Thread 4460594

the great migration edition

Previous: >>4458399

I bought a Pentax K1ii 2 days ago and I'm second guessing my decision despite looking for one for the last 2 months. Even though I paid what's relatively cheap for them ($920 + tax w/2 batteries + D-BG6 grip 4000 shot count, usually they're like $1100-1400 used when they come up for sale).

Wonder if I should've just taken the opportunity to go to a different FF format (Nikon Z6II or Sony A7C) for the same money. There's too many good cameras in 2025. I still wanna pick up a a7iv in a year or two when the a7v comes out.

On the flipside I have a ton of FF lenses I already own that'll work (Quantaray 28-90mm, 35-70mm F4 and 35-135mm Pentax-Fs, 80-320mm FA, 70-200 and 70-210mm Takumar 4-5.6s) and 2 strobes (AF540FGZ + Metz 52). Next I'll pick up a 50mm f1.4 FA or a 28mm f2.8 FA.

And I'm selling my KF w/18-55mm to make up for it for $400 + whatever DA lenses won't work and I won't wanna keep for my K200D (18-135mm for $100 and 50mm f1.8 for $60 are the first ones, while 35mm f2.4 is a fav for me to shoot with).

I took this with the KF + 28-90mm

>>4460600
>Picture of nothing.

Sony have been restructuring across the company for the last year.
This isn't a new development and it isn't restricted to just the photographic division.

>>4460601
ok

>>4460601
You cant take a picture of nothing.

>Youtuber drama
Sony is #1 in FF market share worldwide.

The only issue they are facing is their unwillingness to produce better cameras than the r50, r10, and r7 for less money than canon is charging. Their APS-C lineup was good, but now it's just out of date and still the same price.

There is already a gear thread. It's over 100 images away from the image limit and won't be bumped off the board for a month.

Go there.
>>4458399
>>4458399
>>4458399

>had monopod
>shit
>returned it
>buy this on craigslist a boomer who said it was his fathers for $5
>way way better
WHY is this style not more common? Nearly all of them are like 4-5 segments and narrow down to nothing at the bottom to get max height and end up flimsy as shit. Where this one is maybe like 1/3 longer but only has 2 rods the telescope out and is way sturdier.
I thought this was like 80's but it turns out the company rebranding the Japanese import stuff went defunct in 1969.

Looking to get a compact travel camera for the times I don't want to carry around my huge bulky FF gear. Should I get an x100VI or M43?

>>4460617
Ricoh GR IV soon brother

Micro four thirds is an overall disappointment if you can afford full frame, and fujis are so expensive (and not small enough) that you might as well buy a sony a7c+35mm f2.8. Sony will never be as good as nikon but it's still better than fuji and micro four thirds.

>>4460605
Well anon got as close as possible then

>>4460617
The Fuji is expensive for what you get. A used m43 is pretty good for it's price. The other anon is right though. A Ricoh GR iv is probably best bang for your buck

>>4460631
Not really. There are definitely many things in that picture.

>>4460617
Olympus EM5iii or OM5. It's more versatile than the fixed lens cameras and just as compact with a prime. Cheaper too.

>>4460610
Snoy schizo only made this thread early because he to make sure 5 new people who visit each year don't buy a sony without first consulting the wildly successful photographer "camera conspiracies" or reviewing the unique and yet to reproduced test results of lumix s9 girl.

We don't need two gear threads for that. Snoy schizo can just do that in the real one.
>>4458399

>>4460600
Welcome to the consoomer treadmill. Regret, disappointment, confusion, indignance, and self doubt drive the worst decision making the human psyche is capable of and every single mature business has departments specializing in creating them in their customers. That's why we went from clear cut product lines in 50s-70s film cameras to the cripple hammering of modern digital.
>Wait doesn't it cost them zero dollars to enable a basic firmware feature?
>But then the nicer one wouldn't have a reason to cost more money.
>RRRRRRGH! FUCK IT!
Half the camera market is basically designed around the assumption that you will hate the first two-three cameras you buy. They want as much money as possible out of the few customers remaining and seem to think the overall number is doomed to shrink down to the lowest possible number of dedicated, leica tier fanboys, so they make sure it does.

Some brands bleed more than others but they all do the same thing. Even pentax.

>>4460610
>>4460639
>old thread is full
Meds

>>4460641
>the thread with 109 images left that won't 404 for a week is FULL ok I need my posts to be on the front page!
Watch out boys, this one is fresh off the boat from reddit. He's new here and doesn't know how 4chan works.

Protip: We like dogs here, not cats. Instead of spamming the catalog with extra gear threads because you're a faggy teenager and cry if your gay shitposts aren't on the front page where everyone can see them, try contributing to the board with quality photos of dogs.

If your dog is badly trained, just take photos of them in your backyard! Its ok!

>>4460646
>t.schizo newfag jeet that doesnt know what a bump limit is

>>4460647
Holy shit... look at this post. This is what someone with an extremely low IQ looks like.

>>4460646
You were right. He's a redditor. AKA retarded, and apparently an indian because he's so insecure about being a jeet he's calling everyone else a jeet so they can't get to it first (that's a winning strategy in less developed, childish minds ie: that of the pajeet).

He literally did not realize you were aware of the bump limit despite it being inferred by the comment about the front page. Amazing! Where do we get these retards from? r/m43? Is there a gearfag youtube channel that recommends people check out /p/?

cop or not...
seems kinda based half frame camera
fast lens, probably good for portraits of friends and artistic shots....

>>4460648
>Is there a gearfag youtube channel that recommends people check out /p/?
Unironically yes, and some youtube channels that are obviously /p/ users. Some dpreview editors stop by as well. I have no idea why. Maybe its a conspiracy. Maybe moderately successful photographers are mentally ill and cant vent it on reddit.

>>4460648
>>4460664
Seriously... Meds.

>>4460678
You lost anti sony schizo. Take the L.

>>4460594 (OP)
>everyone is leaving sony
>only brand with growing market share is nikon and only for full frame mirrorless and only in japan
Lol

>>4460600
>>4460619
I own an a7c, it's only worth it if you're gonna run small primes. Every time I take out my 28-75 zoom I regret not buying the a7iii for the larger grip

>Just get an aftermarket grip

Some of them add too much bulk to handle properly, there's no room between the lens and the grip to put your fingers unless you're a tranny. Also it adds up to about the weight you save from an a7 series camera anyway

>>4460658
From what I've heard half frame is a bitch to dev unless you're doing it yourself. Something about the price or how they dev the film that means they end up raking you.

>>4460683
Hold it by the lens, not the grip. Its fine with 70-200 f2.8s and 16-45 f4s but not boring professional only lenses like 24-70s. It doesnt really matter that much. Its not a professional camera. A professional would buy a less compromised machine like a canon r5.

>>4460658
>Its been almost 10 years since the greatest mirrorless camera of all time was made
>still no successor
What gives?

>>4460687
>phone sensor with a lens mount
>almost the size of ff
pentax q did it better

>>4460687
>camera with a CRT dial
>greatest mirrorless camera of all time
keklmao

>>4460610
>There is already a gear thread. It's over 100 images away from the image limit and won't be bumped off the board for a month.
This guy always cries when somebody makes a new thread. It isn't good enough that 2 month old threads are still active.

The a7c really is special just because so many lenses were designed specifically for it. Half of sony and sigmas lineups look goofy/small on their pro cameras and have optical compromises and aperture rings just to make them ergonomically complete the a7c.

And then sony added a bigger grip to the a7cii, which made all the aperture rings and optically compromised slim dessigns pointless, and made it try harder to be a professional camera instead of leaning into the growing film larp hype they themselves participated in. Lol.

Sony accidentally almost grew a soul.

>>4460639
I like my KF because of the ergos, colors, and experience. Its fun to shoot, the colors come out really nice, and I like how it feels in hand with the fat grip on it. Its great at high ISOs too, it runs really high ISOs with minimal noise. I also like the cheap lenses, it lets me engage in GAS without spending $500-1000+ a lens.

I dislike the autofocus. Its pretty fucking bad. I also want to try full frame since I never owned a FF camera, only APSC. I figured a K1ii would let me keep most of my old lenses + give even better low light and better autofocus. I had a Nikon Z50 before and I hated the colors, the low light capabilities was about the same and the AF marginally better despite being mirrorless.

I'm probably overthinking it, I figure a K1ii is enough of a jump from a KF/K-70, but I end up asking in the process how much of a jump is a Z6ii/A7c/A73 over a K1ii that I could've bought for nearly the same money.

