>>4396396
>x100
>pocketable
Post jinco jeans and gun belt. That piece of shit is a massive hunk of weight.

>>4396396
As soon as you carry a bag, doesnt being pocketable sort of stop being useful in 90% of circumstances. Would rather carry my dslrnosaur and get better image quality desu

>>4396503
I used to think that but changed my mind, it's annoying to fuss with unpacking and packing a bag every time you want to take a shot, it becomes cumbersome and you end up missing moments or decide nah it's not worth it, and thinking about having your camera out and at the ready, then the weight does become a serious consideration, I recently got a camera + lens which are together under 1.8 lbs. and I can just have it around my neck all day with no fatigue, feels like fucking liberation

>>4396510
Depends where you are, you can just carry the camera in your hands until you need to put it away, instead of the other way around.

>>4396510
When I'm out somewhere, I carry my DLSR on a shoulder strap basically all the time and have never had issues with fatigue. But I guess it's understandable if you're older.

Lads recommend me a compact camera that's good primarily for video with photo secondary, for use when travelling etc
I'm thinking about the Fuji xm5 or the Lumix S9 but open to suggestions

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	216 dpi
Vertical Resolution	216 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1290
Image Height	435

>>4396517
the s9 is so hilariously crippled for photo and video, the xm5 is actually better to use (maybe not better to pixel peep and compare charts), but do wait until fuji release the xe5 or just get an a7cii or a6700 like basically everyone else already did because no viewfinder makes using cameras outside suck. the screens are consistently dimmer than iphones.

panasonic didn't even give it a cold shoe so you cant attach a light or a mic. it cant shoot anything moving fast enough to blur at 1/30 without things stretching or warping, photo or video. it has no viewfinder so you can't see shit in bright light. and most L mount lenses that have variable aperture control are very large. you would be better off buying a micro four thirds like a gx9. worse iq but it's a better tool that can get the job done without googling "how am i supposed to..."

if the s9 is marketed to anyone, its people who will rig it up with a cage and a manual "cine" lens and tell all their friends on the internet how cinematic their dci 6k open gate vlog is and that it's almost netflix approved. sigma already tried this camera, it was called the FP, and it sold poorly.

>>4396517
i always see zv-e1 recommended for video

How about Panasonic releasing the tz99 for $500 which is just a 2016 tz80 without the viewfinder. Oh they added a tiltable screen and usb-c though.
It really does seem like camera tech is at a standstill with all these old cameras selling for good money and every compact camera being on backorder.
Smart move by Panasonic regardless because I a sure it will sell.

>>4396517
Let me guess, you need more

>zs99
>complete trash
feels bad, I'd love something like it but with better iq

>>4396577
dude what if GoPro but expensive lmao

>>4395369
Are you ITT
Tell me more about the camera if you have it

Why do normies like the GR3 so much?

It's a fixed wide lens, minimal bokehshit, not suitable for portraits and most social media crops wide shots into little cuck squares

>>4396637
Its not mft so it looks better than a phone + good social media like flickr and personal enjoyment exist

>>4396637
It's a pocketable brick with an acceptable sensor size, familiar phone FoV, manual controls, and the dust sucking performance of a 10 year old dyson. It's essentially a phone camera with an APS-C sensor that people can wear like a fashion accessory when not in use.

>>4396604
Not comparable to a GoPro in terms of video quality or photos. More like a stripped down Rx100 with a fixed lens.

>>4396637
apsc sensor for low light, pocketability, smol sharp lens, snap focus.
if you want to take advantage of the sensor size and 1:1 square ratio, then lx100 variant has the option.

>>4396651
wouldn't any small crop or mft camera accomplish the same thing with a 35mm lens?

I jsut don't understand the hype, in my country they're still sold out with the only options 1.7k usd imports

>>4396652
A GR with the lens retracted is as slim as the smaller mft bodies on their own, they would be twice as thick with a lens mounted

>>4396652
GR3 is the sweet spot for a pocket camera with an apsc sensor. the only similar contender is the discontinued fuji xf10 with apsc sensor, built-in flash, slower AF, and less menu customization. it was sold for half the price when it was released. if you like the look and aesthetic of what smaller sensors produce, then there are also plenty to choose from.

>>4396652
>wouldnt a larger camera with a worse sensor be better?
No.

