[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Is there a smaller way to get a good 18-55mm on a good APSC sensor?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1024
Image Height913
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
I never bring my 18-55 out nowadays. I almost always end up bringing just the 35 f/2 and 16 f/2.8.
>>
>>3789094
I take my zoom travelling as I go from street, to architecture, to portraits.
I was always a prime day so carrying a zoom has actually been a big boost for my creativity.
>>
>>3789082
The Pentax DA Limited 20-40mm f/2.8-4 WR.
>>
>>3789082
X-E3 Is smaller but not comfy to hold
Plus smaller viewfinder so fuck that
>>
>>3789094
The 35mm f2 is a nice little lens.
>>
>>3789114
With which body? That works out smaller than OP’s combo?
>>
>>3789141
Grow bigger hands and it will appear smaller.
>>
File: D3S_6169-top.jpg (218 KB, 1200x772)
218 KB
218 KB JPG
>>3789082
Nikon Z50 + 16-50mm kit lens

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3788234 here, bringing it up again because I got basically no input in the last thread.

I'm at a crossroads, friends. Do I replace my trusty D200 with a D610 or a D7200? Or do I buy a used equivalent canon (don't know much about them, though the lenses seem to be better at the expense of camera sensors, 6D?) or an A7/A7R with an adapter even?

I mainly shoot as a side hobby, I take pictures of landscapes when I travel, cars, planes at airshows, the occasional birds. What I'm really interested in is having more dynamic range and low light sensitivity because I really like interesting lighting and contrasty scenes. Bracketing usually does the trick, but there are a lot of scenarios where bracketing is just too slow and having an extra stop or two of dynamic range would help. Unfortunately I'm an engineer, so I get really hung up on specs and test results. Sites like DXOMark are like crack to me and I get analysis paralysis. So please help me out you judgemental bastards, many of you also are mildly autistic and your input will be valuable to me.

>>3789082
>a good 18-55mm on a good APSC sensor?
I'm not aware of any good 18-55mm lenses, at least when you're using performance relative to the 24-70s available for full frame use as the comparative criteria. It's one of the primary things that makes me want to switch to full frame; the availability of fast 24-70 range standard zooms that aren't soft or filled with CA.
>>
>>3789082
Sony a6000 with 16-50. But the lens is not very good, and the colors are awful. I went from there to the x-t1
>>
File: a5000&18-55.jpg (65 KB, 934x622)
65 KB
65 KB JPG
>>
>>3789155
>a6000
We need to wordfilter this to "I don't know anything about cameras."
>>
>>3789157
He asked about size. I even said it has terrible colors. It's pocket sized though.
>>
Why are people on ebay so retarded?

>be me
>selling RF 24-105 kit lens
>research suggests it should sell around $250-300
>posted with buy it now price of $279 + $8 shipping with the ability to make an offer (auto accept set at $250)
>no takers
>day later, drop the price to $261
>no takers
>eventually drop the price to $239
>sits for two days
>still no takers
>say, "fuck it" and post 3 day auction
>starting price of $1 with "free shipping"
>three days later, sells for $306

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
>>
>>3789188
Early bidders make me seethe
>>
>>3789193
haha, i always throw in a low ball for auctions i know will sell for a lot but i'll never win. just to get the ball rolling because fuckit why not
>>
>>3789188
Notification filters. The $1 auction popped up in notification and gets watched while $239 auctions were filtered. Maybe people also need to wait for their paycheck to buy.
>>
File: camera-back-3q-acros.jpg (68 KB, 589x442)
68 KB
68 KB JPG
Can someone explain wtf is going on in this photo?
>>
>>3789327
This is a rear lcd display with the most useful information to the Fuji user, currently selected film sim
>>
>>3789154
>many of you also are mildly autistic and your input will be valuable to me
sorry to be the one to break it to you, but everyone here are autistic brand whores, so there judgement is 100% biased and of no use to you
>>
>>3789153
holy fuck that is hot
>>
>>3789154
If you're shooting nikon stick with nikkor glass but if canon use a sigma
>>
>>3789427
There's no top LCD, why is it hot?
>>
>>3789467
this, i got excited by the price point, don't care about fps or a few hundred less evf pixels, but no top LCD just kills it
>>
>>3789467
>>3789469
You've got to pay more for that. It's a *very* expensive feature to implement. Those Casio digital wristwatches were actually subsidized by the government. When you take away the subsidy, it's like $1000 in parts per watch. Granted, the LCD is just one part, but still like $500 for just that part.
>>
>>3789472
ooh, maybe a smart watch app that displays the top lcd info via BT/Wi-Fi... that would be cool...patent pending
>>
Between the Pentax Q7 with the prime lens and a first generation Fuji X100, which should I get?
>>
>>3789498
I'd go with the Sony A7III
>>
>>3789467
who fucking looks at hte top lcd while shooting???
>>
>>3789510
Moron. You don't look at it WHILE you're shooting.
>>
>>3789514
are u just wanking looking at the camera then? u use the evf to shoot dickfucker and it has all the info u ever need!
>>
>>3789322
If you bid with more than 1min left on an auction you deserve to be executed
>>
>>3789127
Some sample pics? I got the 35mm f1.4 and it’s absolutely beautiful.
>>
>>3789522
I do look at the info in the evf while i shoot. But that top screen is really handy. It tells you a lot of useful info. I don’t want to bring the camera to my face just to see if i’m in high speed burst or single shot. I don’t want to bring it to my face just to check the iso. Most of the time i look at it before i take the first photos of the shoot to get the basics right before i start
>>
>>3789584
>I don’t want to bring the camera to my face just to see if i’m in high speed burst or single shot. I don’t want to bring it to my face just to check the iso.
Use the back screen for this?
>>
>>3789574
>35mm f1.4 and it’s absolutely beautiful.
virtually welded onto my x-h1, almost never leaves it. fucking love it.
>>
>>3789082
Should I buy the X-E2 with the XF56mmF1.2?
>>
Should I buy a Nikon Z50 or the Olympus OM-D EM 1 Mk II?
>>
>>3789596
The X-E2 is a great compact camera and works perfectly with my 35mm f2. The viewfinder is a bit weak after using an X-T3 but it’s worth it for the compactness.
>>
Am I crazy for considering buying a Nikon DF?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width800
Image Height743
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3789611
Is it going into a glass case with other antiques and curios in your living room?
>>
>>3789656
Nah. I just think it’s the best looking and most compact full frame DSLR.
>>
Hi, should I get a fuji xe3? I want to take super sharp pics, I was thinking of buying the lens Fuji 23mm f/1.4.

Would that lens work with any fuji camera?
>>
>>3789741
Like how do I decide the body? It seems all pictures are equally good.
>>
>>3789741
xe3 is very nice for its price point
pleasantly compact with a competent sensor and great battery life (in my experience, at least)
sharpness is dependent on the lens, so look towards reviews for that
any fuji x series lens is compatible with any fuji x series camera, the xf lenses are their "premium" range
>>
>>3789611
>>3789670
Depends on why you want it. Since you want it for a subjective reason and a dubious reason I'd say no. I would, however, check it out in person and *directly* compare it to a contemporary such as a D600/610. You will find that the Df is barely more compact, and what makes a D600 bigger is the grip and flash. If compact and boxy looks are your priorities, you'd be better off with an A7R than a Df. But if having a new camera that looks old is your priority, there is no other option honestly. I like the Df because it looks cool and performs well but for anything other than looks it is a terrible value considering a nice used Df sells for almost twice what a nice used D610 does.
>>
>>3789082
are printers /gear/? what do you guys have at home to make copies of your snapshits? considering buying one of the following: Canon PIXMA iP8720, Epson XP-960/XP-970, or an Epson HD XP-15000

any input would be welcome, and since i'm just a hobbyist, not considering anything that would cost nearly a grand or more (not yet, anyway)
>>
>>3789587
he cant possibly rotate his tiny little bitch wrists a few degrees to do that and get a wonderful 3" full color display. nooo he needs a gay little 0.75" inch LCD from the 80s lmao
>>
>>3789763
Must be hard being a poorfag and not getting something you actually want just because it is a few hundred dollars more. Seriously bro get your money up.
>>
>>3789898
Must be hard being a marketing victim, a consoomer in underageb&speak
>>
>>3789898
Joke is on you, I've owned both the cameras I just lectured your dumb ass on lol
>>
>>3789912
lol sure retard. you probably sit on ebay all day looking for "bargains" then cope that whatever cheap piece of shit you find on sale is what you actually wanted. get the proper tool for a job and stop coping because you are poor.
>>
>>3789923
>you probably sit on ebay all day looking for "bargains" t
You can't find bargains on ebay, only market price. Shitwit
>>
>>3789898
>hurr durr u poor
>is looking at a retro styled camera from 2013

