as hell and scratched on the body and no pictures of the back or front glass
>>4536211You mean bargain, ugly or what? Bargain grade is usually fine.
Are there any good prakticar lenses?
>>4536191Thanks. Do not worry, I like the M6 to much to do that. I like shooting film much more than digital, but there are just these rare occasions when shooting digital makes much more sense. >>4536203I was also thinking about Lumix, since it is L-mount and they have cheap Sigma lenses. But I was also thinking about getting a used A7III since Sony also has Sigma lenses. Really, these purchasing decisions kinda makes me remember why I decided to sell all my gear for one camera and lens.
>>4536215the 85-250 one i was looking at was graded Ugly, but i've also found a few 300mm Zuikos decently priced on keh and ebay so i'll keep looking for now
>>4536207>Who the fuck cares if fiddling with the camera controls enables in-camera cropping when shooting raw and editing later is the standardProbably the guy who wants to record video in addition to photos cares.
>>4536220dont waste your time with lumixthey’re unreliable and have no OLPFs
>>4536227Over 10 years with my GX8 and no problems other than batteries holding little charge. Just waiting for Lumix to release something similar in form with a new sensor.
>>4536224Yeah ugly is best avoided. May bring fungus that infects your other gear.
>>4536227This is the Capture One/Sony shill and moire autist who hates Panasonic and Leica because they are superior (no baby mount) and give him buyer's remorse lol
>>4536136You keep saying that, yet the *only* off-photos you have to show are complete technical failures? Not a single one where you even held the camera straight?>inb4 "using my skills would reveal me!"Yeah, and my 10/10 huge-titted girlfriend goes to another school.Always the same claims, and always the same failure to back them up. For years.
>>4536081BETTER AF
>>4536235>This is the Capture One/Sony shill and moire autistI'm the moire autist. I broke this sony/C1 shill over and over.At first he denied moire was a problem.Then he said it was easily removed using Capture One - proven wrong when he tried in pic related.(source: https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9601355361/646450)Then he said it's a skill issue and that skilled photographer shoot at diffraction apertures to avoid moire (lol)Now he turns it against Lumix by saying they're unique with moire problems due to not including OLPF on low MP cameras - more lies/nonsense.
>>4536260You're obsessed with made up booegymen>Now he turns it against Lumix by saying they're unique with moire problems due to not including OLPF on low MP cameras - more lies/nonsense.Anon, you can literally google this. The a7v, a7cII, R6II, and Z6III all have OLPFs. Only the S5II and S9 don't. That's why kolari offers an OLPF upgrade for lumix and an OLPF removal for canikony.
>>4536260Moire is a skill issue for pixel peepersIf you don't insist on using an OLPF-less camera like a lumix or an overly sharp lens it rarely happens, and yes, they were correct. You can eliminate aliasing in landscape and architecture photography by shooting at f/11 or f/16, which also eliminates field curvature issues and makes the photo look less harsh and digital.
>>4536262>be pixel peeper>buy SNOY G MASTER>shoot at sharpest apertures for maximum sharpness while pixel peeping>take a photo of a brick wall so you can evaluate the sharpness more accurately>get moire>how could this happen to me!?>*seethes for over half a year* LOOK AT THIS SHIT I CAN SEE WHEN I ZOOM IN!>meanwhile all the normal people are taking problem-free photos with the same camera and generally enjoying themselvesGearfags really, really do it to themselves.
>spent 4k buying my first digital camera>a7v with 24mm 1.4 gm lens>realize it was pointless because I never leave my house so I can't take pictures of anything interesting I only leave when I go out hiking but then I don't feel safe going out hiking alone with 4k worth of camera gear. How do you guys do it?
>>4536261>That's why kolari offers an OLPF upgrade for lumix and an OLPF removal for canikony.
>>4536266Smart people don't. These 4k cameras are for professional use. They get insured. They're kept in cases and drying boxes. They're used to pay for themselves in one wedding where they are shot carefully and purposefully, not to minmax and get the most out of the specs, but to always get the shot in a chaotic environment and never have to make excuses to the client.People who use top of the line professional cameras for fun are called "gearfags" or "good goys". We make fun of them. They seethe. No one sane here has used such a camera for more than a few weeks during wedding season, and then people usually sell them for a negligible loss (relative to the $15k+ made by shooting 3-4 weddings) and buy the best the following year.Return it without regret.
>>4536267All other info on the page makes it clear it's lumix specific. This blurb is right by generic IR filter removal disclaimers. The a7IV and Z6III both have AA filters.And kolari's website is buggy in general.Curious.
>>4536269It was created for the pannys but you can order one for the Sony
>>4536267>yet another dogfucker tacitly admits he's the moire spammerisnt it weird both our tripfags (cANON and cinefag) are>furries (cANON is a flat out furry, cinefag posts lustfully worded bestiality fantasies "i mean, eugenics program ideas")>nazis>sony/fuji haters>mirrorless in general haters>lumix shills>video spec autists>obsessed with the same schizo boogeymen>>4536270Sony has an OLPF, so it would require removal and installation which they don't communicate. Their website sucks and their services are unclear besides in how likely they are to break cameras. A very scammy website if you ask me.
>>4536266Sell it to buy a gun and CCW while you hike with a more reasonably priced camera Or become a professional photographer, save up to buy a gun, and CCW at random people's weddings
Am I better off replacing my M10 with an M10-R or an M11?
>>4536273An M9 with a repaired sensorSpecsfagging was leica's biggest mistake>yes, e-zine reviewers. i will cowtow to your test charts. more megapixels.