>>4396656
>>4396655
A7Cii with 40mm f2.5

FF>crop cope

>>4396661
The GR or XF10 is smaller than the body without a lens.

>>4396668
They are also inferior in every way, and of the two only the GR fits in a pocket and isnt blurry fuji junk. If i want blur i’ll add it myself instead of pretending xtrans blur and a shit lens are special magic blur.

>>4396661
The a7cii/a7cr pair BTFO everything leica and fuji make, and are probably solely responsible for sony being #1 in FF ILC market share, but they can’t replace a ricoh GR, which actually does fit in a pants pocket.

So it’s sad that ricoh treats it as a cult camera and everything about it is from 2012 - a hard sell at over $1000 unless you’re part of the photo gear cult that delights in fighting technology that is simultaneously inferior to modern cameras and inferior to all manual rangefinders.

>>4396661
if only sony can cram an apsc sensor in an rx100 body...

>>4396593
compact superzooms are just compromise after compromise, it wont get better than that. all other compact superzooms like nikon a1000 and canon sx740 have same size, same quality sensors.
at least lumix has raw support unlike canon

>>4396517
I forgot to elaborate - I'm essentially looking for a balance between the smallest size and the greatest image quality. Bigger than a GoPro or a phone, but smaller than a dslr (all of which I have, the former of which don't satisfy in terms of quality and versatility, and the latter being too big (s1h) to constantly lug around with me)

>>4396681
If you say video everyone will debate as if you are doing it for business
If you say photo everyone will debate as if you are doing it for fine art and the megapixels and then some tryhard will say no, FPS is the most professional spec
Because all photographers are self important douchewads who think they will be famous any day now

Can you tell us what you mean by photo and video? How are your photos seen? How are your videos watched? How often do you edit, how deep do you expect to crop? How long are your takes? Do you rely on burst shooting because you have no timing skills? Are you a turbo autist who stands there being focused on using the camera or are you a cool dude who wants to shoot one handed while glancing at the screen and eating a burger?

>>4396685
I mean primarily video and it might get used in a film (for cinema - I'm technically a professional filmmaker but I'm small time, so some of the shit I shoot while travelling might end up in one of my films, some might not). I just always find myself seeing things I want to film when on the go, but not having the appropriate device with me. My takes ranges from 1 to several minutes, but can also go considerably longer on occasion. I shoot 4k at 24fps at whatever the highest bit rate is that's available.
I edit on occasion but on features I have an editor so shit for me, I don't crop. I'm half autist half cool.
My photos are not seen because I am not really a photographer and don't take photos except with my phone, but have found myself wishing to take more proper photos with a proper device

>>4396704
Pick your poison:
The ZV-E1 is very small and can record great bitrates and is tiny but overheats after 30 minutes even as a webcam because it is too small for the hardware it contains. It lacks a mechanical shutter.
The fx30 is okay, and has a fan so you can do interviews and longer takes, but it doesn't have any mechanical shutter.

the fx3 and a7siii are great and have shutters so they can do action/flash photography on the side, but $3k and 12mp.

the a7iv is not really that bad, it has all-i ibp internal and dual cfxA slots, the downside is a 4k60 crop. You probably don't care about that.

The R6ii isn't very good for anything in my opinion.

The canon r5 is not very compact, but is actually extremely competent as a photo camera (better than the Z8 IMHO) as long as you avoid crazy shadow pushes from ISO 100 and acknowledge electronic shutter as what it is (12 bit only, not great for HDR shooting), but after lenses (especially adapting EF) it gets even less compact. but it does 8k raw and is a very competent video camera (better than most snoys, like a serious gaming laptop is going to be better than a mac), and used ones are dropping below $2k. RF has a handful small primes on it but none of them are weather sealed or that high quality, and the larger RF lenses have been coming out second rate. That might bother you. It might not.

>>4396670
The XF10 has a Bayer sensor and a non-X lens. Autofocus is slow, but the images are really sharp. It fits in a pocket, but not in your skinny jeans.

>>4396708
thoughts on these two >>4396517 ?

>>4396637
>normies
what makes you say it's not suitable for portraits? i think you've got it backwards because the things you listed are the normie concerns
gr users are elite patricians

>>4396744
These cameras are part of a common big tech scam called "the cripple hammer"

Companies throw in a few headlining but not very important features for the target market, and then cut out a bunch of basic shit so you're impressed initially and then want to upgrade the device really badly less than a year later as the frustrations build.