Yeah you're definitely mr moneybucks looking at $900 obsolete DSLRs. If you actually cared about compactness and aesthetics you'd be buying leicas but oh wait you are actually poor and projecting on /p/

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2009:03:09 17:11:37
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width299
Image Height259
>>
>>3789934
Dude it’s not that hard just work more.
>>
>>3789962
Keep pretending that being able to afford a 7 year old DSLR isn't something anyone with a mcjob can do
>>
I spent money on a brand new 50mm 1.8g and I can't find any use for the 50mm

How do I "get" the 50mm?
>>
>>3789981
Make a landscape picture with 50mm
Make a portrait with 50mm
>>
>>3789963
50% of Americans have access to less than $300 liquid right now and a shit load of debt on top of it. It's no wonder there are so many poorfag Americans ruining the board lately. They should learn to save money and appreciate what they have instead of wasting money on a constant supply of cope purchases.
>>
>>3789963
Leica makes dslrs? :^)
>>
>>3789934
>If you actually cared about compactness and aesthetics you'd be buying m43
ftfy
>>
>>3790020
I just can't take your opinion seriously if you think MFT is still a viable platform.
>>
What a scumbag thread this is. Shameful Mammon worshipers.
>>
>>3790026
>still

that’s generous
>>
>>3790015
Yeah?
>>
>>3790061
Show me the DSLR that Leica makes
>>
>>3790061
lol idiot
>>
What to do while we wait for them to pray, bros?
>>
Received a Canon t7 casual user have an old t5. What should I do?
>>
>>3790065
https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-S/Leica-S-Typ-007
>>
I want to buy a camera with the BEST SHUTTER SOUND I can get for under $1500. Image quality means NOTHING to me. Any recs?
>>
>>3790079
Canon 5D Mark II. Very, very masculine and very, very alpha. Start clicking a 5DII shutter in a crowd of people next time you are at a comicon type of event and just watch the beta MFT shooters scurry away to their hidey holes, and all the females in the room start to give you the "fuck me" eyes while trying desperately not to touch themselves.
>>
File: eicaS3.jpg (23 KB, 450x450)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
>>3790065
>>
File: RZ.jpg (108 KB, 1000x664)
108 KB
108 KB JPG
>>3790079
*THWOOMP* *CLICK* WWHHRRRR*
>>
>>3790086
These don't have a leaf shutter?
>>
>>3790079
Fujifilm X-H1. Elegant and sophsticated as fuck.
>>
What's a good camera with weather-sealing that's on the cheaper end? (Does one exist?)
>>
I have an XT200 and I want to shoot at 85mm. Is the XF56mm my only option? It's pretty expensive...
>>
>>3790100
>on the cheaper end?
This means nothing. Cheap smartphones cost $600, and you're talking about buying a specialized photography tool, so what's you're price range, nigger?
>>
>>3790102
the viltrox 56mm f/1.4 is highly regarded, even if it doesn't have the magic of the fuji (whatever that means).
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Mirrorless-Camera-Lenses/ci/17912/N/4196380428?filters=fct_fixed-focal-lengths_2207%3A50mm%7C55mm%7C56mm%7C58mm%7C60mm%2Cfct_lens-mount_3442%3Afujifilm-x-mount
>>
>>3790102
Viltrox 56mm 1.4. There may also be a Sigma 56mm soon.
>>
>>3790103
up to $1000
>>
>>3790103
>>3790122
for clarification, I currently have a D3500 and some lenses that I'm fairly happy with, but I live in a rainy area and am looking to get something I can use comfortably in such conditions. I've gotten a quote on my kit from KEH, so I'm using that + a few hundred bucks to get my price point
>>
>>3790124
Do you want lenses too for under $1000? You can do a lot less than that if you go with a Pentax and some of their weather sealed zooms. I carried my K-5 II with kit lens through many a rain storms while hiking. Olympus also seems to play up the weather sealing of their cameras, but they are MFT, so I'd avoid that garbage. The chad move would be to get yourself a used 5D Mark II for $450 and an EF 24-105mm f/4L for $450. Spend the leftover $100 on beer.
>>
>>3790090
Yeah, it still goes click though
>>
>>3790130
kind of a gay click ngl
>>
>>3790129
thanks for the detailed answer, I'll check out the Pentax system. Your idea with the Canon 5D is a good one, but I generally don't like the Canon ergonomics and UI; I've borrowed friends' Canons before and something about them doesn't really click with me, I'm not sure what exactly.
>>
>>3790137
Fellow (former) Nikon user who doesn't like Canon ergonomics as much, definitely check Pentax out. It's like the perfect symbiosis between Canon and Nikon. You get a shorter flange, awesome weather sealing, backwards compatibility and great ergonomics. Plus IBIS.
>>
>>3790137
>>3790138
Pentax is cute as fuck, but it is not as good as Canon. Especially a 5DII. I can’t tell you how many mis-metered, mid-white-balanced, out of focus or shutter-shocked (as a result of the shifty IBIS) photos I got shooting Pentax. Canon is popular because it just works. You may have some sort of weird hang up about using a popular camera. It makes you feel like less of the special snowflake your mother assured you that you were. But seriously, we all need to grow up sometime. Get over yourself and get a Canon.
>>
>>3790144
I have a Canon fulll frame but it makes me miss my Nikon in terms of ergonomics. The grip is too shallow. I have no experience with Pentax cameras but absolutely in love with the concept.
What Pentax do you have? I'm impressed by what Eggy achieves with his camera.
Canon is popular because it's way ahead of the competition when it comes to video and AF. Magic Lantern alone is reason enough. Then there's the lens adaptability thing. If Nikon is type O negative of the lens world, Canon is the type AB positive. One is the universal donor, the other can take from everyone else. If I could have the ergonomics of Nikon on my Canon I'd gladly take them. Same with the lack of pattern noise, when I push my Canon I get banding. If Pentax was as good as Canon for video or if I didn't care about video I'd have bought a Pentax instead. The K-70 seems awesome.
>>
>>3790151
Lens adapting is a retarded meme. Just use native lenses. Wtf is wrong with you? And no, Canon is popular because their native lenses are so good. Not because of magic lantern or any other 2011 memes. God damn, you’re stupid.
>>
>>3790157
Why would I limit myself to vanilla lenses? Fuck you, Olympus OM glass is great.
>>
>>3789153
I hate the thumb wheel exposed on top. It'll age like milk, mark my words. All done to shave a couple mm where it doesn't matter.
>>
File: image0.jpg (1.11 MB, 3088x2320)
1.11 MB
1.11 MB JPG
I'm mainly interested in doing short films, "artsy" stuff or whatever. I'm looking at a BMPCC4K with the cheap speedbooster.

Am I dumb to think this would be better than a Sony A7ii/iii?
I know that I am still somewhat cropped on the 4K, compared to full frame, but aside from that I am having trouble deciding.
Anyone else want to weigh in?'

Also, if people have experience, A7ii or A7iii for video? Am I just dumb to consider a cheapter A7ii at this time?