>>4536260>>4536235
>>4536272>Or become a professional photographer, save up to buy a gun, and CCW at random people's weddingsk3k!>>4536271Take your meds, schizo.You wouldn't know a lustful fantasy if it struck you in the face.>Sony has an OLPF, so it would require removal and installation which they don't communicate. Their website sucks and their services are unclear besides in how likely they are to break cameras. A very scammy website if you ask me.https://cameradecision.com/specs/Sony-Alpha-A7-IVIt has no OLPF.>>4536275Time bomb>>4536276Curious how you don't mention >>4536271
Chat, is it true that Mamiya 645 lenses have ARRI DNA in them?
>>4536277>You wouldn't know a lustful fantasy if it struck you in the face.>cinefag wants to cum all over snoyschizo's faceAaaaaaaaaand... that's enough internet for today!
>>4536279k3kNot what I meant but funny and terrypilled nevertheless (just like Lumix cameras!)
>>4536275I appreciate the M9, especially now Kolarivision are giving people an option, but I ended up with my M10 because I was finding myself ISO limited by my M240, I do end up shooting at f/5.6 in low light enough to want the ISO performance.
>>4536277Big meltie
>>4536282>making a post is a meltyHere have a definition:>Meltdown: An intense breakdown of self-control or an overwhelming emotional reaction caused by extreme stress, fatigue, or sensory overload.
>>4536268>4k cameras>professional usetheyre barely entry level. are you poor, american or both?
>>4536278Only if they've been fapped in, in a very, very specific way.
>>4536285meltie
>>4536289Torch one for me will ya chief
>>4536285Didnt have self control not to reply huh
>>4536266/gear fact/You don’t need more than an old DSLR or a pocketable PNS. You overspent. It doesn’t matter who you are or who you think you are. Your photos would turn out just as good with an old DSLR or a cheap pocket camera. If you have more, you wasted your money and reduced the total amount of opportunity in your future for absolutely nothing in return (if you know how to invest your money, you actually wasted future millions). This can be coped with but not denied.
>>4536305trvke
>>4536305Depends on how old and the type of photography being done. The pocketable point and shoots unless they're film are mostly a total meme only worth it for the optical zoom but otherwise phone tier.
>>4536305So true.
>>4536305I do like my foolframe collection, but sometimes I kinda miss using my old Snoy PnS (picrel) - or maybe just the simpler times.
>>4536254Won't make any difference in real world situations. You're just consooming.
>>4536286>A7V>Entry levelOh shit the fuck up. It's a camera for weddings and studio work. Nobody sane lugs around a 4K USD FF body with a GM lens to take photos of their dog in a park. For that kind of shooting you buy a compact Fuji with a cute little prime.
>>4536305Mostly true but I'd correct it to entry level mirrorless because DSLRs are a pain in the back to carry around and look autistic.
>>4535995Is this better than the BF? I dont own a camera and was considering the BF for point and shoot. The video aspect of the fp2 sounds enticing.
>>4535937I just bought myself a Helios 44-2 and wondered if it was a bad idea to buy a generic tilt adapter for it?Have any of you tried one?
>>4536320Fuji is an even bigger waste of money. Snoy a7iv price and weather sealing for micro four thirds performance.
>>4536327BF is Sigma targeting Apple fans. Form over function, simplicity (restricted controls), only built-in memory.FP2 is aimed at conventional photographers/videographers, including professionals. For me FP2 is an easy choice over BF, but if you like the Apple philosophy BF might be for you.
>>4536333The fp2 is a marketing stunt aimed at sigma fans that like paying exorbitant amounts for mediocre lego cameras and full frame bmpcc wannabes. There’s literally nothing it actually DOES that makes it better than a cheaper older nikon or even sony (sigma is sony-like in quality anyways) for photography.
>>4536266Every lens made in the past 100 years is more than sharp enough to make super-sharp pictures if you know what you're doing. The only limitation to picture sharpness is your skill as a photographer. It's the least talented who spend the most time worrying about lens sharpness and blame crummy pictures on their equipment rather than themselves. Skilled photographers make great images with whatever camera is in their hands; I've made some of my best images of all time with an irreparably broken camera! Most pixels are thrown away before you see them, but camera makers don't want you to know that.If you're not getting ultra-sharp pictures with this, be sure not to shoot at f/16 or smaller where all lenses are softer due to diffraction, always shoot at ISO 100 or below because cameras become softer at ISO 200 and above, avoid shooting across long distances over land which can lead to atmospheric heat shimmer, be sure everything is in perfect focus, set your camera's sharpening as you want it (I set mine to the maximum) and be sure nothing is moving, either camera or subject. If you want to ensure a soft image with any lens, shoot at f/16 or smaller at ISO 1,600 or above at default sharpening in daylight of subjects at differing distances in the same image.People worry waaaaay too much about lens sharpness. It's not 1968 anymore when lenses often weren't that sharp and there could be significant differences among them; ever since about 2010 all new lenses are all pretty much equally fantastic.
>>4536305>Your photos would turn out just as good with an old DSLRThat is only true if you shoot auto-exposure, auto-white balance and then auto-levels in your RAW software (or arbitrarily dragging sliders.)Advanced photographers prioritize capturing the scene accurately which means tuning tone curves and white balance to match the observed scene. This is especially important in lower light scenes where sensor response to colour and tone relation deviates more extremely from human vision.Mirrorless cameras with an EVF make that much easier to do since you adjust the tone curves / WB while comparing what you see with your eyes with what the sensor sees through the huge hi-res OLED display which has excellent colour accuracy and perfect contrast (better than your monitor at home).Technically this process is possible with a DSLR if you have a LCD loupe, but those LCDs have poor contrast and most DSLRs have limited or inconvenient controls over tone curve while a good mirrorless camera puts those controls at your fingertips.