Best to save your money and get something nicer in the first place. It's cheaper in the long run to buy for the long run and get your savings by buying an older model off ebay.

>>4396668
You're not putting a 1.5k USD camera into a pocket to collect more dust and lint

At most people put them into a little fanny pack but at that point just buy the Sony, unless you're a woman

I can't help but feel that there are paid Sony shills here...

>>4396805
>You're not putting a 1.5k USD camera into a pocket to collect more dust and lint
Sadly, some people do. But I agree - pocketing these cameras is full on retarded.

>>4396859
All of 4chan is full with shills, political and commercial. On /p/ we have shills for snoy and canon, who pretend they have hands-on experience with full product ranges including every flagship model. Then they say their preferred brand is better.

The only brandfags I trust are the guys shooting ten year old nikons, and the guy with a GFX 50 who is honest about the pros and cons.

>>4396859
I got shilled into a rx100 and they're pretty mediocre

OM SYSTEM (Olympus) TG-7 would be interesting p&s because it's small, rugged and has GPS. Perfect for wandering in nature. But i'm dissappointed its image quality is lower than in modern smartphones. It looks like there is no competition in this niche so they don't have to bother improving it image quality wise.

>>4396907
nothing better for underwater photography unfortunately

>>4396905
It's a 1" 3x zoom, what were you expecting? It's good for what it is.

>>4396905
shame, I was thinking about getting the vii

>>4396905
Depends what you're comparing it to. You need to take into account that it's really bloody small, and considering that it performs pretty well. Your alternatives for a truly pocketable camera are basically the GR, which has a prime lens, or a phone.

>>4396912
Then do it

>>4396912
>>4396905
I have the rx100vii
I like it

>>4396919
I put it in an automatic image resizer (to 5MB) and the exif data is gone?

>>4396927
Maximum zoom will be in the next pic

>>4396905
skills issue, (You) problem

>>4396930
That's enough I think

>>4396859
Sony is just one of the few real options for photography due to the nip camera industry being staffed entirely by fucking idiots, and it's not even the whole lineup that's good

>Nikon
Hideous oversized blob shit and a gross ovesrzied tranny camera with scratch-tastic plastics.
>Canon
Hideous oversized blob shit
>Sony a7c, a7cr, a7cii, a6****
Oh wow, normal sized cameras that look and work like normal cameras! Was that so fucking hard?
>Sony a7*number*
Hideous fucking blobs. They don't have mirrors, so why are they shaped like cameras that do?
>Sony number is less than 4
Unusably shitty ass camera with garbage colors that will break after 3 days
>Pentax digital
Blobs. DSLRs were a mistake. Hideous IBM laptop tier pieces of shit that never belonged on this planet. Just buy a K1000 if you want to enjoy life.
>Fuji
Xtrans is fucking garbage that has half as much resolution as they say it does, build quality of a shitty a7ii, stupid tranny controls don't belong on a digital camera. It is not film. Modern controls are superior. Only building corner shooting trannies like these because all the time wasting camera fingerfucking makes them feel like more of an artist than they actually are. The very definition of a tranny camera. You Will Never Be A Film SLR.
>Olympus -5 and -10 models
>Panasonic rangefinder style cameras
These are almost normal cameras, but the sensor is unusably small. Image quality is very close to a smartphone. Costs as much as buying a fancy sony if you want results anywhere near the IQ of a 10 year old DSLR blob, which is already objectively worse than 35mm film so you really might as well forego the digital crutches and shoot film.
>Leica
Tranny camera or rebranded panasonic, pick your poison.

And then there's lenses
>MOST sony lenses
Hideously overszied bazookas for pixel peeping FAGGOTS.
>Like 3 sony lenses and maybe 10 third party lenses
OH WOW, lenses that are normal sized, WHY IS THIS SO FUCKING HARD, JAPAN? Canonikon is even worse.