Thanks for the help

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
>>
>>3790171
>Am I just dumb to consider a cheapter A7ii at this time?
Not dumb, I’m not sure I’d want to spend so much money on a setup just to use a cheap speed booster either.
>>
>>3789082
This gear thread is easily the worst OP in years. Fuji posters are the worst.
Peak 2020 I guess
>>
>>3790172
The ii has terrible color science, even worse high iso noise performance and a 300 shot battery life. The iii was a massive upgrade in all those things plus excellent auto focus and better weather sealing. If you can afford it get the iii. If not maybe look at another brand.
>>
>>3789153
i had an F-601 circa early 90's with a top exposed thumb dial and it's surprisingly held up well, feels better to use than my DSLR and later model SLR which were recessed
>>
>>3790078
>>3790082
>useless
imagine such a large body costing so much with no fucking buttons
>>
>>3790079
the phone you have with you
>>
>>3790184
looks like the leica medium format camera lol
>>
>>3790196
what?
>>
File: Leica-S_teaser-1200x675.jpg (52 KB, 1200x675)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
>>3790198
>>
>>3790203
as >>3790082 already posted and to which i was replying to?
>>
File: sour grapes.jpg (91 KB, 383x800)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
>>3790184
>>
>>3790214
>oh... it's retarded
nevermind
>>
Is the Nikon DF the smallest full frame dslr?
>>
>>3790244
Probably. It is the only DSLR to do away with the ergonomically sculpted bodies that SLRs have been developing for the last 35 years.
>>
>>3789891
No one? You guys all order prints made or only see your photos on a screen?
>>
>>3790253
It’s such a shame that camera companies can’t produce a DSLR the size of a film SLR. Or just a digital module that you can bolt on.
>>
>>3790255
I order my prints online. No point buying an expensive printer and ink when there are dedicated companies to do it for cheap.
>>
File: epson-tank-4760.jpg (58 KB, 1500x844)
58 KB
58 KB JPG
>>3790255
This is mine, it get the job done. 8x10 is the biggest I've printed idk if you can go bigger. The prints are on the cooler side but I'm pretty sure that's because I haven't setup the icc profile.
>>
>>3790255
>No one? You guys all order prints made or only see your photos on a screen?
Most people here only talk about gear, why are you surprised?
>>
Bought pic related, did I do okay for a beginner just getting a compact point and click?
>>
>>3790267
the one you have with you
>>
>>3790267
Tool doesn’t matter. Just take it everywhere and take photos. Your first 10,000 shots are your worst.
>>
>>3790102
What do you shoot with that focal length? Portraits?
>>
>>3790184
>imagine such a large body costing so much with no fucking buttons

It's a studio camera.
>>
The kitlens 15-45mm is a lot more compact than the XF 18-55mm but it's also plastic shit. At some point you have to accept you can't make things like zoom lenses even more compact.
>>
>>3790257
>It’s such a shame that camera companies can’t produce a DSLR the size of a film SLR.
What kind of film SLR? If you compare a DSLR to a late model film SLR with automatic advance and built in flash and AF they're pretty much the same size. If you compare it to a compact manual advance manual focus SLR like an AE1 sure it's going to be bigger, there's practically nothing in an AE1 compared to a DSLR.

>Or just a digital module that you can bolt on.
It has been tried many times. It's not commercially viable.
>>
>>3789154
If low light performance is a big factor then you are going to do best by getting in the D750/D780/Z6/Z6ii vein of Nikon's line.
>>
>>3790184
>costing so much
>no fucking buttons
Can you see the red dot? It's a Leica.
>>
>>3790267
It's probably not the best idea but since it's got a very long zoom, see how much you can abuse it.
>>
>>3790277
>>3790277
Yes portraits. That's pretty much all I shoot. Mostly full body shots and I like lots of bokeh.
>>
>>3790290
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. What's your insight into the difference between a D750 and a D610? The differences in low light performance between a D750 and D610 seem negligible to me, looking at test images and dxomark (pretty much every comparison is like this, no significant difference). For such a seemingly insignificant difference, I'd rather put the extra $3-400 toward a lens, since with the D610 I was planning to buy a 28-70 f2.8 VR, 70-200 f2.8 VR and 200-500mm VR. Either way, I'm planning to divest entirely of my DX camera and lenses. As for D780 and Z6, well outside of the range of what I want to spend on just a body.
>>
>>3790255
What do you do with the print once you get it?
Scan and upload that?
>>
Sony boys, What’s the oldest model of A7 you’d buy? I’m finally wanting to try a full frame mirror less with my m mount Zeiss glass.
>>
>>3790284
Good point. Although given that mirror less bodies come really small and include all of those things, I feel like DSLRs could be smaller if they had the same investment as mirrorless.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E2S
Camera SoftwareDigital Camera X-E2S Ver1.11
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2020:12:31 16:46:42
Exposure Time1/350 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating250
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness1.8 EV
Exposure Bias-1 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length35.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1776
Image Height1184
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3790311
Why do you want fake Zeiss glass?
>muh microcontrast
Literally just a buzzword. Sony/Zeiss lenses are no better than Canikon's top lenses.
>>
>>3790321
The ZM 50mm is my favourite lens. I already own it.
>>
So I got me a Kodak Pixpro az528.
It's definitely not a high end camera, but that's perfect for me, I just wanted an entry level something. It's a step up from the low end compact I had been using, and I'm a poorfag anyhow.
How bad did I do? Is there anything I should watch out for on one of these?
>>
>>3790313
>Although given that mirror less bodies come really small and include all of those things
>all of those things

Are you kidding right now? Mirrorless bodies don't have the mirror or its mechanisms, pentaprism, usually no built in flash. No mirror or its mechanism means things it does have in common with a DSLR can be put where the mirror mechanism would be. No mirror means flange to sensor distance can be made smaller because the mirror angle must be 45° and its dimensions are dictated by the size of the sensor, increasing depth of the body. EVF is a lot more compact than a pentaprism, no flash means no big capacitor, bulb or reflector/optics. If you made a DSLR with the exact parts that came out of this a7 you'd have to add a pentaprism in place of the EVF, a mirror, its mechanism, its motor, and an AF sensor array. Adding the mirror will make the distance from flange to sensor larger, adding the pentaprism will make the camera taller, adding the motor and mechanism will displace other components outward and make the camera thicker or wider, etc.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D600
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.4
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern906
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)80 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width5965
Image Height3982
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2017:12:01 22:45:17
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/8.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/8.0
Exposure Bias1/3 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length80.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width5965
Image Height3947
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3790326
So sell it. Sheesh.
>>
>>3789897
why does this matter to you so damn much?
>>
>>3790333
The pentaprism, mirror and mechanism are able to be squeezed into an Olympus OM2 sized body made in the 80s. I’m sure DSLRS could be a lot smaller than they are now. Just bang together an OM2 wit the electronics of a M43s. Easy.
Battery is a big space user though I give you that.
>>
>>3790381
It’s a truly stellar lens. Shame you won’t ever try it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1280
Image Height960
>>
>>3790086
dear god cameras are cool looking. I don't know anything about this but just by how it looks, I want one.
>>
File: 942x576x2.jpg (47 KB, 942x576)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
>>3790385
>The pentaprism, mirror and mechanism are able to be squeezed into an Olympus OM2 sized body made in the 80s.
No AF motor, no AF sensors, a mechanical shutter, no built in flash, no sensor and associated circuit board (much thicker than film), no memory card slots, no usb connectors, rudimentary light metering, a battery the size of a coin, no optical viewfinder adjustment. Take a film SLR apart sometime, the mechanical shutter is a wonder to behold, beautifully engineered and miniaturized, but there just isn't that much inside of the camera. A light metering circuit that a first year EE student can design, a couple of wonderfully complex mechanisms for the shutter and mirror lift, and the gears which advance the film and the exposure number indicator. Most of the camera is empty space without a roll of film in it, and a roll of film takes up a lot less space than a decently sized battery, a sensor, an image processing board, a memory card board, an AF sensor array, etc. Common components like the mirror and pentaprism are of fixed dimensions governed by physics and the size of the sensor, an APSC mirror is fairly small, but a FF mirror is bigger, the mirror must sit at 45° to the sensor plane to direct light upward, setting a minimum size requirement for the space between flange and sensor, the APSC camera can't reduce this distance unless it is to use dedicated lenses.

Compactness is a huge selling point for cameras, Sony leans heavily on the compactness and light weight of its mirrorless offerings. Do you think all the marketers and bean counters and engineers just ignore the opportunity to sell the most compact SLR because they don't want to try hard enough and make it smaller? Modern entry level DSLRs are fucking tiny btw, they're easily as small as the compact AF SLRs of the '90s.
>>
>>3790395
Errybody wanna a RZ, ain’t nobody wanna lift no heavy ass weight.
>>
>>3790310
>What do you do with the print once you get it?
look at it, you loon. maybe frame it and put on a wall, or even gift if it holds sentimental value
>>
>>3790417
But I already look at them on the monitor, posting on walls is a good idea actually.
>>
>>3790487
>>3790417
printing and developing and making a photograph tangible is arguably one of the most over-looked and skipped steps in the photographic process.
>>
>>3790171
Sony doesn't do ProRes, so it's a non-starter.
BMPCC4K is Cinema camera, the A7 is not.
>>
I'm moving to Japan soon and buying a motorbike to travel, I want to buy one camera for night photography and mainly city snaps but possibly some nature ones but not worried about that

What should I go for?

