z7 is cheaper and one adapter from cheaper f mount glass
(x2)
>cheaper
I can find the Z6 and the S5 at the same price (used), but I've seen the S1R sold new for a thousand euros while I can't find even a very used Z7 for that much. For 1000€ the S1R would be the best bang for your buck mirrorless, if you can deal with the size and weight (and the non-phase AF)
A7III. Nothing comes close. Pros are STILL putting miles on these things while hobbyists whine about “weather sealing” (thats just as shit on their beloved fuji and totally absent if your canon lacks an L lens or if your nikkor has a plastic mount or is every other f mount lens, but they dont whine when its not sony)
THIS. If you're a shutin loser who doesn't care about art or quality photography (or really taking any photos at all), perfect camera. Sony has this market cornered.
>canon costs 2x more to do the exact same thing >even nikon z8 autofocus is worse than an a7iii >fuji is the same price and size for worse everything
Yeeeep. Only lightroom users “genuinely” dislike sony because they have no bundled color profiles that dont suck.
See, hobbyfags seethe hard just because sony… exists. Meanwhile most magnum photographers are using sony kek.
Reason? Buyers. Remorse.
Nikon fag here, I seethe at sony because on Nikon I have to pay 1.5-2x more to get the same thing done, but worse, with more size and weight. I cope by seething about star eater, even though I do not do serious astrophotography, and vignetting correction raping raws, which you can turn off and do in the raw developer anyways. I even have a capture one subscription so sony raws would have good colors for me. I just have to hate sony to deal with how I'm using inferior gear for more money.
Oh, can't forget my favorite cope - "LE WEATHER SEALING!!!!" as if putting a plastic bag on a camera is too much when my gear is already 1.5-2x larger. I just cope non-stop because I made a bad purchase. Sony cameras are just better and their 1.4 GMs put the 1.8 S shit to shame. Same size, sharper, same price sometimes....1.4 Fuck even their 20mm 1.8 is better. Fucking sony being better than nikon even before nikon went mirrorless, ugh
Why did I fall for photography fag memes and buy a shitty overpriced meme camera? I should have just went with an a7iii. Only other photography gearhomosexual schizos even hate sony! Everyone else likes it!
i think A73 is not affected by star eater, or perhaps only on bulb mode, also a bit of trailing prevents star eating, also check Pentax K-1 Mark II astrotracer, seems quite cool
As a canon user this is very similar to my own coping and seething. I wish I could afford to go back and get a sony - they dont shit bricks when the battery is low so the advertised battery life actually is what you get. Even the lenses are better.
Has a III and then a IV. Both are absolutely great sensors and absolutely terrible cameras to shoot with in every fucking way. You must be a fucking dope to think 15 more pegamixels is worth all the goddamn compromises of having to deal with that piece of crap all day. Fuck Sony for putting those badly designed & cheaply made pieces of shit out into the world.
only nikon users think this because nikon Z autofocus barely works (it's not auto, and it's never in focus)
only fuji and panasonic are worse
[...]
Nikon fag here, I seethe at sony because on Nikon I have to pay 1.5-2x more to get the same thing done, but worse, with more size and weight. I cope by seething about star eater, even though I do not do serious astrophotography, and vignetting correction raping raws, which you can turn off and do in the raw developer anyways. I even have a capture one subscription so sony raws would have good colors for me. I just have to hate sony to deal with how I'm using inferior gear for more money.
Oh, can't forget my favorite cope - "LE WEATHER SEALING!!!!" as if putting a plastic bag on a camera is too much when my gear is already 1.5-2x larger. I just cope non-stop because I made a bad purchase. Sony cameras are just better and their 1.4 GMs put the 1.8 S shit to shame. Same size, sharper, same price sometimes....1.4 Fuck even their 20mm 1.8 is better. Fucking sony being better than nikon even before nikon went mirrorless, ugh
Why did I fall for photography fag memes and buy a shitty overpriced meme camera? I should have just went with an a7iii. Only other photography gearhomosexual schizos even hate sony! Everyone else likes it!
In terms of high megapickles it seems like snoy is the best choice. Us canon users don't have anything that comes close in terms of price and performance.