If this thing has good SOOC jpegs it might be my favorite camera. I actually heard the newer Sonys are good at that.

>>4460683
Honestly that's the thing I kinda remember disliking about the a7c, it feels awkward to hold like its gonna slip out of your hand. The price you pay when you get a FF camera the size of a APSC I guess, surprising thing is how big the a6700 was iirc, nearly the same size.

>>4460687
Due to technical limitations because of energy usage and such it is impossible to improve upon it. All long-running lines of compact micro four thirds are discontinued. Panasonic GM, GF, GX, Olympus PEN etc. The used market is extremely hot for such cameras for that reason. The manufacturers of course know that such cameras would sell like hotcakes.
OK so you want a new Pen-F. Obviously that means upgrades from the original, which means what? Better EVF resolution, higher megapixel sensor, 4k, perhaps faster WiFi to transfer those larger files, you want a better resolution screen as well.. and so on. Now how do you achieve that? Obviously you need a bigger battery which means that now the form factor is completely different so the camera is larger and not that much different from other products already on the market. Or they could just release a camera that runs out of juice in 20 shots which would be slaughtered by the reviewers. Looking at the last couple of iterations of the small micro four thirds cameras there wasn't really much to separate one from the other so you are getting a lot of bang per buck for buying used. Fact of the matter is that all cameras suffer from the same thing at the moment, but M43 is taking the main impact.
R5MK2, worse dynamic range than the OG, RX1RM3 foregoing a tilting screen, using the same lens from an ancient camera, but hey at least the processor is quicker etc.
tl:dr, tech has plateaued.

>>4460698
more like those lenses were designed for the crop a6000 series cameras (about the same size as an a7c).

Look at the ziesse 55mm 1.8, it's 80mm equivalent on crop. The ziesse 35mm also fits well on crop sony. iirc the 55mm ziesse actually predates Sony mirrorless FF, they only had a crop line when it released.

>>4460700
I forgot, KF + 70-210mm f4-5.6

>>4460694
What a fucking autistic retard. Nobody cares about the image limit. If the bump limit is reached, its dead. Nobody is going through 10 pages to find the general.

>>4460705
These OCD fags are the worst disease inflicted upon any forum.

>>4460684
Nah it just takes normal 35mm film, but takes two images in portrait orientation per frame. You might be thinking of APS film, which yes is a bitch to get a hold of.

>>4460687
>>still no successor
Isn't the OM3 basically the same thing but SLR styled?

Took my new S9 out on the weekend and the results are pretty good considering I was using a kit zoom.
I don't think I can live without a viewfinder but the camera is pretty small and I didn't struggle with the lack of grip at all.

>>4460729
I just got the 50mm 1.8 today and it's basicaly the same size as the 20-60mm. I don't see why the 50mm needs to be so big but the quality is great.
If the S5ii was smaller I'd use it but it's just not enough benefit above using my X-T2 to warrant the extra weight.

>>4460730
I do love the LUT browser in the Panasonic app and in general, the camera is simple without many controls and buttons which is perfect for me as I just shoot in P and use exp comp. The focussing is great but I disn't really shoot any fast-moving subjects.

What's the take on Leica reliability? Obviously they're overpriced and underspec'd but do they even last? What about their SLRs?

>>4460705
>>4460706
>/gear/ is redditors that dont know the catalog exists
That explains why everyone here uses shitty cameras to shoot objects and backs of heads

>>4460768
>he said while posting here instead of posting in the other 6 gear generals

>>4460729
I'm so torn between the S9 and the Nikon Zf. Wanna use both as hybrid photo/movie. Love how compact the S9 looks and prefer overall the look of the body.

>>4460787
too bad it cant shoot flash or anything that moves moderately fast or have working autofocus

panasonic fucks themselves over to maintain daddy leica’s Q series profits. L mount isnt even good. no one lusts after leica SL lenses. they are shit to mediocre.

The x100 is a really poorly made camera. Everything from the rattly build to the clunkiness of every moving part and common camera function (ie: autofocus, menus) calls back to all those disposable semi-premium consumer electronics toys of the mid 2000s (good enough but not great notebooks, mp3 players, etc) that were always 3 generations behind in tech and 1 generation behind in price. Except it's 2025, and it's a social media meme. So it's 10 generations behind and 1 generation ahead in price.

The thing is literally a plastic shell that isn't truly weather sealed, it has wiggly doors ffs, and it's going up against better made and/or cheaper compacts that only lack sheer image quality - while targeting a market that doesn't give a fuck about sheer image quality. The x100vi isn't even pocketable so it also has to compete with people buying sony aps-c and even full frame and just slapping cheap shit samyang lenses on, and while sony has shit image quality, the x100vi market doesnt give a shit about shit image quality and sony's shitty green colors are just begging to be turned into a cinestill 800t film sim. If you don't like green, buy a ricoh gr III/X or an olympus/om system.

Call fuji's general lack of quality soul if you want (autofocus worse than an a6500) but the slowish but functional dell notebook with finish rubbing off the plastic aesthetic is some really shitty fucking soul.

https://www.reddit.com/r/fujifilm/comments/1b6re5b/x100vi_rear_dial_accuracy_issue/
https://www.reddit.com/r/x100v/comments/1c7j8ot/shutter_speed_dial_broken/
https://www.reddit.com/r/fujifilm/comments/y0zav4/x100v_front_command_dial_stuck_pushed_in/

>>4460787
The ZF is a flimsy plastic POS
The S9 is missing basic features

Japan hates you and wants you to buy a whole new camera for every marginally different niche. Just buy a sony a7c. It's what people want both cameras to be minus the ability to use overrated leica lenses.

>>4460800
where did Fuji touch you

>>4460800
l-leave fuji alone ;_;

>>4460787
Get the a7cii. Better camera. Dont be a hipster and screw yourself over to play with dials and larp.

>>4460801
>>4460803
>a7cii
Did that mistake once and sold it after few weeks. The only good thing about it is the AF and the compact body. Not only is it dead ugly (some people care), the EVF is useless, shutter sound is loud as hell, it feels cheap and isn't reliable at all, the raw files are awful to work with.. you need to correct lots of colors to make it look natural and the UI is really bad that kills any fun of using the camera. It's a tool at best for one that doesn't care about the experience.

But you are right in saying that Japan hates me. I'm yet to find the perfect camera. I guess Leica is as close as you get with their m-series IF you don't care about autofocus. But even they suffer from reliability issues, not to mention the costs. Still I wish I could afford one.

>>4460801
>ZF is a flimsy plastic POS
Disagree. It's chonky and meaty except for the bottom plate and battery door which feels cheap.

>>4460805
Lots of people use the a7cii without issue and think it has good color science. It sounds more like you bought a high end camera and found out you didn't actually know what you were doing. People are praising the jpegs right now "after setting them up to your liking". If you don't have an eye for color or know how to work a camera, and just use lr/c1 defaults and fix white balance and beg for people to make you "recipes" on fujixwhatever, maybe professional equipment isn't for you.

The more time passes the more it becomes apparent that /p/ is the only place that dislikes sony cameras because /p/ is where all the people who dont know what they're doing but think they do end up - apparently, after they get banned from reddit or fail on instagram.

>Muh fun
It has a complex menu because it has a lot of functions. The only way to make the menu simpler is to reduce the functionality of the camera. It's designed for people who are experienced at using cameras, will set it up once, and just use the main exposure controls and user modes forever with a few custom toggles for AF and stuff.

i have an old lumix gx7, i want to take pictures of bugs and birds. should i get a x150-300mm lense for it or get a better camera+lense? (money is not an issue)

>>4460807
Lots of dishonesty in your reply
>Lots of people use the a7cii without issue and think it has good color science.
This a true statement for basically any model from any brand
>dead ugly (some people care), the EVF is useless, shutter sound is loud as hell, it feels cheap
No amount of "knowing what you're doing" will make those better
>2.36M dot OLED viewfinder with 0.7x magnification
The EVF is pretty bad still by todays standards, the og a7c just had a truly awful one

>>4460716
Yeah it is. But pen F fans are some of the most annoying m43 fan boys in the world. Which is saying something. For 99% of what it is used for it is the same thing as a ricoh gr

>>4460805
can't forget the rolling shutter and bokeh issues. Also every sony lens is the flatest garbage money can buy. There also isn't any pancake options for the camera so it being small is pretty useless.

>>4460821
Linking this because two threads. I'm a ref for paintball and airsoft and I don't wanna use my phone camera to get close up shots because I don't want my screen shot out, so I need a telephoto lense right? I figure if I get something for that then I can get a macro lense for miniature wargaming photography too.