I don't want to carry more than I have to
>>
>>3790786
Sounds like Ricoh GR II to me (don't get the III, it has no flash).
Canon G1X III is a viable option too if you prefer a zoom lens.
Avoid Fuji like the plague, if doing night photography the worm noise will be accentuated.
>>
What lens should I buy next after the Sigma 18-35 for my Nikon D7200 ?
>>
>>3790799
That's an unfortunate question. You need to provide more context. Are you trying to be more versatile or more specialized? Because if the former, some telephoto zoom like a 70-300. Also are you buying DX lenses or do you prefer to get FX for a future upgrade?
>>
>>3790786
i ride a bmw k1300r and a husqvarna nuda 900r, and i use a fuji x-h1 (sorry >>3790787). for travel usually the 27mm f/2.8 is bolted on, or the 16mm f/1.4. hired a r1200gs for japan schlepping with my girl on the back.
what do you mean by night photography? if you want a camera that can basically be a night vision goggle, you'll need a big sensor with big heavy glass in front of it. for travel that fucking sucks, especially on a motorcycle. carrying around a buky kit like that in high-vibration backpack or panniers means you'll never use it, and you'll miss opportunities. when i review my motorcycle journeys they're mostly gopro videos or a shitty pocket pentax point+shoot because its so portable.
this is where something like >>3790787 makes sense. if it's in a pocket or tankbag, you'll actually use the fucking thing often.
>>
>>3790803
I'm thinking of switching to Z-mount by 2023-2024 so I'll probably buy FX
To be fair,I only do portraits these days so maybe a cheap 50 1.8D and a zoom like the old 80-200 should the trick
maybe even the 24-120
>>
File: DSCF6882.jpg (3 MB, 6000x4000)
3 MB
3 MB JPG
>>3790786
X100V or Ricoh GRIII (who needs flash?)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX100F
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:12:27 16:44:06
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating800
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness1.0 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length23.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3790102
There's also the XF 50mm f2. It's not a bokeh machine though.
Also some argue the XF 90mm f2 is better than the 56mm at portraits.

However your best bet is the Viltrox 56mm f1.4
>>
>>3790308
Then for Fuji I would say there is no other lens good as the XF56mm. Look for some example photos on flickr. It looks pretty amazing and I'm thinking of buying a Fuji camera just because of that lens.
>>
>>3790903
XF 16mm f1.4 is the real "muh fooji magic" lens.
>>
>>3790904
owning both, yes, and there is some fantastic portrait work done at 24mm equiv, but the average photographer and average client are bokeh whores who think the most important part of a photo is the out-of-focus backgrounds.
i prefer the 90mm for portraiture
>>
>>3790910
Oh I wasn't argueing from the perspective of portrait just pointing out that other than the 56mm being given magical abilities the XF 16mm is also seen as a special lens.
>>
I bought an x-e2 and a 18-55 lens. Wish me luck, boys!
>>
>>3790946
Yes lad. It’s a great combo. I also recommend the 7artisans 35mm f1.2 for proper compact street sessions.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1280
Image Height853
>>
>>3789154
Speaking of canon vs nikon comparison on DXO, I'm in the market for a D800 or 5D III, and I saw this. Now someone told me that this is because dxomark's methodology is biased toward shadows, and the Nikons tend to handle shadows better where you can pull more from the highlights on Canons. Is this true?
>>
>>3790970
Will do, anon. Thanks.
>>
File: image.png (6 KB, 355x252)
6 KB
6 KB PNG
>>3789082
>18-55mm
>APS-C
>good
>>
File: reddit.png (38 KB, 600x800)
38 KB
38 KB PNG
>>3790970
>compact street sessions
>>
>>3790970
>I also recommend the 7artisans 35mm f1.2 for proper compact street sessions.
i agree, it really can't be beaten for the price desu
>>
>>3790975
You should ignore dxo dynamic range charts completely. Only good dynamic range test is comparison of two raw files side by side of a high dynamic range scene, then doing +5ev and -5ev. Pretty much all the sensors today perform the same.
>>
Anyone have experience with 135mm or 135mm equivalent primes? I've been eyeing one in particular and I liked that it'd half the bulk of a 70-200 while providing better background separation and also being a pseudo macro (0.3x) lens, which I feel like one open a lot of new opportunities without going down the rabbit hole of macro photography. I already have a 70-200 and 85mm but I feel like I leave the 70-200 at home sometimes just because of the bulk. I kinda like the challenge that a fixed focal length brings but I'm just concerned that 135mm might be too restrictive.
>>
>>3791329
>equivalent
fujifag?
>>
>>3791333
Yeah I've got an X-T3 and I was eyeing the 90mm F2.
>>
>>3791337
the xf 90mm f/2 is ironically fuji's sharpest and fastest focusing lens. i wouldn't hesitate at all jumping on it; it keeps its value
there's also a viltrox 80mm f/1.8.
>>
>>3791337
It's like a 135mm f/3 equivalent. Not f/2. Not f/2.8. The reason people buy 135mm primes is for portraits, so having such a gimped ability for subject separation kinda defeats the purpose. As with pretty much every piece of Fuji equipment, it's just overpriced, flashy garbage for low IQ "nerds."

>>3791340
Fuck off, fujishitter.
>>
>>3791342
I agree about the products but this guy already has a Fuji.
90mm F/2 should provide enough subject separation on APS-C.
>>
>>3791342
>deliberately avoid mentioning lens and brand specifics in the question to avoid these kinds of low quality posts and brandfagging
>this fucking retard immediately starts shit flinging

Honestly this board is such fucking trash. Literally the worst of the worst on all 4chan. Entirely brandfagging, tripfag drama and pointless shit flinging and arguing.
>>
>>3791372
Tell you what anon, a f/1.8 50mm provided plenty of separation on a Nikon crop so 90mm f/2 should be decent enough for you. Ignore that guy, he doesn't want to help. Most of the times it's fujifags shitting up the place but you're alright and he's in the wrong (even if he has a point about Fuji gear being objectively inferior for worse prices, you are already in the system so you may as well make as much from it as you can).
Buy used, one of the advantages of Fuji is that prices drop like rocks when used. I don't have that advantage with Canon. You can get the 90mm for under 600 used on eBay.
>>
>>3791342
>gimped ability for subject separation
ah, you're one of those people who only likes 1mm depth of field. where the most important part of a photograph is the out-of-focus background.
it's a telephoto. they naturally have plenty of subject seperation. even my $50 just-for-fun cheapie M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm F4.0-5.6 R has more than enough.
>>
>>3791385
>>3791372
Spare me the acrimonious "I'm so wounded by your mean words" routine, fujiscum. I know your tricks.

It is a $950 lens for APS-C.

Nine hundred and fifty federal fucking reserve notes.

Almost a grand. And what do you get....will you get to larp like you're a real portrait photographer using the legendary EF 135mm f/2L? No....no, you will not because the Fuji lens has *more than a full stop less* of subject separation.

The final nail in the coffin? You can get a real 135mm f/2 lens for literally only about $50 more, new. THAT is why people say that Fuji lenses are overpriced.