Also AF, EVFs, burst shooting, lens selection, battery life, and if you want IBIS you'll need one of the newer bodies. I haven't kept that up to date with Canon since they went mirrorless so what is it they do do best? Video?
Please dont use this shit site. Go to dxomark. They measure actual dynamic range and dont shave off multiple stops because they are a physics undergrad instead of a photographer and dont know jack shit about cameras.
“FF has 11 point fuck stops DR” - a nerd who has never taken a photo of anything but the back of a lens cap
1 month ago
Anonymous
there's basically no difference you fucking retard, except it looks like dxomark fucked up their 12800+ measurements.
1 month ago
Anonymous
DXOmark didn't fuck up their measurements, theirs are the actual proper ones. See what the X axis says? MEASURED ISO. This is something claff does not use and is barely aware of because he is a fucking idiot. His is "ISO SETTING" which is meaningless. ISO settings can off +/- a full stop depending on how the individual camera does its tone mapping - that means to get a raw with the same amount of data (exposure) you would need to use more or less exposure!
Claff doesn't know what the fuck he is doing or talking about hence the missing stops of dynamic range. He determines DR by measuring the SNR of a downscaled dark frame. He is an idiot. And he charts against labeled ISO. DXO charts against measured ISO so you can actually draw valid comparisons between cameras - labeled/measured sensitivity discrepancies vary depending on the individual ISO, the brand, and the individual camera!
There are some big names in gearhomosexualry you should ignore:
Jim Kasson
Bill Claff
They're essentially bumbling Wyato tier idiots. You'd be taking advice from the kind of person who thinks an a7rv is less noisy than a z6ii (it actually has way more noise per pixel which destroys color information cuz lol bayer - they dont mind because they only look at sharpness)
1 month ago
Anonymous
>DXOmark didn't fuck up their measurements
they did. fuck off retard.
1 month ago
Anonymous
No, he's right. They didn't fuck up their measurements. They actually did complete measurements by charting against actual sensitivity instead of manufacturer stated ISO, and shooting a xyla chart instead of a lens cap.
photos to photons or whatever its called is literally non stop lies and bullshit. if it weren't so common for gearfag measurebators to be simply idiotic i would think a certain manufacturer had it set up as a cheap shilling operation...
Do you SERIOUSLY believe the opinions of someone that shaved over 2 stops of dynamic range off by using his own nophoto definition?
1 month ago
Anonymous
>he's right
ACTUALLY kys, samefag. And don't reply to my posts ever again.
1 month ago
Anonymous
fuck off and fix your charts bill >protip: ISO should be measured, not labeled, if you're going to compare cameras in stills mode where the full ISO range is available. not even cineD is this dumb. >protip: use a xyla DR test chart, not a dark frame, SNR of a dark frame is not a proxy for dynamic range outside of the metrology shit they use in labs, cameras use proprietary tone mapping algos and cook their raws >protip: "photographic dynamic range" is an invalid thing you invented contrary to the entire photographic world, full frame does not have 11 stops of dynamic range lmfao, it has 14. "645 film is 12 megapixels" levels of stupidity.
DXOmark didn't fuck up their measurements, theirs are the actual proper ones. See what the X axis says? MEASURED ISO. This is something claff does not use and is barely aware of because he is a fucking idiot. His is "ISO SETTING" which is meaningless. ISO settings can off +/- a full stop depending on how the individual camera does its tone mapping - that means to get a raw with the same amount of data (exposure) you would need to use more or less exposure!
Claff doesn't know what the fuck he is doing or talking about hence the missing stops of dynamic range. He determines DR by measuring the SNR of a downscaled dark frame. He is an idiot. And he charts against labeled ISO. DXO charts against measured ISO so you can actually draw valid comparisons between cameras - labeled/measured sensitivity discrepancies vary depending on the individual ISO, the brand, and the individual camera!
There are some big names in gearhomosexualry you should ignore:
Jim Kasson
Bill Claff
They're essentially bumbling Wyato tier idiots. You'd be taking advice from the kind of person who thinks an a7rv is less noisy than a z6ii (it actually has way more noise per pixel which destroys color information cuz lol bayer - they dont mind because they only look at sharpness)
No, he's right. They didn't fuck up their measurements. They actually did complete measurements by charting against actual sensitivity instead of manufacturer stated ISO, and shooting a xyla chart instead of a lens cap.
photos to photons or whatever its called is literally non stop lies and bullshit. if it weren't so common for gearfag measurebators to be simply idiotic i would think a certain manufacturer had it set up as a cheap shilling operation...
