How bad am I fucking up if I get this as my first camera?

>>4444929 (OP)
Fuji sensors are mega soft so I don't recommend them. Everyone here is a big fag about gear though so idk. I started on something worse

>>4444929 (OP)
Much better than Sony.

>>4444929 (OP)
Bigly. Get a DSLR, find the joy of reflex and implicit photographic integrity before they ban them. The image you see when using a Fuji or any mirrorless for that matter is fake, a mere shadow of reality. Reality as we see with our eyes is already a mere shadow of the Ideal. Why look at the shadow of a shadow? Look at the world through the lens and maybe you can get closer to photographing like a philosopher, who aims to perceive the higher levels of reality. If you wish to remain ignorant like the others, by all means shoot mirrorless.

fuji wants $1400 for this shit? just buy an a6700 its a way better camera. weather sealed build quality, best AF in the biz (fuji has the worst AF, you cant rely on the camera. fujifags say this is a good thing because it makes them focus on their back of head photography.) and it can use tons of high quality affordable lenses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_YaLe3rAbA

>>4444947
See this schizophrenic rambling? Do the opposite of what this antisemitic woke-right nut says. These trailer park crazies just hate it when people buy nice things (if trump was a communist, they would be too) so they always recommend poor person junk.

>>4444948
You know what's even better? A 90D or a K-3 III.

>before they ban them
Do you see what kind of people are responding to you?

>>4444947
everything is in a state of constant change, no perception is fixed or stable, reality is not a static ideal, both are just temporary appearances in the ever-changing flow, all is flux, nothing stays still

>>4444953
Yeah, Davos types.
>you vill see life through a LCD screen and be happy

>>4444948
from what i've looked up i can get the x-s10 used for like $900, the one you mention is in my top 5 of choices but it's more expensive so idk, either that or the a6600 for sony
still need to look up panasonic
not sure about the e-m1 iii or e-m5 iii, can't tell if a meme or not
don't want full frame
mostly wanna take travel/landscape pics, some vids, maybe a little bit of macro stuff down the line (so i guess ibis might be important)

>>4444955
>>4444951
Have you taken your meds today, mortal? You know I don't like it when you can see me. You haven't earned the right. Take them. Close your eyes.

>>4444954
Sure, but Photography allows us to freeze that flow for a moment so that we can better analyze it. Problem is, when you get photos (and a viewfinder feed) doctored on the fly there's no imprint of Reality to analyze. It's basically becoming subject to Deus deceptor's fake image of the Real.

>>4444959
sony a7c
just buy third party lenses

the viltrox 50mm f2 is good. some even say it's the current meta.

Back in reality, DSLRs just add softness from mirror shock and their inherently inaccurate autofocus system. They also typically have inferior sensors (you have to buy a really shitty mirrorless to get DSLRs worse shadow tonality)

>>4444961
i'm supposed to wear glasses but never wear them so the evf would be like a bionic eye for me

>>4444929 (OP)
Don't trust anyone that unironically uses the word "meta"

>>4444959
Do you like your photographs looking like a rotten carcass covered with worms? Because that's what Fuji X-tranny sensors do to pictures.
>>4444963
He said he doesn't want full frame. And he's looking at a 26MP (if soft) APS-C camera, so he probably wants some reach (that he won't get with a Fuji).
90D is the answer.

>>4444965
the mirror isn't used in taking a picture are you retarded?

>>4444965
inferior lenses as well

mirrorless made sharp, compact, leica-like lens design common and affordable. SLRs need more overengineered optics to achieve the same level of quality because the mirror box is where the glass should go.

it's not even a contest really. DSLRs are obsolete, period.

>>4444966
Except it's all fake. The OVF on a DSLR can be used without glasses too, what you see is the image on the ground glass of the focusing screen.

>>4444970
When DSLRs slap their mirror up it creates micro-vibrations that soften the image. It affects both tripods and handheld photography. It also prevents the camera from focusing off the same surface used to take the photo and from focusing with a closed aperture because you wouldn't be able to see shit. they're inherently worse.

>>4444965
Mine's accurate and mirror shock has never been an issue for me, git gud. DSLR doesn't need to sacrifice pixels to achieve proper autofocus unlike most mirrorless cameras.
>>4444971
>mirrorless made sharp, compact, leica-like lens design common and affordable. SLRs need more overengineered optics to achieve the same level of quality because the mirror box is where the glass should go.
This is utterly wrong, mirrorless reduces the flange distance so much it needs to digitally compensate for the horrid vignetting its lenses have.