>https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1149216-REG/fujifilm_16463668_xf_90mm_f_2_r.html

>https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/112539-USA/Canon_2520A004_Telephoto_EF_135mm_f_2_0L.html

Sell your Malaysian wormy-sensor, overpriced crapola and buy a real camera. Doesn't have to be Canon, but you apparently want to larp as a legit photographer, so that's what I'd recommend. You'll save a lot of money in the long run, and your self-respect will also begin to recover over time this way.
>>
>>3791410
Dilate
>>
>>3791440
It hurts to hear the truth when you're completely deluded. It's also only normal for you to project being deluded onto me. You think I'm a deluded tranny, just like you're a deluded x-tranny. Irony can be cruel sometimes, I know. But the only way to move past it is to acknowledge your delusion and come back to reality.
>>
>>3791372
>>deliberately avoid mentioning lens and brand specifics in the question
Because you knew we'd make fun of your shitty camera, which deserves to be made fun of.
>>
File: Scan (35)-facebook.jpg (1.64 MB, 2048x1365)
1.64 MB
1.64 MB JPG
I've only ever used film cameras, however film is getting pretty expensive so want a digital to do the bulk of my practice with. Current camera is a Nikon F5, so the logical choice is a full frame Nikon F-mount so I don't have to buy extra lenses. I don't know anything about digital sensors or camera functions unique to digital but I do know I want the ergos to carry over as much as possible so it's a seamless change between using either. What's my go-to? 99% of my usage is for shooting motorbikes and cars, both static meets and track days/street racing. Df is attractive for its small size and familiar controls but apart from that I'm not convinced.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareNegative Lab Pro v2.1.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:04 19:09:50
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3791410
>You can get a real 135mm f/2 lens for literally only about $50 more, new.
guess what, i can link ancient old legacy flappy mirror garbage too, and it'll be cheap too.
look how breathtakingly dishonest you are: you can't even fucking get a 135mm for rf mount. the closest they have is a 85mm which is $3000. the fuji, even at full retail (it's a $500 lens at most during sales and rebates) is $2000 cheaper.
nikon? no 135mm for z-mount. they have an 85mm f/1.8 for $800.
snoys 135mm f/1.8 is $2100.
seethe and dilate, larping gearwhore.
>>
>>3791542
>what is EF adapter
>what is FTZ adapter
You're making me side with him and I had called you out thinking you were one of the exceptional decent fujiposters, but you've proven me wrong. You're like the other fujifags, a dishonest coping faggot with a chip on your shoulder because you know your camera system sucks.
>>
>>3791542
>look how breathtakingly dishonest you are: you can't even fucking get a 135mm for rf mount.
“The fujifag cries out in pain as he strikes you.”

All EF lenses function perfectly on all EOS R bodies with a $99 adapter.

Who said you needed a mirrorless camera, though? Sell your Fuji consumerist toys and get yourself a used 5D Mark III ($700ish) and a copy of the EF 135mm f/2L lens and you’ll come out ahead in a lot of ways, including in life.

>larping gearwhore
You’re the one trying to justify spending more on less. The Fuji worms might have had an effect on your brain, fujiscum. Only way to get them out is with an ice pick.
>>
God this board is cancer. It’s actually an analogy of the world at the moment. Everyone chooses a side and doesn’t budge or accept the views of somebody who has chosen a different side. I’m a Sony shooter who actually posts pics but I see many talented guys here with Fuji gear. Your camera doesn’t make you a good photographer and arguing about brands makes you a vapid, cancerous prick.
>>
>>3791505
>I've only ever used film cameras
Jesus Christ.

It is 2022, man! Do you connect to the internet on a dial-up modem too? Are you Amish? I am honestly curious what other ancient technology you still use.
>>
>>3791550
*2021
It may surprise you to learn that I typed up that post on the glass keyboard of my smartphone. Not on a typewriter. Sometimes there are mistakes.
>>
>>3791549
>many talented guys here with Fuji gear
Liar. Fuji users are not photographers, they are internet trolls.
>>
>>3791542
You shouldn't 'debate' this thing it's like a chatbot instructed to spew garbage.
>>
>>3791549
>Your camera doesn’t make you a good photographer and arguing about brands makes you a vapid, cancerous prick.
You might actually believe that you made a valid point here, but in reality, you just weaseled in a way to call people names. Way to take the high road....
>>
>>3791342
You can just google XF 90mm f2 and see it's great for portraits.
>>3791554
The type of tecchie freaks who spend more time online than outdoors shooting are the ones drawn to BIG SPECZ like you find on Sony and Canon full frames.
>>
>>3791555
I assume you mean the fujibot.
>>
>>3791505
The F5 is more like a DSLR than the SLRs that the DF imitates, two knob setup. I'd recommend something like a D750 with a battery grip to get the same handling. Or a D3S for those sweet 9 FPS, but you lose a bit of resolution and have to use expensive CF cards instead of SDs.
>>
>>3791557
I can definitely make a point while insulting. I just did.
Do you have a thread for your photos taken with your Sony btw?
>>
>>3791552
kek, such a beautiful allegory for newer being worse sometimes
>>
>>3791549
The sides are Fuji and the rest, lol.
>>
>>3791563
The only point you made was to illustrate your lack of commitment to the rational discourse.
>>
>>3791559
Shoo, shoo, fujiscum!
>>
>>3791565
So true! Because a giant fucking keyboard would be so much better to use to type with while I’m literally on my back, in bed, in a dark room. Yeah, smartphones suck!
>>
Behold! The best combo for less than $500

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1280
Image Height958
>>
>>3791572
lol you can mog that with a brand new M50
>>
>>3791571
I miss this fucker like you can't imagine.
Took beautiful pics too.
>>
>>3791572
In the era of on-sensor phase detect AF being a mature technology, whenever I see someone still fucking around with manual lenses, whether a soft vintage lens or these Chinese ones built by slave Uyghur workers, my first thought is “low IQ” and I try to avoid getting caught up in their stupidity. But at the same time, you need to know that you’re stupid.
>>
>>3791576
Tiny screen.
>>
File: Scan (22)-facebook.jpg (1.71 MB, 1365x2048)
1.71 MB
1.71 MB JPG
>>3791561
I never shoot on Ch anyway so the 9fps isn't as much use to me as higher resolution/better sensor and cheaper storage.

>>3791550
Bait?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareNegative Lab Pro v2.1.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:04 20:21:25
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3791584
>Bait?
Aside from the typo of the year, no. You’re a troglodyte.
>>
>>3791580
kek, AF is never as great as manual focus for certain things.
But you're right that he's retarded, the shitty camera recommendation gives it away. Rotting with worms.
Outside of sports/action, what's the point of shooting AF?
>>
>>3791574
Lol no you can’t.
>>
>>3791587
I know you’re trolling, but I’ll play along.

Accurate focus is “the point.” Focus peaking can only get you so close.
>>
>>3791580
I shoot MF as the lens is small and I enjoy it. Not that enjoyment means anything in these threads.
>>
>>3791583
More than large enough, I'd gladly get the "tiny screen" and a physical keyboard if I could. Sadly I'm stuck with a shitty touchscreen. Everyone hates typing on them even if they don't admit it. That's why those dreadful whatsapp voice notes are a thing. Sometimes I refuse to even give them a listen if they're over a few seconds long, it's simply rude to send a shitty monologue like that. Too cheap to call.
>>
>>3791592
I agree. Is there a good recent phone with a physical keyboard?
>>
>>3791591
So it’s the same motivation for masturbation.
>>
>>3791589
>Focus peaking can only get you so close.
You must my be a weapons-grade retard if you can’t even focus a camera. Why are you even here?
>>
>>3791588
Yes you can. Keep coping friendo, your X-tranny trash sucks ass. And to get on-sensor phase detection they lose pixels aggravating the already flawed color reproduction.
DPAF>Bayer with AF pixels>X-tranny with AF pixels. Simple as.
>>3791589
lol k
the most accurate focus is manual focus in live view, AF is always making guesses
>>
>>3791598
I said you can’t. Camera is irrelevant and I guarantee your photos are awful.
>>
Is the Leica Q a meme?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1465
Image Height824
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3791597
I wonder how many newfags you think actually believe that.
>>
>>3791598
>the most accurate focus is manual focus in live view, AF is always making guesses
The camera is constantly readjusting because your body is not rock stable. The only way you will get 100% accurate focus manually is on a tripod.
>>
>>3791604
at what distances are you shooting? I always nail focus better than AF if it's not a moving subject
>>
>>3791598
>Yes you can. Keep coping friendo, your X-tranny trash sucks ass. And to get on-sensor phase detection they lose pixels aggravating the already flawed color reproduction.
>DPAF>Bayer with AF pixels>X-tranny with AF pixels. Simple as.
Why are you so angry, man? You can't find anyone that complains about Fuji colours and the output, so I don't get what your knickers are in a twist about.
>>
>>3791600
Yeah, fixed lens and EVF at that price is for retards. Might as well get a fucking Fuji lol.
>>
>>3791610
Shills piss me off that's why.
>>
>>3791609
What cameras are you using for AF? It sounds like the problem is either you don’t know how to use your camera or your camera sucks. Mirrorless cameras are capable of nailing focus every time. I guarantee that you are not nailing focus as often as AF would if you knew how to use it.
>>
>>3791616
How do you tell it what to focus on in a tiny screen? lol
I'm nailing focus because I'm seeing the photo before taking it, I fully zoom what I want to focus in the LCD
>>
In case you stupid assholes didn’t get the memo—we only ever had to use manual focus lenses on mirrorless cameras when mirrorless cameras were brand new and there were no lenses available for them. Also, early mirrorless cameras had shitty contrast detect AF. Now there are lots of lenses for every system, and virtually every system has a mature AF implementation. The only reason to still fuck around with focus peaking manual lenses is to literally wear a fedora and feel like a special snowflake.
>>
>>3791598
>Bayer with AF pixels>X-tranny with AF pixels
x-trans is a bayer array.
>>
>>3791621
>How do you tell it what to focus on in a tiny screen?
Have you literally never used a modern camera? Lol, this is sad.