Do you SERIOUSLY believe the opinions of someone that shaved over 2 stops of dynamic range off by using his own nophoto definition?
based p2p haters
1 month ago
Anonymous
>dxo mark fucked
They are literally the only ones besides cineD who do this right. And cineD could do it more autistically but its irrelevant what the labeled or measured ISO is when using log gammas.
Flagship vs flagship. Canon would have announced the R3 as the R1 for a higher price if they didn't get spooked by snoy first.
And that's more of a comparison between 10-bit h.265 vs 12-bit """raw""" codecs than anything else.
Seems fairly disingenuous when the R3 was always a temporary flagship and the R5 is significantly better for video in comparison. The R3 never served a purpose in the tier it was shoved into. Even the R6mk2 can throw heavy punches at the R3, though it lacks the stacked sensor.
1 month ago
Anonymous
it also lacks the forced shadow noise reduction at high ISOs, only forcing it for the low ones
1 month ago
Anonymous
The forced noise reduction on my R6Mk II genuinely pisses me off. The camera can provide incredibly sharp photos even with mediocre glass, but the forced noise reduction can often destroy detail in certain areas, or completely ruin shadows with smudging. Ever since the success of the Rebel line they've been purposefully kneecapping their professional cameras to shoot decent photos right out of the box.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I’ll kinda side with you on certain points. I personally never understood what canon was doing with the r3. I know it’s anecdotal but I don’t know a single professional in my field who bought an r3. Everyone has r5s or r6 IIs. The stacked sensor is important but it always felt like canon just rushed out door stop while they were working on better shit. Beyond that, using an r3 for video is unbelievably retarded.
>$800 for no ibis and the 6d2 sensor?
Used ones go for as low as $600. IBIS isn't an issue because RP is crap for video to begin with, and it has a really nice eye-detect AF.
>IBIS isn't an issue because RP is crap for video to begin with
IBIS is terrible for videos unless you have a lens with IS or you are also shooting on a gimbal. The warping is ridiculous. IBIS is incredibly useful for stills, you can take photos at 1/8 shutter speed with no motion blur as long as you don't have shaky grandpa hands.
Because video is a succession of still frames and the variance is from frame to frame, so you won't see it in a single frame (a photo). Similar to how you might notice an LED flickering in a video at a high speed, the flicker is the brightness change from frame to frame, but if you're only viewing a single frame then you have nothing else to compare to and you can't tell it's flickering.
A pre-owned Z7. You can get one for a thousand bucks. They’re practically identical to the current $3200 Z7II minus the second card slot. So use a bigger card, save $2k for premium Z glass instead and don’t be a putz, you putz.
do you have any experience with the 40mm f/2? I'm considering getting a used Z7 with that for a minimalistic travel setup but I'm concerned that the lens won't be able to make the most out of the sensor's resolution
Has a III and then a IV. Both are absolutely great sensors and absolutely terrible cameras to shoot with in every fucking way. You must be a fucking dope to think 15 more pegamixels is worth all the goddamn compromises of having to deal with that piece of crap all day. Fuck Sony for putting those badly designed & cheaply made pieces of shit out into the world.
You must be some kind of prissy autist. Mine is the ideal camera. Everything else is bloated and very “japanese flip phone”.
How's the Panny S1? I don't *need* to upgrade but it seems like a whole lot of camera for the 800 euro-bucks it goes for here. Got a first gen a7 currently.
well if its sony its way smaller, way sharper, and way faster, but sony cripples FPS and video hard outside of the "appropriate" product lines so poorfag gearfags from the church of the dollar seethe because the council of the holy spec sheet finds the feature per dollar ratio lacking.
if its canon its the same size but way faster and the lenses under 100mm have gotten a lot better. they're super fast to shoot - but with truncated raw data and e-shutter only, but hey, mech shutter is still fast (10fps-ish) and the autofocus is ridiculously good, like sony. the r6ii is essentially an a9ii but it says canon in it.
if it's fuji it's a fucking joke.
if it's olympus it's what photographers wished bridge cameras were. go-everywhere do-anything slight IQ hit.
if it's panasonic it's a baller camcorder but worse than olympus at actually being a camera
if its nikon its uh
worse. a lot worse. spend as much money as you want if you want the mirrorless QOL of the 1st gen canon EOS R but otherwise there's no reason to go with nikon over sony/canon except pixel peeping, raw digging autism that no actual artist ever gave a shit about.
