>>4233918I don't pixel peep and unfortunately not pixel peeping is the best way to see the banding. If you only pixel peep you'll never see it. Normal vignetting correction that's not written into raw files doesn't create these bands either. It should have just been metadata for lr/c1 to read.
In the end this camera was just $600 for good autofocus/controls/resolution so i'll probably just keep it, deinvest in the fancy lenses, and just not expect anything of it anymore. The only way it very subtly fucks a photo is if it's a higher ISO, is mostly clear sky or a solid color, and you underexposed and fixed it later. you need all 3 to see a strong pattern because nobody is doing 5-6 ev pushes. Sony has been getting away with this for ages for a reason. like star eater, it hides itself well and doesn't affect most people, not even generic milky way and landscape shots.
the noise changing just because a lens is attached is concerning tho. i did it again in total darkness just to be sure and it didn't change (in the same way) that time. CA correction might change the raw a little but not much.
body cap confirmed for light leak. who fucking knows what this camera is really doing without reverse engineering the firmware, but i dont want to invest $1000+ or even $500+ in lenses for a flawed system anymore.
>>4233939>extending consumer grade zoom without full weather sealing$800 dust vacuum plastic kit lens, what a deal
the tamron 28-75 f2.8 gii is good enough for nikon to pretend they made it fyi