You can pick the focus point manually or the camera can pick it for you. Many cameras can auto detect an eye and focus on that. Yes, I’m sure it sounds like I’m describing space travel to a primitive cave-dweller, but the technology is very easy to use and very accurate. You are just backwards and likely very low IQ.
>>
>>3791624
No
>>
File: bayerxtransfeat.jpg (186 KB, 1600x840)
186 KB
186 KB JPG
>>3791624
Oh no, it's retarded.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2017:03:03 12:45:42
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1600
Image Height840
>>
>>3791626
So you're having the camera guess for you, as I said lol. I've seen stuff like eyeAF and was utterly unimpressed from a photographic point of view. The engineering is neat, though.
>>
>>3791631
Can you take an online IQ test and then take a screenshot of the results? I am honestly curious how dumb you are.
>>
>>3791632
I've done it before, 137.
>>
Imagine being on a photography board and not being able to manually focus a lens.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width640
Image Height723
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3791633
I guarantee you it’s not 137.

>>3791635
You’re deeply deluded.
>>
>>3791637
Okay Mr “Focus peaking can only get you so close”.
>>
>>3791637
I guarantee you suffer from Dunning-Kruger's effect. In other words, you're not as smart as you think you are.
If I wanted to focus things like I'm using my phone I'd use my phone.
With manual focus I have full control.
>>
>>3791627
>>3791629
x-trans is a bayer array, no matter how much you stamp your feed. a bayer array is just an arrangement of rgb pickles on a sensor. the common one is the one on the left. fuji is another. others at the link below. retards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter#Modifications
>>
>>3791646
It's based on Bayer, not Bayer. The article you posted even proves you wrong. It's like claiming an OHC engine is a pushrod engine because it's a modification of the OHV concept.
>>
>>3791644
>>3791642
I really have no hope of contradicting your mother, do I? She told you that you were a special snowflake and you could do anything, and I’m just some rational person who looks at the evidence. What do I know. I just have extensive experience with digital cameras, and you have a lot of wojak images saved on your computer. So I guess that means you win the argument. Good job.
>>
>>3791652
Not even the same poster, I haven't posted pics other than the X-trans vs Bayer one.
>>
>>3791652
Can I see your Flickr or Instagram?
>>
Is a Sony A7ii is bitch to use nowadays? Is the iii worlds better.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width480
Image Height640
>>
Are there any action cameras without wide FOV/fisheye?
>>
>>3791663
the a7 and a7ii were just so inherently flawed i dont even consider them options. the a7iii and the a7riv are the two cameras sony really managed to nail
>>
>>3791663
I agree to >>3791688 and would add the A7 III has been dramatically improved with firmware upgrades since its release. It is a camera that is almost up to date, even though it has the respective low price of a camera with a release year of 2018.
Sony was not a faggot, desu.
>>
how is olympus pen-f?
>>
>>3791741
Absolutely fantastic. I loved owning it but would recommend having another camera to use in low light.
>>
File: IMG_20210104_163052.jpg (3.76 MB, 4000x2250)
3.76 MB
3.76 MB JPG
Hi I'm a newfag sorta used to shoot photos on my old compact camera/ smartphone when i was a lad
A friend of mine suggested i took up a hobby so here I am
Looking at a DC-FZ82 rn. Is it a good pick for a beginner ( my old camera was crap, so It doesn't count). Is it overkill? Is it shit?
Anyway here is a photo i just took with my 48MP (really?) phone, cropped for upload. As you can Tell i like landscapes.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeXiaomi
Camera ModelRedmi Note 8T
Camera Softwarewillow-user 9 PKQ1.190616.001 V11.0.6.0.PCXEUVF release-keys
Sensing MethodUnknown
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4000
Image Height2250
Image Created2021:01:04 15:41:53
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
ISO Speed Rating170
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure Time1/216 sec
Focal Length4.74 mm
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Image Height3000
White BalanceAuto
Brightness2.9 EV
Image Width4000
Exposure ModeAuto
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
Does anyone where to get 7artisans lenses in Europe? I don't wanna pay custom fees which will 100% happen if I order from ebay.

I want to buy the 35 mm f1.2
>>
Hey P, Im already incested in Canon with some quality lenses but have a shitty entry level body, I want to move up a step, should I buy a 90D thats APSc or go with a FF 6D mark 2.

the 90D basically has all the features I want except FF
>>
>>3791858
Why do you want full frame so much?
>>
>>3791818
Amazon. I'd get Meike f1.4 instead, though. It's halfway usable at f1.4.
>>
>>3791657
No, too ashamed of all the autofocused images with perfect in-focus sharpness. A good photo should be manually focused and definitely not sharp.
>>
>>3791663
My brother got an a7ii and likes the photos he can make with it. He does complain about focus speed at times, though. He was hoping to adapt his Canon lenses, which apparently focus-hunt.
>>
>>3791858
If you’re already at the $1000-1300 price point of the 90D or 6DII, then you really have a lot of options, even with Canon. Used, you could probably afford literally 5D, including the Mark IV. The 5DS went on fire sale recently for only $1500–I don’t know how that had affected used prices, but you might even be able to find it still in stock somewhere. The EOS R and RP are well within your price range, and I only recommend them because the future of Canon will likely be in the RF mount...not to say that the EF mount isn’t already fully mature and already good to go. You might also consider the M6 Mark II as an alternative body with better features than the and a more compact package, but you will have to adapt EF and EF-S lenses because the native lenses suck.
>>
>>3791783
It would be my second camera behind a relatively large nikon. I was eyeing the Olympus because I wanted something I actually could have on myself most of the time and was looking at cute compact mirrorless cameras. How bad is the low light performance?
>>
>>3791783
>>3791954
To add to that, I looked up some satisfactory pics taken at iso 6400, so maybe it can't be that bad?
>>
>>3791954
It might be fine but when I was taking pictures of people at night I was getting bad blur. The IBIS is amazing for still nighttime shots like buildings. I could hand hold 1/2” shots with a 25mm.
All in all I loved the PEN F. It feels great in the hand and the shutter noise is really nice.
>>
File: 1607561283764.png (33 KB, 640x591)
33 KB
33 KB PNG
>>3791968
>All in all I loved the PEN F. It feels great in the hand and the shutter noise is really nice.
Well those are the two most important qualities when picking a camera!!
>>
>>3791974
For me it is. All modern cameras have ample photo quality so for me it’s down to enjoyment and ergonomics. Only spec- obsessed, trite, photographers would disagree.
>>
I got this old beast from my dad recently. I don’t have any EF lenses yet, where should I start?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width675
Image Height450
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
File: fuji.jpg (317 KB, 1125x750)
317 KB
317 KB JPG
>>3791982
>All modern cameras have ample photo quality
Just not true. Fujifilm is a great counter-example of a camera that can't produce any kind of quality without embedding worms into every image.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D300
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
PhotographerBruce Forster
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern1290
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2848
Image Height4288
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Compression SchemeUncompressed
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Data ArrangementChunky Format
Image Created2014:05:16 14:39:38
Exposure Time1/125 sec
F-Numberf/5.6
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/5.6
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.84 m
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceCloudy Weather
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length100.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width2848
Image Height1911
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3791999
amazing piece of gear. Try going after a 35mm2 or a 50mm1.4 (like the pic).

remember this camera is APS-H with a 1.3 crop factor
>>
>>3791982
ummmmmmmm based?
>>
>>3792000
Can you find me the worms?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1280
Image Height853
>>
Found an old Polaroid Automatic 250 Land Camera laying around. I thought it might be a slide-film type of camera (yeah, I'm retarded), but I have never shot film before.
Is there any way to shoot huge, high-res film on this thing? Is the lens too dogshit to care about that? What's the main point of this beefy bastard?
>>
>>3791858
I mostly shoot wildlife and I love my 90D its basically an EF mount mirrorless with a not shit viewfinder and battery life for days.
The only real reason to go full frame is if you want slightly better low light performance or bokeh whoring, the crop factor on APSC is a benefit imo because its much easier and cheaper to get a good wide angle lens for APSC than it is to get a lens that can reach out to 500mm on full frame.