More durable, quieter, better lenses because they don't have the limitation of needing the rear element to be 40+mm away from the sensor, better AF, EVFs have many advantages over optical viewfinder, they've continued to improve in areas like resolution and video where as DSLRs are discontinued, typically faster burst rates
>Better lens adaptability, more opportunities for lens design >Potentially smaller bodies and lenses >More sophisticated autofocus stuff like subject detection, much wider AF coverage >EVF, MF assist functionality, exposure tools like zebras and histogram in the viewfinder >In camera USB charging / USB-C integration, better live view / screen performance >Better electronic shutter functionality, better IBIS
Some of that also applies to some recent DSLR's, but often more common or simply better with mirrorless
Not much is really specific to mirrorless, just newer tech being put on newer products, and could just as easily be put on newer DSLRs (rip)
Size, lens adaptability, better MF assist, and new features/tech were my primary motivations for switching. USB charging is great on the go. IBIS is overhyped, but it really does magic sometimes. Eye autofocus was a total game changer, and made me give up BBF.
>evf as a positive
lol good one >MF assist
has existed for decades, don't need little colored pixels to tell me what's in focus while running down my battery life >usb usb usb
onions feature, real men recharge their batteries (multiple) outside of camera and swap as necessary (which is rare, as DSLRs have superior battery life) >better ibis
lay off the caffeine and Adderall >potentially smaller bodies and lenses
all that potential gone to waste kek see Nikon >wider AF coverage
yeah no worthwhile images were made focusing on the far corner of a shot, center framing is still and will always reign king
anyone could go on
On Wyato, you'll get this. Pic very related. This board is full of literal jobless manchildren. They live in their parents homes. They sleep in twin beds. These are the people insisting on DSLRs. They don't want you to enjoy photography! They want you to be a "serious" autist like them and shoot building corners.
Ignore the people saying real men this and that, they are skinnyfat noodle armed nerds who derive their sense of masculinity from operating a camera - a toy computer. That's like saying "real men compile linux from the source code". Just imagine the kind of prematurely balding pizza faced fuck that would say that. >i prethed a button on a computer to make the number correct im THO MANLEE *farts*
Using a mirrorless is freeing. No more doing the "asian tourist pose". No more black blob making people nervous. You can just take your camera with you and be a more normal person. A GOOD camera, that doesn't spit out blurry colored fog if you shoot indoors without flash. Some of them even fit in pockets.
well if its sony its way smaller, way sharper, and way faster, but sony cripples FPS and video hard outside of the "appropriate" product lines so poorfag gearfags from the church of the dollar seethe because the council of the holy spec sheet finds the feature per dollar ratio lacking.
if its canon its the same size but way faster and the lenses under 100mm have gotten a lot better. they're super fast to shoot - but with truncated raw data and e-shutter only, but hey, mech shutter is still fast (10fps-ish) and the autofocus is ridiculously good, like sony. the r6ii is essentially an a9ii but it says canon in it.
if it's fuji it's a fucking joke.
if it's olympus it's what photographers wished bridge cameras were. go-everywhere do-anything slight IQ hit.
if it's panasonic it's a baller camcorder but worse than olympus at actually being a camera
if its nikon its uh
worse. a lot worse. spend as much money as you want if you want the mirrorless QOL of the 1st gen canon EOS R but otherwise there's no reason to go with nikon over sony/canon except pixel peeping, raw digging autism that no actual artist ever gave a shit about.
This is the truth. Overall mirrorless has better lenses and smaller cameras apples to apples. Physics applies some (an f1.8 lens needs a front element of a certain size, a 50mm lens can only be so small) but generally you can get a smaller setup if someone has made the option. Autofocus is also better, and there's exposure preview - but autofocus is NOT better on Nikon's Z cameras.
