>>4120479>zfcOh, the hipster vintage larp camera WITH a "viewfinder tumor", the one that is actually for autists.
>would be a good camera if the sensor were not crop APS-C is more than fine
>modern camera design looks and feels like absolute shit Modern camera ergonomics are best, they also aren't eyesores like those silver shits you like so much.
>intimidates newbie subjects resulting in bad modelingHave you tried to stop looking like a fucking creep? It's not the camera, it's you.
>Most snoys also suck for walkaround shit and other dynamic photography given the lack of a top LCD displaying your current settings. Sony sucks across the board except for the sensor, the mount forces terrible lens designs because full frame is an afterthought, its dimensions are ideal for APS-C.
>At least an analog larp camera has that display, and is easy to change without looking at the camera. Even with a top screen, it can be hard to see what's going on in difficult light.What a load of cope.
>And lastly, they are embarrassing to be seen with. Looks matter. Looks get you past security. Looks get you past panties. Looks get you hired. Looks get you friends. Ugly people and embarrassingly clad people have the same disadvantage, but the difference is I can just hold a different camera.Kek, that's all in your head. I have yet to meet someone in real life who thinks vintage larp cameras are cool.
>Because anything under 36mp full frame is dangerously close to phone territory when viewed subjectively if you dare shoot in dimmer light demanding ISOs closer to 3200-12800 for good shutter speeds on people. Pseud shit, when you downscale it looks as noisy if not worse than lower MP count cameras. You won't get better noise from a 61 MP sensor. Your entire post reeks of ignorance. Sensor generation matters a lot more than megapixel count. In fact with APS-C you get the advantage of being able to open up more without your entire background going away.