>>4396938
If you're not zone focusing, leaving your shutter and ISO at 1/250 and 400, and just shoving the camera in random peoples faces and running away you're not using a fuji correctly. You're not actually meant to change settings on them like you want to take pictures of stuff, it's for "art projects" (if you shove a camera in one persons face, you're a nuisance, if you shove a camera in 50 peoples faces, you're an artist deconstructing the intersectional oppression of white maleism, just get circumcized and memorize a bit of the torah first)

>>4396938
>Hideous fucking blobs. They don't have mirrors, so why are they shaped like cameras that do?
They're literally the same shape as the A7C bodies minors the viewfinder hump, which is necessary because they have larger higher res EVFs.

This is what the elves inside your centered viewfinder sony see

>>4396944
It's not the panel, it's the optics. the a6700, a7cii, and a7c all have the same panel but progressively smaller EVFs from the a6700 down to the a7c.

No one knows why sony does this, but the most likely explanation is that all japanese companies are retarded. Despite their high individual intelligence, their corporate cultures are idiotic and result in poor business decisions. As far as we know, the lead designer of the a7cii dishonored his senpai and had to be punished by making the EVF optics a little worse to bring shame to his famiry.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300
Vertical Resolution	300

>responding to blobschizo
The only thing that will come of it is more shitposting, you know.

>>4396950
He is right
Look at the fm3a and then the z6ii and then the z6iii, and then the z8. Disgusting. How is this excusable in a post apple world? No wonder everyone just uses their phone if the only people that want to be seen holding that shit and bother carrying a lump are people like sugar and mildly obese chinese tourists lmao

The only reason leica Ms are so expensive is because literally everyone wants one just to escape planet of the blobs, but tiny german and portugese factories cant keep up. People will give up video and autofocus to not have a blob.
The only reason the x100vi is popular is because it isnt a blob. Technologically its a horrible camera but at least its not a blob.

>>4396954
Is the blob in the room with you right now?

>>4396946
>It's not the panel, it's the optics. the a6700, a7cii, and a7c all have the same panel but progressively smaller EVFs from the a6700 down to the a7c.
The A7C was 0.6x, the rest are all 0.7x. The A6x00 bodies have always been 0.7x so the A7C is the only outlier for whatever reason, I'm sure they would have gone with the same magnification if they were able to but they didn't figure it out until the A7C II. And they're all still smaller and lower res than the A7 bodies.

>>4396957
It actually is

My uncle lent me his Lumix TZ95D he uses when traveling. I'm really impressed by it give how small and cheap it is. It starts falling a bit apart in low light, but I think it's a pretty cool little camera anyway.

>>4396954
>all cameras used to be compact
>STOP NOTICING THINGS
an old Hasselblad 500cm with the 80mm f2.8 (50mm f1.4 equivalent) is smaller overall than a z7ii with the 50mm f1.8… the 907x is still smaller than many ff mirrorless.

why? one answer. weddingsports. event coverage photography ruined camera design.

>>4396979
>Hasselblad 500cm
Because it doesn't have a fucking grip, real ergonomic. It's still thick as fuck because it has a flappy mirror. If you want something small and useless then look at the Sigma FP
>907x
See above, it's basically an MF FP

>>4396991
Oh no, no grip. How will you ever cover an event with a 24-105 f2?

>>4397002
Was that supposed to make sense?

>>4397007
why else would you want a grip besides having arthritis? cameras didnt have or need permanently integrated grips until mass produced professional zooms became more popular and more than 5 people used fuckhuge primes.

back then if you wanted to blob, the blob was an optional attachment and it wasnt assumed the default lens was a wedding lens.

When is Sony gonna release the successor to the rx100vii
I don't wanna spend that much on a 5 year old camera

>>4397011
Not only, it wasnt even a blob, it was a big angular box AND it made cool noises

System camera used to MEAN something..

>>4397011
Because I want to hold onto my camera, not cradle it like a giant nutsack

>>4396918
Should I get it? I'm ready to blow an entire paycheck on a simple, easy-to-use camera.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

>>4397042
Va is the last acceptable model of this line to buy. It was questionable even then, but starting with the vi sony decided in its infinite retardation conclusively make the line pointless by giving in to whiny boomerzoomer faggots and ruin the lens, when they already had the perfectly good and capable rx10 series for those idiots. VI/VII i would never.

>>4397047
If you had to recommend a non-Sony camera that's comparable, what would it be?