>>4460646
Could definitely have done without the fake sun

>>4460823
Depending on how far you are out from the players, anywhere from 70mm to 400mm would be usable. Either a 70-200mm or 100-400mm lens would be applicable if you were going full frame, but honestly you could easily get away with an APS-C camera and pair it with their 50-250mm lenses and it'll cost less and be less of a brick to lug around.
I'm assuming you're not doing this at night time?

>>4460828
Hell no. They make glow balls iirc and people have tracer units but with airsoft I'll get way closer than I would with paintball since they play a lot slower pace. Just trying to get Facebook glamour shots for the field and advertising. I can get up to like 15-20 ft away but I just don't wanna be 5 feet away and lose my phone catching a stray ball

>>4460646
Haha wow. Cute dog and nice pic.

>>4460800
That is an inexcusable design flaw for sure, but it seems like the redditor hasn't handled his gear properly judging by the wear so it doesn't surprise me if it has been in the ground a couple of times. The thread can be of the "please give me new gear now that you have this bad publicity" type of thread. One would have thought though that the camera manufacturers had learned from all the film era SLRs that had similar issues.

Is the EF 70-200 2.8 IS (or possibly without IS) sharp enough for my R7?

>>4460818
Sounds like nitpicky schizo nonsense. Outside of this shithole board on a pedo website everyone likes sony.

>>4460816
You’re just not very skilled or knowledgeable. You’re here, after all. How is it /p/ knows something millions of professionals dont?

/p/ thinks adobe/camera jpeg default settings are "the real color science" and editing and changing settings doesnt count. And they believe they can buy magic lenses that will somehow grant their photos basic artistic qualities like leading lines, perspective, and soft directional light. The people here just dont know how to use cameras or do photography.

Stick to your PNS if you cant figure it out.

Your nikon colors look like ass too. Capture one prostandard is meant to be graded, not used as is.

>>4460833
>no way could fuji quality crater as they cut costs
Multiple people have that issue lol

>>4460833
the x100v has build issues. so does the xt5. now the x100vi is made in china and the finish rubs off.
zero x100 models have had effective weather sealing and they cant figure out how to buy a modern autofocus motor thats faster and quieter
even the gfx has a lot of build issues with wires snapping off inside and gaps in the weather sealing

anon i think fuji doesnt give a fuck. their customers are idiots and they know it.

>>4460844
The people here are autistic. They will snap their cameras in a quiet room back and forth to compare shutter sounds. They are THAT autistic.

Hence all the anime dolls (lolicon weebs) and dog photos (furries).

>>4460844
>You’re here, after all
There have been skilled and knowledgeable people here.
>Your nikon colors look like ass too. Capture one prostandard is meant to be graded, not used as is
What is this in reference too?

>>4460800
The Sony a7cII probably has the worst build quality of any recent modern day camera. The rubber material used in the memory card slot literally crumbles away when touched.

>>4460861
If it were often the case, surely you'd have lots more examples to post instead of the same one over and over

>>4460861
My uncle dropped his nikon Z 2 feet onto carpet and this happened

Maybe if they called it the nikon ukraine mount they’d have better luck

>>4460847
I have done that and the shutter sound is unironically one of the reasons I have chosen a camera

Cameras are supposed to be fun to use it's still a weirdo autistic hobby

>>4460907
>Cameras are supposed to be fun to use it's still a weirdo autistic hobby
>obsesses over different clickclack noises
zozzle

>>4460861
is that it? geez other brands have entire dials shearing off, err 20s, and rubber grips peeling

>>4460700
>but I end up asking in the process how much of a jump is a Z6ii/A7c/A73 over a K1ii that I could've bought for nearly the same money.
A huge jump... in the wrong direction. The optical viewfinder is the last stand of implicit photographic integrity.

>>4460703
Very nice.

>>4460914
Schizophrenic take.

>>4460700
>but I end up asking in the process how much of a jump is a Z6ii/A7c/A73 over a K1ii that I could've bought for nearly the same money.
It's basically an upgrade in every single way. Pentax had a great idea but it was executed poorly. I think their APS-C cameras actually have better autofocus. The K-1's autofocus system sometimes misses inanimate objects and the viewfinder is not as crisp and easy to focus on as nikon's ultrafine mattes.

>>4460787
Definitely the S9. Its the best compact FF mirrorless travel camera.

>>4460917
too crippled.
>you dont need ___ you can still take great photos *benches & backs of heads*

>>4460800
Poorly made and dishonest. A hopelessly aspirational derivative design that poorly apes vintage cameras at a very surface level, with subpar internals.

>>4460916
You don't buy a K-1 for the autofocus, just like you don't buy a 5D for the same reason. If you're trying to shoot niggers breaking racquets on the court then the K-3 III is a much better option than the K-1 will ever be.

>>4460920
>lowkey I have a 1D skit reference
gay

>>4460920
>the camera has bad autofocus so just accept it!
No. Pentax should have put more reliable autofocus than a d750's on their premium camera. It's 36mp. The minor misses its prone to are extra obvious.

>>4460921
Never watched the show but that scene is fairly on point. A 1D would in fact be detrimental compared to the 5D in that setting where shots aren't so time sensitive but the bigger picture is what you want.
>>4460922
Skill issue.

>>4460924
It's not about skill. It's about paying a grand for a camera with slow, miss-prone autofocus. It's a DSLR the only usable autofocus modes are the 9 box group and single point same as every DSLR. Don't bring up skill issue like there's a (slow, still not as good) workaround for lacking subject detection here.

It's very cuckoldy, consumer behavior, like when applefags make excuses for sub-par hardware at a high price because "like, its just a casual computer for fun man". This is a modern thing. Every brand is apple and has applefags now.

>>4460925
>nooooo I need this crutch so a camera without it is bad!
>nevermind that the Sony I'm shilling loves to focus on the background so the AF gets in the way of shooting
>nevermind that the Sony is a dishonest machine that alters what is in front of it (star eater, baked-in exposure lift on its vignetting caused by its poor design)
>nevermind that the Sony is basically poorly designed ewaste with a baby mount

>>4460910
>is that it?
Oh no, there's also issues with the rubber used around the EVF, loose screen hinge, battery door clip breaking, fragile shutter curtain and firmware updates bricking the camera.

>>4460929
>More dishonesty
Did you really just accuse the a7cii of have every issue every sony camera has had since 2008? lmao

Don't you have a lumix to send in for its 3rd back dial and HDMI port job?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfcFDGbtZyE
Arguably the most based gear related video on youtube ever.

>>4460928
>You can't expect high end cameras to be made to a standard because high quality features are CRUTCHES!
>WHAT ABOUT SONY *NIGGLE NIGGLE*
Yes, you are an applefag in spirit. You will come up with anything to defend the brand that screws you.

>>4460933
No, the iToddlers of photography are fujislugs. Pentax cameras are even upgradeable in some cases, where else have you seen that?

>>4460594 (OP)
>every OP image has been YouTuber slop videos
Says it all really. Next thread better have "two more weeks" or I will be very disappointed.

>>4460935
>the iToddlers of photography are fujislugs
extremely accurate. or maybe leica.

>>4460942
>youtube vid when it shills my favorite brand :)
>youtube vid when it reveals the truth of my favorite brand >:(

>>4460946
I don't watch YouTuber slop videos, try again faggot.

>>4460942
It's a paid shill. Might be panasonic. Their reputation for shilling checks out.

>>4460935
>Pentax releases a premium camera with worse autofocus than older canikons
>ITS NOT THAT KIND OF CAMERA! YOU DONT NEED GOOD AUTOFOCUS! CRUTCH! CONSOOMER! IT WAS UPGRADEABLE ONCE BTW!
>Apple releases a $2000 laptop with the CPU out of a 5 year old thinkpad
>ITS NOT THAT KIND OF COMPUTER! YOU DONT NEED FAST PROCESSING! CRUTCH! CONSOOMER! THEY DID A VOLUNTARY UPGRADE PROGRAM 10 YEARS AGO BTW!

>>4460948
apple actually does the pentax circular economy thing! they're doing it right now, arguably on a larger scale than pentax.
you can lease an iphone for about $500 a year and then send it in to be recycled and get a new one with the same 12 month lease. this is the only channel through which apple is able to thoroughly recycle old phones.

so pentaxians are literally applefags

>>4460948
>panasonic
I honestly forget Panasonic even make cameras anymore. I think it's more likely some autist that likes a different brand, sort of like how /g/ has its own brandwhore schizos that hate some rival brand.

