/p/ - Photography » Thread #4242762

[349 / 90 / 85]

2MiB, 5184x3888, PA013316.jpg

/M43/ /MFT/ General

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 14:47:46 No.4242762 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>4242780 >>4243319 >>4245167 >>4245636

Post some ruddy pictures edition

>Topic question
What's your latest lens and how is it going on your camera?

NEWS

>Current state of m43
https://www.43rumors.com/a-bit-of-everything-1862/

>First look at Lumix G9 II
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C-fpZ_hJWg
https://www.43rumors.com/first-leaked-image-of-the-new-panasonic-g9ii-has-25mp-sensor-and-two-new-leica-lenses-coming-too/

OTHER LINKS
https://www.43rumors.com/
https://www.mu-43.com/forums/micro-4-3-news-and-rumors.66/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 14:55:59 No.4242766 Report

Quoted By:

Gearfag safe space thread

Just post in the photo threads you’re acting like a foolji

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:04:32 No.4242771 Report

Quoted By:

Ohnononono ahahahahaha

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P5101033s.jpg, 481KiB, 2000x1500

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:13:43 No.4242778 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P5101146.jpg, 4MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:15:30 No.4242780 Report

Quoted By: >>4242781

>>4242762

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P2230142 (2).jpg, 2MiB, 4056x3040

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:16:41 No.4242781 Report

Quoted By: >>4242784

>>4242780

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9293277.jpg, 2MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:18:25 No.4242784 Report

Quoted By: >>4242787 >>4245636

>>4242781

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9203081.jpg, 3MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:21:11 No.4242787 Report

Quoted By: >>4245636

>>4242784

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:42:16 No.4242800 Report

Quoted By: >>4242809 >>4242811 >>4242813

>4000x, 5000x
Why do MFturds never resize their images? We don’t want screen filling blurry lines. Stick to 3000x or less instead of forcing us to pixel peep your noise and soft lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:55:01 No.4242809 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242800
Oh look, it's this guy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:56:15 No.4242811 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242800
>b-but thats not what I like!
nigga who cares

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 15:57:38 No.4242813 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242800
Because micro four thirds is a gearfag system and they have a breakdown if they dont post 100% size because the pixel peeping gets less pixel peepy

t. FF user always resizes to 25% for 4chinz

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P6061611 (3).jpg, 2MiB, 3888x5184

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 16:00:19 No.4242814 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1050259.jpg, 2MiB, 3705x2740

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 16:04:02 No.4242817 Report

Quoted By: >>4242818

>mfw

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P5101092e.jpg, 2MiB, 3556x4744

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 16:05:50 No.4242818 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242817
he looks cooked

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1060030.jpg, 2MiB, 3406x1723

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 16:47:53 No.4242840 Report

Quoted By: >>4242846 >>4243315

Lumix sisters, why do we always get so much hate?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 16:56:44 No.4242846 Report

Quoted By: >>4242847 >>4242848 >>4242850 >>4242885 >>4242886

>>4242840
because you're irritating, aggressive gearfags that whack off to spec sheets and mass larp about buying every panasonic to come out to make it look popular, but take trash photos like this and film total garbage.
>new panasonic comes out
>all 3 panasonic users on /p/: SNOY BTFO IM BUYING
>6 months after release: no one bought it
You even have cinefag and cANON on your "side". Ubercringe.

Just like that tldr essay shill that tells everyone to buy an R6 but has never given any indication that he owns more than a canon rebel.

BASED HASPHOTO GOODPHOTO CHADS:
Olympus
Leica
Fuji
Hasselblad
Sony
Pentax
Minolta
Nikon
Blackmagic design

NOPHOTO/BADPHOTO GEARFAGS:
Canon
Panasonic

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1030787.jpg, 2MiB, 4000x2521

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 16:59:59 No.4242847 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242846
>gearfag
I just take photos sis

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:01:01 No.4242848 Report

Quoted By: >>4242885

>>4242846
>Today I will go into a MFT thread and tell everyone that they're not living rent free in my head.
K. Keep me posted.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:07:31 No.4242850 Report

Quoted By: >>4242857 >>4242864 >>4242867 >>4242868 >>4242885 >>4243323 >>4243403

>>4242846
i too have noticed this unusual pattern.

people with panasonic cameras post much worse photos than people with olympus cameras. and i think the specs have to do with it. panasonic is chosen by people who have very little real world photography experience but are enamored by professional sounding word salad like "DCI 4k plog 4:2:2 12 bit 240p" and "dark noise is -0.5ev improved when pushing shadows 5ev and shows no chroma shifts" while everyone else recognizes these phrases as irrelevant bullshit that won't actually affect them except in super niche situations that they've never been in (if they have you think they'd post the feat?)

like the only one to do anything with those specs was trying to use high framerate video to catch nip slips at concerts

likewise, the canon r6 has been attracting this kind of inexperienced gearfag.

olympus/nikon etc on the other hand attract real photographers who are more concerned with ergos, focusing and whatnot

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20231018-100707.png, 335KiB, 1440x765

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:09:06 No.4242851 Report

Quoted By: >>4242852 >>4242856

>bokeh limiting
>more expensive than a ff camera
>5 percent of market share
>about to give up on cameras like Pentax did
>cameras famously used by a rapist
>just a crime front for the yakuza
>famously also used by larpers who have never touched another camera before.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO A7c_FE-35mm-F2.8-ZA-Carl-Zeiss-S (...).jpg, 668KiB, 2300x1820

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:16:51 No.4242852 Report

Quoted By: >>4243064 >>4243103

>>4242851
>selects the biggest joke of 4/3 that nobody is buying except retards
Maybe if you buy a gimped enough FF or APSC cam you'll be almost as small as four thirds can be

>BUT MUH BOKEEEEEH

sage

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1030613.jpg, 530KiB, 2312x1541

sage Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:21:07 No.4242853 Report

Quoted By:

meow :3

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1030518.jpg, 4MiB, 4624x3472

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:25:40 No.4242855 Report

Quoted By:

fungus :3

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:30:32 No.4242856 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242851
>5 percent of market share
Crowd sourcing your decisions

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:33:00 No.4242857 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242850
Thanks for typing all that.
Didn't read.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:43:04 No.4242864 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242850
Truth. Good specs != good cameras. Newfag gearfags always reveal themselves.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:48:15 No.4242867 Report

Quoted By: >>4242881

>>4242850
>Brand tribalism the post
Well at least you're getting paid for it.
You are getting paid aren't you anon?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 17:49:16 No.4242868 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242850
>like the only one to do anything with those specs was trying to use high framerate video to catch nip slips at concerts
based if you ask me

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _1525189_01.jpg, 3MiB, 2000x1499

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 18:21:11 No.4242878 Report

Quoted By:

clouds

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 18:31:14 No.4242881 Report

Quoted By: >>4242889

>>4242867
tribalism but everyone is in one tribe and the panasonic viral marketing campaign is in the other

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 18:47:42 No.4242885 Report

Quoted By: >>4243088

>>4242846
>>4242850
I'm pretty sure you're all the same poster, because last week it was 'Olympus is the brand of crappy photographers who have a chip on their shoulder' and this week it's Panasonic.

>>4242848
Yep.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Wed 18 Oct 2023 18:54:44 No.4242886 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242846
How could I be on the Panasonic haters side? You're dumb. Being a brandfag is the only reason to hate them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 18:58:23 No.4242889 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242881
>Tribes but there's is a hidden cabal working day and night to convince the handful of active users on here to buy their camera
Honestly, if that's how Panasonic spend their marketing money, it explains a lot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 20:30:16 No.4242959 Report

Quoted By:

Thinking about getting the 300mm f4 Olympus pro lens, I got the 75-300 because it was cheap but it's been prohibitively slow in the shade. The 40-150 f2.8 is also attractive as it's even faster, but both seem a bit big given I mostly do macro wildlife photography and just want a nice long lens for birds and chipmunks when I go on hikes. No free lunch I guess.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1060599-reduce.jpg, 772KiB, 2309x1732

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 21:19:12 No.4243003 Report

Quoted By:

Actually took some pictures with this Lumix G2 I have.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F8vEd4XaIAEWQeT.jpg, 1MiB, 4096x3075

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 21:36:54 No.4243010 Report

Quoted By: >>4243019 >>4243031 >>4243034 >>4243042 >>4243061

judging by japan twitter, G9II is a smashing hit.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1050281.jpg, 1MiB, 3437x1223

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 21:56:34 No.4243019 Report

Quoted By: >>4243024 >>4243104

>>4243010
Now debating between the G9II and a OM-5

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 22:02:56 No.4243024 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243019
if you don't need video there's nothing THAT important that you can't do on the OM-5, plus it's much cheaper.
the build quality is much better on Panasonic though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 22:12:31 No.4243031 Report

Quoted By: >>4243048

>>4243010
Still no release date for UK, just "November"

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 22:16:00 No.4243034 Report

Quoted By: >>4243041

>>4243010
I read asobinet and follow sumizoom and the only complaint I have seen is
>why does it have so many video features
They sorta look DOWN on video as ewwww, pleb tier.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 22:38:54 No.4243041 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243034
lmao now I get why they usually prefer Olympus in japan

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 22:42:37 No.4243042 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243010
>japan
who cares
>flowers

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cbfcd6c092e6abc1.jpg, 4MiB, 2599x1951

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:08:09 No.4243046 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:13:25 No.4243048 Report

Quoted By: >>4243058 >>4243059

>>4243031
in EE we got late october; since the g9II was announced Nikon, Canon and Sony have been running -20-30% sales. they're scared shitless for their aps-c lines.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:39:06 No.4243058 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243048
I waited until Sony announced the A6700 before buying my GH6 cos I was hoping for an APSC GH6 killer, but it wasn't.
Luckily for me that meant I could return the GH6 when the G9ii was announced, but now I'm sitting here with 4 mft lenses and nothing to put them on.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:39:26 No.4243059 Report

Quoted By: >>4243060 >>4243088

>>4243048
>scared
It’s more like a fuck you to panasonic for cheating ISO ala fuji and NR ala canon to fake their DR results for dxotards that make a hobby out of salvaging -7 ev bookshelves
>fine we’ll give everyone a discount on the r7 because almost nobody takes pictures of birds anyways lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:40:18 No.4243060 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243059
ok buddy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:42:09 No.4243061 Report

Quoted By: >>4243062 >>4243063

>>4243010
>judging by soulless bugmen, a camera tailor made for spec sheets and charts is a hit
Call me when the french care

They aren’t fooled by “show me duh raws” chartfags

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:48:56 No.4243062 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243061
>french
those baguette niggers haven't been relevant on photography since WW2

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image_2023-10-19_025130147.png, 58KiB, 1314x324

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:51:35 No.4243063 Report

Quoted By: >>4243080

>>4243061

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 18 Oct 2023 23:52:30 No.4243064 Report

Quoted By: >>4243078 >>4243080

>>4242852
>panasonic 100-300 f/8-11
>"but why is sony bigger?"

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 00:24:33 No.4243078 Report

Quoted By: >>4243106

>>4243064
they have the same reach you dumdum

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 00:27:57 No.4243080 Report

Quoted By: >>4243090 >>4243105

>>4243063
There you go

S1R it is. FUCK micro fool turds.

>>4243064
Because sony isn’t radical enough to sell people an f8-11 200-600 and tell people “raise ur iso lol”

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 01:28:19 No.4243088 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243059
Sure.

