>>4155964>muh ergos! muh ergos! i spent 40 hours holding this up with a 70-200 f1.4!One must wonder why he wants the camera to be a monstrous blob by default when he's already on the right track of putting extra grips on it to fit his personal preference. He extended the bottom plate, now all he has to do is stick a pad to the front and he's done. Sony does not have to make what is a relatively small camera DSLR sized, when the entire selling point was that going out in public with a DSLR kills your sex life on the spot, and nobody wants to have a two pound camera setup bouncing around on a strap, or to be seen alive and conscious with a camera fanny pack or camera purse. Let alone those huge weddingfaggot zoom lenses.
Why should people who do not hold their camera with ugly weddingfaggot zoom lens attached up for hours straight taking totally random fucking snapshits at an event be forced to deal with monster cameras like canons unusable two pound can't-be-seen-with-and-expect-to-have-sex pieces of shit?
>>4155975The P1000 displays dismal image quality, it's just less pixellated blur. That's all you get.
>You're just coping, and you'll drool over 100MP full frame when it eventually reaches the shelves.I've already seen 40mp APS-C which is very nearly the same thing and it does absolutely fucking nothing for resolving additional real details. Lenses people want to pay for and carry around are not up to it. I already consider 60mp full frame to be slightly past the point where anyone needs it, and 24mp is fine.
Sensors do not magically add reach. Your lens is what it is, you can only make the blur less pixellated. If you want to get more fine details in a picture, either get a truly longer lens or walk closer.
>>4155977You just listed a bunch of ugly oversized blobs. Set them next to an XT4/leica and you will understand why people who are not geeks don't want to take them on a trip. Nerds and weddingfaggots should not force their "superiority" on artists.