Mirrorless can also have larger lenses on the smaller cameras because removing the mirror makes room for exotic optical designs. These lenses are super sharp and closer to the optics used for spy planes. They are totally unlike anything you can put on an SLR except for $$$$$$$$$ "cinema" lenses. You can not compare them to DSLRs. Nikon's Z mount is infested with such incomparable lenses. They really are super sharp compared to DSLR lenses, but why would you want them? Just get a sony or olympus, stick to the smaller lenses and enjoy life instead of pixel peeping.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1028Image Height702
Lumix S5 used
z6 is cheaper and one adapter away from cheaper f mount glass
>muh NIGGOR
fuck off
>cheaper
I can find the Z6 and the S5 at the same price (used), but I've seen the S1R sold new for a thousand euros while I can't find even a very used Z7 for that much. For 1000€ the S1R would be the best bang for your buck mirrorless, if you can deal with the size and weight (and the non-phase AF)
>cheaper f mount glass
>No AF on pre-ultrasonic lenses
This except the S1 instead
z7 is cheaper and one adapter from cheaper f mount glass
(x2)
>f mount glass
I vomited a little on my mouth
I WILL NEVER USE CANONIKON GARBAGE
Depends on what you consider "cheap."
A7III. Nothing comes close. Pros are STILL putting miles on these things while hobbyists whine about “weather sealing” (thats just as shit on their beloved fuji and totally absent if your canon lacks an L lens or if your nikkor has a plastic mount or is every other f mount lens, but they dont whine when its not sony)
THIS. If you're a shutin loser who doesn't care about art or quality photography (or really taking any photos at all), perfect camera. Sony has this market cornered.
See, hobbyfags seethe hard just because sony… exists. Meanwhile most magnum photographers are using sony kek.
Reason? Buyers. Remorse.
>canon costs 2x more to do the exact same thing
>even nikon z8 autofocus is worse than an a7iii
>fuji is the same price and size for worse everything
Yeeeep. Only lightroom users “genuinely” dislike sony because they have no bundled color profiles that dont suck.
Actual photographers have no problem.
Nikon fag here, I seethe at sony because on Nikon I have to pay 1.5-2x more to get the same thing done, but worse, with more size and weight. I cope by seething about star eater, even though I do not do serious astrophotography, and vignetting correction raping raws, which you can turn off and do in the raw developer anyways. I even have a capture one subscription so sony raws would have good colors for me. I just have to hate sony to deal with how I'm using inferior gear for more money.
Oh, can't forget my favorite cope - "LE WEATHER SEALING!!!!" as if putting a plastic bag on a camera is too much when my gear is already 1.5-2x larger. I just cope non-stop because I made a bad purchase. Sony cameras are just better and their 1.4 GMs put the 1.8 S shit to shame. Same size, sharper, same price sometimes....1.4 Fuck even their 20mm 1.8 is better. Fucking sony being better than nikon even before nikon went mirrorless, ugh
Why did I fall for photography fag memes and buy a shitty overpriced meme camera? I should have just went with an a7iii. Only other photography gearhomosexual schizos even hate sony! Everyone else likes it!
i think A73 is not affected by star eater, or perhaps only on bulb mode, also a bit of trailing prevents star eating, also check Pentax K-1 Mark II astrotracer, seems quite cool
As a canon user this is very similar to my own coping and seething. I wish I could afford to go back and get a sony - they dont shit bricks when the battery is low so the advertised battery life actually is what you get. Even the lenses are better.
Has a III and then a IV. Both are absolutely great sensors and absolutely terrible cameras to shoot with in every fucking way. You must be a fucking dope to think 15 more pegamixels is worth all the goddamn compromises of having to deal with that piece of crap all day. Fuck Sony for putting those badly designed & cheaply made pieces of shit out into the world.
can you expand on your experience with the a7iii and iv cuz I have a ii but I’d like to upgrade one day.
What's your problem with the IV? I've been using one since release and the only thing I actively dislike is the hinge on the flip out screen.
So you hated the MkIII so much you decided to buy another Sony?