I also considered the R/RP in that price range but they are just rebel tier mirrorless gimped crap.
>>
>>3792053
The rp can resolve more details than the 90d
The 32mp thing is a meme no lens can resolve that much res
Thers a reason every camera maker stopped at 24mp apsc
>>
>>3791974
Yeah like for this guy >>3790079
>>
>>3792077
>32mp thing is a meme no lens can resolve that much res
It's good for tele and especially macro
There are good macro lenses that are sharp enough, and at 1:1, smaller sensor is smaller subject
>>
>>3791860
Why wouldn't he? FF is great, same lens gives you 1.6x the FoV.
>>3791858
>incested
kek
I assume you mean invested.
Tell me, are your lenses full frame or crop?
The 90D is truly a dream camera, but it's not FF.
>>3791923
>If you’re already at the $1000-1300 price point of the 90D or 6DII, then you really have a lot of options, even with Canon. Used, you could probably afford literally 5D, including the Mark IV. The 5DS went on fire sale recently for only $1500–I don’t know how that had affected used prices, but you might even be able to find it still in stock somewhere.
This is true too. But I wouldn't go mirrorless. The OVF is too awesome to replace it with a tiny screen.
>>3792053
It's arguably the best camera currently available for wildlife.
>>3792077
>The 32mp thing is a meme no lens can resolve that much res
kek, sounds like cope to me
That thing puts the a7RIV to shame with good glass.
>>3792138
This.
>>
File: apu.png (23 KB, 741x568)
23 KB
23 KB PNG
aside from low light performance, why does MFT get shit on so hard?
>>
>>3792169
Almost every time I see color banding in a shot, I look at the EXIF and it's Olympus.
>>
>>3792077
>The 32mp thing is a meme no lens can resolve that much res
any modern L series is more than capable of resolving 32mp
>>
File: Screenshot.jpg (103 KB, 640x1080)
103 KB
103 KB JPG
You own a Canon R5 or R6? Help a /p/rother out or learn something:
>>3792182
>>3792184
>>
>>3792169
It's just a bunch of jelly nophoto foolframers.
>>
>>3792169
Low highlight ceiling and poor subject separation.
However I'd rather get MFT than Fuji any day.
>>
>>3792053
>90D its basically an EF mount mirrorless with a not shit viewfinder and battery life for days.
That's one way to look at it, I supposed. Another way to look at it is that it's an enormous mirrorless camera that doesn't have an EVF.
>>
>>3792200
>they are just jealous
Not hard to tell you heard this from your mum every day of your childhood.
>>
>>3789333 (checked)
based and redpilled feature actually
>>
>>3791860
better for lowlight.

and so I dont have to do goddamn math everytime I want to change/focus lenses and settings to compensate for crop factor
>>
>>3791923
If I was going to go 5D, I would go 5DSR.

The problem with the 5DSR is that it doesnt have a flippy screen, no 4k video, and no IBIS.

I realize that neither the 90 or 6D2 have IBIS, but they also arent at 50mp and I dont want to have to always use a tripod.

Further, the 5DSR is another $1k, and Id rather save for the R5 towards mid/end of 2021
>>
>>3792159
>Tell me, are your lenses full frame or crop?
>The 90D is truly a dream camera, but it's not FF.

Canon 50 1.2 L, 24-70 4 L, and 8-15 4 L

along with the 2 kit lenses that came with my current camera (T7) the 18-55 and 70-200
>>
File: no-photo.gif (12 KB, 248x300)
12 KB
12 KB GIF
>>3792230
>>
How do you snap with autofocus lens? Does your camera support seeing manual focus to hyperfocal distance?Does it keep the distance through power save or restart?
>>
>>3790255
I was close to buying a printer once but then I realized that
* the ink is ridiculously expensive
* unless you print regularly, the heads dry out and need cleaning, which uses even more ink and wastes it
so it wouldn't have been worth doing because I wouldn't have been printing regularly enough.
>>
>>3790311
You should know that rangefinder lenses don't perform great on mirrorless cameras due to the thickness of the sensor stack, especially for wide angle lenses. See https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rangefinder-wide-angle-lenses-on-a7-cameras-problems-and-solutions/
>>
>>3791213
Not true. With Canon cameras you get banding. Nikon cameras are better but still suffer from banding. Sony is the only brand that is banding free as far as I know. Fuji cameras are sadly limited by being APS-C. Leicas perform worse but they aren't trying to compete. So no, they're not all the same. If you mean that they are all good enough, then you're right about that.
>>
>>3792369
Are you the retarded kid who shitposted last night about how you think you can manually focus faster than autofocus? Now you're demonstrating to everybody that you are unaware of the existence and purpose of the AF/MF switch. Lol.
>>
>>3792392
>With Canon cameras you get banding
newer ones too? I noticed banding on my 5D2
I had a Nikon that didn't suffer from it and it was from 2011 or so
>>
>>3792395
>you think you can manually focus faster than autofocus
Who said any of that?
What was said was that AF is good for sports and action in general but less precise than manual focusing with live view
>>
>>3792423
>>you think you can manually focus faster than autofocus
>Who said any of that?
The plebbit tourist wojakposter:
>>3791597
>>3791598
>>3791609
>>3791621
>>3791631
>>3791635
>>3791642
>>3791644

>What was said was that AF is good for sports and action in general but less precise than manual focusing with live view
There was a contradictory statement to that effect that was made very early on: >>3791587.
>kek, AF is never as great as manual focus for certain things.
>But you're right that he's retarded, the shitty camera recommendation gives it away. Rotting with worms.
>Outside of sports/action, what's the point of shooting AF?

To be honest, I assumed that it was a completely different person because the conversation very quickly morphed into just "it's impossible to beat MF speeds no matter how advanced your camera's autofocus capability."

And it's a contradictory statement anyway. "AF is good for sports and action in general," so you acknowledge that modern cameras are able to autofocus accurately--so accurately and quickly in fact that manually focusing is not even on the table. But somehow when the subject is not playing a sport, the camera's ability to automatically acquire accurate focus becomes COMPROMISED. It's not easier for a camera to autofocus on a slow-moving or still subject, it's actually much SLOWER and LESS accurate. Absolutely insane.
>>
>>3792434
Nobody said anything about speed and you quoted some of my posts together with the wojakposter.
>"it's impossible to beat MF speeds no matter how advanced your camera's autofocus capability."
Again that only happened in your head.
The MF argument is precision not speed.
>so you acknowledge that modern cameras are able to autofocus accurately--so accurately and quickly in fact that manually focusing is not even on the table.
They're able to focus FAST, and accurate enough. When you want razor-sharp accuracy manual focus is king, because AF is always making rough guesses of what the subject is.
>it's actually much slower
sure
>less accurate
you're just wrong here
sometimes I use AF as a quick approximation and then fine tune it manually
>>
Does anyone here know how to contact whoever replaced Helen Oster on Adorama?
>>
>>3792441
>They're able to focus FAST, and accurate enough.
Vintage lens cope. You are also contradicting your earlier statements that manual focus is faster.

>because AF is always making rough guesses of what the subject is.
You ARE the wojak poster.

Just because the AF is "guessing what the subject is" doesn't mean it's slow or inaccurate. It focuses precisely on what it decides is the subject, and for tripod-mounted shots, all you have to do is learn (difficult concept, I know...) how to move the focus point, and then the camera won't be guessing.
>>
>>3792479
>Vintage lens cope. You are also contradicting your earlier statements that manual focus is faster.
Quote my statements where you claim I said manual was faster. I literally said the only reason to use AF is action/sports aka when you need fast focus. And my lenses are all AF capable, I just prefer the manual focus mode. They aren't the shitty ones with no clutch either, it's easy to override the AF without switching to MF if I want to.
>You ARE the wojak poster.
It's impossible for me to be the wojak poster because there's 60 seconds cooldown between posts. You made a retarded statement and had more than one person calling you a retard, what a shocker.
See >>3791633 and >>3791635.
>Just because the AF is "guessing what the subject is" doesn't mean it's slow or inaccurate. It focuses precisely on what it decides is the subject, and for tripod-mounted shots, all you have to do is learn (difficult concept, I know...) how to move the focus point, and then the camera won't be guessing.
It's accurate for the subject it decides to focus on, kek. Full manual is for those who want control and precision like me. AF is for those who want the job done quickly. Same type of people who used to do zone focusing. Depends on the subject you're photographing.
>>
Please help: for casual family and vacation photography would you buy the EOS RP with kit lens and the 35 f1.8 for a total of 1180€ or the EOS R with the same kit lens (non L) for 1250€? Basically better camera vs more glass. I don’t take any professional pictures at all, only personal stuff. Also I want Ringer the 85 f2 down the line at some point.