>>4397050
what do you want out of your camera, there really isn't such a thing as a one size fits all gadget imo. there's the GR which is good for snapshitting and some portraiture but limited by fixed lens, and poor video may be bad for some (i don't care, it's a photo camera, faggot), the rx100 series i see as more of a travel/vacation snapper, it has lots of fancy ai this and that and video modes that will dazzle your mom i guess. canon has the g series which kind of sits in between the bing bing wahoo rx100 and the utilitarian gr, and then there's the x100 series which is basically a fashion accessory unless you really like the "i coated my lens in vaseline" look to your photos. the market is small for cameras like this, cell phones obliterated most of the non-interchangeable lens camera industry.

>>4397050
olympus pen ep

>>4397052
GR III vs GR IIIx? These two look appealing to me.

>>4396911
>>4396912
Anything remotely low light, even blue hour will be noisy shit. I have my iso capped at like 2500, LR noise reduction helps a bit but not enough to make night portraits nice.

I'll say it's an ok daytime camera if you can get it cheap, I like the build quality, the range is better than anything I used before. But you have no bokeh. I bought a full frame and regret buying a compact camera for the 700usd I did.

>>4396924
This is my second issue with the camera, it's pretty razor sharp like 24-40mm but it gets really soft 140-200mm as you see >>4396930

Which for me defeats the purpose of having 200mm in your pocket

>>4397036
>i want to really get my hands around it like a fat dick, not cradle it like a pair of tits
ftfy
apparently grip designs are an arthritis thing. every boomer has big grippy everything because small angular stuff hurts their hands.

>>4397011
This is your most successful attempt at getting your opinion discarded lol

>>4397011
The blobbers hate him because he tells the truth. The compact is the original camera. Everyone always wanted cameras to be smaller, and then...

The rise of the work camera.

>>4397083
That is close. The rise of the "work camera" design was due normal people buying cheaper compacts due to america's gradually failing economy, resulting in any serious camera that wasn't worse than a 70s SLR being optimized for payrolled photographers who exclusively used zooms with speedlights attached 24/7, therefore requiring a grip to not discriminate against people with weaker hands.

This is the origin of morbid blobs like the 1d. The camera industry simply assumed that no one would buy one for anything but work and therefore optimized them for photojournalists so thoroughly only an oblivious fatso would use them for anything else (even today most DSLR people you see outside of the amazon rainforest are fat). Society eventually changed, the industry still hasn't, so out of touch nip bugmen keep making cameras designed for a photojournalist that doesn't actually exist anymore and alienating the rising class of tech bros who can afford the cameras their blue collar parents couldn't, but are disappointed by how every camera is an ugly POS that takes up 4x more space than it needs to.

And thus every single fuji x100 sold out despite xtrans being shite and the lens being worse than a petzval.

>>4397042
If this is an entire paycheck for you and you're new to photography. No

If you're set on a rx100 spend a few months trawling pawn shops and used camera stores for a used one. Pick an older model up for $300-400 and it's a good deal. The 1k USD for one new is a joke because the longer lens is far from perfect. It's acceptable for landscapes and street snapshits but not much more

>>4397042
Entire paycheck? don't buy it.

>>4397080
It's because I used "digital zoom".

>>4397116
nta it's $1300 here which is almost exactly how much my welfare check is

>>4397130
>welfare
What other expenses do you have?
Do you rent an apartment? live with your parents?
Maybe you should buy the camera.

ngl bros im still kinda tempted by the S9 desu...

>>4396673
Wanted to love the A7CII combined with those small prime lenses. But after a year of trying I sold it. IQ and especially AF is veeery good but anything else is such a pain. The way the camera feels in hands, tactile experience, the shutter sound, the tiny EVF, the UI. And it's ugly as shit. If you only care about the photos then you can't go wrong with this camera. But if you value the whole shooting experience it's another topic. Sold mine and bought the X100VI instead. Instant regret because apsc and soft lens. I also used the GR3 for some years and that camera is much better than the Fuji. Now got a used Leica Q1 for under 2 grand and I'm happy. Similar size to the A7CII but quiet leaf shutter, feels very good in hand, EVF still shit, AF worse but the IQ is on another level. Tried so many primes but nothing comes close to that 28mm 1.7. Even at 1.7 it's sharper than the 40mm 2.5 at f8. Also very easy to edit in LR, especially colors. I just hope not to get any software issues or so which Leica seems to be famous for.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2018-12-03T21:12:19-05:00
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1280

>>4397042
No. It's only marginally better than a smartphone. Although it's not compact, I suggest you save a bit more for the Nikon ZF with one of the kit lenses (or a Q1 as mentioned by >>4397137). So much better value, and very cool cameras.