>if your nikkor has a plastic mount
Wouldn't a plastic mount actually seal better than a stainless/chrome one?
buy a dslr. It's better in every way and cheaper with better glass. Mirrorless is a scam
only nikon users think this because nikon Z autofocus barely works (it's not auto, and it's never in focus)
only fuji and panasonic are worse
lol isnt this every nikon user?
I don't shoot Nikon at all.
I'm noticing a theme here
Have you also noticed that ISS is fake and gay?
any non gay evidence?
>D800E
>Z9
Seems like spacehomosexuals at least do something right.
(No AA filters)
That the ISS is sponsored by Nikon?
>cheap
define "cheap". a used M9 is cheap these days
>disguised snoy cope thread
*bricks your camera with a firmware update
In terms of high megapickles it seems like snoy is the best choice. Us canon users don't have anything that comes close in terms of price and performance.
Also AF, EVFs, burst shooting, lens selection, battery life, and if you want IBIS you'll need one of the newer bodies. I haven't kept that up to date with Canon since they went mirrorless so what is it they do do best? Video?
snoy is somehow still best for video even though nikon has nraw
Shutterless nikons have aps-c dynamic range
sure they do
Please dont use this shit site. Go to dxomark. They measure actual dynamic range and dont shave off multiple stops because they are a physics undergrad instead of a photographer and dont know jack shit about cameras.
“FF has 11 point fuck stops DR” - a nerd who has never taken a photo of anything but the back of a lens cap
there's basically no difference you fucking retard, except it looks like dxomark fucked up their 12800+ measurements.
DXOmark didn't fuck up their measurements, theirs are the actual proper ones. See what the X axis says? MEASURED ISO. This is something claff does not use and is barely aware of because he is a fucking idiot. His is "ISO SETTING" which is meaningless. ISO settings can off +/- a full stop depending on how the individual camera does its tone mapping - that means to get a raw with the same amount of data (exposure) you would need to use more or less exposure!
Claff doesn't know what the fuck he is doing or talking about hence the missing stops of dynamic range. He determines DR by measuring the SNR of a downscaled dark frame. He is an idiot. And he charts against labeled ISO. DXO charts against measured ISO so you can actually draw valid comparisons between cameras - labeled/measured sensitivity discrepancies vary depending on the individual ISO, the brand, and the individual camera!
There are some big names in gearhomosexualry you should ignore:
Jim Kasson
Bill Claff
They're essentially bumbling Wyato tier idiots. You'd be taking advice from the kind of person who thinks an a7rv is less noisy than a z6ii (it actually has way more noise per pixel which destroys color information cuz lol bayer - they dont mind because they only look at sharpness)
>DXOmark didn't fuck up their measurements
they did. fuck off retard.
No, he's right. They didn't fuck up their measurements. They actually did complete measurements by charting against actual sensitivity instead of manufacturer stated ISO, and shooting a xyla chart instead of a lens cap.
photos to photons or whatever its called is literally non stop lies and bullshit. if it weren't so common for gearfag measurebators to be simply idiotic i would think a certain manufacturer had it set up as a cheap shilling operation...
Do you SERIOUSLY believe the opinions of someone that shaved over 2 stops of dynamic range off by using his own nophoto definition?
>he's right
ACTUALLY kys, samefag. And don't reply to my posts ever again.
fuck off and fix your charts bill
>protip: ISO should be measured, not labeled, if you're going to compare cameras in stills mode where the full ISO range is available. not even cineD is this dumb.
>protip: use a xyla DR test chart, not a dark frame, SNR of a dark frame is not a proxy for dynamic range outside of the metrology shit they use in labs, cameras use proprietary tone mapping algos and cook their raws
>protip: "photographic dynamic range" is an invalid thing you invented contrary to the entire photographic world, full frame does not have 11 stops of dynamic range lmfao, it has 14. "645 film is 12 megapixels" levels of stupidity.
based p2p haters
>dxo mark fucked
They are literally the only ones besides cineD who do this right. And cineD could do it more autistically but its irrelevant what the labeled or measured ISO is when using log gammas.
and of course snoy destroys canon in video
isn't the A1 $2,000+ more
Flagship vs flagship. Canon would have announced the R3 as the R1 for a higher price if they didn't get spooked by snoy first.
And that's more of a comparison between 10-bit h.265 vs 12-bit """raw""" codecs than anything else.