>>4460950
There was rough evidence panasonic actually did pay someone to post here for a short period. /p/ is usually pretty against buying new but someone kept spamming panasonic threads and linking everyone directly to panasonics website whenever they had sales/rebates going on. No way would someone do that for free.

There's also possible marketers who do similar things with linking canon and nikon refurbs literally 5 minutes after they're available.

It could even be GPT bots.

>>4460951
>No way would someone do that for free.
Honestly, I can sooner believe some random autist would be that dedicated to a brand, rather than some brand trying to advertise on what is ultimately a pretty small imageboard.
But if true, then Panasonic must be in real trouble if advertising on 4chan is considered beneficial.

>>4460953
Fucking sennheiser has shilled on 4chan. Bots are borderline free.

>snoy schizo talking to himself again
meeeeds

>>4460955
>he can't simply ignore this discussion
I think we might be close to the truth here boys

Or, maybe, this guy is just a loser

>>4460617
Just get the compact. A GR for a fixed prime, or a type 1 sensor camera with fixed zoom.
If your FF is MILF, consider buying a pancake like the Viltrox 25 4.5, or their Air series. Yongnuo has started with their Lite series, Samyang's small lenses, or other brands that make small, compact lenses.

>>4460916
>>4460920

Honestly I just want a upgrade in AF capabilities vs the KF (11 point). I kinda expect the K3 Mark III to have better autofocus considering that's their D500 killer. What I don't expect is the K3/KP to have better AF than the K1 Mark II especially with the accelerator chip.

I manage to take birds in flight with my KF + Screw Drive Lenses older than me. I just want a higher keeper rate desu.

>>4460914
I kinda agree with you. But a EVF is nice for exposure preview before the shot.

>>4460949
Ironically I own both, my MBP M4 Pro is unironically the best computer I've owned after 20+ years of Windows. It just werks isn't a meme.

>>4460991
Thought that was ken rockwell from the thumbnail

>>4460991
I forgot I got the K1 in the mail today, I have to go through my lenses and figure out which ones I'm keeping/letting go.

A bunch of them have excessive haze (Pentax-F 100mm Macro, Pentax-F 35-105mm f3.5-4.5, 70-200mm SMC Pentax-FA) where you can see it just by opening the aperture and I have 2 duplicates (2x 70-210mm Takumar-F, 2x 35-70mm f4 Pentax-F). Probably gonna go on eBay for $20 each. 18-135mm DA I'll probably let go for $100 and 50mm f1.8 for $50 (mint, just don't use them enough and would rather get FA 28mm f2.8 and FA 50mm f1.4 primes for the new FF camera)

Its a fucking brick but the PASM dial seems okay and it seems like it can take some nice photos from the test shots I took. Mogs the fuck out of the KF and K200D next to it. Took the pic with my Fuji Z1000EXR snapshitter. Its pretty mint, didn't get a chance to take it with me to work since I was rushing.

Is the Sigma 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 APO DG Macro Lens noticeably worse than the 75-300mm Canon lens for EF mount? I understand that they're both pretty shit but my Canon 70-300mm is usm or whatever the fuck it was bit shit and looking for something cheap to replace it with.

what's the cheapest(as cheap as possible, esl here) gear i could get that works, i know nothing

>>4461075
Something stolen

>>4461042
That 75-300 is notoriously shit, compared to the 70-300 gen I USM being only somewhat shit. The gen II USM is actually alright, and the L version is a bit better. If you've got a crop camera get the 55-250 STM hands down, otherwise I would avoid the 75-300 at all costs and get the 70-300 IS USM II.

>>4461075
Probably Nikon or Canon APS-C from 2014ish.
>>4461097
The IS STM is the way to go indeed.

>>4460829
above's anon APS-C rec should be fine. 6700, or older from the same line if you want something cheaper. Make sure the lens is OSS.

Kek

Rumors are the GR IV gonna be released central european time at midnight, that's aruond 4 hours from now. Who /preorder/ here?

>>4460594 (OP)
My wife's boyfriend bought me a GM 70-200/2.8, so I took a photo to celebrate!

>>4461184
Looks like he is the wife's boyfriend

How does the Canon 50mm f/1.8
EF II compare to the modern STM version?

Not actively looking to buy one right now but want to be aware if I see them pop up from time to time. I want a long, high end telephoto, what would be better/cheaper of the L series lenses, a 100-400 or the 70-200 plus an teleconverter?
I heard the the teleconverters don't work with some lenses, is that just if you try to put it on a non L series, or does that apply to certain L series lenses too?
I've heard it said that 70-200 is sharper even with a 2x teleconverter than the 100-400. What if I ran the 100-400 with a teleconverter, would the quality degrade a lot? Or would it still look alright with the consideration that I'm using a old crop sensor consumer DSLR, not spending $4000 on a 800mm prime lens that weight 2 tons and I'm not a professional.

is this worth 50 us dollars? can i resell it?

>>4461204
Ay cabron $50 looks about what it sells for after shipping on ebay.

Sirs...what is the best alternative to the Peak Design Clutch?

>>4461178
I'm not participating in any preorder bullshit. It's an international corporation, if it needs cash in advance, it can take a loan.

>>4461097
>get the 70-300 IS USM II
Is it really worth twice the price of the first version?
>If you've got a crop camera get the 55-250 STM hands down
I had a crop camera and I had that lens. Unfortunately I am become fool frame.

I kind of knew that the 75-300 would be dogshit as they're incredibly cheap. I was more so just wondering if the smigma was also shit or worth looking at to replace my fucked 70-300 is usm. I'm actually open to any zoom in that sort of range with the right balance of price/not too shit.

>>4461178
anyone seen rumors on the price. I was guessing like 1300$ since the tariffs

>>4461228
It's listed now in Canada for 1899 CAD

Is the Sony FE 70-200mm F/4 G OSS SEL70200G particularly shit? I've been looking on ebay and so far it's the lens I've seen the most.

>>4461244
Its very good but version two mogged it to death by doubling as a macro lens and having more prime like image quality

>>4461218
I like the smallrig one

>>4461178
>$1499
>For a jazzed up 2005 camera

>>4461257
the majority of photographers are idiots with no sense of fiscal responsibility
a minority of them know they're overpriced but have no hope for the future so they buy anyways
and a smaller minority still calls companies out on their absurdly overpriced, underperofrming shite and get called "soulless" by the idiot majority for simply taking issue with business practices. this last group eventually fucks off and enjoys their canon rebel, becoming extremely disdainful of anyone with a nicer camera.

>>4461259
>this last group eventually fucks off and enjoys their canon rebel, becoming extremely disdainful of anyone with a nicer camera.
I have had a camera for 28 days this is me.

Last time I traveled asia for 2 months I took my x-t2, xf18mmf2, xf35mmf1.4, and xf70-300. If anything it was just too much weight in my backpack and I was always worried that airlines would weigh my backpack and make me check it (usually 7kg total limit). I think my iphone 15 max pro is good enough for 13-120mm, what I want is a compact camera that can shoot birds and monkeys - so 120mm - 450mm or so. What's the ~$800iest compact that suits this?

>>4461277
you will come back and end up buying a nice mirrorless which you will say sucks but wont get rid of, after the one you want gets cheaper

everyone does this

>>4461284
some olympus m5 something
and
100-300

its basically a bridge camera that can swap lenses

>>4461248
I was just curious about the volume of 70-200mm lenses on ebay, but if the version 2 doubles as a macro then that's what I'll probably try to get.

>>4461249

my colorfull neckstrap is branded after some security corporation not blackrock but similar

I'd shoot raw with Micro Four Nerds if you know what I mean.

>>4461042
Me again. Seriously considering just buying another 70-300mm IS USM (first version) unless any anon can recommend something else in the same sort of price range for EF mount (the red dot, not the white square)

>>4461317
i think the canon is generally sharper but its worth getting the II or L instead if you can afford it

Does /p/ think that the Z50II is a good budget entry level mirrorless camera for a casual? Good enough to choose over other options like the R10, R50, Z30, Zfc, and budget Sony and Fujifilm cameras? It caught my attention since it's a newer model and I've heard that the Z kit lenses are pretty good. Will mainly just be taking photos of figures and statues I collect along with anything that catches my eye while outside or traveling.

>>4461347
It should be more than enough for your needs.

how fucked is this lens, and can it be cleaned for it to be worth buying?