>>4242885
I’m pretty sure all of the non-cAnon trolling on this board is one dude who doesn’t even take photos.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 01:36:54 No.4243090 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243080
they just registered a new camera, either the GH7 or a S1 mark 2 with PDAF. Just wait a little.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:09:40 No.4243103 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242852
>if 99% of my photo is blurry, then it can't suck!!
lmfao do snoyboys really? back to the repair shop for you fatty.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:12:41 No.4243104 Report

Quoted By: >>4243107

>>4243019
Ooh tough choice. How much do you value size, because the OM-5 is waaaay smaller. The G9 II is bigger than the OM-1, and despite the higher MP I think the 20mp Oly sensor takes cleaner, more pleasing stills.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:14:42 No.4243105 Report

Quoted By: >>4243109

>>4243080
Yeah cus if you raise ISO past 1600 on any A7R are you get le epic ifone 13 giga processed AI filter noise

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:15:28 No.4243106 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243078
Unless you do a 2x crop on the Sony dumdum

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:15:58 No.4243107 Report

Quoted By: >>4243108

>>4243104
>the 20mp Oly sensor takes cleaner, more pleasing stills.
he doesn't know....

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:20:25 No.4243108 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243107
make it make sense schizo

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:34:13 No.4243109 Report

Quoted By: >>4243112 >>4243121 >>4243126 >>4243221

>>4243105
Lol why do you lie

There's no indication sony is reducing ISO noise. The only noise reduction anyone has ever seen is a hot pixel filter on exposures longer than 4 seconds. They do label their ISO approximately 1/3 of a stop lower than they should, however, but neither should phase you, because panasonic and olympus both label ISO a full stop lower and apply shot noise reduction to all exposures in order to falsely achieve an SNR equal to a physically impossible 4/3 sensor (for ISO setting, not real ISO). Similar to what canon does to pretend their sensors actually got better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:37:07 No.4243112 Report

Quoted By: >>4243120

>>4243109
>to falsely achieve an SNR equal to a physically impossible 4/3 sensor
provide the math for your retarded claim

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 2MiB, 1162x1204

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:56:27 No.4243120 Report

Quoted By: >>4243122 >>4243126

>>4243112
Not him but there are three explanations for what's presented in these links, versus dpreview's exposure equalized test scene (all the cameras are shot with the same ISO, shutter, and aperture and jpeg and raw versions of the image are generated from two lightroom classic presets - if one takes a darker or brighter picture than the reference camera [a phase one iq180] exposure is increased or decreased in lightroom classic, so it is the "correct" ISO assuming the sensor is ISO invariant within a stop or so - but colors are only as correct as camera standard and lens field curvature can defocus parts of the chart, so you shouldn't use the tool to compare colors or lens sharpness)
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Ideal%204/3,Olympus%20System%20OM-1,Panasonic%20Lumix%20DC-G9
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm#Nikon%20Z%2050_14,Olympus%20System%20OM-1_12,Panasonic%20Lumix%20DC-G9_12
1: Olympus, which uses sony sensors, and panasonic, have secured the aid of aliens and made impossible technology
2: ISO is labeled a full stop lower. These are charted against ISO setting. after all. So IRL you'd never notice a benefit and never notice an issue, you would just raise your ISO until you got the aperture/shutter speed you wanted.
3: Photostophotons is just wrong, or his SNR measurement method doesn't correspond to how humans actually view noise as impacting their photos in which case he's not wrong just totally useless.
4, not an option: Dpreview is CHEATING! But they really aren't, you can download these raw files yourself. I did with the G9 and Z50. They're legit. Panasonic = 1 stop darker.

I have included a common and affordable (~$1300-1500 used) full frame camera as a standard frame of reference. Go to this site yourself and try some sony cameras. And laugh at how every single sony camera, literally every single one, is noisier looking than their nikon counterpart, despite p2p suggesting a better performance fucking KEK.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:57:10 No.4243121 Report

Quoted By: >>4243124 >>4243128

>>4243109
>There's no indication sony is reducing ISO noise
>I’m impressed! Those are really good results from the Sony a7 IV! Just keep in mind, much of it is achieved by downsampling and significant noise reduction in camera which cannot be turned off.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 02:58:17 No.4243122 Report

Quoted By: >>4243124 >>4243125

>>4243120
provide the MATH not some articles you took at face value, fucking faggot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:04:11 No.4243124 Report

Quoted By: >>4243130

>>4243121
A sourceless quote may as well have come from a ghost only you see. But based on how you are incapable of communicating with other human beings i'm going to assume this is related to video specifications in which case lol lmao, who cares, everyone reduces noise in video, and should, because chroma noise ruins shots but nobody pixel peeps cats fur for noise reduction softening. If I wanted to do my own NR in video as if my shoots were going to make it to theatre sized screens, i'd buy an actual cinema camera.

Well, ok. Panasonic and sony paid shills pixel peep their frames. But we don't really count them. They don't represent anyone who exists in the real world. In the real world, these cameras are used to make youtube videos and hobby projects with 0 quality expectations other than not having crazy banding and artifacts.

>>4243122
>Hey do a mathematical disseration you could only possibly do with access to the camera
No. Go fuck yourself. See those pictures? That is what you get. End of story you sissy faggot. Go take that cock outta your ass and lick the shit off it, fuckface.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:07:14 No.4243125 Report

Quoted By: >>4243130

>>4243122
>Noooo dont show me how noisy my camera really is
>Do some math instead, because i know, you will never meet those terms!
does seeing how noisy the cameras actually are anger you
is that why you try and set disingenuous terms to avoid confronting this fact
that your cheap, small camera does not perform as well as an expensive, big one
that you made compromises similar to those of people with 1" sensor compacts (such as the new iphone 15 pro)

face it. what you see on that dpreview page is truth. you can even download the raws. go download the iso 12800 raw since that's the real iso 6400 lmao its actually even worse.

lol
heh
ha
hahahahaahahahahahaha

micro FOOL tards will find any excuse not to confront the simple fact that smaller sensor = lower quality hahahahahahaha

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:11:51 No.4243126 Report

Quoted By: >>4243128

>>4243109
LOL

>>4243120
notice how when this dude posts le dpreview specfagging, he doesn't use a sony camera?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1060131-3.jpg, 430KiB, 1600x1168

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:13:05 No.4243127 Report

Quoted By: >>4243128 >>4243287 >>4243288

>muh noise
who cares

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 1MiB, 1146x594

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:15:13 No.4243128 Report

Quoted By: >>4243136 >>4243137

>>4243121
>Sony reduces noise bro
i think you quoted an imaginary person instead of posting a link to a written article (the only thing that counts) because you know it's just some retard, probably a youtube retard (the most dishonest, error prone, dunning kruger type of retard on earth) mistaking the inherent NR of downsampling to shoot full width 4k for additional NR. Downsampling always reduces noise, that's why the footage from your M43 camera is only a little noisy and not an unusable snowstorm. When you shoot full width 4k on 4/3s you are essentially gaining a stop and a half of ISO performance.

sony definitely doesn't reduce noise on the A7IV. it performs as badly as an APS-C nikon.

>>4243126
>Go to this site yourself and try some sony cameras. And laugh at how every single sony camera, literally every single one, is noisier looking than their nikon counterpart, despite p2p suggesting a better performance fucking KEK.
Thank you for this post, rajesh from panasonic marketing, but your inability to understand english mena your shitposta fall flat.

>>4243127
People who take pictures of people, instead of dolls. Women don't like their skin looking like sandpaper.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image_2023-10-19_061607008.png, 1MiB, 1208x1216

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:17:20 No.4243130 Report

Quoted By: >>4243135 >>4243138

>>4243124
that's CineD.
>No.
Okay, faggot.
>>4243125
comparing a $800 camera released in 2017 with cameras released 4y afterwards.....

You DO know you'll have to redo those comparisons in 2weeks, right, you dumbfuck?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1020603.jpg, 722KiB, 2177x1633

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:22:09 No.4243132 Report

Quoted By: >>4243142

post more photos sisters :3

trans rights~!

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:23:10 No.4243135 Report

Quoted By: >>4243147 >>4243150 >>4243159 >>4245920

>>4243130
Sensor tech can not change shot noise and modern sensors are 99% dominated by shot noise. With regards to IQ, sensor tech can only change totally useless bullshit, like color shifts on shadow recoveries that are so noisy they are unusable anyways, slight vignetting differences with more efficient microlenses and sensor stacks, and maybe in the future we will get a real ISO 1 and be done with ND filters for most cases. But shot noise is inherent to the quantum nature of light and electronics. It can be edited out, even before the raw is written to your SD card, but you can't start with less of it than your sensor size dictates.

>An $800 camera from 2017
Oh yes you see unfortunately sensors pretty much peaked aside from on sensor PDAF, readout speeds, and truly useless bullshit (le shadow recovery! le iso invariance! ok film has neither and still looks 10x better and has 17+ stops of actual in-scene dynamic range, not bring up some useless noisy garbage "dynamic range" ala digital)

Literally the highest performing micro four thirds camera on earth according to "math" and very close to the G9 II except in extreme shadow recovery. AKA snapshit bullshit.
>Whatifyouhaveurcameraonmanualanduseebigfootatnight.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:23:34 No.4243136 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243128
>Women don't like their skin looking like sandpaper.
Lmfao who cares what women want

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:24:50 No.4243137 Report

Quoted By: >>4243139

>>4243128
>iphone tier noise
>words words words
your photos would be bad even without the iphone noise, so you're right to gaslight yourself

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:25:01 No.4243138 Report

Quoted By: >>4243144

>>4243130
you can use the gh6 and the om-1 and the results are the same every time

micro four thirds literally can not be anything but one stop worse than aps-c and two stops worse than FF as long as they all have roughly the same megapixel count and aren't snoy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:26:02 No.4243139 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243137
>cope cope cope
>seethe seethe seethe
Smaller sensor = lower quality
S

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P5100879s.jpg, 5MiB, 5128x3846

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:27:18 No.4243142 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243132
olympus daddies own lumix kittens
it was meant to be

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1200x1200bb.jpg, 217KiB, 1200x1200

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:28:27 No.4243143 Report

Quoted By: >>4243146 >>4243216

>Smaller sensor = lower quality, faster readout
>Nikon, Canon, Fuji larger sensor = higher quality, slower readout
>Sony camera any sensor = lower quality, slower readout
based nikonbro BTFO snoy and fool turds at the same time

it has never been more over than it has been now

>be fool turds fanboy
>cope because your camera is 2x noisier than a cheap z6
>be snoyboy
>cope because your camera is as noisy as the cheapest entry level nikon mirrorless (aps-c)

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_4014.jpg, 2MiB, 2911x4367

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:35:52 No.4243144 Report

Quoted By: >>4243152

>>4243138
This is true, but everything gets better. We're at a point where m43 cameras are as good in dynamic range and noise management than full frames were X amount of years ago. Obviously if you compare two cameras of the same generation then yeah the FF is always going to have the best specs. But I don't really look at specs when I buy cameras I look at samples. I want a camera that takes pictures that I like, some numbers don't actually mean anything. I've been shooting olympus for over 20 years now and no other brand produces results that I like as much as them. That and m43 lenses are mad, especially with options from Voigtlander and mystery chinesey glass companies. Another thing that people often get wrong in my opinion is the kind of noise as opposed to the amount. The original 5D has horrendous amounts of noise, but no one ever afraid to push the ISO to max on those because the effect is so pleasing. Picrel

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:42:07 No.4243146 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243143
What the fuck is snoy doing? I just checked every single one from the a7iii (the older ones don’t even work) and they’re all noisier than canon/nikon FF. In the center, so it’s not vignetting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:45:28 No.4243147 Report

Quoted By: >>4243148 >>4243222

>>4243135
>Sensor tech can not change shot noise
provide source
>and modern sensors are 99% dominated by shot noise
provide proofs

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:49:11 No.4243148 Report

Quoted By: >>4243153

>>4243147
>anything to avoid facing the music

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:52:40 No.4243150 Report

Quoted By: >>4243152

>>4243135
>Sensor tech can not change shot noise and modern sensors are 99% dominated by shot noise.

never heard a more retarded statement, try using a dslr from 2005 before saying stuff like this. ff and crop of that era had unusable noise at iso 800, lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:55:41 No.4243152 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243150
>try using a dslr from 2005 before saying stuff like this. ff and crop of that era had unusable noise at iso 800, lmao
true, picrel