>>4397137
This mirrors my experience with cameras too. Non-GFX Fuji is fucked up. Sony bodies have good autofocus, but not much else going for them. I went the other way and embraced the blob with a z8. Nikkor S lenses are retardedly good and reasonably priced. Couldn't be happier.

just want a TG with PASM...

>>4397140
What's your address?

>>4397137
GR3 is a full on autism camera and makes you look like you're on the spectrum

Which you may be with this gearfag disorder anon. Imagine swapping camera ecosystems because of the shutter sound

>>4397144
>because of the shutter sound
Shutter sound, ergonomics, UI and look of the body. And since I'm not a professional photographer I value a lot the experience of taking photos. So yeah, enough reason for me to change cameras. Would be easier if all the modern camera manufactors would not decide on so many flaws and questionable designs.

If I were to get the S9 the question remains which lens I would get it with... the 18-40 (compact but limited, 1600 eur), 20-60 (much less compact but still kinda limited, 1500 eur), or 28-200 (not compact at all but also not limited, 1900 eur)
Decisions decisions... I also wanted to get the zoom m3 with it and a video monopod, and wanted to keep the total cost of everything under 2k...

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	1500
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4397131
oh no, I'm not getting one, my Olympus is compact enough for me. though maybe I like my old Kodak point and shoot too. I might save up for a a7rvi or a7rv when they come out.
I live with my parents because I'm disabled.

>>4397157
honestly I'd just go with one of the primes. the 50mm 1.8 is a rather nice lens for the price, I almost never use my 20-60

>>4397157
None of the bigger lenses make any sense with the S9, the ergos will suck and the setup won't be compact, you might as well get the S5 if those are the lenses you're going for.
The only lenses that make sense are the 18-40, one of the compact Sigma primes (17 f4, 24 f3.5, 45 f2.8) or adapted M glass. The wide angle Sigmas actually have really nice magnification ratios given their FL and size and should be nice for macro that includes more environment instead of having laser thin DoF and completely obliterated background.

>>4396499
fits into the pockets of most jackets I own

>>4397137
You sound like the kind of autistic person who HAS to use a fountain pen, frequents audiophile forums, and owns a leather murse.
>ugh the shutter sound, no retro dials, and its not even silver

>>4397160
>>4397164
but muh on the go zoom versatility...

>>4397203
the s9 doesnt even make sense but maybe panasonic just appeals to dumb people idk

>>4397204
idk I see the faults that people here and elsewhere mention but it still appeals to me despite those
Don't really see anything better offered at that price
Maybe I'm just a Panasonic shill to myself, I've had a gh4, lx100, and s1h after all

>>4397209
It MIGHT make sense if you use it with appropriately sized lens, not if you couple it with a giant zoom that will make it pain in the ass to hold and handle. There is no such thing as high IQ, compact FF superzoom.
Getting the S9 in order to use it with a big lens is utterly imbecilic. If you don't see that, go ahead and get whatever you feel like, because nothing we say can help you.

>>4397217
>no shutter
>no hot shoe
>no viewfinder
no, it doesn't make sense at all. even snoy's crippled vlog cameras aren't this bad. it's just panasonic trying to push the argument that sensor size doesn't make a good camera by purposefully making unnecessarily bad full frame cameras. their massive investment in m43 thus far demands it. they can NOT make a good compact FF, it would render their entire m43 line obsolete.

the omitted hardware would have cost them $25 extra.

>>4397217
Yeah that's why i made that post about the theee lenses because i am conflicted on this matter, i didn't say im definitely getting one of those massive ones because yes it does defeat the purpose
>>4397219
I don't particularly care about those three omissions

>>4397221
How will you use it in bright light?
How will you attach a mic for video?
How will you take photos with flash?
How will you take photos of anything that shouldnt warp if it travels faster than one pixel in 1/30s?

This thing is as bad as a phone.

>>4397221
Not the previous poster, but you sound like a tard. Don't ask for advice if you already know what you want/don't want.

>>4397219
>>4397223
I've never looked too closely at the S9 because it's clearly a shit camera, so I've only just realised that it has a cold shoe. Holy shit that's retarded, as you say it would have only cost them a couple bucks to put some contacts in it. I've not seen many cameras where a flash wasn't an option at all.