Video in FHD would also be important, so Incan Film my kids etc. thanks a lot!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON Z 6
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Macintosh)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern888
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)55 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:04:10 15:27:16
Exposure Time1/50 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Exposure Bias1/3 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceCloudy Weather
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length55.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1333
Image Height750
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
File: 41ApJGhTndL._AC_.jpg (16 KB, 498x246)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>3792593
>>
>>3792421
Yeah, even on their newer mirrorless ones. I don't know about the R5 and R6 but the R definitely had it when it came out and I was watching reviews.
>>
>>3792486
>Quote my statements where you claim I said manual was faster.
>>3791635
>>3791609
>>3791597
>>
>>3792805
My only post there is >>3791609, but also none of those posts you quoted say anything about speed. You either imagined it or have short bus tier reading comprehension.
>>
>>3792834
Speed is an implied advantage of autofocus, so your stupid little temper tantrum about "quote exactly where I said that exact word exactly!!" is a moot point.
>>
>>3792593
Buying a full frame set-up for your purpose is just ridiculous. Something like the EOS M50 or any Fuji would do the job better.
>>
>>3792860
>implied advantage
It's THE only advantage and I pointed it out in my first post that set YOU on a temper tantrum (saying that it's pointless if you're not shooting sports/action). The mountain isn't going away so you can carefully place the focal point on that tree with the weird colors that's too small to autofocus practically. In fact, in cases like that manual focus may be faster to get the results you want (not faster in general because the moment you hit the AF it will focus on something in the general vicinity in seconds). You can fight AF all day or take control like a man.
>>
>>3792867
>or Fuji
Kek
At the current full frame prices it's nice to have more bokeh, and I suspect the RP won't be too bad for FHD video.
>>
>>3792869
Sorry to break it on you, but fujifilm is both cheaper and better.
>>
is the canon 80D still a good camera? tempted to get it upgrading from a canon eos 4000D
>>
>>3792869
Of course not I'm just saying that everything you described screams APS-C, they're quite literally build for that purpose.
Also portraiture on APS-C works just fine since 56mm is enough so you don't have fuckhuge long lenses
>>
>>3792918
Depends on the price. At the time it came out, it was expensive for a crop sensor camera, but it has great fast action capabilities. For $550 used, you certainly could do a lot worse. If you can step up just a few hundred dollars, though, you'll be within reach of a used 5DIII or 6D for affordable full frame. The 5DII sells for $500ish, and you might save money getting one of those, although the autofocus is much less advanced than that on the 80D.

As an upgrade from the 4000D (I forgot this camera even existed, desu), you will get much better direct controls, a clearler/brighter viewfinder, and generally the camera is a step up in specs across the board. But if you know how to use your 4000D quickly and are familiar with it, you may not see the quality of your photos change that much. The 80D is probably the camera you should have started out with and at this point you should be upgrading to full frame. What lenses do you have?
>>
>>3792927
that makes sense. I started out with the 4000D because I was able to get it for $250 and wanted something cheap to learn how to use a DSLR. I've been using it for 2 years and felt it was probably time to upgrade - I'm definitely not opposed to spending a bit extra and getting a full frame, I'm just not really sure what to look for when it comes to camera hardware.

As for lenses I have the stock 18 - 55mm that came with the camera. I also have a Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III and a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM. I've found both enjoyable to use for different reasons.
>>
>>3792868
>It's THE only advantage
You JUST claimed that you went to great lengths to troll the thread because you think manually focusing is more accurate.

>that set YOU on a temper tantrum
False characterization.

>The mountain isn't going away so you can carefully place the focal point on that tree with the weird colors that's too small to autofocus practically
You can do photography however you like, but we are having a discussion, so I am going to hold you to higher standards than you hold yourself. Saying--or "implying" if you want to pull the literal card again--that focus point selection is unusable because you might place the focus point over an obstacle instead of your subject is a strawman. You're describing user error, if anything, but you're simultaneously denying that user error could ever be a factor for manually focusing lenses. Insanity.

>In fact, in cases like that manual focus may be faster to get the results you want (not faster in general because the moment you hit the AF it will focus on something in the general vicinity in seconds). You can fight AF all day or take control like a man.
And here you clearly articulate your cognitively dissonant argument. User error applies to manual focus point selection for AF, but doesn't apply to manual focusing itself, which is inherently much more prone to user error.
>>
>>3792937
Well, going by ebay prices, you could probably get around $175-225 if you sold the 4000D and 18-55 today. The 50mm is a decent lens, so I would hold onto that. If you like the 75-300, then keep it too. That's not a whole lot of funds to work with and I don't know what you want to add, but again, you will definitely have a less clumsy experience doing photography with the greater number of direct controls and better AF specs that the 80D offers. You will not get a better fast action full frame camera for that price; the 5DII and 6D take quite a bit of technique to shoot action with (not that you can't do it, though, both are fantastic cameras). Keep in mind that full frame lenses are also more expensive than crop lenses. What is your budget?
>>
>>3792949
I'd be happy to spend $1250 - $1500 if I knew I was getting a good quality camera that is going to last
>>
>>3792952
That's more than enough for a quality camera and a decent lens to go with it. What are your needs? What are your wants? What are you photographing and what do you do with your photos?
>>
>>3792679
Another solid fullframe choice
>>
>>3792956
I mostly photograph landscapes, sunrises / sunsets and I've used my zoom lens for a bit of bird photography. I don't do anything special with my photos atm beyond editing and posting them online. I'd like to look to get to the level of selling prints / calendars or something similar if my photography skills are good enough and people like my photos. Though I'm by no means a professional photographer, I mainly take these photos for my own enjoyment and so I have images to look back on. I'd like them to be high a bit higher quality than what I'm shooting right now. Something that gives me an image with a bit less noise and handles low light situations better
>>
>>3791708
>Sony was not a faggot, desu.
What's actually going at Sony? I've only realized Sony has reworked the menu again and added touch with the A7riv and A7siii.
>>
>>3792174
L lenses r full frame lenses not apsc
Even if they resolve the 5dsr 50mp res thats only 17mp apsc
Resolving 32mp apsc is impossible
>>
>>3792965
Definitely upgrade from the 4000D, then.
>>
>>3792987
Consider Toneh Northcrop has tested some lens on full frame 240 MP pixel shift mode and found improvement over 60 MP.
>>
>>3793009
the 6D seems like the play. thanks for the recommendation and advice anon
>>
NEW THREAD

>>3793113


>>3793113


>>3793113
>>
Is worth upgrading from X-E2 to the X-E3?

Or should I wait for X-E4 or save for X-T30?
>>
>>3792939
Not user error, but the constraints of the system. It simply isn't precise enough. If the area covered by the AF spot is too big for the subject the camera has to guess a lot.
As for false characterization, that would be what you did.
>>
>>3793138
Stay with X-E2, save up for a X-T20/X-T2 so you have a video shooter too.
>>
>>3791600
Leicas have been a meme since the first days of japanese rangefinders. They're a premium brand and practically nothing they make is actually competitive with anything else. You buy a leica because you want a leica and are loaded, not because you want a good camera.
>>
File: OM-1.jpg (646 KB, 2500x1930)
646 KB
646 KB JPG
My Olympus OM-1n just arrived. Second hand so a bit scuffed, but seems to be in good nic. Any tips? Recommendations? Very pretty piece.
>>
>>3791342
>multiplying the aperture by crop factor

ngmi
>>
>>3789082
Is the X-A7 worth getting primarily for video? I mean like short films and that kind of thing. It would be my first mirrorless too, but I don't know if it's too basic an entry level.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.