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/197613344827

>>4461257
>sharper than any fuji apsc
>can easily compete with the Leica q or other full frame 28mm lenses
>tiny yet it comes with ibis and over 50gb internal storage
>fast AF as it seems
>great sooc images
>6 axis ibis
>appearently solved the dust issue

Name a camera that can compete for cheaper

>>4461257
>still no proper weather sealing?
>dust issue should have been fixed in the previous model
>still no built in fill flash
let's see if this will still have the same erratic menu issue

>>4461352
Not trolling: E-M5 mark III and a couple 1.8 primes are faster, have comparable ibis, and have very fast AF. You have the option for real weather sealing with nicer lenses, zooms, etc. and it's cheaper. T Swift approved jpg engine. Modern fixed lens cameras are a scam.

>>4461178
Dear Lord, it's 30% more expensive than already marked up III.

>>4461377
I don't doubt that the E-M5 is a fine camera but yuo can't compare it at all because the GR is pocketable.

>>4461352
any of them since it's so fucking expensive

get a z30 if you want a point and shoot footprint that does 95% of the same shit for 1/3 the cost

Best image-stabilizer on a 70-200 Nikon mount lens? Doesn't have to be f2.8, f4 is fine. I have the 70-200 f2.8 VRII and though it is quite sharp, the stabilizer isn't great for panning.

Doesn't even have to be constant aperture, can be a 70-300 I just want something to pan cars with that I don't have to stand 300 feet away from. My old Canon 70-200 f4L IS had an awesome stabilizer on it.

>>4461398
I liked your rally car photos. Have you thought about using a 135mm or similar prime?

What made you guys open your wallet and purchase your first gear? I'm currently torn between choosing Samsung S25 Ultra or spending 800-1100 euros on a starting camera + lens. I'd like to try experimenting and have better equipment to capture the moments during my trips, but it's not a small investment.

>>4461351
Would be a huge job to clean as it's on internal elements. There's also no guarantee that the fungus wouldn't leave marks even after cleaning.

>>4461352
5d mark 2 takes better photos and costs like 1/10th that. Also has better af, battery life, ergos, and its ILC so you're not getting your camera bricked by a single atom of dust.

>>4461480
>What made you guys open your wallet and purchase your first gear?

trolling eBay for the camera I liked until there was a combination of low shutter count + bid not that high + came with 2 lenses so I didn't do the "get the camera then wait a year before getting another lense" thing

eventually the stars will align and you will see something like a d780 with an 18-300mm extra lense for 800 bucks

>>4461484
meant to say 28-300 (18-300 is a aps-c lense)

do this

>>4461075
check Facebook marketplace and come back here with a screenshot when u see something shiny

I want a ZF so bad

>>4461388
>>4461482
Again missing the point: Both cameras aren't pocketable. Of course you can get better IQ for cheaper, but then it won't fit in your pocket.

The unique selling point of the GR is that it's tiny, yet offers great image quality. No one else offer something like this and therefore they can make it as expensive as they want and people still buy it.

>>4461492
me too bruh. With the 40mm F2 kit lens and a voigt 50mm apo

>>4461495
skip the apo for the z 50 f1.8 s

>>4461495
"voigtlander" (cosina) lenses eventually wear out and send nonsense aperture signals to the body that can fuck up auto exposure and EVF zoom to check focus

>>4461495

Manual focus scares me

>>4461501
Do you have an example of the aperture signals affecting auto exposure? Even if the aperture value displayed is wrong, that doesn't mean the aperture itself is actually changing, and exposure wouldn't change either as it's still based on the physical aperture. At worst, you have incorrect EXIF (and then possibly incorrect corrections). Messing up the EVF zoom to check focus would suck, but to the same extent it can "wear out" so can any other lens electronics / AF motor. Hope you call out all other lenses in a similar manner when brought up.

Good thing pretty much all of the Z-mount Voigt glass is available in M-mount, electronic free for autists like you.

>>4461504
Modern Z bodies are the best digital MF experience. You can just use trap focus (hold button, turn lens, it fires automatically when in focus) if you want. Worst case, you just turn lens until box is green and click shutter.

>>4461500
I really like the sharpness corner to corner and overall rendering of the apo. But yeah the z isn't far off either

>>4461501
Really? I never heard of that. Damn that would be sad

>>4460698
The grip makes no fucking difference, it still sticks out less than the lens unless you're a pancake using moron.
>>4460702
>they made all these full frame lenses for their crop bodies
Another moron

>>4461351
The mount is bent, it's fucked

>>4461351
Buy it and send it to sugar to fix.

>>4461347
the z5ii is a much better camera and it's worth just putting the extra cost on layaway if your buying a new one

>>4461531
How's the 24-50mm kit lens and its versatility? A good lens is outside of my budget at the moment if I get the Z5II.

>>4461501
yes that is how all electronics work. Everything dies eventually

instead of the action camera we know today, why don't they just make a cube, with the 3 phone sensors, a massive fuck off battery and a shitty screen with tripod mount.
shit will be cheap and last the whole day.

>>4460874

aha i see voigtlander lens hood for $89

>>4461312

seafoam knows how to crackle i have seen one or two amateurs but what is seafoam

>>4461552
Electronic EF lenses from the 80s still work fine. CV lens failure is actually mechanical in nature. Mechanics are way less reliable than electronics.

>>4461524
Play/wear develops in the aperture rings mechanism and the body starts getting aperture signals at random. If changing the aperture cancels an action it cancels it, and even though the aperture doesn't change the meter changes the shutter speed/auto iso.
https://www.reddit.com/r/nikon_Zseries/comments/1gu9isy/zf_auto_changes_aperture_on_voigtlander_lens/

This failure is more common on E mount because sony bodies are sensitive to smaller variations in aperture in order to support their native vlogfag-first aperture ring implementation. But it will happen to every CV eventually.

>Digital camera progress in 2025 be like: We made it SLIGHTLY SMALLER!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJiCSNvcvlU

>>4461494
No, you've just been marketed to and you don't realise it. Pocketing a camera is actually a really shit way of carrying a camera for most genres of photography, but especially for str**t photography, which is what the GR is usually marketed for. Having to pull it out of your pocket and boot it up and then still have to dial in settings means you've already missed your shot. Its almost as bad a carrying a purse. Carry a DSLR on a strap and leave it turned on.

>>4460646
Overdid the eyes by a lot.

I'm very confused why there 4 replies and nobody mentioned the elephant in the room.

$13k AU for a ARRI Alura 45-250
Very temping bros,

What's that thing on her backpack's strap? She uses it to carry the camera.

>>4461635
Peak Design Capture Clip.

Was innovative when it released, but as usual the Chinese copied the concept and made it better and cheaper.

The PGYTech's clip is smaller and has a better attachment system that doesnt require you to tighten gears.

>>4461637
>>The PGYTech's clip
Ahh thanks a bunch

this is bad for the glass, right?

>>4461667
What is?

>>4461678
being placed on and the surface directly touching a block of glass

>>4461601
>Electronic EF lenses from the 80s still work fine
Except for the plenty of ones that don't anymore

>>4461601
>and even though the aperture doesn't change the meter
It meters based off the light entering the camera, not the aperture value
Even in your example video, the auto iso changes from them pointing there camera around differently, has nothing to do with the aperture

>>4461693
That's literally anything made you dumbass. There are zero electronic or mechanical devices with a 100% survival rate. Your comment is retarded.

>>4461627
So you carry your DSLR on a starp anytime you leave the house? Guess what? My GR is everyday in my pocket and in two seconds ready to shoot.

>>4461705
> My GR is everyday in my pocket
Based cargo shorts enjoyer.

>>4461705
The autofocus is too slow for the price

A used 5dIII is better all around and makes you look like a chad

if you post dubs onder this line, you will be stuck on EF-M mount for the rest of your life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

>>4461705
>anytime you leave the house?
No, if I know I'm going somewhere ugly I leave it at home, otherwise, yes I bring it. It weighs like a kilo dude you're a pussy if you even notice that.
>My GR is everyday in my pocket and in two seconds ready to shoot
Aaaaand you lost the shot unbuttoning your ankle jorts.

>>4461697
So is the one I replied to
>>4461705
Yes, if a woman can carry a purse all day, I sure can carry a camera all day

So what I am hearing from this thread is that I should take the 1500 (about 900 was my limit actually) I was going to spend on a GR IV and instead save the money for the (completely hypothetical) retro camera Canon might make this year?

God what a let down that was. I was hoping for more reasonable pricing but there's just no way I'm spending that much on a point and shoot. I'll just carry my R6 II on a strap. Love you guys. This place continually reinforces and justifies my autism.