Seems fairly disingenuous when the R3 was always a temporary flagship and the R5 is significantly better for video in comparison. The R3 never served a purpose in the tier it was shoved into. Even the R6mk2 can throw heavy punches at the R3, though it lacks the stacked sensor.
it also lacks the forced shadow noise reduction at high ISOs, only forcing it for the low ones
The forced noise reduction on my R6Mk II genuinely pisses me off. The camera can provide incredibly sharp photos even with mediocre glass, but the forced noise reduction can often destroy detail in certain areas, or completely ruin shadows with smudging. Ever since the success of the Rebel line they've been purposefully kneecapping their professional cameras to shoot decent photos right out of the box.
I’ll kinda side with you on certain points. I personally never understood what canon was doing with the r3. I know it’s anecdotal but I don’t know a single professional in my field who bought an r3. Everyone has r5s or r6 IIs. The stacked sensor is important but it always felt like canon just rushed out door stop while they were working on better shit. Beyond that, using an r3 for video is unbelievably retarded.
It hilarious how obvious samehomosexualry is on this board, yet the pea-brained dumbasses that do it can't figure out how to hide it.
The RP is legitimately an excellent budget option, for stills at least.
$800 for no ibis and the 6d2 sensor?
Just buy a DSLR.
>$800 for no ibis and the 6d2 sensor?
Used ones go for as low as $600. IBIS isn't an issue because RP is crap for video to begin with, and it has a really nice eye-detect AF.
>IBIS isn't an issue because RP is crap for video to begin with
IBIS is also very handy for stills
Cannot copers think being limited to 3 stop IS primes is an excuse
Doesn't almost every RF lens already have OIS though?
>IBIS isn't an issue because RP is crap for video to begin with
IBIS is terrible for videos unless you have a lens with IS or you are also shooting on a gimbal. The warping is ridiculous. IBIS is incredibly useful for stills, you can take photos at 1/8 shutter speed with no motion blur as long as you don't have shaky grandpa hands.
Why does IBIS warp the shot on videos, but not stills?
Because of how fast you're shooting
How is it at 24fps?
Because video is a succession of still frames and the variance is from frame to frame, so you won't see it in a single frame (a photo). Similar to how you might notice an LED flickering in a video at a high speed, the flicker is the brightness change from frame to frame, but if you're only viewing a single frame then you have nothing else to compare to and you can't tell it's flickering.
>mirrorless camera
Why though? Get an old crop dslr if you actually enjoy photography.
got an NX2000 for close to fuck all
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSAMSUNGCamera ModelNX2000Camera Software1.14Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Width5472Image Height3648Horizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2023:09:18 16:37:42White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/2500 secF-Numberf/0.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating400Exposure Bias-1.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceDaylightFlashNo FlashFocal Length0.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width5472Image Height3648Exposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
A pre-owned Z7. You can get one for a thousand bucks. They’re practically identical to the current $3200 Z7II minus the second card slot. So use a bigger card, save $2k for premium Z glass instead and don’t be a putz, you putz.
do you have any experience with the 40mm f/2? I'm considering getting a used Z7 with that for a minimalistic travel setup but I'm concerned that the lens won't be able to make the most out of the sensor's resolution
Lol no autofocus
You must be some kind of prissy autist. Mine is the ideal camera. Everything else is bloated and very “japanese flip phone”.
Probably get a leica s2 for about $500 by now. And then drop 30k on a couple lenses for it. Pretty fucking cheap compared to when I bought mine.
How's the Panny S1? I don't *need* to upgrade but it seems like a whole lot of camera for the 800 euro-bucks it goes for here. Got a first gen a7 currently.