>>4243144

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 03:57:20 No.4243153 Report

Quoted By: >>4243156

>>4243148
>I keep spouting retarded shit with zero proofs
>can't ever present data
ok, fooltard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 04:15:56 No.4243156 Report

Quoted By: >>4243158

>>4243153
>anything to avoid facing the music

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 04:24:00 No.4243158 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243156
>anything to avoid looking like a retard

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20231018_212555_Gallery.jpg, 403KiB, 1079x840

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 04:26:07 No.4243159 Report

Quoted By: >>4243160

>>4243135
>Sensor tech can not change shot noise
Hah, good one.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 04:35:27 No.4243160 Report

Quoted By: >>4243161

>>4243159
Not from this current point or 2015 even no

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 04:39:12 No.4243161 Report

Quoted By: >>4243176

>>4243160
There's all sorts of sensor differences even today, it's definitely not cut and dry like you're trying to argue. ISO is not consistent between camera manufacturers either.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 05:41:05 No.4243176 Report

Quoted By: >>4243181

>>4243161
>there are all sorts of
Name 5 specific cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 05:56:35 No.4243181 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243176
not cameras, but
>sony, st micro, omnivision, onsemi, canon
>stacked, classic cmos, bsi, x-tranny
plus combinations thereof

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 07:12:38 No.4243189 Report

Quoted By: >>4243192

this thread is making me want to pick up a m43 camera

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 07:55:36 No.4243192 Report

Quoted By: >>4243193

>>4243189
It's making me worry about getting mine. Is this what it's going to be like? Just people following me around, showing me test charts, telling me my f2.8 zoom is actually f5.6, seething that I didn't buy something else instead?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 08:03:14 No.4243193 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243192
just let the photos speak for themselves. that's my plan (i'm not good enough for gear to make or break my shots). also, no one irl cares like the perverts here. brand or format obsession is a strictly anonymous online phenomenon in my experience

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO pxlmagwinner.png, 986KiB, 1231x737

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 10:31:18 No.4243216 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243143
unpleasant camera holding experience, small and heavy is best

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 10:40:10 No.4243221 Report

Quoted By: >>4243281

>>4243109
>stars disappear from RAW image
>"There's no indication sony is reducing ISO noise."
lmfao

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 10:43:54 No.4243222 Report

Quoted By: >>4243235 >>4243268 >>4243277

>>4243147
>>Sensor tech can not change shot noise
>provide source
Shot noise is inherent in the quantum nature of light. It's literally part of the light signal prior to the signal being recorded by anything. How the fuck is a sensor going to change that?

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Thu 19 Oct 2023 12:06:36 No.4243235 Report

Quoted By: >>4243277

>>4243222
shhhh don't get in the way of Dunning Kruger and redditards asking for sources on the very concepts that should be second nature to them for their posts on the subject to matter at all
that poster is probably Moop

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 13:43:37 No.4243268 Report

Quoted By: >>4243456

>>4243222
>Shot noise is inherent in the quantum nature of light
still no data backing up the claim

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 14:22:13 No.4243277 Report

Quoted By: >>4243456

>>4243235
>>4243222
You're making the mistake of making the assumption that sensors have no room to improve based on the assumption that sensors are "99% dominated by shot noise" which is further based on the assumption that shot noise cannot be reduced. If you think you understand quantum mechanics; then you don't.

Sensors (non scientific ones) used in our cameras are like 60-70% quantum efficient. Increasing QE means improving output noise. It's also possible to have more than 100% quantum efficiency with the way we are measuring this, though may be difficult to apply to image sensors.

Quantum noise/shot noise is not set in stone despite being "part of the signal" (you don't understand quantum mechanics). Quantum noise can be reduced with technology, you can call it non-destructive, but it's more than non-destructive to the signal, it's constructive to the signal and "creates" more original signal. Such technology already exists and is in fact already in use in other scientific fields of research, there are various techniques, whether engineers can apply any of them or new techniques to image sensors is another story. But simply put; it is not impossible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 14:30:23 No.4243281 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243221
Hot pixels in long exposures at iso 100 are not ISO noise retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 14:50:04 No.4243284 Report

Quoted By:

Also, quantum dot technology applied to sensors could end up being shat foveon was supposed to be, not just for colour, but improve tech level by 2 stops, and potentially also enable multiple exciton generation

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9173002.jpg, 2MiB, 3888x5184

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 14:57:57 No.4243286 Report

Quoted By: >>4243287 >>4243288 >>4243309

cute figga my nigga

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 14:59:02 No.4243287 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243286
>>4243127

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 15:03:49 No.4243288 Report

Quoted By: >>4243304 >>4243309

>>4243127
>>4243286
you can really tell they're cheap and plasticy, but at least they saya only does it at the ends of the hair thanks to it blurriness.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9253198.jpg, 2MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 15:54:11 No.4243304 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243288
Yeah they're just prize figures. This one isn't though.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20231019_0003_01.jpg, 1MiB, 2921x3471

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:01:36 No.4243309 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243286
thanks bruh
>>4243288
My Saya its a bootleg so its expected

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PA180007.jpg, 752KiB, 2048x1536

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:09:30 No.4243315 Report

Quoted By: >>4243316

>>4242840
superiority breeds contempt

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1010128.jpg, 782KiB, 1536x2048

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:10:54 No.4243316 Report

Quoted By: >>4243317 >>4247607

>>4243315
m43 is just superior to fool frame

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1010139.jpg, 826KiB, 1536x2048

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:11:57 No.4243317 Report

Quoted By: >>4243318 >>4247607

>>4243316
this kitty's name is lumix btw

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_9896.jpg, 619KiB, 2048x1363

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:13:10 No.4243318 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243317
here's a shot of lumix taken with a FF camera. look how unhappy lumix is. he just knows that FF image will be bad

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:14:06 No.4243319 Report

Quoted By: >>4243333

>>4242762
itt: poorlets using shitty crop sensors

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1010757.jpg, 699KiB, 2048x1536

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:16:19 No.4243323 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242850
where's your god now?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:20:49 No.4243330 Report

Quoted By: >>4243333

smartphone camera general?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:21:10 No.4243331 Report

Quoted By: >>4243333 >>4243337 >>4243344 >>4243374

In the end micro four thirds the best camera ever for hiking because you cant carry more without dying is just used for cats and pedophile jackoff toys huh

>meanwhile bird and landscape threads: all apsc/ff DSLRs lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:25:05 No.4243333 Report

Quoted By: >>4243344

>>4243319
>>4243330
>>4243331
no photos mads as usual

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:38:48 No.4243337 Report

Quoted By: >>4243344 >>4243580

>>4243331
If you pay attention you’ll notice that’s all panasonic people. It’s not sensor sizes. Full frame panasonic users are just as annoying and retarded.

Olympus exif = good post almost guaranteed

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 16:50:03 No.4243344 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243333

smartphone camera user lol

>>4243337

its all dogshit

>>4243331

> waah i cant carry 1 extra pound

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 18:13:41 No.4243374 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243331
And Canon has the R7 which is cheaper than an OM-1 while outperforming it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 19:42:04 No.4243403 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242850
>like the only one to do anything with those specs was trying to use high framerate video to catch nip slips at concerts

Holy based

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 19:58:32 No.4243409 Report

Quoted By: >>4243412 >>4243445 >>4243619 >>4243655

What's a small and cheap but not too bad m43 lens if I want to start shooting with an old cheap body like a pen e-pl5 or a gx1?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 20:03:02 No.4243412 Report

Quoted By: >>4243416

>>4243409
the pana 25mm 1.7 or 20/mm 1.7 to go very small, if you don't mind manual, TT Artisan 25/2 is the best price/quality you can get.
Oly is 3expensive for going cheap

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 20:20:32 No.4243416 Report

Quoted By: >>4243448

>>4243412
manual focus is tempting just to further the retro feel. I've never been stuck with manual before sounds kinda fun. and like $40? damn.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 22:10:00 No.4243445 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243409

14-42 and 40-150 kit lenses if you don't already have them or oly 12-40 2.8 or pana 12-35 2.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 22:44:08 No.4243448 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243416
Olympus 17mm is the retrolarpest, but as I said, 3expensive

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 19 Oct 2023 23:28:11 No.4243456 Report

Quoted By: >>4243463 >>4243589

>>4243268
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_noise

>>4243277
>You're making the mistake of making the assumption that sensors have no room to improve based on the assumption that sensors are "99% dominated by shot noise"
I did not make the "99%" statement, and that statement was clearly a statement of rhetoric any way. The anon who wrote it was trying to say that the majority of noise with modern sensors is shot noise.

>which is further based on the assumption that shot noise cannot be reduced.
You physically cannot "reduce shot noise" in the way that you think. Shot noise is part of the nature of light before anything records it. When you collect more photons you collect more signal AND more shot noise photons. But when you collect more photons the ratio improves towards signal, i.e. increased SNR.

>Sensors (non scientific ones) used in our cameras are like 60-70% quantum efficient.
Increasing QE would not "reduce shot noise". It would enable a higher SNR through the conversion of more photons to electrons. However, there's not even 1 stop of light left on the table. A 100% QE m43 sensor still wouldn't be as clean as a 70% QE aps-c sensor.

>Quantum noise/shot noise is not set in stone despite being "part of the signal" (you don't understand quantum mechanics).
No, you do not understand quantum mechanics. cinefag was right and you are Dunning Kruger on display. You cannot reduce shot noise. You collect more photons to improve SNR but that ironically collects more shot noise photons as well. Signal photons just outpace noise photons.

I'm not even sure wtf you're rambling about in your last paragraph. You probably think something you read applies to shot noise when it has nothing at all to do with shot noise.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:03:56 No.4243463 Report

Quoted By: >>4243467

>>4243456
Continue explaining how shot noise is different based on sensor size, fucking shitskin.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:08:43 No.4243465 Report

Quoted By: >>4243466 >>4243467

Micro fool tards always try and guide the argument to theory because the photographic evidence plainly BTFOs them and they want to imagine a world where the next panasonic will finally be better than standard format like they said the last one was

Congratulations on whoever fell for their red herring. They’re hated for a reason. They will always find some theories to argue to avoid facing the hard evidence. Like snoys do everything to avoid anyone checking dpreview and noticing snoy FF is really as noisy as APSC.

Just not olympus bros it’s always panaturds for some reason. They are the snoys of m4/3.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:09:54 No.4243466 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243465
I also notice they use really hostile incel language like racist slurs and attempts at using traditional british names in the context of insults. They really are the snoys of four thirds.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:12:42 No.4243467 Report

Quoted By: >>4243469

>>4243463
>REEEEEEE STOP TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT MUH M43 SENSOR!!!!
Larger sensors collect more photons thereby increasing SNR. You can't escape basic physics.

>>4243465
So it seems, anon. So it seems.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:13:26 No.4243469 Report

Quoted By: >>4243474 >>4243488 >>4243490

>>4243467
>Larger sensors collect more photons thereby increasing SNR
Put pen to paper and provide the math, fuckwit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:17:11 No.4243474 Report

Quoted By: >>4243476 >>4243477

>>4243469
Go to dpreview and check the studio shot tool you mad little baby

Oooh are you going to say fuck again? Are you going to say faggot, nigger, shitskin, kike, tranny, and maybe even goy or consoomer? Are you going to seethe again? Are you going to say shit? Do you think that will change what the photos look like? Or what YOUR photos look like?