>>4461764
Canon might make a retro body yeah
The sony a7c (1st gen) is already totally fine for that. Slap a zeiss 35mm on, fits in a jacket pocket. The zeiss lens coatings also fix sony colors. Sony color science is their lenses, not their sensors. Putting the same lenses on nikon Z with the ETZ21pro causes the same weird color shifts.

>>4461769
no saar, sony is bad because the default lightroom profile is bad and the standard jpeg profile is bad and the default settings in the raw processor are the real color science and changing them doesnt count ok saar editing does not count the color science is what the camera comes with and what you get on fresh install of lightroom ok sony colors are bad and editing presets and changing settings does not count ok

i am go to work at my 7-11 now if you do the cope and defend sony i will post snoy goblin at you do you understand timmy benchod bitch basterd

>>4461770
how much is sony paying you to be this autistic and insufferable

>>4461771
i am paid by panasonic my sir. would you like to hear about the s9's ability to use the loots?

>>4461770
Yes, when people buy a $2000 camera, they expect they can use it without manually calibrating colors.

>>4461778
People who are buying a $2000 camera are expected to know what white balance is, shoot raw, and to be smart enough to use capture one.
>UHM, I PAID $2000, WHERES MY SMART HDR. MORE EXPENSIVE MEANS BETTER COME ON! - consumerists out of their depth

>>4461778
>be you
>buy $2000 sony
>cheap out and buy lightroom, the second lowest tier of raw editor just ahead of darktable
>the colors are wrong because adobe is incompetent (they cant even get canon colors right)
>RRRGH! BAD COLOR SCIENCE!
>shoot jpeg
>standard profile is just best buy demo mode
>never change it
>RRRRGH! BAD COLOR SCIENCE!
>over 20 different profiles with per color depth, hue, saturation, and lightness settings available for professionals to dial in their look
>never touch a single one
>just reee at "std" because you are boomer brained - "i am a god damn paying customer, more expensive means better, so this god damn thing better do everything for me or i wasted my money and i want to speak to the manager"

>>4461783
>maybe if you buy a nikon it will be better!
>autofocus "doesnt work" (I PUT IT ON AUTO AND IT MISSED FOCUS ON THE CLOUDS! INEXCUSABLE! -actual boomer complaint about the z8)
>"green skin" (failure to use natural light auto instead of auto wb)
>"the auto exposure doesnt work, its too dark in snow. i did not pay $3000 to ~change settings~ fucking nikon" (also an actual boomer complaint about the z8)

>well perhaps canon
>colors are desaturated and neutral. GOD DAMN 5D CLASSIC WAS BETTER SON!
>lightroom makes everything too red
>menus confusing
>lenses expensive
>DR is low
>FPS is high
>you're going to hit your credit limit soon

>well how about fuji?
>all the colors are wrong and it misses focus all the time
>and then it breaks

>ARRRRRGH all cameras suck!
>buy a micro four thirds
>lens is incapable of shooting wider than f11, everything in focus all the time
>colors are just as bad as sony but you're too mentally fatigued to notice anymore
>wait, it looks like your phone photos
>THATS IT! THERE IS NO REASON TO BUY A CAMERA! PHONES ARE ALREADY BETTER!

So concludes the journey of a boomer gearfag

>>4460700
>surprising thing is how big the a6700 was iirc, nearly the same size.
It's both roughly the same size and comparable weight. I was recently considering upgrading from my old A6000, because it does not have IBIS, the autofocus is kind of dated and there aren't any of the modern connectivity features. (I don't like fidgeting with cables and SD card readers.)
>go to the store
>lift the A6700
>it feels like holding a brick compared to my A6000
>remove the lens
>still heavy
>see the A7C2 next to it
>almost the same size, almost the same weight
>bought the A7C2 a day later
Unless you're running longer zooms while also trying to be compact or shoot video, there's almost no upside to the A6700. It's somewhat cheaper too, I guess, but if you're already spending that much money and carrying that much weight, you may as well go FF. So I did. Very happy with the switch.
Really impressed with the IBIS. I can handhold 1s exposures at night, get light trails or washed out people, and still have sharpness on static objects.

>>4461779
I have a $2000 camera, know what WB is, but have zero interest in shooting raw or dealing with C1. Works great for me. Some people just want nice-looking pictures straight out of the camera.

>>4461800
>I don't know how to use professional cameras, so I bought an overpriced point and shoot
Many such cases

Photography is an easily mocked hobby, seen as for posers and trust fund kids, for a reason

>>4461705
>My GR is everyday in my pocket and in two seconds ready to shoot.
Anon keeps one in the chamber.

>>4461804
>I don't know how to use professional cameras
But I do, anon, I just no longer want to. It's not interesting to me. I want pretty pictures out of the camera.

>so I bought an overpriced point and shoot
Yep. Works great for me.

>Photography is an easily mocked hobby
>stop having fun doing my hobby your way reeeeeee

I bought a Targus TG-DL20C with a bag and a lens for $5 (the flash, not all).
Like it will test in the camera, and work sometimes but is not consistently flashing despite deliberately sitting in pitch black room messing with modes trying to get it to consistently flash.
A T3i and T6i both detect it in the hot shoe, but doesn't give features in settings since it says it's not compatible.
Am I just retarded? Is it just too old? Am I missing something? I thought they were universal.

>>4461804
>>4461807
Two retards arguing over who doesn't make any money from their photos.
Lol amateurcucks are so funny.

>>4461805
Grrrrr

>>4461821
>making a weekend pastime his profession
>thinking it's the 200 IQ move
Bold take. You should print it out and put it on a wall. It'll pair nicely with your lifelong roommate and instant noodles.

>>4461825
>I'm a vastly unsuccessful photographer so everyone else must be
Amerimutt take + dunning kruger effect. You have no idea how little you know.

>>4461826
>wanting to be a "successful photographer"
lmfao. based retard.

>>4461827
>retard keeps taking the bait
onononono oml hahaha

>>4461829
The bait was you pretending to have made idiotic life decisions? Impressive. Never been served that hard.

Best lenses for Nikon d750? I am thinking of picking up the voigtlander 58mm 1.4. what's a good wide angle option that isn't huge? I'm fine with autofocus or manual focus lenses but id prefer not to use adapters.

>>4461830
>y-y-you're an idiot
Why?
>b-because you're living my dream!!!
Kek, enjoy your amazon wage cage. I get to do my hobby 24/7 and make your yearly in a week.

>>4461807
This is me too now. I shot nothing but raw when I was a student, but now that I have a family and a job, I just want the camera to do the heavy lifting. It's literally just for me and 3-5 other people.

>>4461831
Voigtlander 20mm f3.5

>>4461833
I just bring my laptop to work anon. MacBook Pro M43 Pro is awesome for raw editing on the go. It's that or I edge at work for 16 hours straight (my dick gets raw after the second day)

>>4461832
>you're living my dream!!!
Anon, just... you're legitimately a fucking idiot if you think that most people envy the life of a photographer. Which makes sense, because you decided to become a photographer, which is only something an idiot would do.
Nice cope there that you're beating wagies at Amazon. Really aiming for the stars there lmfao.

>>4461826
you sound underage af

>>4461839
>y-yes im on the photography board
>n-no i dont even like photography
ahahaha you sound like such a coping retard holy shit. obviously i struck a nerve with that amazon shit lmfao

>>4461841
you look and sound bald and gay

>>4461842
>hobby board for photo
>thinks that everyone here secretly wants to spend all day shooting someone else's weddings or the latest H&M jeans
Anon...

>>4461836
Get some higher quality lube. I can office edge for weeks no problem.

>>4461845
>Doesn't wanna shoot other peoples stuff
My bad bro, maybe you can find a job shooting those building corners you love so dearly?

>>4461849
I'm sitting in a pickup by myself most of the time, I like being discreet in case someone sees or I have to get out and do something. It's the fabric from my underwear.

>>4461850
>Doesn't wanna shoot other peoples stuff
Literally zero interest.

>>4461852
>>4461842
That's great fellas can we go back to talking about masturbating at work

>>4461849
get some foreskin

>>4461798
>no upside to the A6700
Not feeling the need to buy FF lenses is a plus

Why do I feel like I'm going to regret starting out with just a prime lens

>>4461881
do whatever you feel like. it most likely doesn't matter what gear you start out with per se. the most important thing is getting experience and reps

>>4461881
Because you are a zoom to fill snapshitter at heart

>>4461881
why does the wind blow?

