Domain changed to archive.palanq.win . Feb 14-25 still awaits import.
Threads by latest replies - Page 18
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Noob here. How did a Playstation gaming company dethrone all the legacy camera companies? Was it because the move to mirrorless was the perfect catalyst to leverage their electronics tech knowhow?
fe2fucker
Anonymous
>>4391302 Got offtopic warning for saying 4chan is funded by alphabet soup agencies
Either janitor is certifiably retarded or we have conspiracy on our hands (or both, most likely both).
Also photo incl. for on-topic /p/ discussion.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4391320 Anon, I've been warned and banned for making fun of the guy who rages about Linux.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4391302 Yes. Jannies act on people saying 4chan is allowing private corps to shill here for a fee before they will ever act on this deluge of worthless sony brandwar threads.
This thread is an ad. It is protected. It is off topic and by all means board ruining but all these gearfag brand wars and wut-camera threads are ads.
Posts pointing out that it and others are ads are bad for business.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4391320 Erattas v2.0?
Wait no, nobody gives a fuck about /p/
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Send here more Walter White memes please
Anonymous
Micro contrast is not real. 3D pop is not real. Well, they may be real phenomena of an image, but they are not imparted by certain lenses due to certain optical designs. Anyone who supports the idea of 3D pop, Zeiss pop, or micro contrast is an anti-science luddite or a grifter. Watch any of these people try to explain what 3D pop or micro contrast is and their bullshit is self evident. If a phenomenon cannot be described using scientific language and measured objectively, it isn't real. Every time you see an A/B test for 3D pop or microcontrast, the tester is using different camera bodies, or the composition is different, the color grade is different, different exposure levels or the lighting has changed. The only other area that has so much peasant level superstition has got to be pro audio.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4385757 >distortion >apparent depth You must not be a shape rotator
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4380208 i dont know about you guys, but i can tell a 3d pop lens from a non 3d pop lens every single time
i can just simply see it
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4381342 most accurate would be to watch movies from 90s-2002
people werent super obsessed with having blurry backgrounds so you could see depth even when everything was in focus, check for outside daylight shots too where they couldnt control depth via lighting other than maybe couple reflectors and such, tv series mainly
Anonymous
>3d pop Why not just get a stereoscopic lens?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4391057 >nooooo that's cheating. You must only get 3d pop from vintage sovl lenses that are hard to find without fungus and haze shitting up their already pathetic contrast
Anonymous
I remember the first 6 months into it were a blast. Grabbing my first DSLR and go out shooting from landscapes to wildlife. But then, as I've mastered it, I don't have the motivation to go out and take pictures anymore. Everything is more or less the same: Go out, takes hundreds of pics, edit the 5% best, print the 1% best, rinse and repeat. I get photography is a simple science and anyone can do that, even professionally, but I've tried my best and challenged myself to shoot only primes or different types of photography, but there isn't anything I can't do. Am I doing something wrong, perhaps?
Anonymous
Share a few of your shots, I'm curious to see your work.
Anonymous
>>4391080 I don't post my photos online, at least not anymore. Been away from social medias as they are actually toxic. Besides, I don't seek validation to do what I do for personal purposes. So no, I won't.
Anonymous
>>4391079 >>4391082 Fuck off you lying bait posting attention whore.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4391086 Take some meds to control your anger issues, for your own sake.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
This is such a damn chore to use, What's a paid alt that doesn't use cloud servers?
Anonymous
>>4390922 >can't even install darktable that bad huh? yeah stick to taking pictures with your iPad
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4391064 nerd npc program on repeat
>well i bet you couldnt do (menial, time wasting computer/gaming task)! Anonymous
Quoted By:
I have never seen an actual good edit, or a good photo, from these “super smart computer wizards” that possess the immense intellect required to spend an hour following a how to set up darktable tutorial so I’m going to just assume either they dont exist, darktable is not capable of producing good colors or landing on good noise reduction settings in a reasonable amount of time, or they do exist and darktable could theoretically work fine but anyone so inclined to waste that much time on an editor is a terrible photographer and even worse at editing.
Anonymous
>>4390981 >Darktable? No thanks, I'd Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Anonymous
After doing intense research, I just found the holy grail cost-benefit wise, camera for portraits and action, that performs in low-light and it's affordable, with professional-tier lenses (also affordable). Thought on that plus any XF 55 mm lens?
Anonymous
>>4390901 This some kind of pre-emptive anti-fagging, or did you schizo out and not realise you're the first poster itt?
>>4390902 The mount is small, but the sensor is APS-C, which is basically the first real tier above P&S and phoneshits
>>4390900 Well done, you'll be posting photos soon right?
Anonymous
>>4390906 >>4390908 that's apsc? the camera is huge in comparison
fe2fucker
Quoted By:
>>4390900 i think that's a great idea, just make sure you get warranty on the shutter, i've seen them fail (once)
other than that, the XT series are lovely bodies
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4390910 I believe that's about the right size, anon.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4390900 It's pretty solid, shot many weddings and portrait sessions with an XT3 back in the day.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
The Nikon D810 and Canon 5dm3 are now over 10 years old. Where did the time go? Crazy to think photography sensors were not going to improve at all in the following 10 years after such an amazing run of improvements.
Anonymous
And they still have not surpassed film.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4390892 >inb4 "film has over 100MP of effective resolution. Digislugs cannot compete" guy appears.
Anonymous
GH5ii, GH6, GH7, G9ii?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4386221 why would you call me names
it has good ergonomics, takes very good pictures in raw format, many really good lens options, pictures probably as good as any ff photography camera released in recent years for dirt cheap
i dont know what the problem is
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4386221 >Calls other guy luddite >Shills for objectively worse technology Not the win you were expecting homie. DSLRs were great for decades and the existence of inferior mirrorless tech doesn't make them somehow worse at making good photos
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4384805 As long as you aren't shooting BIF you're fine, even then it's possible just not the right tool for the job. Whether or not it's a good buy depends on your requirements. M43 is a compromise in a lot of ways.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4382756 >GH52 and GH6 if no autofocus for video needed >GH7 and G92 otherwise All of them are built like a tank and have awesome ergonomics and stabilization.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4383739 Congrats. Now pay and carry the glass.
Zach
WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4389085 I know frfr, where's the autofocus?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4389125 why would he need a cinema grade camera?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4389229 >does it have ibs