Noisy bokeh cats?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:21:39 No.4243476 Report

Quoted By: >>4243488 >>4243490

>>4243474
grrr show me the $&@! math! i dont care about &$?!** photos i want to make this hard for you so you give up and i can say i won! Actual photos dont *%#+!? count! *string of profanity and racial slurs*
t. Panasoiboy

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:22:09 No.4243477 Report

Quoted By: >>4243478 >>4243490

>>4243474
put pen to paper and provide the math, it shoudl be easy if you actually understood the shit you're talking.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:24:35 No.4243478 Report

Quoted By: >>4243479

>>4243477
But you can just look at the photos on dpreview and even check the raws yourself
You can even post a photo yourself and dare people who use the standard 35mm format to post better

Why waste time doing calculus when you can just look at the evidence

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:26:44 No.4243479 Report

Quoted By: >>4243490 >>4243538

>>4243478
if you are unable to prove the shit you're spouting, then there is zero value to anything you say. you are a mental midget shitskin, who mymics knowledge in typical shitskin fashion; you will never be white, and your shitskin race will never be able to sustain civilisation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:43:48 No.4243488 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243469
>>4243476
>REEEEE THE MATH REEEEEEE I WANT THE MATH REEEEEEEEE
Literally in the linked Wikipedia article on the topic.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2023-10-19 at 5.44.1 (...).png, 203KiB, 1622x664

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:45:22 No.4243490 Report

Quoted By: >>4243495 >>4243581

>>4243469
>>4243476
>>4243477
>>4243479
>REEEEEE PUT PEN TO PAPER I WANT THE FUCKING MATH REEEEEEEE MOUTH FOAMING REEEEEEE GOD DAMN IT GIVE ME THE MATH

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 00:54:44 No.4243495 Report

Quoted By: >>4243505 >>4243538

>>4243490
put pen to paper, shitskin. prove your claim, I know what the formula is. Put values into it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9190022.jpg, 2MiB, 2500x1877

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 01:00:09 No.4243501 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 01:03:08 No.4243505 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243495
>provides a link to the formula
>provides a screenshot of the formula
>REEEEE I WANT TO KNOW THE FORMULA
Wow, you are a dumb one, aren't you?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 01:15:59 No.4243518 Report

Quoted By:

Micro poor turds

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 01:57:15 No.4243538 Report

Quoted By: >>4243539 >>4243571

>>4243495
>>4243479
>*RACIAL SLURS*
Is this really how micro four thirds users conduct themselves when shown a simple photograph demonstrating the effect of ISO on image quality? Really? What’s next out of his filthy little mouth? Hopefully the panasonic cock that’s in it

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 01:58:47 No.4243539 Report

Quoted By: >>4243577

>>4243538
OK shitskin, ping back when you can demonstrate your claims with math and numbers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 02:31:39 No.4243571 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243538
>[group] judgement
>Is this how [group] conduct themselves
Retard alert

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 02:39:59 No.4243577 Report

Quoted By: >>4243581

>>4243539
>ignores the math and numbers
>PING BACK WHEN YOU HAVE MATH AND NUMBERS
You are really stupid. That's all that can be said. You are just beyond fucking dumb at this point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 02:43:57 No.4243580 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243337
Almost right but it's actually brand bashers that are uniformly awful.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 02:48:33 No.4243581 Report

Quoted By: >>4243600

>>4243490
>>4243577
I do t get exactly what you're both arguing about but I'd like to see the numbers.
Is this signal to noise ratio equals noise divided by the square route of noise equals noise?
What does that mean for different sensors?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:07:29 No.4243589 Report

Quoted By: >>4243600

>>4243456
Again, you do not understand quantum mechanics. I don't care about m43u.
1) Yes, you can reduce quantum noise, your assumption that it cannot is plain ignorance. LIGO is already using one of these techniques to reduce quantum noise in collection of photons. It is not physically impossible to bypass some quantum noise.
2) Increasing QE increases SNR, different to shot noise, that's your misinterpretation.
3) 100% QE is not the limit for QE, because 100% QE is not actually 100% efficiency, it's not even close
4) Any sensor that is RGB vertically stacked that is as efficient as current sensors will gain SNR as well. As each photosite location will take all in visible light instead of 1/3rd of it. Quantum dots were used in research on image sensors a couple years back. This is likely to trickle down at some point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:16:41 No.4243594 Report

Quoted By:

https://sumizoon.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/10/16/161116

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:19:58 No.4243595 Report

Quoted By:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XylK6wnRSeg

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:28:15 No.4243600 Report

Quoted By: >>4243610 >>4244874

>>4243581
>but I'd like to see the numbers.
They were already provided.

>What does that mean for different sensors?
Collecting more photons = higher SNR.

>>4243589
>Again, you do not understand quantum mechanics.
OK Dunning Kruger.

>1) Yes, you can reduce quantum noise
No, you cannot reduce shot noise.

>LIGO is already using one of these techniques
Holy Dunning Kruger. LIGO is not "reducing shot noise." They are using techniques to shift noise around so that they can better detect certain properties they wish to measure. A very, very rough analogy would be an audio DSP shifting noise to frequencies humans can't hear so that the frequencies we can hear are cleaner. They're not breaking the laws of physics. And what they are doing has absolutely ZERO relationship or application to imaging sensors for cameras.

>2) Increasing QE increases SNR, different to shot noise, that's your misinterpretation.
No it's not "different to shot noise", it's intricately tied to the nature of light and shot noise. Increasing QE means increasing the conversion of photons to electrons, i.e. gathering more photons, i.e. more exposure. The increase in SNR from the increased QE is predicted by the formula for shot noise.

>3) 100% QE is not the limit for QE, because 100% QE is not actually 100% efficiency, it's not even close
So now your hopes are pinned on the belief that consumer class imaging sensors are going to somehow have >100% QE? You do realize that if that ever happens, FF sensors would have the same tech, do you not?

>4) Any sensor that is RGB vertically stacked that is as efficient as current sensors will gain SNR as well.
That's a big leap considering that so far stacked RGB sensors have higher light loss than Bayer sensors with a CFA. But let's say someone invents this magic sensor: do you think FF won't use it as well?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:36:00 No.4243605 Report

Quoted By: >>4243611

>LUMIX G9PROII - It seems that most stores are no longer able to deliver products on the release date.
already on back order

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:37:33 No.4243606 Report

Quoted By:

>fool turds attempting to do math to prove the photographic evidence of micro for poors not being better than full frame is actually false

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F8ylLjOaQAA8dFM.jpg, 766KiB, 3029x4035

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:37:55 No.4243607 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20231011201117.jpg, 821KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:40:13 No.4243609 Report

Quoted By: >>4243611

>virtually unlimited recording

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:42:37 No.4243610 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243600
>They were already provided.
Where?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:45:27 No.4243611 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243609
>>4243605
Thank you for these totally organic posts panasonic marketing department anons

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F8zCq-qaQAAciOo.jpg, 918KiB, 4096x2304

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:53:18 No.4243612 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO n.jpg, 3MiB, 4575x3044

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 03:57:55 No.4243614 Report

Quoted By: >>4243617

Am I A Talented Photographer ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 04:26:24 No.4243617 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243614
Yes, honey.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 04:33:45 No.4243619 Report

Quoted By: >>4243650

>>4243409
The 20mm f1.7 is one of people's favorites for "small cheap and good". I don't have one and may not get one (I appreciate Olympus' true weather sealing and don't have a real need for the slim profile and speed it provides, though it'd be nice), but it's cheap enough that it's probably worth getting.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9010241.jpg, 4MiB, 3825x5149

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 06:35:19 No.4243650 Report

Quoted By: >>4243655

>>4243619
It's not bad. It's not the sharpest but it maintains a fairly good sharpness throughout the whole image due to the aspherical elements. It's not my favourite lens but its a very nice looking lens, and its very compact and well built. It's also very light for a metal body/mount lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9010262 (2).jpg, 2MiB, 5184x3483

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 06:40:57 No.4243655 Report

Quoted By: >>4243656

>>4243650
My guess is that the 25mm Olympus would probably be better, but its not as small.

>>4243409
17mm Olympus lenses are good, either the 1.8 or the 2.8, depending on how small you want it to be. If you can find one, the 8mm bodycap lens is fun. It's a terrible lens but it's fun, and absolutely tiny. If you want a compact folding zoom lens the best one is the Lumix 12-32.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9010259 (2).jpg, 3MiB, 3888x5184

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 06:43:10 No.4243656 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243655

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_4127.jpg, 1MiB, 3075x4096

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 08:09:26 No.4243670 Report

Quoted By: >>4243705

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_4128.jpg, 1MiB, 3075x4096

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 08:11:40 No.4243673 Report

Quoted By: >>4243705

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PA143479.jpg, 3MiB, 3888x5184

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 10:10:17 No.4243705 Report

Quoted By: >>4243728 >>4245636

>>4243673
>>4243670
Nice shots

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 12:18:41 No.4243728 Report

Quoted By: >>4243796 >>4244038

>>4243705
these are just sample G9II shots from twitter, not mine.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _1280487.jpg, 675KiB, 1501x2000

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 13:27:44 No.4243744 Report

Quoted By: >>4243746

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 13:28:51 No.4243746 Report

Quoted By: >>4243750

>>4243744
bring the shadows up a bit, seems half a stop underexposed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 13:31:32 No.4243750 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243746
I don't have the raw or the pc on me, I'll fix it up later

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F83-S_9bwAA1trI.jpg, 818KiB, 4096x2304

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 14:11:24 No.4243763 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 15:13:19 No.4243796 Report

Quoted By: >>4243803

>>4243728
Thank you for those totally organic posts, panasonic marketing department.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 15:25:41 No.4243803 Report

Quoted By: >>4243806

>>4243796
buy our washing machine too, you dirty homo!

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 15:56:26 No.4243806 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243803
And our monitors.
If you want to get the most you can out of your Lumix™ G9ii™ you have to buy a Panasonic™ professional™ monitors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 20 Oct 2023 16:24:02 No.4243816 Report

Quoted By:

>xirs monitor doesn't have LUT support

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 21 Oct 2023 09:05:00 No.4244038 Report

Quoted By: >>4244061

>>4243728
I mean they still look good, wonder what lens that is.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F884CppaYAAZtD_.jpg, 927KiB, 3074x4096

Anonymous Sat 21 Oct 2023 13:25:14 No.4244061 Report

Quoted By:

>>4244038
this one was with the 50-200

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9010238.jpg, 2MiB, 5032x3888

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 04:18:20 No.4244656 Report

Quoted By: >>4245734

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 04:23:31 No.4244657 Report

Quoted By:

cANON !!XeinTgYHH1f

cANON !!XeinTgYHH1f Mon 23 Oct 2023 20:30:50 No.4244874 Report

Quoted By: >>4244901

>>4243600
>Collecting more photons = higher SNR.
You only collect more photons if your equivalent aperture is larger

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 22:06:07 No.4244901 Report

Quoted By: >>4245732

>>4244874
No, it’s better no matter what. Sorry sweetie.

If you disagree you are automatically wrong unless you post ten original photos

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO mirrorless-camera-mount-diameter (...).jpg, 561KiB, 1634x752

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 23:11:04 No.4244929 Report

Quoted By: >>4244933 >>4244938

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image_2023-10-24_022143154.png, 30KiB, 716x386

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 23:21:47 No.4244933 Report

Quoted By: >>4244938

>>4244929
also

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 23:30:21 No.4244938 Report

Quoted By: >>4244940 >>4244960

>>4244933
>>4244929
>micro four thirds thread
>CHARTS! LOOK AT THESE CHARTS! whats in them? idk.
Nerd shit. Who cares.

As a physics PhD who works for fujinon as a lens designer let me lay this out for you so you can behave like a human being in the future

Things that do not matter:
Charts (just because you can measure and chart it, doesn't mean it matters)
Tables (see above)
Specs (just because it says it does something doesn't mean it makes a difference)
Raws (raws aren't viewable yet - you need a tiff or jpeg with an embedded color profile to have a photo. gearfags gravitate them falsely believing they represented the unmoelsted output of the camera and therefore something to measure dicks with. this is false.)