>>4536336ChatGPT shitposting should be a bannable offense
>>4536334>There’s literally nothing it actually DOES that makes it better than a cheaper older nikon or even sonyIt's significantly smaller than the Nikon ZR and Z5iic, and it has a much thinner cover glass sensor stack than the A7C cameras. That makes the fp2 the only current generation compact full frame camera that is even mildly suitable for adapting small rangefinder lenses with acute ray angles. The S9 was another one but I think it had more ray angle issues.If you're comparing the fp2 with other bodies on a spec by spec basis rather than understanding the ideology behind it (maximum compactness), you're doing it wrong. It's a good body *for its size*. It will serve best as a pocket camera to complement a larger traditional body that covers the remaining bells and whistles.
>>4536327>Is this better than the BFSignificantly better. You really have to want the BF solely for its appearance. FP2 is better in every objective criterion
>>4536340>>4536327However, also consider that it lacks a mechanical shutter and any form of stabilization. If you don't already own a more conventional workhorse camera I wouldn't buy an FP2. If you're a beginner you will be scratching your head as to why you're getting banding in artificial light and handheld shots sometimes come out shaky. Given your assumed budget, the current best entry level full frame body in my opinion is the Z5ii which you can already get discounted, and the Z mount is perfectly fine for adapting lenses too, so you can have some fun with vintage glass if you're so inclined.
>>4536327>>4536341If you must have a tiny camera for point and shoot then your options for new bodies are somewhat limited. The Leica Q and last two Ricoh GR generations both have stabilization and leaf shutters, this is very good and important for the use case. The S9 has at least stabilization but a slow sensor and no mech shutter, not a good combo. Some Sony A7C body is probably okay too, EFCS only though. Fujifilm has some small bodies but it's Fujifilm. Then the discussed Sigmas, and that's about it.
worst power switch placement of all time?
>>4536342The a7c having an EVF, any number of shutter curtains at all and an ILC mount puts it way ahead of everything else.Brand fanboys shill sony hate and nitpick everything about it (despite lesser brands doing worse) on /p/ for a reason, and it's the a7c being the cult camera killer. Its release was the inflection point for micro four thirds basically dying among general photographers and becoming fully relegated to macro.Sony also recently killed off the compact telephoto prime argument for shooting olympus (doubly so, since sony lenses work natively on nikon cameras that have better-than-OM1 weather sealing). Once lumix's new lens design for FF macro lenses percolates through the market, micro four thirds will be very much over.Guess why /p/ also seethes at FF lumix?
>>4536345The new Pen, while not a terrible placement is a pretty fucking horrid implementation. It's a rotary switch and photo is the first option so it's easy to go past it to video, then when you try going back to photo end up turning the camera back off.
>>4536347literally anyone could take a chunk out of sony's sales by just releasing a brick with a shutter and an EVF but they won'tinsert blackrock/vanguard investor money conspiracy theory here (backroom deals are standard japanese business practice. see: sigma is banned from making FF nikon Z lenses)
>>4536347Custom firmwares are taking off due to AI decompiling. I might even use an A7Cii if a custom firmware gets the feature set up to the level of a 10 year old Lumix.
>>4536347It's not even Sony's best seller. In the real world people buying FF cameras care little about size.
>>4536350Ohhh the liminal deals so spookyRetard
>>4536356Firmware features are a non-photographer's concern. Tech nerds aren't really an important part of the market because they're not capable of good photography, only "arguing facts and logic" about shit that doesn't matter in reality.
Reminder that the compulsive liar comes here to shill made-up history about things he doesn't understand because he's anonymous and permabanned from all the forums he got caught peddling disinfo on. That's why he won't trip, he's scared of the same fate or worse, getting exposed as a professional bullshitter. >>4536347>sony lenses work natively on nikon cameras that have better-than-OM1 weather sealingWith an adapter isn't natively and most likely ruins the weather sealing. You spew nonsense.
>>4536345I think the ones around the shutter button are the worst. Wearing winter gloves makes it easy to accidentally turn off when trying to operate front dial.There's little need to have fingertip access to the power switch since normally when going out and about you turn the camera on and let it go into standby on its timer. To wake from standby you half-press the shutter button.
>>4536361In the real world, institutional buyers purchase far more cameras than individuals, and institutional buyers go for the higher end models or the lowest end models, not middle of the road enthusiast gear. Most camera market share is just this plus compact sales in asia.
>>4536368The ETZ21 Pro II is weather sealed.It's a moot point because sony pro body weather sealing is great. The AP uses them in all conditions. The only people who feel a need to dance around this FACT are terminally online 4channers with a sony hateboner.>uh, better not imply sony has weather sealing, teehee that would anger the meme forcers t. >>4536347Pathetic.There's no reason to adapt to nikon to "get weather sealing" when sony already has it
>>4536372>The ETZ21 Pro II is weather sealed.You win this one, I have no problems admitting someone proved me wrong. You should be proud, you won and with the truth. Most here lose twice: they lose the argument and they lose themselves to lying.
>>4536328bump
>>4536390we are all glad you’re at least trying to act like less of a white womanmaybe one day you will realize no one ever disagreed with you about “reach”, they just called your use for it autistic and non-artistic (and your use of it incompetent), and after that, you might finally admit DSLRs are actually kind of shit
>>4536395>no one ever disagreed with you about “reach”Actually they claimed it provided no extra detail, that it only made aberrations bigger and a number of other retarded claims. They have an antiscientific, antiintellectual approach to things.
>>4536328Yeah it kind of is a bad idea to use tilt shift with lenses that are only sharp in the center with unique bokeh. The closer you get to the edge of projection the busier your OOF/bokeh area will look and the softer your center will be because you are not using the center of your image circle anymore and altering the optical path that gives you that nice bokeh. Your adapter doesn't have that mich movement so it may only be a little noticeable depending on how the image circle of your lens.
>>4536398>that it only made aberrations bigger and a number of other retarded claimsThat is certainly true of (your) setup.
>>4536406I proved extra detail was there, and I barely used a 18MP crop sensor. It's not rocket science, everyone knows this outside of /p/ autists. People on astro forums don't even bother debating it.