>>4397223
>How will you use it in bright light?
With an ND filter
How will you attach a mic for video?
Zoom M3 onto the cold shoe
How will you take photos with flash?
I won't
How will you take photos of anything that shouldnt warp if it travels faster than one pixel in 1/30s?
idk
>>4397224
nah im just trying to weigh the pros and cons for my use case, ive checked out all the other cameras posted here in response to me but none of them really seem appealing

>>4397229
>ND filters make rear screens brighter
lol yep its another panasoi youtuber

>>4397229
I know some people like panasnoyic for video, but it's a fucking weird brand. A z6iii is less retarded and gives you access to great lenses that work well for video.

>>4397234
it was not clear what you were talking about
>>4397236
yeah i think im one of those desu, and my primary use for this would be video rather than photo
>z6iii
costs over twice as much and is much bigger
I already have an s1h, im specifically looking for something compact for daily use...

>>4397229
One look at this and i finally understand the appeal of snoy

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2276
Image Height	1707
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4397240
and by the way I was also considering the Fuji m5, but that one got kind of ignored by everyone here

>>4397240
>compact for daily use
How about A PHONE or a DJI?

And the X-M5 is dogshit. Hence no recommendations here. Video stuff is bulky and costs a bit, so it makes no sense to have a smallish crappy body when you need a tripod, a mic, recorder, lighting, filters, maybe a cage, etc.

>>4397240
>I already have an s1h
well it's a shame those other posts spent so much time trying to give you advice before, clearly you were retarded from the start. fuck off retard.

>>4397248
>phone or dji
As I mentioned previously, the quality ain't there, hence why I'm looking for what I'm looking for
Yes I know it's bulky and I have a bulky setup, but that shouldn't stop someone from looking for something else for a specific use case
>>4397252
?

>>4397242
What exactly is wrong with this

>>4397260
pannyshills out!

>>4397262
thats right, we only allow sony shills around here!

>>4397260
When you add all the stuff around a new smaller body, you'll find that you've gained almost nothing compared to your current setup by doing so.

I've done recordings on Fuji bodies, and noticed there was no loss doing it on my smartphone directly. When I want quality, I go for my 8k60p internal raw blob. Midsized cameras are never part of the equation, unless I get an FX3 one day.

>>4397278
>When you add all the stuff around a new smaller body, you'll find that you've gained almost nothing compared to your current setup by doing so.
I wouldn't add anything except a lens and mic, and even then it's smaller than my s1h, which I use with a cage and atomos etc etc
Anyway I'm pretty sold on this idea, I just don't like the quality smartphone videos (I use a 15PM), the question is just which camera
I'm taking another look at the a6700 and a7cii now...

>>4396525
>panasonic didn't even give it a cold shoe so you cant attach a light or a mic
But it does have one.

>>4397143
10 Downing St London

>>4396396
This satisfies 100% of my daily photography needs and 100% of the subjects

>>4397300
Sony shills full of shit as usual

>>4397378
thoughts on the 45mm?

>>4397389
Can't show portraits of friends unfortunately, otherwise it never feels inadequate and often I have to stop it down because the DoF is too much

>>4397389
forgot to attach kot example

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-GM1
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 10.1.0 (Android)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	90 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2025:01:06 11:44:04
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	45.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4397393
Mmm. Wholegrain

What's the 2025 version of the LX100?

>>4397565
the lx100ii

>>4397565
D-Lux 8

If I prefer compact lenses but still want to blow out the background in portraits would it be ok taking a 50mm 1.8 over a big chunky 85mm 1.8?

>>4397611
anon that's the 2018 lx100
>>4397631
>non full frame leica
what the fuck

>>4397633
1.8 will be more than shallow enough for portraits, you may even want to stop down a bit depending on how tight you're going if you actually want the person's entire head in focus. Depth of field is practically the same for the same f/ stop regardless of focal length (there is a slight difference, but it would be more apparent if you were compare extremes like a wide angle with a tele lens). What a longer focal length does do is change the perspective, enlarging the background and making it blurrier.