Things that theoretically may matter:
Brick wall/test chart shooting (document reproduction applications only - essentially a measure of field curvature at a certain distance)
"Corrections off" test shots (unless you are making MTF measurements *focused at infinity* and debating what the corrections do to IQ based on that data, you're not accomplishing anything, single digit megapixel differences are not visible to the human eye)

if you can not make your point in real, finished jpeg/tiff format photos, you do not have a point. You are a schizoposting nophoto, the same as a fooltard posting shadow recovery memes he's never used for a real photo or a fool turd posting reach memes he's never used for a significant photograph.

And don't fuck up and do things like try and equalize FOV between different sensor sizes with a crop instead of an equivalent lens, or with an ISO setting instead of the pupil size. ISO doesn't have the exact same effect on shot noise as cropping. I see gearfags do this stupid shit frequently. No, ISO is not cropping. Cropping is cropping. Gain structure matters. Lens quality matters. ISO doesn't change these.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 23:33:51 No.4244940 Report

Quoted By:

>>4244938
The single biggest gearfag fuckup is measuring lens sharpness by photographing a chart, rather than by projecting a known image through the rearmost element

The second biggest one is not using adapters to verify FOV on multiple cameras otherwise as far as you know sony shoots with a 1.1x crop as a starting point

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO mfw_allthatshit.jpg, 252KiB, 1088x1000

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 23:38:24 No.4244944 Report

Quoted By: >>4244949

assblasted/10

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 23 Oct 2023 23:47:08 No.4244949 Report

Quoted By:

>>4244944
>Can't make his point with photos
>on a photography board
>has to post tables of numbers he doesn't actually understand
>worries about mount area, not mount depth, like he would have been taught to if he knew the first thing about designing lenses for ILCs
leica M mount requires snowflake microlenses
most nikon Z lenses vignette more than 2ev
most lenses made today are too small and need to be larger retrofocus designs
DSLRs were better only because they forced marketing departments to accept more appropriate designs, instead of overly compacted trash that only functions if you crop out at least half the image

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 00:19:57 No.4244960 Report

Quoted By: >>4244961

>>4244938
My dad is a physics PhD with two jobs, one at Nintendo and one at Nikon, and he says you're wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 00:23:33 No.4244961 Report

Quoted By: >>4244967

>>4244960
My dad is the president of playstation and your dad’s boyfriend, and he told me your dad is gay.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 00:27:12 No.4244967 Report

Quoted By: >>4244977

>>4244961
My dad said your dad's penis is micro 4/3rds.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 00:42:45 No.4244977 Report

Quoted By:

>>4244967
My dad said your dad doesn’t mind because he can’t feel anything smaller than a 100-400 GM anymore.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO shopping.jpg, 95KiB, 1080x1080

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 03:47:30 No.4245038 Report

Quoted By: >>4245043 >>4245085

This or the Olympus 14-150mm f4-5.6 II?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 04:10:53 No.4245043 Report

Quoted By: >>4245054

>>4245038
For what kind of photography?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 04:58:21 No.4245054 Report

Quoted By: >>4245056

>>4245043
Mostly as a do-it-all lens for trips or walks. I know image quality would be far from ideal but the reach of the lens is quite appealing, at least on paper

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 05:11:18 No.4245056 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245054
You should consider the 12-100 f4 pro too. Way better optics and speed if you can be ok with less reach or carrying around a backup lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PA184678.jpg, 1MiB, 3395x4527

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 05:12:47 No.4245057 Report

Quoted By: >>4245066

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PA094673.jpg, 883KiB, 3456x4608

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 05:15:25 No.4245058 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 06:22:28 No.4245066 Report

Quoted By: >>4245166

>>4245057
they weren't joking when they said using pixel pitch for "reach" enlarges aberrations and details simultaneously dude

this is the kind of thing you should post a few pixels smaller. i clicked on that and was immediately greeted with fine detail shits that make my film scans look like gfx100ii demo shots and so much CA I had to check if the lens was from 1940 or not

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 06:56:59 No.4245085 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245038
My kid has the 14-150. Sharpness is not good, distorted as hell before corrections.
Buuuuut... it's fun as fuck having a tiny lens that covers you for any kind of snapshit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 11:53:41 No.4245166 Report

Quoted By: >>4245294

>>4245066
>lying about an image everyone can see
Do people really? I don't even like m43 and I'm still going to call you on your shit: post your 35mm film scan that's sharper.
>but muh ca!!!
Every fast lens can show CA in the bokeh. It's hard enough correcting CA at the plane of focus. No one does it in the out of focus areas. If you even own a camera you certainly have never shot a fast prime.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PA230022 1.jpg, 985KiB, 1579x2048

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 11:56:10 No.4245167 Report

Quoted By:

>>4242762
mft is the psychonaut's choice

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 12:37:57 No.4245178 Report

Quoted By:

>the mft autist shitposted so hard even filmfags are defending a DIGITAL CAMERA

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 18:34:17 No.4245291 Report

Quoted By:

New User manual just dropped.

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/dscoi/DC-G9M2jp/pdf/DC-G9M2_DVQP3009_full_jpn.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 18:38:27 No.4245293 Report

Quoted By: >>4245294

New User Manual just dropped

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/dscoi/DC-G9M2/pdf/DC-G9M2_DVQP3010_full_eng.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 18:42:47 No.4245294 Report

Quoted By: >>4245340

>>4245166
The image quality is shit sorry. Looks like a crop.

>>4245293
Thank you for this organic post, panasonic marketing department. Like the s5ii that was “killing canikony”, no one will be posting with g9ii exif 2 months from now. They don’t send product samples to india.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 20:15:42 No.4245340 Report

Quoted By: >>4245350

>>4245294
>i bought a used 7yo FF body and korean ramen lenses so I must cope and seethe at m43 chads

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 24 Oct 2023 20:46:42 No.4245350 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245340
>making up people to argue against
>uses incel buzzwords
Life of a paid shill

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PA193504.jpg, 2MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 17:05:54 No.4245620 Report

Quoted By: >>4245632 >>4245633

Testing out the 75mm f/1.8
This thing an the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 are really all you need for mft. They're fantastic, I really love detail and personal compositions you can create with it. Would love that 29mm f/0.8 super Nokton but thats crazy expensive for an mft lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 17:49:58 No.4245632 Report

Quoted By: >>4245636 >>4245692

>>4245620
but you can still distinguish the background. if it's not muddied into a complete grey mess it's not "professional" like foolframe is

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 17:55:12 No.4245633 Report

Quoted By: >>4245636 >>4245637

>>4245620
How's the softness of the Voigtlander? Do you stop the lens down or do you like it?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9102720.jpg, 2MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 18:10:42 No.4245636 Report

Quoted By: >>4245637 >>4245684 >>4245693

>>4245632
you're right, if the background isn't just one huge bokeh ball then the photo is unusable

>>4245633
Here it is stopped all the way down to f/0.95, it does lose a little sharpness as you would expect, but it's an extremely sharp lens to begin with so you're starting from a pretty good place. What most people would probably have an issue with is that you can get a bit of chromatic aberration when you're wide open, though I find this happens for the most part in harsh light. Keep in mind my example is the mk1 of this lens, there is a newer one that has a toggle for switching between smooth and clicky aperture ring operation, it may also be optically better but I don't know about that.
These are all also with that lens
>>4242762
>>4242784
>>4242787
>>4243705

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9203100.jpg, 4MiB, 5184x3888

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 18:12:06 No.4245637 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245636
>>4245633

This one was at f/2 (i think), cant remember as obviously being a manual lens it doesn't store that data.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F9SsD6AbEAAmX-W.jpg, 4MiB, 4056x3042

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 20:31:22 No.4245682 Report

Quoted By: >>4245697 >>4245727

G9II + 100-400 + TC, handheld.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 20:46:55 No.4245684 Report

Quoted By: >>4245689

>>4245636
Neat thanks for sharing. Probably a matter of time before I pick one up, that speed is really tempting on MFT even if it's a little soft.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 20:57:40 No.4245689 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245684
They're probably not as good, but the whole set of Sirui t1.2 would cost less from AliExpress.
Just something to consider.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20231025_0002.jpg, 2MiB, 3471x2978

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:06:04 No.4245692 Report

Quoted By: >>4245741

>>4245632
i am a professional yet

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:06:55 No.4245693 Report

Quoted By: >>4245695 >>4245696 >>4245719

>>4245636
IIRC the movie Upstream Color was shot on a GH4 with two Voigtlanders.
Purple fringing is there but the movie is gorgeous. I've seen a lot of people talking about The Creator and how it means small creators don't have an excuse any more.
Nigga, you haven't had an excuse since Upstream Color.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:09:06 No.4245695 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245693
>The Creator
was that shot on m4/3? Looked pretty good desu

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO upstream-feature.jpg, 116KiB, 1200x750

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:09:21 No.4245696 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245693
Forgot pic

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:10:30 No.4245697 Report

Quoted By: >>4245698 >>4245723 >>4245735

>>4245682
how do u properly fix chromatic abberation like this?
I set green/purple/magenta to 0, which has worked great so far as I havent had a shot where I actually need those colours yet

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:12:00 No.4245698 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245697
In this particular case, I'd just desaturate the green.

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 25 Oct 2023 21:55:40 No.4245719 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245693
>Nigga, you haven't had an excuse since Upstream Color.
As a matter of fact, we have and still do. The camera was never anything other than a rounding error in the budget of a reasonably sized production. You don't get a massive increase in production value when making a movie by using a RED instead of some Canon DSLR from the late 00s. You get a massive production value increase by spending more on sets, lighting, wardrobe, makeup and the likes. And even catering for the cast and crew is comparable to what a competent camera costs. Remember art is made, not taken. And making it is where the cost lies. You can also get a massive boost with a well written screenplay. There's a recent Argentinian movie entirely filmed inside a SUV and the block it's parked at. Yet it's so well done it doesn't become tiresome. But it isn't carried by the cinematography either. If you want a cinematographic masterpiece, you will have to spend more on sets or getting to locations, and more on lighting or at least be more creative. Watch Dario Argento's works and you'll see how it's done.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:09:01 No.4245723 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245697
as another anon said, unless the "fix" button isn't working, select your area of interest, pick the color and desaturate it.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:18:46 No.4245727 Report

Quoted By: >>4245740 >>4245742 >>4245744 >>4245760

>>4245682
>no signs of Apollo 11
As expected.
Also expect losers to claim you "missed focus on the sky" because there's aberration even though both colors are present.
Really neat setup btw, what's the TC? I use a 100-400 plus 2X TC on FF and APS-C but even if yours were to be a 1.4X I'm sure you're getting a lot more reach from it. Impressive to shoot that handheld too.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:21:34 No.4245732 Report

Quoted By:

>>4244901
Can't tell if bait or retarded so I'll be benevolent and assume bait.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO plant redux.jpg, 529KiB, 1000x750

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:27:48 No.4245734 Report

Quoted By:

>>4244656
Don't mind me, just posting another specimen taken with a FF DSLR and cropped to four thirds to blend in :^)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:30:57 No.4245735 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245697
Leave it, it looks cool. We already have better pics of the moon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:39:03 No.4245740 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245727
it's sumizoon's pic from twitter, I assume it's the 1.4x teleconv.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:41:38 No.4245741 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245692
getting there

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:41:58 No.4245742 Report

Quoted By: >>4245749

>>4245727
You got BTFO by LRO images. I could btfo you with hard data about optical resolving power and you’d day it’s all comped or too convenient.

The largest earth based telescope can only resolve lunar features that are 130sqm. Apollo 11’s hard evidence is 5sqm. Tracks give you another dozen sqm. It would be lost in the blur.

You can’t see sino/soviet moon rovers from earth either.

What you can do is hit the moon with lasers until you get a reflection that indicates man made material.

There is no arguing with a conspiracy theorist. All evidence to the contrary must be the jews doing or satans hand or whatever. They’re mentally ill.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 22:49:13 No.4245744 Report

Quoted By: >>4245749

>>4245727
How can there be apollo 11 signs if the Earth is flat with a firmament on top?
Do balltards still believe we're on a ball speeding through the universe at thousands of miles/s?