>>4536364>Firmware features are a non-photographer's concern. Tech nerds aren't really an important part of the market because they're not capable of good photography, only "arguing facts and logic" about shit that doesn't matter in reality.Nobody is interested in your obsolete conception of photography. What you think is "good photography" is trash. Go use a film camera if you don't care about firmware. In the real world people care about upgrading to better tools because better tools = better results faster.
>>4536356>Custom firmwares are taking off due to AI decompiling.This is some dystopian shit. Of course the faked moon was just the beginning. Of course they needed to do away with the OVF.Every passing day I'm closer to selling my car to get one without any kind of ECU. The answer to the cyberpunk dystopia lies in a dieselpunk future leveraging the rich past. With a car, you can go anywhere you want. If they can't hack it.
>>4536364If you have trouble understanding this you are a hopeless coping chartfag/gearfag.
>>4536419>Regular: 2.249
>>4536419>This is some dystopian shit.>>4536116>my camera runs Magic Lantern as God intended.???
>>4536423Magic Lantern isn't AI.
>>4536423That guy is clinically retarded. I don't think pointing out his retardation has any effect on him.
>>4536429>I don't see the difference between installing spaghetti code that AI generated and easily auditable open source software made by human devs with discussions on how to implement things on public forumsYou deserve to become a coppertop
>>4536405But will it be a problem when it's in the 0 degree default position?If not, then I thought it might just be a fun option to have.
>>4536431Magic Lantern project doesn't ban contributions with AI generated code. It's safe to assume that almost all code in Magic Lantern was touched by AI because all major IDEs come with AI code prediction and generation enabled by default.It's quite possible that there is no active, open source project in existence that does not contain at least some AI generated code.Leave this place. Everyone here hates you or feels bad for you or both. You're a pathetic nobody and you're ruining this board.
>>4536427A firmware coded with AI help isn't AI. It's functionally indistinguishable from something human coded - AI is simply arranging previously human coded things that are in its database. The difference is the many many many hours saved by having the AI do menial decompiling/programming tasks.I can understand having a problem with AI generated novels for example, since there can not be originality, but coding does not need originality, it needs to work.Magic Lantern is ramping up to tackle R series cameras now with the help of AI and I'm looking forward to it.
Finally got it. Four cable speedotron 105 strobe! 9600ws max power with a flash duration of 1/1250. The strobe has 4 cables that you hook up to either 4 2400ws packs or 2 4800ws packs. The power of this thing is absolutely bonkers. Even the reflection off my backdrop is blinding lol.You can get some pretty decent DoF with wetplate using one of these beasts. F8 through a socked beauty dish or softbox.>>4536435No. If there is no movement the projection will be centered and parallel on your sensor. The other possible problem is that you are adding an extension tube to your lens which means it wont be able to focus at infinity.
>>4536439>The other possible problem is that you are adding an extension tube to your lens which means it wont be able to focus at infinityNo, it needs an offset to work with mirrorless anyway
>>4536439>9600ws max power with a flash duration of 1/1250Bruh ISS crew is gonna see you snapping from space.>pretty decent DoF with wetplatePost results later.
>>4536440Ahh yeah that makes sense.
>>4536441I probably wont be doing wetplate today, but I may do some direct positive prints using it. The paper runs around 1-1.5 iso, so it is in the same ball park as wetplate just with orthochromatic/low red sensitivity rather than primarily blue/UV.I really want to do some outdoor night portraiture with large modifiers. Sounds really fun and interesting to basically create your own daylight in a scene.Most of my strobe stuff is for portraiture so I can't really share too much, sadly. The vintage soft focus lenses I have combined with a good strobe setup has produced some incredibly cool and unique looking portraits.
>>4536436ML started in 2009, fuck off.
>>4536444And the last commit was 3 weeks ago...You have absolutely no idea how any of that works, do you?
>>4536264>there are people here that fell for the snoy g-master memeDeserved.
>>4536417>saaaar photography is playing with camera controls saaaaarSnoybrain
>>4536454Its funny every brand that goes down the software gimmick route dies while featureless leicas are eternal
>>4536417All tech nerds say thisThe only ones that are ever right are talking down to other tech nerds about how removing some dumb "feature" is actually a good thingThe camera of the future will have 4 controls>shutter speed>ISO>aperture>drive mode
>>4536461Get rid of drive mode. Spray and pray is bad photography.
>>4536484Counterpoint: bursts are good for bracketing, which mostly eliminates the need to gearfag over sensors
>>4536079When I say noob I don't mean I received my first camera yesterday, I actually took photos during years, using tripod. For the aperture, shutter speed and ISO well, when I take landscapes I just want the photo to be the cleanest so I take the lowest ISO, lowest aperture and the fastest shutter speed. Usually 100 ISO 1.4f 1/2000 at sunset.I say noob like I lack experience, I don't know what the different models, brands, do or don't. Whenever I read people here discussing technical stuff I'm kinda lost. I know the focal lenght influences the background blur, warmth changing with season or hours, basic knowledge like that but that's it.>>4536080I'll take a look.>>4536082>the details picrelVery nice. I appreciate them. Very neat. Impressive. What was the setup?It's possible the focus was fucked up in mine. The camera and lens were old and fell a few times. But yes as cANON said, it's cropped. I didn't precise. Here's the original.
>>4536461>The camera of the future will have 4 controls>shutter speed>ISO>aperture>drive modeToo complicated. All we need is a shutter button Good photography is learning to do everything in raw software.
>>4536488>fastest shutter speedthe faster the shutter speed, the more noisy the image. That is because noise is mainly the result of the randomness of light, not a product of the sensor. Longer collection time = less randomness.https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8189925268/what-s-that-noise-shedding-some-light-on-the-sources-of-noise
>>4536491Oh damn, shit, I didn't know.So I should do long exposure? How long? With a wide angle, for landscapes? and a tripod?
