>>4521369I have a job.
>your philosophyno, my philosophy is buy the right tool for the job, and enjoy the process.
your argument is cheap means junk, and you must get expensive camera to share things.
no normal person that wants to see interesting or beautiful photos is going to zoom in and pixel peep.
that's only for gearfags, or for pros. and no matter how much gear cost it won't make a boring shot good.
>>4521370any camera released in the past 15 years will use a 64gb SD card with or without an adapter.
but you're looking at it a bit wrong, cameras usually want faster SD cards, at least v30, if you're planning to burst fire and shoot raw especially, cause it takes a while to write from the buffer onto an SD card.
a decently fast as card doesn't cost that much. 15-30$. SanDisk are usually pretty good.
>next yearyou can buy a camera on any platform in the world and have it within the week. check ebay too they can have decent sellers as well.
>>4521371these are decently valid points at least.
except mine doesn't creek, feels sturdy so no problem with the build.
I'm not planning to roll around in the mud with it, if I get in the rain I'll put a twin cover on it, dust could be a problem but I'm planning to get some cleaning tools when I get other lenses, and no matter your camera dust can get into it when you swap lenses.
having more dials would be nice, but I decided not to pay x3 the price just for that, and it's not that inconvenient to use a modifier button for aperture, maybe if I was shooting fast action in very variable light it could have been more of a problem.
firmware seems alright. not sure what you mean by that.
>to save fractionagain, your issue with money makes no sense.
having money doesn't mean overspend.
and cheaper things don't automatically mean ewaste, especially when it comes to older stuff that was still made to last at least for a bit compared to modern actual ewaste.
and can always look for reviews, data like dxo, photonstopixels