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Wed 25 Oct 2023 23:01:48 No.4245749 Report

Quoted By: >>4245768

>>4245742
>You got BTFO by LRO images
That's operated by NASA, probably AI generated.
>>4245744
Begone shitposter

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 25 Oct 2023 23:28:14 No.4245760 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245727
>implying you didn't miss focus on the sky
heh heh heh

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 25 Oct 2023 23:41:44 No.4245768 Report

Quoted By: >>4245822

>>4245749
He called it
>everything that proves me wrong is the work of satan! source: i know the truth!
Said you and the fentanyl addicted bum that screams at everyone at the corner of 2nd and heather st k3k

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.png, 9KiB, 528x67

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 02:08:35 No.4245795 Report

Quoted By: >>4245797

I fell for the meme
What am I in for?
How bad did I fuck up?
$175 includes a lumix vario 3.5-5.6 14-42

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 02:41:31 No.4245797 Report

Quoted By: >>4245802 >>4245807

>>4245795

pretty big fuckup since it has no viewfinder, otherwise the body is fine for a cheap m43 camera.

a viewfinder attachment costs as much as what you already paid, which would have been enough to get an a6000 + kit lens which is leagues ahead of the early 2010s era m43 bodies that are in the usual $150-250 price range.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 02:59:19 No.4245802 Report

Quoted By: >>4245810

>>4245797
you cannot get an a6000 and a kit lens for $175
and I already have an a6400 and a suite of lenses, this is just for fun.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:07:33 No.4245807 Report

Quoted By: >>4245820

>>4245797
>no viewfinder
Is a no issue if he has a lens made for the system, now adapting vintage glass to M4/3 with only a screen that is pain.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:12:10 No.4245810 Report

Quoted By: >>4245820

>>4245802
>you cannot get an a6000 and a kit lens for $175

you can for the cost of the gx1 and viewfinder attachment.

> and I already have an a6400 and a suite of lenses, this is just for fun.

sounds like you know what you're getting into then, i assumed you were a beginner

> Is a no issue if he has a lens made for the system, now adapting vintage glass to M4/3 with only a screen that is pain.

nah it sucks, i have a panasonic body of similar vintage and the screen washes out quite quickly in even mild outdoor light even on highest brightness.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:38:20 No.4245820 Report

Quoted By: >>4245823 >>4245824 >>4245826

>>4245810
>>4245807
I'd read something about the idea that using a viewfinder makes you keep brining the camera to your face and limiting creative angling?
idk it seemed interesting enough to try out shooting with a non-viewfinder camera but didn't want to spend a bunch and I'd seen a lot of people talking about the gx1.
I will miss an articulating screen though.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:49:41 No.4245822 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245768
How and why would I trust the images from the same guys who hired Kubick decades ago to film their initial hoax?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:52:49 No.4245823 Report

Quoted By:

@4245822
>Schizobabble

>>4245820
>I'd read something about the idea that using a viewfinder makes you keep brining the camera to your face and limiting creative angling?
Imagine for a second you're not using a CCD DSLR and you can use either or depending on the situation. And that WLVF angles are getting overused. Fucking every mommy with a camera shoots with the screen as a WLVF.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:54:22 No.4245824 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245820
that's retarded

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Thu 26 Oct 2023 03:56:22 No.4245825 Report

Quoted By:

>@
seething glownigger lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:03:22 No.4245826 Report

Quoted By: >>4245828 >>4245913

>>4245820
i'm confused, why are you buying a 10+ year old m43 rangefinder body if you already only an apsc rangefinder with a much newer sensor, evf and better autofocus? if you want to shoot waist level use your existing camera.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:13:23 No.4245828 Report

Quoted By: >>4245830

>>4245826
he has no rangefinder and isn't buying one either, stop using words you don't understand as buzzwords

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:14:39 No.4245830 Report

Quoted By: >>4245833

>>4245828

retard, gx1 and a6400 are both rangefinder style bodies.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:24:29 No.4245833 Report

Quoted By: >>4245834 >>4245835

>>4245830
>rangefinder style
style, that weasel word you're now using to save face
a6400 is a half frame SLR/Four Thirds DSLR style camera and GX1 is a digishit style camera
rangefinder style cameras were the viewfinder+CdS meter trash or the digital fuji trash (X-Pro/X100 line)

/\nonymous !!zJbpV0948+w

/\nonymous !!zJbpV0948+w Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:27:54 No.4245834 Report

Quoted By: >>4245837

>>4245833
>assault-style

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:28:28 No.4245835 Report

Quoted By: >>4245837

>>4245833
pure delusion, they are both rangefinder style.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Olympus_Pen_F.jpg, 3MiB, 5616x3744

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Thu 26 Oct 2023 04:34:51 No.4245837 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245834
kek
>>4245835
I don't see any glass in the front outside of the lens itself
SLR style

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 13:30:56 No.4245913 Report

Quoted By:

>>4245826
it sounded fun to pay around with and very small.
I saw a lot of videos about it giving really sharp images with that 20mm lens and having great colors.
and under $200 for a camera and a lens is well within impulse purchase territory for me, especially when that lens is $125~ used.
I also want to get an older olympus pen or something too. they're so cute

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 26 Oct 2023 14:20:06 No.4245920 Report

Quoted By:

>>4243135
I'd upgrade from my 2014 D750 but other than moving to 45 or 50 MP, I don't think I'd gain anything with regards to dynamic range or picture quality.
Next time I take a big trip, I'm considering bringing an om-1, the f/2.8 kit zoom, and the 300mm f/4. Daytime snapshits can be easily handled by a cellphone, and I mostly like planning dramatic tele sunset and moon shots.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 08:33:29 No.4246181 Report

Quoted By: >>4246236

Yodobashi sold all their stock of G9II.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 12:24:15 No.4246231 Report

Quoted By: >>4246234

Olympus slashes 30% off OM1 price in Europe

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 12:27:59 No.4246234 Report

Quoted By: >>4246244

>>4246231
They're cooking something
Or they're desperate

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 12:32:35 No.4246236 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246181
They sold all 20 cameras? Dayum

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 12:42:48 No.4246244 Report

Quoted By: >>4246256 >>4246266 >>4246296

>>4246234
>they're desperate

As cool as the stacked sensor is, it's not really a big deal when the G9II is hitting the same results in output, has higher MP, better AF algorithms, etc. OM is repeating all the same errors as Olympus by not introducing subject detection, not advancing the OM-1's subject detection, etc.

I think Panasonic is absolutely aiming to monopolize M43 because it's clear that OM has nothing in the tank after the sale of Olympus to JIP.

Panasonic clearly is aiming to provide a good solution for existing m43 users, and make people pause before picking up Olympus, or Fuji or a Canon R7 for wildlife/landscape type photography. It's still expensive, but considering Panasonic discounts stuff heavily, it's price competitive, especially for the feature set.

Olympus on the other hand does not seem to understand they're now competing with FF prices that have come down significantly.

cANONreflexchad

cANONreflexchad Fri 27 Oct 2023 13:25:29 No.4246256 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246244
It's all aggrotech when you get down to it really

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 14:04:49 No.4246266 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246244
If we're talking the entry level lenses, Olympus is better (the expensive line Leica>Oly) but what to do with that stacked sensor who's only advantage is readout speed (image quality is worse compared to a classic CMOS) when Olympus cannot into video.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:26:06 No.4246296 Report

Quoted By: >>4246303

>>4246244
The original G9 was not a fuji killer, or an APS-C killer, even though foolturds gearfags posted MUH CHARTS (that they don't understand are useless data) over and over again claiming a dynamic range advantage that isn't real, because panasonic labels ISO 100 as ISO 200. Why would the G9II compete with them either?

At $1899, unless it supports timecode and jam sync it's just an overpriced piece of shit given its inferior sensor format. The video gains over the X-T5 are marginal given this lacks timecode and jam sync and basically anything over 4k is only good for cropping (not viable, micro four thirds image quality is too low) and resizing to 4k to try and downsample out some of your fool turds snowstorm. Kek.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:30:18 No.4246301 Report

Quoted By: >>4246310

>I-It's not reaaaaaaal
so much seething, love to see the fooltard breaking down in anal angst.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:32:34 No.4246303 Report

Quoted By: >>4246320

>>4246296
i see video spec minutiae like crop sensor stills framerates

boasted about but not actually useful because AF doesn't keep up and anything that fast shouldnt be shot with an eshutter that isn't global
>yeah but I HAVE IT and YOU DONT - gearfag who will never use it and doesn't understand how minor the significance is
Stillsfags in their MP war mindset: But PRORES INTERNALLY.
People who actually do video for a living: If you need this, you need a recorder anyways. Where timecode? Seriously, where? I NEED TIMECODE FOR MY JOB.
Gearfags: It is over for fuji my 6k doesn't change the FOV of my lens. I dont have to buy a new light prime for vlogs!
Professional: I do not fucking CARE nobody uses 6k and its useless if your camera is this low quality DOES IT HAVE TIMECODE INTERNALLY? NO? WELL I GUESS IM JUST USING THE FUJI FOR BETTER QUALITY AND NOT HAVING MOIRE.
Gearfags: How about sony huh snoys don't even appreciate cropless 4k

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:36:42 No.4246310 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246301
Panashills say every new release will kill everything and that they are buying one. This never happens.

The OM-1 was supposed to be a fuji killer too. But, micro four thirds users keep jumping ship to the X-T5. Weird.
>Its the same size
>Its the same price
>bbbbbbut prores internal?
>if video is that important you also need timecode. timecode internal?
The G9II is an overpriced piece of shit for hobbyists who jerk off to specs rather than focusing on what they mean for their output. In the case of this inferior sensor format, better vlogs? Kek.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:47:48 No.4246320 Report

Quoted By: >>4246343

>>4246303
you touched on part of why fuji is superior no matter what
>moire is a solved problem. moire ruins footage, objectively, have fun editing it out.
>chroma noise is reduced by over half and replaced with luma noise so the SNR is unchanged from standard APS-C but the visual appearance of the noise is over two stops cleaner for video (still grainy for stills). chroma noise needs removed. luma noise does not and functions as dithering in footage. severely reduced noise reduction requirements.
also same size, same price, better selection of weather sealed compact primes, while MFT has FF SIZE FF PRICED panaleica and zuiko lenses that desperately try to keep up with the tack sharped WR pancakes on fuji. it's ridiculous how much better the X-T5, X-H2, and X-H2s are compared to the entire micro four thirds ecosystem. the X-T5 is cheaper than the G9 II and superior in every way that actually affects the end result especially in a professional context and not a hobbyist "i upload 8k to youtube" or "i use slow motion video to try and catch nip slips at concerts" context.

fuji also has the best entry level cameras and lots of cheap lenses so it's the best poorfag brand for buying new as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:49:03 No.4246321 Report

Quoted By:

>it was a fujishill all along
Enjoy your worms, lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 15:54:50 No.4246331 Report

Quoted By:

>it was a fujislug wormenjoyer seething all along
can't make this shit up. wait until marketshare for 2023 comes out, it'll 41% itself.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image_2023-10-27_190614427.png, 1MiB, 2358x1240

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:06:25 No.4246343 Report

Quoted By: >>4246347

>>4246320
KEK

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:11:23 No.4246347 Report

Quoted By: >>4246364

>>4246343
>whip camera around in circles as fast as you can
>freeze frame
>zoom in 400%
>care about what it looks like
in this moment, you proved that you don't do video, you just watch people on youtube talk about it
it's like when stillsfags view "100% crop", which based on the display resolution they're using is actually closer to 300% crop and isn't relevant to how photographs are actually used - exported to web size or printed at 250+.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:41:15 No.4246364 Report

Quoted By: >>4246374 >>4246379 >>4246383

>>4246347
>who shoots sports or fast action amirite fujislugs?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:52:02 No.4246374 Report

Quoted By: >>4246378

>>4246364
People with the canon R3. AF on your shit camera cant keep up with the e-shutter either so it is genuinely useless.