>>4536489The exposure triangle is physics. Software can't do it. There's also the secret control: which lens you attachIf you use a sony G master carelessly you'll get moire on everything and have to fix it in post!
>>4536498>If you use a sony G master carelessly you'll get moire on everything and have to fix it in post!And it will turn gray mortar pink if you do it on Capture One!
>>4536500PS the "on" is intentional!Go ahead and call me an indian, snoycoper!
>>4536500>>4536501You have been completely and utterly traumatized
>>4536498If moire is a a big deal why does my SLR show it in the OVF but the film just doesn't care what lens is put in front of it?>inb4 muh digitalNot the question I'm asking.
>>4536491I wonder, if you put the focus on the clouds, can the trees appear distinct? Or will they appear a little bit blurry because of the different distance?>>4536106>It's baitIt's not. I've already posted /here/ months ago to ask what to buy. The 500D is dead rn and I have to spend the money before the seizure by the bank.>he cropped the out of focus edge or something.The focus is on the clouds, because it's the main subject. But I thought it would be nice if the trees were distinct too, since they're very far.>It doesn't exist.Alright, alright. The 500D. I always mix it.>Then he brings up 60fps video which is for brainrot action or slow motion.I don't know what to say. I'm used to watch esport and it's always 60fps and 30fps looks like shit idk. My question is more about:>Do I buy a camera able to record in 60fps or do I buy a film camera for this and the camera only takes photos?But yeah, is 60fps relevant?>Everyone knows 24fps is the video that matters.I don't. I start my post with>noob here>>4536094Yeah yeah I meant 500D come on.I'll take a look, thanks.If I buy this one, will I have to use another camera if I want to do, for exemple, modeling? Or will it be ok?>>4536115Thanks for your precise answer. I'll take a look.
>>4536503Your SLR has a micro-matte that imitates a pixel grid so you can anticipate moire>>4536505You should genuinely ignore that guy. He speaks with authority, but has literally never handled a camera, never posted a photo, never even proved he owns a camera, and just repeats youtube marketing material and makes shit up. He seems to be a paid advertiser because he has this inhuman habit of reposting the same argument over and over again, like it's an adhttps://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/1eO4TIIQ7ft19IWHYIV0ow/https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/XZ0CFqP4AAis98kM0bUcUw/https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/image/eL9KGl0qi1I4dXML95daow/And his consistent theme is "DO NOT BUY SONY, BUY PANASONIC OR OM". Like it's an ad.98% of photographers use canon, nikon, sony, or fuji. This is for a great number of good reasons. But the reason for using sony is mostly just companies securing a supplier contract with them... IRL I have never seen someone using a sony without being paid to.Just be sane and buy a used nikon, canon, or fuji mirrorless that fits your budget, and always prefer used, older higher end models to newer beginners cameras. Simple shit.
>>4536505panasonic and olympus are actual fucking garbage. i had an om-5 that broke and then a lumix gm5 that also broke. then i bought a used canon EOS R that looked like it had been through hell and it kept working.buy literally any brand but panasonic/olympus.
>>4536080>>4536488>I'll take a look.>cube>20k$topkekI didn't even know this kinda shit existed.
>>4536488 (checked and heil'd)Noise is mostly determined by the amount of light shining on the sensor. Base ISO can sometimes be detrimental to shadow quality without improvement of highlights. A large aperture reduces your depth of field, look up what hyperfocal distance is. Ideally you'll be shooting your lens at whatever its sharpest aperture is. Use a tripod and expose long enough. >>4536491This, with the caveat that extremely long exposures heat up the sensor and bring a different type of noise (it's one of the reasons DSLR is cleaner after a long shooting session, with mirrorless the sensor needs to stay on). >>4536498This but moire is highly situational. >>4536503You're most likely seeing the Fresnel lens and interpreting it as moire. >>4536505>500DOh, then even a 5D2 is an upgrade. I highly recommend spending a little bit more for a 6D instead. If you already have a bunch of EF-S lenses you want to keep using, ignore this and get a 750D or 200D instead (24MP with ML support).
>>4536507>>4536508Shill
>>4536436LLMs are relatively new to the scene, certainly newer than my installed ML version.
>>4536437>I can understand having a problem with AI generated novels for example, since there can not be originality, but coding does not need originality, it needs to work.It's not originality I take issue with, it's opacity. Debuggability. Auditability.
>>4536511>>4536512>>4536513>>4536514WARNING: This poster does not own a camera or do photography
>>4536507>DO NOT BUY SONYPretty based in my book>PANASONIC OR OMBetter than the Sony meme. Sonys overheat. Panasonics keep going.
>>4536515Let me quote the anon I replied to:>>4536488>But yes as cANON saidI realized this, you didn't and couldn't have given good advice because your job is to sell people Sony cameras.
>>4536488>1.4f 1/2000These settings are what you'd use to freeze fast action at the expense of a very thin field of focus. Focal length influences depth of field but so do aperture and distance to focused subject.The more you open the aperture the less you get in focus. Also sharpness is highly influenced by the lens you use. Some vintage lenses are very sharp and cheap, modern ones tend to be expensive when sharp except for basic 50mm primes and the like. Pentaxforums is a great place to find which vintage lenses are worth getting but take the ratings with a pinch of salt or ignore them altogether and look at the sample photos instead. Hope this helps. >>4536507>Just be sane and buy a used nikon, canon, or fuji mirrorless Lol, mirrorless sucks. Fuji has bad build quality, bad ergonomics, worm artifacts and smears foliage. Canon mirrorless is a walled garden with shit sensors in the cheaper models. Nikon mirrorless is one of the better mirrorless options, but as I said mirrorless sucks. >always prefer used, older higher end models to newer beginners camerasThis is too broad of a brush to paint with. You definitely don't want a gimped camera with price as the only target (hello Canon 4000D ewaste) but the highest end often offers features that come at the expense of others. I'll quote Ken Rockwell's wisdom here:>These are the same idiots who bought the first 2.7 Megapixel digital SLRs designed for newspapers like the Nikon D1 back in 2000 just because they cost $5,000. They gave technically poorer results than the film cameras used by snapshooters. All because it's expensive doesn't make it good. Pro gear is tailored to the needs of the pros, before buying pro gear you should check whether it fits your own. Modern consumer gear is often superior in terms of output than much older pro gear. Features of some pro gear are irrelevant today, for example if you buy a 10 year old pro camera for its weather sealing you're asking for trouble (rubber dry rots).