>>4461881
Every prime between 35mm and 75mm will never leave you wanting

<35mm and >85mm make people wish they had a zoom instead unless they're autistic and pretentious

>>4461769
>The zeiss lens coatings also fix sony colors. Sony color science is their lenses, not their sensors.

>>4460605
Yes I can. Pic related

>>4461894
Yes. If you knew how cameras work you'd understand this instantly.

Sensors are for the most part interchangeable. CFA specs do not vary widely. Raw profiles are arbitrary and can correct for almost everything.

ALL lenses, however, filter and diffuse color.

If my lens is so heckin good and shit, and dabs on shitty phone meme lenses, why is my camera so low resolution? Huh?

If a phone can get 12MP out of a 4mm lens with like an 8x crop factor, why can't a full frame camera get 100MP from the same?
Don't tell me pons don't ACTUALLY get 12MP, they do, and this has been proven countless times.
Why are real cameras so painfully low res?
We carry all this glass around for what?

45MP Nikon Z with a 50 1.8 is certainly better than a phone but it's not much better to scale.. at least not in terms of resolution and detail, mainly in noise and dynamic range.

>it's 2025
>a high end camera still can't photograph a large painting with enough resolution
Shouldn't full frame be over 200MP by now? What gives?

>>4461769

Nigga you are straight trolling I have a 1st gen A7C AND vintage Zeiss lenses for it they do not correct the Sony colors you're fucking retarded

Hell I have the modern 24-70 ZA OSS and I still have to move sliders in LR for it to be usable.

>>4461915
I have a 1st gen a7s and an a7iv. It's not so much the lenses, though they can look quite different. It's your profile that makes it look good or bad. Adobe profiles can be quite bad on these.

This is the only thing preventing me from buying a Z5ii. Nikon is refusing my money over a firmware update. My nikkor telephoto zoom's AF is broken too, so now I'm thinking about switching systems altogether.

>>4461919
The fact you can't just do live view at f/16 by default is fucking retarded.
>too dark
User error, complain less
>camera correcting for retards, not allowing you to preview scene as-is, regardless of light levels
This is camera error, complain more, buy less. Boycott more.

>>4461920
>The fact you can't just do live view at f/16 by default is fucking retarded.
You can, this feature is for allowing you to live view and focus using an aperture lower than 5.6.

>>4461921
It's the other way around, you can live view at wide apertures but it doesn't open any wider than f/5.6.

The excuse is muh brightness n shit and you can configure a button to "preview" the DOF but it can't be set to just show it live without holding a button down.

>>4461915
>>4461917
How are people still talking about Sony colors in ANNO DOMINOS 2025? Not only have the color profiles improved on more recent bodies, but you can also just adjust the color profile to whatever it is you need in-body. I found the portrait profile works really well.

>>4461922
correction
I mean it doesn't go any tighter than f/5.6, not that it doesn't open wider kek

>>4461923
Most of us shoot raw, and most (not me) don't change from the default Adobe profile

>>4461876
Still need the APS-C glass.

>>4461923
because the issue isn't software, it's deeply rooted in the sensor hardware and is a result of too much green and bad color separation
profiling can only fix so much
it's never 100%

this is caused by high ISO autism
they want more sensitivity so color separation is gimped in favor of better total light gathering capability and that results in compromised colors
don't forget snoy has produced a 48mp sensoe they sold as 12MP using the same cancerous shit that phones do, quad bayer, they're truly just experimenting and throwing shit at a dartboard and seeing what sticks

>>4461922
That's right, my bad. I meant it allows you to take in light at your lowest aperture AND still use something like f/16. Silly that Nikon is the only one who doesn't allow this by default.

>>4461925
If you're shooting raw, it's kind of a non-issue in the first place, isn't it?

>>4461927
>because the issue isn't software, it's deeply rooted in the sensor hardware and is a result of too much green and bad color separation
That's not really true. "Too much green" is just the Bayer pattern itself, which is used by Canon as much as it is used by Sony. Color separation depends on the exact spectral shapes of the red/green/blue filter dyes and microlens/pixel design, not the count of green sites.

>>4461930
The profile you use during raw conversion has a large impact. The Adobe ones look awful on Sony. Of course they are also the default.

>>4461930
Colors a non-issue unless you don't edit which is actually a lot of people
The only time it really is an issue in practice is when shooting with multiple different brands and then can be more annoying to try and match in post
>>4461919
That's a silly reason to avoid in practice
>>4461927
Dishonesty

>>4461914
Resolution is just one spec, just how many pixels, that's all
There are a lot of 4k TVs that might share the same resolution, but very wildly in quality

>>4461894
For all the talk we have here about different sensor color, we sure never talk about lens color

>>4461939
>dishonesty
Yes, on your part indeed.
All digital is quite shit. Film was, for the most part, subject to vary by film choice.. but was never perfect either.

Modern SNOY however is less accurate than other digital and the alternatives weren't even good to begin with, so honestly, them being unable to render even a color checker well is kind of sad. Profiling with one usually results in higher delta values remaining vs others.
Micro four thirds cameras also suffer the same issue.

When you are shooting under controlled lighting and using a color checker to profile the individual shoot a lot of SNOYs still require tweaking and shit to remove awkward color casts. Sorry it's just... true. At the same time, every faggot youtuber is wrong about the issue and shills presets but don't use their fraud as an excuse to say it's not a problem. It is, perhaps a bit overblown, but it is real regardless.

>>4461942
>more dishonesty
What's even the point in comments like that bruh

>>4461941
>we sure never talk about lens color
Because its not real and just snoy cope?

>>4461944
You don't think different lenses on the same body can result in different colors?

>>4461945
Its not going to fix the bad color science.

>>4461939
> Colors a non-issue
Hi Ken.

>>4461941
Everyone knows lenses affect color.
The problem is people don't realize that the sensor is important too.

>>4461946
Sony has bad color but as soon as you leave /p/ and casey’s channel everyone likes them?

>>4461942
Source: you, some failure?

>>4461783
Nailed it.

Its a /p/ issue that sometimes comes up on other failure hangouts like youtube and mu-43. These people just dont know how to use cameras.

>>4461951
The only important thing is your lack of skill. I’m glad sony doesnt waste time on defaults and lightroom doesnt either. Pros grade everything and use c1. Keep your wannabe ass on fuji. Its all you deserve. Shoot jpeg too, and remember, you may have paid $2000, but dont "pixel peep"! Only view on IG!

>>4461951
It's not the sensor. Otherwise Nikon and Sony would have the same colors. It's the manufacturers color science that chooses how the light is interpreted as color

>>4461954
Light isnt interpeted until the raw is converted. Congratulations you dont know how cameras work.

Raw conversions are fully arbitrary. Sony’s jpeg defaults are an afterthought, but so is any a7/a6 consoomer that cant change them or isnt willing to.

>>4461927
This is what fredmiranda and mu-43 does to your brain

>>4461956
Hey, don't disparage FM, they are just like /p/ but with hasphotos

>>4461957
Do you know why some people NEVER post a photo in a gear argument?

They’re only here because they got banned from FM (half the board is)

>>4461955
saar, changing the settings is an edit and does not count. brand war 101 u fucking snoy timmy. india standa by NIKON

i just bought a pentax k200, what am i in for

>>4461952
>as soon as you leave /p/ and casey’s channel everyone likes them?

>>4461939
>Colors a non-issue unless you don't edit which is actually a lot of people
I don't edit 99% of my pics and it's not an issue for me either. New creative profiles look great.

>>4462000
This is bullshit. I have the same camera and none of my subjects look like they're about to vomit.

>>4458392
When you live in vomit you lose the ability to spot it much like a fish doesn't realize it's in the water.

>>4462000
When all you know is vomit you lose the ability to spot it much like a fish doesn't realize it's in the water. It becomes just normal to you. You only realize how bad she looks because of that Panasonic shot, otherwise you'd think the Sony pic is alright.

>>4462002
When you live in vomit you lose the ability to spot it much like a fish doesn't realize it's in the water. It becomes just normal to you. You only realize how bad she looks because of that Panasonic shot next to it, otherwise you'd think the Sony pic is alright.

>>4461997
the fuji of pentaxes and one of the rarest ones, its one of my favorite ccds as a ccdfag

its a k10d in a ist body

>>4462016
i probably posted these in another thread but w/e was done with 70-210mm takumar-f

theyre actually pretty rare to find and even the nips always bid them up to $80-120

>>4462017
always had some weird issue like a bad mirror bad sensor or no working af when i was looking for one on yahoo auctions before i broke down and bought one that looked brand new on ebay (turns out it had 120k+ shutter counts)

>>4462018
buy some enerloops and enjoy it mine cost $80 probalby never gonna selli

>>4462019
this was a sooc jpeg supposedly it has the best jpeg engine out of all the pentaxes from that era

>>4462020
another sooc jpeg

i just bought a k1ii so im probably gonna use that for a few days

>>4462014
No, it just does not look like that.