Someone redpill me on mirrorless, is the appeal just that they're like 1cm slimmer and that they don't make the shutter noise?
well if its sony its way smaller, way sharper, and way faster, but sony cripples FPS and video hard outside of the "appropriate" product lines so poorfag gearfags from the church of the dollar seethe because the council of the holy spec sheet finds the feature per dollar ratio lacking.
if its canon its the same size but way faster and the lenses under 100mm have gotten a lot better. they're super fast to shoot - but with truncated raw data and e-shutter only, but hey, mech shutter is still fast (10fps-ish) and the autofocus is ridiculously good, like sony. the r6ii is essentially an a9ii but it says canon in it.
if it's fuji it's a fucking joke.
if it's olympus it's what photographers wished bridge cameras were. go-everywhere do-anything slight IQ hit.
if it's panasonic it's a baller camcorder but worse than olympus at actually being a camera
if its nikon its uh
worse. a lot worse. spend as much money as you want if you want the mirrorless QOL of the 1st gen canon EOS R but otherwise there's no reason to go with nikon over sony/canon except pixel peeping, raw digging autism that no actual artist ever gave a shit about.
How is nikon vs canon software, thinking of going for d3400 vs eos700d
More durable, quieter, better lenses because they don't have the limitation of needing the rear element to be 40+mm away from the sensor, better AF, EVFs have many advantages over optical viewfinder, they've continued to improve in areas like resolution and video where as DSLRs are discontinued, typically faster burst rates
>Better lens adaptability, more opportunities for lens design
>Potentially smaller bodies and lenses
>More sophisticated autofocus stuff like subject detection, much wider AF coverage
>EVF, MF assist functionality, exposure tools like zebras and histogram in the viewfinder
>In camera USB charging / USB-C integration, better live view / screen performance
>Better electronic shutter functionality, better IBIS
Some of that also applies to some recent DSLR's, but often more common or simply better with mirrorless
Not much is really specific to mirrorless, just newer tech being put on newer products, and could just as easily be put on newer DSLRs (rip)
Size, lens adaptability, better MF assist, and new features/tech were my primary motivations for switching. USB charging is great on the go. IBIS is overhyped, but it really does magic sometimes. Eye autofocus was a total game changer, and made me give up BBF.
>evf as a positive
lol good one
>MF assist
has existed for decades, don't need little colored pixels to tell me what's in focus while running down my battery life
>usb usb usb
onions feature, real men recharge their batteries (multiple) outside of camera and swap as necessary (which is rare, as DSLRs have superior battery life)
>better ibis
lay off the caffeine and Adderall
>potentially smaller bodies and lenses
all that potential gone to waste kek see Nikon
>wider AF coverage
yeah no worthwhile images were made focusing on the far corner of a shot, center framing is still and will always reign king
anyone could go on
>Someone redpill me on mirrorless
It's a scam, buy an SLR
dropped your trip there cANON
I'm not cANON. But I wish he'd be my friend, he's funny and cool.
On Wyato, you'll get this. Pic very related. This board is full of literal jobless manchildren. They live in their parents homes. They sleep in twin beds. These are the people insisting on DSLRs. They don't want you to enjoy photography! They want you to be a "serious" autist like them and shoot building corners.
Ignore the people saying real men this and that, they are skinnyfat noodle armed nerds who derive their sense of masculinity from operating a camera - a toy computer. That's like saying "real men compile linux from the source code". Just imagine the kind of prematurely balding pizza faced fuck that would say that.
>i prethed a button on a computer to make the number correct im THO MANLEE *farts*
Using a mirrorless is freeing. No more doing the "asian tourist pose". No more black blob making people nervous. You can just take your camera with you and be a more normal person. A GOOD camera, that doesn't spit out blurry colored fog if you shoot indoors without flash. Some of them even fit in pockets.
This is the truth. Overall mirrorless has better lenses and smaller cameras apples to apples. Physics applies some (an f1.8 lens needs a front element of a certain size, a 50mm lens can only be so small) but generally you can get a smaller setup if someone has made the option. Autofocus is also better, and there's exposure preview - but autofocus is NOT better on Nikon's Z cameras.
Mirrorless can also have larger lenses on the smaller cameras because removing the mirror makes room for exotic optical designs. These lenses are super sharp and closer to the optics used for spy planes. They are totally unlike anything you can put on an SLR except for $$$$$$$$$ "cinema" lenses. You can not compare them to DSLRs. Nikon's Z mount is infested with such incomparable lenses. They really are super sharp compared to DSLR lenses, but why would you want them? Just get a sony or olympus, stick to the smaller lenses and enjoy life instead of pixel peeping.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1028Image Height702
All of Wyato is powered by performative contrarianism to cope with their past of being shoved into lockers