>>4536519>>4536517This poster does not own a camera or do photography
Ken Rockwell lies about being a professional photographer with serious clients (he shot his friends weddings and for his ebay page)cANON lies about being a photographer periodKnow them by their fruits. What do they produce? Angry words where they are the only person on earth who is right? Or good photos?
>>4536520Anon, I could tell it was a crop precisely because I have experience with photography unlike you.
>>4536522>i am a gearfag who guesses why photoa suck and am occasionally correctYet you dont own a camera or take or post photos
DSLRs are broadly inferior to mirrorless. This is a fact. Only poor and autistic people use them.
>>4536521I am producing actual technical advice unlike you who are concerned with selling mirrorless cameras.
>>4536523I gave you the title of the photo for you to look for it here on the board, what else do you want? Page 3 btw
>>4536522>man who has never posted photo, continues to never post photos.>More at 9.>>4536526Could just post one now. You won't though. There'll be a cope reply, maybe even a wall of text justifying it. I'll take my (You) now.
>>4536527>stalker is too dumb to find itMore news at 11
>>4536524You think that mirrorless is better. But that's not the worst, you think those "better" cameras will make you take better photos. Another quote from Ken, this time the amateurs part of the article:>Amateur: Level 5 >People who earn less than half of their income from photography are amateurs. This has nothing to do with the quality of their photography.>This person loves to create photographs. Good amateurs of pure spirit can transcend the other levels directly to being an artist.>People who shoot weddings and etc. on weekends as a side line from their day jobs are still amateurs; they just charge for their photos.>Amateurs who think that better cameras will improve their photos are at risk of descending to the lowest level of equipment measurbator. Too many amateurs have been misled by camera makers into thinking that they need good cameras for good images. This thought is poison to creating art.>Amateurs who lose themselves in creating great images are set for a path of enlightenment.>Being an amateur is a good thing; from this level one can rise to the level of artist rather easily.>Amateurs almost always shoot Canon SLRs.You have become the measurbator, anon.
>>4536529Oversaturated TRVKE NVKE
>>4536443Make your own thread and post some.
>>4536488>lowest apertureSo you're shooting landscapes wide open? This is your problem. Lenses are the sharpest in the f/5.6 - f/8 range. Bigger apertures like f/1.4 are almost always soft and smaller apertures like f/11 or f/16 suffer from diffraction.Next time you shoot landscapes:- Set your ISO manually to the lowest native ISO value.- Set your aperture to ~f/8.- Expose to the right which means make your image as bright as possible without clipping highlights or getting motion blur from long exposure time.- Lower the exposure in post until it looks good.This will give you optimal detail from the lens and lowest noise from the sensor. Exposing to the right lowers noise in shadows.>Very neat. Impressive. What was the setup?X-H2 and XF90 f/2. An APS-C camera just like what you have.
>>4536530Artists don't care about brand nor technicalities. The cameras they bring are the ones they feel best suit their projects or environments
>>4536532Wrong and retarded advice with a terrible snapshit attached lol.
>>4536538*farts in your general direction*
Can you get used to manual focus? I've bought the SL-M adapter for my Leica SL so I can adapt those fine and tiny Voigtländer lenses. Bought the Nokton classic 35mm 1.4 II S.C. and while it has a nice rendering and all I really miss autofocus. My plan was to keep on buying other Voigtländers or maybe even a Leica M lens but now I have my doubts. Usually with autofocus I do run and gun when traveling, city walks, etc. but now it forces me to stop walking, focus, shoot and hope I have it in focus. I know you also get faster with time but still. What I really enjoy though, is the small size of those lenses. Any af lens on l-mount is rather big. Or I just sell that expensive adapter again together with the Nokton and just buy a 35mm f2 sigma and call it the day. hmmm
>>4536545>Can you get used to manual focus?Yes. It will start to feel natural with time.>it forces me to stop walking, focus, shootThis is kinda the point of using manual lenses in 2026. Modern cameras make photography so frictionless some feel it takes away from the experience. Slowing down can sometimes be beneficial.>hope I have it in focusUse manual focus aids like peaking. I'm sure your camera has something like this. Shooting in black and white JPG + RAW with focus peaking set to red works really well. Red focus plane stands out from BW background and you still get your color with RAWs.>Or I just sell that expensive adapter again together with the Nokton and just buy a 35mm f2 sigmaGive it more time. Force yourself to use that manual lens for a month or two. Then decide. Maybe it's just not for you or maybe you never gave it a fair shot.
>>4536546>Shooting in black and white JPG + RAW with focus peaking set to red works really well.I was using it with color and sometimes it's difficult to see. Thanks for the advice with b/w, gonna try that!
If I already have a full setup of full frame camera + lenses and a new iphone.. would you say a Ricoh GR still is a good addition? Image quality, from what it looks, is very sharp and nice colors. I imagine it to be a companion that I bring all day everywhere which is quite difficult with my full frame camera due to size. But on the other hand the iphone is already quite good for snapshits.
