>>4275782>i was just pretending to be a coping retard/p/ is currently full of awful photographers spouting anti-gearfag gearfag club cope
>its because they dont like my camera>noooo you dont get it i focused on content not quality>sorry i didnt lean on bokeh as a crutch i bet my messy background and shit composition is still better than yours would be at f/11 fool framerwhen their content sucks too
even if you were pretending to be a retard i hope some of them read that and realize their content just isnt sufficient to distract from their technical incompetence. no one ever told this guy "hey, your birds arent sharp, whyd you shoot this at iso 100 1/30" because its an interesting photo but if it was just a woman walking by lazy, unbothered birds it would be more boring and people would go "hey why this part blurry"
you need to get it
it's not about gear, it's because you are right. content can save the worst ever photo. it's a lack of it that draws people critiquing everything else. that, and being a gearfag yourself.
>film is 500mp, digislugs!>stop calling my negatives blurry. focus is a bourgie concept. these leaves have perfectly corrected CA because of the crystal lettuce of film optics. 