Also, talented people who are fine with 12fps mech. As it was on DSLRs. Amazing how actually being good at this makes so many specs useless. Almost like they’re crutches.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:55:21 No.4246378 Report

Quoted By: >>4246379

>>4246374
>Amazing how actually being good at this makes so many specs useless.
I see you talking big about yourself without providing evidence

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:57:51 No.4246379 Report

Quoted By: >>4246380

>>4246364
>Sports or fast action
Did it every strike you as suspicious that despite muh reach and muh fps you don't see many professional sports photographers using micro four thirds? If it is better than full frame, and has been for 2, 3, ,4, 5 years (or since the start depending on which shill you ask), and is lighter, and cheaper, why hasn't it 100% displaced it? People are still using DSLRs professionally surely MFT is better than those old sensors!

Oh wait it isnt lol
>60fps
>1 hit 59 miss

>>4246378
Rule 0 of /p/: Anyone who tells you to post a photo as part of their argument but won't post one themselves will always call it shit. The reason they don't post one themselves is because they are worse than you, or they don't even own a camera because they are a shill based in bangladesh.

This is a panasonic thread so probably #2
>hourly poster: S5 II is sony killa i am buy one sirs
>fast forward
>no S5II exif on /p/
>hourly poster still here
>G9II is fuji kill i am buying on sirs

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:58:44 No.4246380 Report

Quoted By: >>4246386

>>4246379
rule nothing
if you're boasting about skill, you post evidence, end of story.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F7wZAjbbkAAEzlT.jpg, 559KiB, 4096x2728

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:59:35 No.4246382 Report

Quoted By: >>4246386

>R3
>$5K plus tip for the same DR as a $700 G9 from 6 YEARS AGO

kek

G9II, PL12-35

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 16:59:50 No.4246383 Report

Quoted By: >>4246385

>>4246364
>its about rolling shutter in video and pixel peeper torture tests being irrelevant to what people will think when they actually watch a real movie
>changes the subject to stills
inb4 you're that pathetic pedophile fuck who uses high FPS video to try and see underage nipples at kpop concerts in which case kill yourself you waste of air + your freeze frames look like unusable blurry shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:00:55 No.4246385 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246383
you shoot both
video and stills

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:01:54 No.4246386 Report

Quoted By: >>4246387 >>4246402

>>4246380
>POST EVIDENCE SO I CAN CALL IT SHIT AND DECLARE VICTORY
Post first or shut the fuck up, whore.

>>4246382
>Provably false statement
>Garbage bokeh cat picture
Reminder: Animals have no souls and are animate objects. A cat/dog/cow/bird picture is as interesting as a photo of a rock, and stealing one taken by someone else makes you less interesting than a rock. Praise allah.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:03:47 No.4246387 Report

Quoted By: >>4246389

>>4246386
I am not the one boasting about shit, you're afraid because you know you're going to get torn apart.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO base iso.png, 840KiB, 1171x606

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:04:13 No.4246388 Report

Quoted By: >>4246394 >>4246404

Even at base ISO, micro fool turds is lower quality. No wonder this wunderformat hasn't taken over. Pixel pitch enlarges details and aberrations in unison. You need perfect lenses, but they don't exist.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 6400.png, 1MiB, 1168x687

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:05:25 No.4246389 Report

Quoted By: >>4246404

Uh oh. Same DR guise? Muh chaaaarts

>>4246387
>Ur afraid
Rule 0 of /p/: Anyone who tells you to post a photo as part of their argument but won't post one themselves will always call it shit. The reason they don't post one themselves is because they are worse than you, or they don't even own a camera because they are a shill based in bangladesh.

Read it and weep. Post first, whore, or you can pull that panashit cock out of your ass and lick the fool turds off it.

All you shills have is stolen cat pictures from slant twitter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:05:43 No.4246390 Report

Quoted By: >>4246396

>inmediately falls back to his so called "torture tests"
lmao

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO olympus_v311070bu000_m_zuiko_dig (...).jpg, 18KiB, 500x500

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:09:47 No.4246394 Report

Quoted By: >>4246399 >>4246410

>>4246388
I know this is bait but
>You need perfect lenses, but they don't exist.
There are plenty of Olympus and PL lenses with more than enough sharpness for the sensor to take advantage of. ISO is a weakness in less than ideal light, but in practice this just means you have to opt for f4 or faster lenses where you'd do f5.6 on FF (and there are plenty fast, small lenses in the system). Not as big of a deal as people make it out to be.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fool turds is worse.png, 2MiB, 1171x1192

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:11:02 No.4246396 Report

Quoted By: >>4246400 >>4246404 >>4246441

>>4246390
>its a reality when i like the results
>its a torture test when i dont
>non argument whining
You lose, whore.

Its a torture test when it's unrealistic like whip panning, freezing the frame, and zooming in 400%. Nobody does that.

This is merely still image at full size. People do do this. If it looks bad to you, you can press ctrl+- to simulate web size. OR just let me do this, it has a print size mode that makes all the images basically 2023's web size.
Even at base ISO, micro fool turds is softer and the colors or snoy levels of shit.

Go cry about it. You have been claiming micro four thirds is better for 5 years and but it's actually dying except as a budget camcorder format. Congratulations on being wrong.
"The G9 and R3 have the same DR"
Sorry you lose
If something is cheaper, smaller, and better, it replaces what isn't
This has never happened
Actually micro fool turds keep switching to APS-C instead kek, because
>same price
>same size
>better
>inb4 muh 800mm zoom no one uses

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:12:44 No.4246399 Report

Quoted By: >>4246410

>>4246394
f4 on micro four thirds is f8 on FF. Sorry. You lose. Micro four thirds is worse.

If you had a real f5.6 *f2.8* telephoto it would be as expensive and large as the nearest FF lens.

Micro fool turds is objectively worse. It is a hobbyist format intended to be cheap and small at the cost of quality. Its specialty? Camcorders. But even APS-C, thanks to fujigods, has taken over that niche unless your overpriced panashitter has internal timecode.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:12:49 No.4246400 Report

Quoted By: >>4246404

>>4246396
IDK man then only one losing anything here seems to be you, writing all that shit to be ignored, you really don't value your time do you?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 240KiB, 800x500

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:14:18 No.4246402 Report

Quoted By: >>4246404

>>4246386
>Provably false statement
you're right, the $5000 R3 has 0.4 stops of DR advantage.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:15:39 No.4246404 Report

Quoted By: >>4246411

>>4246400
You're in tears already. Your next post will be even more cope.

>>4246402
Your numbers are wrong, sorry:
>>4246396
>>4246389
>>4246388
Fool turds is worse.

Reminder, panasonic fakes one whole stop of dynamic range by labeling ISO 100 as 200, which requires a wider aperture (that you literally dont have) or a slower shutter speed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:18:30 No.4246410 Report

Quoted By: >>4246414

>>4246399
>f4 on micro four thirds is f8 on FF
>>4246394
was talking about brightness, not dof dumbass. Also
>ignoring sharpness point
so you concede

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:19:29 No.4246411 Report

Quoted By: >>4246414

>>4246404
>Y-y-you're in tears already.
Nigga what the fuck is your problem? people don't get emotional over a sensor

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:22:48 No.4246414 Report

Quoted By: >>4246417 >>4246423 >>4246438

>micro four thirds is just as good in my calculations no reality not aligning with my calculations does not count

>>4246410
>brightness
your sensor is 1/4 the size. f4 is f8 for exposure as well. You need to lower your ISO two stops to get the same real DR as full frame. No one cares about DOF either, f5.6 on full frame is enough to get an entire sports player in focus so where's your f2.8 telephoto?

>Ignore sharpness
You have an f8 telephoto. Kek. Sharpness? ISO noise will be out of control. Even at "base ISO" (really 400, not 100 labeled as 200), fool turds is noticeably soft and grainy.

>>4246411
Rule of white people resorting to saying "nigga who tf no cap bruh" online: They lost and are trying to distance themselves from being autistic spergs by acting black.

t. based american born chinachad

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:24:59 No.4246415 Report

Quoted By: >>4246421

>meme fool shills getting btfo again
just watch them cope now
>words bad
>i didnt read
>reeeee

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:28:22 No.4246417 Report

Quoted By: >>4246429

>>4246414
>your sensor is 1/4 the size. f4 is f8 for exposure as well.
Wrong, idiot.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P9170338.jpg, 635KiB, 3000x1688

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:31:30 No.4246421 Report

Quoted By: >>4246429

>>4246415
you seem to have mistaken this board for /lit/
here we post shit that's worth more than a thousand words

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:32:41 No.4246423 Report

Quoted By: >>4246429

>>4246414
>f4 is f8 for exposure as well
literally braindead nigger.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:38:38 No.4246429 Report

Quoted By: >>4246432 >>4246433 >>4246435 >>4246436

>>4246417
>>4246423
>use an f4 300mm at 1/250 on 25mp micro four thirds
>the photo is largely identical to an f8 600mm at 1/250 on full frame, but the ISO needs to be two stops lower to have about the same amount of noise
>even at base ISO, sharp edges are blurrier, and CA and coma are larger and more noticeable
kek
>its better especially for sports but no one is using it and micro four thirds users keep switching to aps-c
kek
>its been better for 5 years it has the same dr in my calculations thats why-
https://petapixel.com/2023/09/05/canon-has-nearly-50-of-camara-market-share-nearly-double-sony/
1.6% behind fuji, even with panasonic FF rolled in to the stats. KEK.

>>4246421
This photo is worth one word
Shit
Lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:41:04 No.4246432 Report

Quoted By: >>4246439

>>4246429
and it still humiliates you enough to not post your own work
I can't imagine how bad it is

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:41:53 No.4246433 Report

Quoted By: >>4246439

>>4246429
Didn't read, but know it's butthurt.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:43:31 No.4246435 Report

Quoted By: >>4246439

>>4246429
>doubles down on misunderstanding equivalence
Okay, let's try to help you understand this way: when you crop your FF photos do they get darker?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:43:45 No.4246436 Report

Quoted By: >>4246439

>>4246429
you've outed yourself as a braindead nigger. didn't read.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fooltard.png, 69KiB, 942x288

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:47:08 No.4246438 Report

Quoted By: >>4246441

>>4246414
Sorry anon, you will never live this down

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:48:00 No.4246439 Report

Quoted By: >>4246442 >>4246448

>>4246432
My work ranges from avant garde experiments with non-traditional film developers with an artistic purpose starting with picking the exposure for the look to portraits, event photography, lifestyle photography, and documentary portraits of people close to me and places i've been.

And doxing myself isn't worth coping, lying retards like you. Neither is being stalked by hordes of nophoto and shitphoto micro fool turds and having to strip exif and never post photographs from certain locations ever again to avoid triggering the nophoto/shitphoto fool turds shills.

>>4246433
>>4246436
>Uh oh, facts that prove me wrong detected
>DIDNT READ ;_;
You read it to make the decision that you got BTFO and will be ducking out of this brutal asspounding, correct.

>>4246435
It gets noisier. You can only maintain your SNR by making it darker.

Assuming perfect optics, you must lower your ISO by two stops to take the exact same photo with the same aperture and shutter speed as a full frame camera. Period. MFT is ALWAYS two stops of ISO worse. Period.

You will never be able to escape this simple fact with mental gymnastics. Equivalence includes aperture and ISO.
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso
True equality includes aberrations, lens resolution, and megapixel count. Fool turds just can't keep up.