>>4536545>>4536547First of all, since you don't have Leica lenses, you should have just gotten the equivalent Novoflex adapter for half the price, or better yet the Rayqual if it's available in your region (I got mine for 50 bucks used, like new).Second thing. The VM 35/1.4 is extremely glowy wide open, the SC version more so. This can interfere with focus peaking (that is to say, even things in focus seem out of focus because they lack texture so much even a sensitive peaking algorithm can't detect in-focus edges). Maybe this is playing a role in your frustrations.I have the same camera as your pic related. It's absolutely fucking god tier, I love it so much with manual lenses, but granted I spent years shooting manually on a Pentax SLR with a 50/1.4, so shooting with a VM 50/1.2 on the SL2S feels extremely natural to me (after more years of shooting on a DSLR and not enjoying it much). Note that the earlier SL models (before the SL3 basically) have pretty slow/poor autofocus, so they might not actually be so great for your run and gun style as you're imagining.However if you have an SL3 or later, I would definitely keep one autofocus lens of your choice for situational options - maybe indeed the Sigma 35/2, as it has a totally different rendering philosophy to the funky 35/1.4 you have, it won't overlap in use case much.So maybe try a sharper manual lens (maybe the Voigtlander 35/2 APO, or if you need to save money, the 35/2.5 - either of them will be different enough from your 35/1.4 to justify keeping both) before you throw the concept into the bin.
>>4536549Do you have money to blow on toys you don't really need? If yes, then why not. Stimulate the economy.In the right hands Ricoh GR will produce significantly better results than the newest iPhone but what's probably more important: it will be more fun to use.
>>4536549If you have some very compact lenses then consider a small MILC within your system to get more value out of your glass
Why for what they charge can Leica not make a nicely dampened aperture ring to fucking save themselves?
>>4536525>i am shilling ewaste because i think EVFs will fake the moon landingIts really disgusting how you put your mask on and rush to fool new people too, nophoto. >>4536529Look, a non-photographer quoting a non-photographer in response to shit nobody said. Ironically mirrorless cameras do result in better photography in the same way a rangefinder beats a primitive box camera with a viewfinder thats just a metal rectangle on topDSLRs literally cant compete optically, especially in standard zooms, and require huge lenses to come close (a mirror is where the lens elements have to go). DSLR lenses are huge in general. So, DSLR users often dont leave the house with their camera (YOU ARE HERE) and if they do, its usually with just the 50mm-28mm prime. DSLRs have inherently inaccurate autofocus and can’t focus on anything outside the center third of the frame if it isn’t a static object severely limiting their ability to be used for significant photography like family editorials, falling behind an iphone in their ability to photograph your own damn kids (you dont have any)And DSLR video is just kind of shit, with no worthwhile video autofocus existing anywhere and no real stabilization except on hilariously large zooms or apsc kit zooms with phone like aperture sizes that cant be used indoors/evenings without added lightDSLRs are actually AN INFERIOR DESIGN.Thats why they aren’t made anymore and are just shilled by nophotos who prey on new users and even drop their moon landing denial and antisemitic conspiracy rants to do so (see: you)
>>4536559Yeah but an autist with nothing else to do could take a decent photo of a tree or a posed, flashed portrait with a box camera so there
>>4536559Sounds like you have descended to measurbator hell. I never had issues with the so-called focus inaccuracy of DSLR, in fact the Saturn proof of concept shot was focused through the OVF and critical focus was achieved. Your complaints sound like you bought a damaged unit, sorry for your loss! Maybe next time don't go for the cheapest neglected unit you can find!>Thats why they aren’t made anymorNo, profit margins are why. Pentaprisms are expensive and new mounts let manufacturers sell people new lenses. Just like Microsoft forcing people to upgrade their computers to not be on the EOL side recently, there's a lawsuit over that. I didn't recommend ewaste, I recommended some of Canon's best sensors leveraging anon's lens collection.
>>4536538I mean other than being overly concerned with diffraction and ETTR it isn't that bad. In fact it would be an improvement over what anon is doing.
>>4536439More from Ken's article, measurbator section lol:>The one type of gear these people ignore is the only type of gear that actually helps: lighting.
>>4536566Hard to judge lighting without photos, so...
>>4536562>I never had issuesYou literally never post photos >saturn proof of concept shotUnusable blurry dot?>It's a conspiracyOr maybe you're wrong and the rest of the world is right
>>4536566>wall of text poster>photos posted: 0Give me another (You), fAGGOT.
>>4536568>You literally never post photosAnon, I gave you all the clues for you to find a cANON original currently posted on the board. Down to photo title and page of the catalog. If you reverse search it you will see cANON posts. >Unusable blurry dot?Again acting disingenuous. Dots have no rings. It's not blurry, it's small because it's just 800mm on an 18MP APS-C sensor. >Or maybe you're wrong and the rest of the world is rightThe world is ran by bean counters
>>4536569Seething measurbator lmaoBased strobechad shoots on wet plates, you cope on mirrorless digital. It's like comparing an chemist mystic to a pharmacy cashier.