>>4462029
Sonyeed cope

>>4462029
>>4462030
It's the shitty WB on the S9, you fucking retards. Look at her shirt. She's surrounded by greenery and it somehow has a purple hue.

>>4462031
The wall looks green in the Sony example

>>4462032
Why wouldn't it look green? Do you understand how light works? Go grab a leaf, shine a flashlight at it while standing to a white wall and tell me what color the wall becomes.

>>4462031
>>4462033
The white balance on the Sony is off, just look at her shirt. Probably done on purpose. But that's not bad colour science, it's user error.

>>4462033
The main light source on the wall is the unfiltered sun, any through leaf light won't be nearly enough to tint it.

first timer trying to get into the hobby..

bought a refurbished Canon EOS 700D for around $200, Pentax Super-Takumar 35mm lens, as well as a shitty $5 M42 to EF adapter and some flash cards, totaling everything up to around $300. did i fuck up?

planning on getting a Takumar 200mm telephoto lens to do some astrophotography down the line

>>4462029
Nah it does. Sony white balance and color science are abysmal. Thats why they are always changing it with every new model to keep on trying to get it right.

>>4461955
>Raw conversions are fully arbitrary.
What rarely gets mentioned explicitly is when you buy $2000 worth of gear, you may expect to be provided with a baseline raw to srgb conversion that's somewhere between accurate and good looking. When his gets mentioned, photo editing aficionados come out of woodwork and try to shout you down.
> I fucking love EDITING I EDIT all my colors I hate taking photos but I do it anyway and then I EDIT

>>4462000
Now post the Tony survey where Sony ranks #1 in a blind vote
Dishonest if you dont

>>4462035
>>4462037
That's exactly the color you would have. The green from the greenery would color the surroundings green. You're not going to have the same skin color as in a studio with a white diffuser aimed at your face. Sony is actually showing the correct, neutral image. You just don't like the way it looks.
If the author set the camera to the appropriate mode, it would also make her more red than she actually was. The operator does not understand their own gear.

>>4462000
Left is slightly too pink. Ideally, you'd need to compare 3-5 cameras to see whether one stands out.

>>4462044
He reposts that over and over because its all he has. A faked youtube video.

yes, julia trotti lied. EVERYONE who has ever received a perk or a free camera from panasonic had to lie, as confirmed by gerald undone.

>>4462046
The lumix has the correct white balance tint
The sony has a wildly incorrect one. I've used the a7cii and know it doesn't do that. It always adds a magenta tint in greenery heavy scenes unless you manually set the white balance. She had to have used an incorrect manual setting.

The only cameras that dont do +M in AWB are nikons because they have a separate mode for outdoor light.

>>4462043
See:
>>4461783
>>4461785

You are overspending on tools that are not meant for you.
The intended audience color grades everything and calibrates everything, or at least knows how cameras work. The intended audience does not believe in canon vs nikon vs sony "color science".

>I paid $2000 THE JPEG DEFAULTS BETTER LOOK GOOD
Change them. Like on the a7c just select portrait, +1 saturation.
>THAT IS AN EDIT IT DOES NOT COUNT SAAAR! -you, unironically.

UHHH GUYS?

>>4462055
woah the sony makes you look fatter too. Another "Sony Cope ®"

>>4462055
Skill issue

>>4462054
>tools that are not meant for you.
If Snoy is not meant for people who just want to take photos, who is it meant for? Pixel peepers? Obsessive editoors? Wedding wagies?

>>4462072
video editors and aspiring influencers who wanted the best camera to make youtube videos with

not joking that's why sony is so autofocus and video centric

>>4462072
It's meant for people who take photos, and know how to use a camera

If you want to shoot with jpeg defaults+auto mode and think the profiles fucking blightroom ships with are actually meant to be used, go buy a canon r50 and leave real cameras alone. An idiot like you has no business using real cameras and you'd probably even find the nikon z8 insufficient and deeply flawed.
>NOO SAAR I HAVE TO CHANGE A SETTING THIS IS FOR OSBESSIVE EDITORS TO SPEND HOURS ON A COMPUTER
>2 weeks earlier
>White guy: Rajesh, you've been on the computer for 2 hous
>rajesh: *staring at file selection dialog* sir... what do i do with the arw file. i have been thinking about what arw stands for, and i cant figure it out. i am out of chatgpt credits. please help.
>White guy: Uh.... maybe you shouldn't have bought an a7rv.

>>4462093
can you defend sony without some stupid greentext strawman scenario you cooked up in your autistic redditor brain

im saying this as someone whos about to buy one and does not want to be associated with people like you

>>4462097
>Defend sony
There's nothing to defend

It's pure offense against bullshit that basically only exists on /p/ and a few shitty youtube channels.
Any camera made by sony, canon, or nikon is 100% fine. There are no actual problems with them. It's just idiots making up false standards
>sony has bad colors
>no changing the settings doesnt count i shouldnt have to
>canon has no lenses
>no adapting EF doesnt count i shouldnt have to
>nikon autofocus doesnt work
>no i will not read the manual i shouldn't have to

>>4462093
>jpeg defaults+auto mode
Must give realistic and pleasing colors. No amount of seething or personal attacks is going to convince me otherwise.

I just traded my camera for a better model and it turns out I can't import my previous settings despite the bodies being nearly the same.
All my buttons and profiles are wrong but I can't remember what everything was.
Wouldn't it be nice if the settings files were human readable.

>>4462021
>>4462020
>>4462019
>>4462018
>>4462017
>>4462016
I bought it for $200 Australian (about 130 usd) and it's in really good condition. I know pretty much fuck all about photography and bought it to learn on, im bored of taking crappy post processed to hell photos with the phone

>>4462122
Look for these lenses:

55-300mm DA or DA-L or 80-320mm FA for distance shots/telephotos. You can try a 70-200/210mm Takumar instead if you find one cheap enough. I really don't suggest the 100-300mm and 70-300mm Sigma/Tamrons, they're not sharp and have a ton of chromatic abberations in the form of purple fringing at the edges of whites (or sample variety). 18-135mm is a great walk around lens but that's usually $100-140 USD. I like the 28-90mm Macro Quantaray, I took the Mustang pics with them (usually $20-30).

Primes: 35mm f2.4 is my favorite. I recommend a good 35mm. A lot of people like 50mm but I find it a weird focal length on a crop sensor.

Just got a proper camera and lens for the first time, is it normal for a supposedly new lens to have a bit of dust on it? There was a bunch of dust on the inside of the cap too. The boxes weren't sealed with tape either but I guess that's common for Nikon?

>>4462072
>people who just want to take photos, who is it meant for? Pixel peepers? Obsessive editoors?
Yes.
>Wedding wagies?
Photo wagies shoot whatever their employer tells them to shoot, which is mostly Canon/Nikon. It's very common for the camera brand to be specified in the contract.

>>4462114
NTA. They do.

>>4462118
Japanese can't into UI.

>>4462126
Thanks, I'll look into those.
Currently I've got a 18-50 Sigma that came with it and a 28-80 Sigma lens that came with a MZ-50 film pentax that I bought for $30 from a thrift store that ended up being fucked up

>>4462118
If you can't remember what things were, then it's no big deal because it's obviously not that important

>>4462131
It's possible to have a spec of dust or two in a new lens, nothing to worry about
No "new" lens or body should have any dust on the exterior at all, and every brand will at least have the item in a plastic cover inside the box

t. Worked camera sales and opened thousands of "new" boxes

>>4462228
I remember what they are when I press button to do "thing", but "other thing" happens instead.

Is it fair game to ask for a small discount when buying camera and lenses? Or is it a no-go? Walking in the local shop tomorrow for the first time, hate buying online.

>>4462350
If its used, go ahead.
If it's new not really, at least directly on on bodies / lenses, etc. Retail margins on 1st party gear is very small, and they are typically required to follow manufacturer pricing anyways. They might be able to throw in freebie useless accessories or discount on like 3rd party batteries / memory card.

>>4462350
They'll maybe match whatever the cheapest mainstream online retailer sells for if you can find that. I'm not talking ebay but shit like camerawarehouse or whatever you have where you live.

>>4462228
I'm prone to agree. Switched to a newer camera model myself, new settings, don't really care about what they were before.