>nooo its not two stops behind
>its been better for 5 years it has the same dr in my (wrong) calculations thats why-
https://petapixel.com/2023/09/05/canon-has-nearly-50-of-camara-market-share-nearly-double-sony/

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:49:01 No.4246441 Report

Quoted By: >>4246448 >>4246451

>>4246438
your sensor is 1/4 the size. f4 is f8 for exposure as well. You need to lower your ISO two stops to get the same real DR as full frame or else you just see this:
>>4246396

Read it, whore
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:49:27 No.4246442 Report

Quoted By: >>4246445

>>4246439
>It gets noisier
LMAO

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:52:17 No.4246443 Report

Quoted By: >>4246447 >>4246448

>use an f4 300mm at 1/250 on 25mp micro four thirds
>the photo is largely identical to an f8 600mm at 1/250 on full frame, but the ISO needs to be two stops lower to have about the same amount of noise
>fool turds use incorrect math to deny this but can't post any proof using real cameras to the contrary

f4 on mft has the same dof as a FF lens with the same FOV set to f8
1/250 is 1/250
to take a picture with the same amount of noise, MFT must use an ISO that is two stops lower. this makes the photo darker unless aperture is widened (you can't, your f4 lens is an f8 and no wider), or a slower shutter speed (non-negotiable) so what really happens is you use the same ISO and just get a noisier photo.

micro fool turds is worse.

you can not prove this wrong with real cameras
you can only fuck up your "math" and "logic" and live in your own world where this never happened

https://petapixel.com/2023/09/05/canon-has-nearly-50-of-camara-market-share-nearly-double-sony/

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fool turds is worse.png, 913KiB, 1131x1179

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:54:05 No.4246445 Report

Quoted By: >>4246448 >>4246465

>>4246442
Cropping increases noise. Read it again:
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso

Remember when you said the G9 had the same DR as an R3?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_4187.png, 59KiB, 942x288

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:54:58 No.4246446 Report

Quoted By: >>4246448

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:56:06 No.4246447 Report

Quoted By: >>4246448

>>4246443
>this makes the photo darker unless aperture is widened (you can't, your f4 lens is an f8 and no wider)
Yeah, gonna need another another six paragraphs failing to explain why cropping makes your photo darker lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 17:59:33 No.4246448 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246446
You can't disprove it.

>>4246445
>>4246443
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso

You lose. You've had 5 years of a "better cheaper lighter". It has less market share than fuji.

You lose.

>>4246447
It makes it noisier which is the same as raising ISO. This is a fact. ISO 400 on MFT = ISO 1600 on FF. Period. You can not disprove this with real photos from real cameras.

If you want to make it less noisy without using a lens that doesn't exist or a lower shutter speed you can only lower the ISO LOL.

Repeating lies will not win you this argument
BECAUSE
YOU
ALREADY
LOST

Read it AGAIN
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso

AGAIN
>>4246445
>>4246443
>>4246439
>>4246441

CANON. WINS.

MFT: Useless PNS
Panasonic FF: Overpriced niggon, R6II is objectively better
Fuji: legitimate budget option xtrans actually brings something useful to the table besides poorfaggotry
Snoy: APS-C noise performance cripplehammered framerates and video "but i can use china shit lenses" ok why? on a $5k camera? china shit lenses? $5k camera?
Nikon: Dead in the water
CANON: WINS.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image_2023-10-27_210437409.png, 120KiB, 1390x622

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:04:45 No.4246451 Report

Quoted By: >>4246452 >>4246453 >>4249017

>>4246441

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:08:00 No.4246452 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246451
So the chinsect can't even read it's own links? Par for the course. No wonder it found a host in jewmerica, it's too stupid to be tolerated in based Xi's China.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:11:51 No.4246453 Report

Quoted By: >>4246454 >>4246455 >>4249169

>>4246451
f4 on mft has the same dof as a FF lens with the same FOV set to f8
1/250 is 1/250
to take a picture with the same amount of noise, MFT must use an ISO that is two stops lower. this makes the photo darker unless aperture is widened (you can't, your f4 lens is an f8 and no wider), or a slower shutter speed (non-negotiable) so what really happens is you use the same ISO and just get a noisier photo.

MFT is always noisier in the same situation
Always
MFT always has larger aberrations relative to the pixels
Always
It is never better
it is never the same

CANON FF is always superior.
Always.

That is why you've had 5 years to lie and have less market share than fuji, and canon owns half the industry.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:13:29 No.4246454 Report

Quoted By: >>4246457

>>4246453
>you can't, your f4 lens is an f8 and no wider
still struggling with this one I see

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:15:00 No.4246455 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246453
>MFT must use an ISO that is two stops lower
otherwise it would be overexposed into pure white

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:15:20 No.4246456 Report

Quoted By:

somebody needs their meds, now.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fujifilm_16782301_x_t5_mirrorles (...).jpg, 511KiB, 2500x2500

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:21:38 No.4246457 Report

Quoted By: >>4246461 >>4246464 >>4246740

>>4246454
>no no no you see its just as good
It's not. You've had at least 5 years of lying about it being better and nobody uses it. Even if it was truly the same it would still be 4x noisier.

Every sports photographer on earth would be shaving off 50% of the weight and cost like a bitch of it was the same. But it's not. It's much worse. 4x worse, to be exact. Might as well use your phone if you're going to spend $2000 on a body that produces measured results that are 4x worse than FF, 2x worse than APS-C, and subjective results that are 4x worse than xtrans APS-C.

5x worse than the GFX100II.
MFT sucks. Just get a fuji and you won't have to cope so hard.
>G9II killer but it came out first

moopco

moopco Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:24:13 No.4246458 Report

Quoted By:

>This time micro four thirds is really better than full frame
>Real micro four thirds hasn't been tried yet

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image_2023-10-27_212656206.png, 61KiB, 942x288

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:27:00 No.4246459 Report

Quoted By:

just leaving this here.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:36:05 No.4246461 Report

Quoted By: >>4246462

>>4246457
>"G9II killer"
>their stabilization is less stable than a 3-legged coffee table
>no reach despite the MP count because X-tranny
>garbage ergonomics
what you have there is a wallet killer at best

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:41:43 No.4246462 Report

Quoted By: >>4246467

>>4246461
>7 stop IBIS
>superior xtrans beats everything but FF canon and the r7
>based ergos trigger carpal tunnel sois
Fuji>ur mum.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:45:27 No.4246464 Report

Quoted By: >>4246467

>>4246457
Canon R7 is the killer for all the supposed 'great m43 use cases'

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:45:28 No.4246465 Report

Quoted By: >>4246468 >>4246659

>>4246445
Cropping doesn't increase noise you worthless parasite, it just seems bigger because you're looking at it closer. Also if you truly understood that article you'd know it means FF loses its advantage from ISO 400 onwards or if you shoot above f/2.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:47:18 No.4246467 Report

Quoted By: >>4246478

>>4246462
MFT has 8 stops that actually work
>>4246464
R7 is just a 90D without the joy of reflex and no, it doesn't match the G9II

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:50:24 No.4246468 Report

Quoted By: >>4246473

>>4246465
>cropping doesnt increase noise it increases noise
>you need to shoot wider than f2
you mean f5.6. Lol no f2.8 zooms on foolturds. No f4-5.6 100-400. Nada. Kek. Also you have no high res r5. Downsampling reduces noise another stop.
>FUJI IBIS IS FAKE IN MY MIND
It has 7 stops and a better sensor. You lost, colon.

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:54:07 No.4246473 Report

Quoted By: >>4246476

>>4246468
>7 stops (CIPA rating) is better than 8 stops (real)
lol, lmao even
in cinefag terms, k3k

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:56:42 No.4246476 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246473
>Fuji IBIS doesn’t work in my mind

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 18:59:18 No.4246478 Report

Quoted By: >>4246647

>>4246467
R7 Autofocus modes seem pretty good...and at least any RF lenses you buy work on FF, since there's no point in RF-S beyond folks buying the RF-S equivalent of the Rebel

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 19:14:18 No.4246488 Report

Quoted By: >>4246492 >>4246495

>micro four thirds is amazing and nothing competes that’s why olympus went out and panasonic has less market share than fuji despite FF
>sony is not worse than canon despite having half as much market share whaddabout using $100 chinese af lenses on my a7riii because I can’t afford an r5
I’ll give a7riv/a7rv users the benefit of megapixels.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 19:21:04 No.4246492 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246488
But nikon has more market share than fuji

Sure, the xt shit has better video specs but the majority of people who need better video specs need more than a codec internally. They also need timecode and jam sync at the least. They also want 8k and 12 bit color in every mode FAR more than apple prores.
Kpop creeper comments not wanted.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 19:39:46 No.4246495 Report

Quoted By: >>4246498 >>4246503

>>4246488
The fact that gearfags repeatedly refer to marketshare as if it were at all an arbiter of quality astounds me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 20:00:55 No.4246498 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246495
I think it's just one retard who outsources a lot of his thinking to the group.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 20:21:27 No.4246503 Report

Quoted By: >>4246504

>>4246495
it unironically is with premium products that are purely luxury rather than something every meth head needs to fix his truck

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 20:25:30 No.4246504 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246503
And that's why the Arri Alexa is the best selling camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 27 Oct 2023 21:56:12 No.4246545 Report

Quoted By:

roll >>4246544

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 28 Oct 2023 01:56:10 No.4246647 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246478
>since there's no point in RF-S beyond folks buying the RF-S equivalent of the Rebel
If Canon ports some of the EF-M glass to RF-S those lenses would be worth it. Thinking of the 22 f/2, 35 f/1.4, and 11-22. Apart from a few special lenses...stick to FF glass so you can upgrade later.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2023-10-27 at 7.09.4 (...).png, 124KiB, 1616x416

Anonymous Sat 28 Oct 2023 02:12:58 No.4246659 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246465
>Cropping doesn't increase noise you worthless parasite, it just seems bigger because you're looking at it closer.
Cropping absolutely decreases SNR. All photographs are dominated by shot noise which is the square root of photons received. As you throw away photons received you shift the ratio towards noise, i.e. reduce SNR. A high rez FF RAW cropped to m43 has no better SNR than m43.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 28 Oct 2023 11:28:23 No.4246740 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246457
>buy this expensive camera with bad lenses thats breaks all the time b-b-because its just good OKAY
if i was going to switch systems, fuji would be my LAST choice lmfao. who tf would waste their time with a turd like that when u can just get a sony for the same money and not be a fedora tipping retro larper

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_2490.jpg, 744KiB, 2296x1724

Anonymous Sun 29 Oct 2023 17:12:09 No.4247176 Report

Quoted By: >>4247181

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_2492.jpg, 4MiB, 4592x3448

Anonymous Sun 29 Oct 2023 17:27:11 No.4247181 Report

Quoted By: >>4249015

>>4247176

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1656963622984.jpg, 3MiB, 3000x2252

Anonymous Mon 30 Oct 2023 13:02:20 No.4247607 Report

Quoted By:

Im a straight out of camera kind of guy. I always like the G9's color and grain but it was a little too expensive for me so I went with the olympus EM5.3 which was near half the price. I am happy with the image quality, but how in the hell can I replicate that Panasonic grit? I saved this pic a long time ago that some anon took with his GH6 when it came out. That color and grain is what I really want to reproduce, like here >>4243316 >>4243317 especially. Classic panasonic. How can I replicate that grit in my olympus?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Nov 2023 02:50:23 No.4249015 Report

Quoted By:

>>4247181
Wow, very nice. was this burd alive or dead at the time of shooting?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Nov 2023 03:22:07 No.4249017 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246451
There's a reason NASA doesn't M43, and that's because capturing more light is always better. There's also a reason I don't lug around portable observatories in my bag. It's all pros and cons and personal decision. S:N comes down to pixel level physics, not sensor geometry. I think the easiest way to think about it is that an M43 takes a smaller picture, all else equal aside from the initial shot. This has numerous advantages that don't relate to IQ.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO GIF-Amused-Chuckle-Chuffed-Pleas (...).gif, 2MiB, 400x206

Anonymous Fri 03 Nov 2023 14:50:48 No.4249169 Report

Quoted By:

>>4246453
>market share
Lmao look at him crowd sourcing his opinions.
The iPhone dominates the photo market you retard.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

/M43/ /MFT/ General