>>4536488Hey dude, genuinely do not listen to anyone here who can not post a photo. A lot of "people" here are just nerds from /g/ who read blogs and reviews about camera specs and can babble in a way that sounds knowledgeable to a clueless person, and might even be technically correct with all things being equal and with idealized, theoretical cameras pointed at a resolution test chart, but in the end they're just that. Nerds doing "thought experiments", very few of whom have actually used a camera. Many of whom twist facts and use their overwhelming technobabble to fulfill an agenda in some brand fanboy forum war. These people dogpile onto new users pretending to be experts because you haven't been here long enough to know they repost this nonsense 20 times a week but literally never post photos. They just want a "convert" to their "cult".Here are some things that are true:Yes, DSLRs autofocus systems have limited coverage, and this does limit photography of moving subjects.Yes, DSLRs autofocus systems are inaccurate, both due to the design, and focus shift (lenses focused wide open are focused at a different point stopped down). This mainly affects closer focus distances. Mirror shake is also a concern, mainly on some less well made nikon DSLRs.Yes, DSLRs get much larger much faster when venturing past the optically mediocre small primes, and most of the people recommending them have never left the house.Yes, olympus and panasonic gear isn't generally good. It's cheap and specialized for people who want to do macro/extreme telephoto or use high end video codecs on a budget. Avoid these brands if you aren't experienced, just like you should avoid a DSLR if you aren't experienced or willing to nerd out.It is genuinely good advice to "just buy whatever canon, nikon, or fuji mirrorless you can comfortably afford". Even a cheap canon EOS M5 is a genuinely good upgrade.t. uses an 18 year old DSLR to take better photos than cANON
>>4536572Anyways my top recommendation is 1: save money 2: buy a used nikon Z6/Z5 and 40mm f2/or/24-70 f4 3: wait for a deal on a capture one perpetual license 4: rub it in cANONs face
cANON is either proof moop was not the worst poster to ever grace /p/, or moop with a new trip and no more psych meds>>4536571Stop getting parasocial with the actual photographers
>>4536575cANON ate moop and absorbed his retardation
>Canon RP>Lenses with "IS" in the namesimple as>gearfags seethe over specs and noise when fixing raws exposure by seven stops>people who think they aren't gearfags but actually are seethe because it's better than their dslr/fuji x100t/micro four thirdsthis is how you know it has SOVLa gearfag will respond to this post seething and recommend a DSLR or micro four thirds, guaranteed
>>4536532Hey thanks for the constructive reply. Really helps. I will follow the advice. I should shoot in RAW, right?>So you're shooting landscapes wide open?Yeah I lost the original 18-55 so I had to shoot with the 50mm Sigma I added. I thought the light would be enough to shoot freehand but in the end it's not.>>4536539>I fart in your very direction>your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries>>4536538You're hard. What would you do instead?>>4536572kek.Nice doge. I love them, especially huskies. We watched Balto last week with a friend. I love wolves too.>(picrel not mine)>>4536574I'm watching used full frame Nikons. It's highly possible I choose one.
>>4536572>snapshot of a doglol>>4536574>save for xyzOr he can buy a good DSLR now for a fraction of the money and not take advice from a mirrorless shill who uses a DSLR when the push comes to shove. >>4536575>>4536576>brings up some poster he had a parasocial relationship with>tells me to stop getting parasocial
>>4536579>recommends the worst mirrorless full frame that money can buy
>>4536580>Nice doge. I love them, especially huskies. We watched Balto last week with a friend. I love wolves too.Yes, do yourself a favor and get a mirrorless camera. You'll have good use for all the crutches you can get.
>>4536581I use a DSLR because I'm a stingy fuck, not because it's good. You even seethe about this specific DSLR because it's so cheap you can't figure out how to use it properly. It wasn't even $200 for the body and two lenses.People willing to spend more and risk their precious shekels should 100% go mirrorless>>4536579Holy shit dude, you got a bite in two minutes.
>>4536580You should also consider picking up a used sony a7cJust $1000 for an ultra compact FF with sovl
>recommending a new system to a guy who already has lenses including a f/1.4However, I think it's all a larp to troll>d500/500d>landscapes wide open>posting ai/overcooked dogsnapsIf actually sincere he should get a consumer camera with scene modes. If after years of shooting you haven't bothered learning the basics of camera operation those are meant for you.
>>4536550Appreciate your feedback, thanks
>>4536505>If I buy this one, will I have to use another camera if I want to do, for exemple, modeling? Or will it be ok?The D800 is a powerhouse that can do anything, but the 14-24mm f2.8 will be very wide. You will want something a bit more narrow for everyday stuff. I recommend getting a 50mm f1.8. They are just 70-100 bucks, very sharp and good for mid-range snapshots and portraiture (with nice and soft bokeh).
>>4536580My dear Anon,You have no idea how to use your current camera effectively. Please don't spend money on new gear before you master what you have and reach its limits. With love,concerned Anon
>>4536595>concerned Anon>c Anon>cAnon (gear gatekeeper)You thought this was subtle.
>>4536598I always thought he was a pirate
>>4536598Silly anon, the c in cANON stands for cuck>picrel
>>4536580You should learn how to use what you have now before considering other gearYour earlier post reads like someone who doesn't know the basics
>>4536496On a windy day you will want to keep the shutter speed over 1/20 or the swaying will blur trees significantly.If no tripod camera should have good stabilization.Non-windy conditions you can do 2 seconds on a tripod and with better brand IBIS like Lumix, OM System that's possible handheld.this is good advice:>>4536532
>>4536598I agree with the general sentiment but it's not my post, also he said the camera is dead. /p/ can't read for shit.>>4536599Ahoy, matey!>>4536600The c stands for can't be bothered by plebs>>4536602He said the camera is dead, but I suspect a troll.
>>4536604>>4536586>>4536583>>4536581Thats a lot of words for a nonphotographer that doesnt even own a camera
>>4536605That's a lot of words to add nothing to the conversation. The most important part of thoughtful posting is perhaps the discipline to not press "post".
>>4536606You don’t post any photos here and absolutely refuse to even post any indication you actually do photography. Maybe you should take your own advice before LARPing as an expert, moop.
cANON has posted zero photosHuskychad has posted many photos (including when he dogmogged cANON in a photobattle) https://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4526676/#4526760Therefore until cANON photomaxxes and mogs the dog, doggo-toggo’s advice reigns supreme >>4536585 >>4536574 >>4536572
>>4536617>cANON has posted zero photosI have posted photos and directed you stalkers with countless clues to find them. Yet you can't. I don't think you want to.
>>4536623Different anon. No one else seems to have trouble uploading their photos (or simply linking to their own posts) when prompted. In fact, I've never seen anyone else be so insistent on giving vague directions as plausible deniability like you have. I will dig through the archives to link to my own posts, and I don't even make a habit of arguing with people here like you do.
NEW THREAD!>>4536628>>4536628>>4536628