>>4397642
>Depth of field is practically the same for the same f/ stop regardless of focal length
That sounds terribly misleading. There's truth in that statement, but I feel like it's better to point out that DoF is greater the wider the FL. Sure you won't feel much difference between 50mm and 80mm, but even going from 24mm to 100mm is like half a meter difference at f/5.6 with a subject 3m away. That could be useful to know.

>>4397652
But the subject won't be the same distance away if you're changing the focal length, you move to maintain the same framing. I should of clarified that but I figured it would be obvious. So if you're 3m away at 25mm (not 24mm, to make the math easier) then you'd be 12m away at 100mm. That results in a depth of field of 1.63m and 1.53m respectively, so even at those two significantly different focal lengths the difference in depth of field is somewhere around 6-7%.

>>4397137
Agree, the a7CII is good on paper, but just a bad photography tool overall, feels more like a very unintuitive soulless computer than a creative device. I really hope Nikon or Canon make a rangefinder style mirrorless body with an EVF. The Panasonic S9 was so close, their 18-40mm lens is perfect.

>>4397657
so s9 with a pop-up evf would be your ideal?

>>4397658
NTA, but it needs a shutter as well.

>>4397657
Canon and Nikon have only produced blobs and ugly dSLR bodies the last 30 years anon, what makes you think they'll change?

Only Fuji, leica and more recently Sony are willing to build something different. Btw how did the a7c sell? Many people said it wouldn't last long and everyone would stick to the A7 series with the bigger EVF

>>4397657
>really hope Nikon or Canon make a rangefinder style
That would be nice. Nikon Zf as a rangefinder, lighter and smaller.

>>4397633
The big difference is background compression, which will help you create a smooth background in more situations.

>>4397137
>>4397657
People like you are impossible to empathize with. Whenever I see people talking about "real photographic tools vs soulless computers" and shutter sounds, my mind goes straight to the universally autistic faggots that think CDs were real music and .mp3s are fake soulless music.

Besides "looks old" what is exactly the difference between moving wheels to change aperture, ISO, and shutter speed, and moving wheels to change aperture, ISO, and shutter speed? How the fuck does a less accessible wheel locked to full stops make for an improvement, unless you're just a hipster who isn't so much in to the output of cameras as he is in to playing dress up with 70s-esque fashion?

Canon could make a featherweight, ultra compact full frame camera and you'd call it a soulless computer instead of a real photographic tool for real creative photographers with real souls like you because it didn't have the AE1s controls.

I also notice this phenomenon was formerly limited to the do-nothing children of the rich in the 20th century and early 21st, and only recently expanded to the do-nothing childless pseudo-rich who made $30k off crypto scams/meme stocks and have a WFH web dev job.

>>4397198
Yeah, those guys. They always have a fountain pen and a shitty mechanical watch too. ALWAYS. No exceptions. What the fuck is it with these people? It's like they wish they were their grandpa. Is it how they compensate for low skill/low accomplishment?
>Well, I have SUPREME taste for real gentlemen such as myself. You are a sheeple NPC normie who isn't capable of abstract thought or emotions if you dont get how this retro styled consumer product STIRS THE SOUL. Something about japanese wisdom, its a link to the past. Retro game reference! *soiface*
They are never, ever about what they make, they are always most obsessed with the process of making it being as quirky and retro as possible.

>>4397697
>Canon could make a featherweight, ultra compact full frame camera and you'd call it a soulless computer instead of a real photographic tool for real creative photographers with real souls like you because it didn't have the AE1s controls.
Literally nobody would say that lol. If it has the same current Canon controls and UI it would be universally praised.

>>4397712
I use all 3 major brands and there is no ui difference. It might be a low iq thing because sony requires ever so slightly more memorization. I know camera 2 page 8 has my setting but old senile guys cant pull that off.

>>4397719
And just because i think you’re parroting things boomers say without ever having used the shit, this is what a canon menu actually looks like. Its the same as a sony menu just with fewer pages to learn. That is the only difference. Sony has more settings on more pages so if you’re dumb you might constantly forget.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 6
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	800
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2020:09:15 23:14:35
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	533
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4397719
>>4397721
Never really got the criticism behind Sony menus. I used Canon before and it's not significantly worse, things have different names but then same with any other brand, some stuff isn't that intuitive to find but again that's not unique to Sony. And the big thing is that once you've got everything customised there's really not much need to go into the main menu often. My most adjusted settings are on custom buttons, of which there are plenty, and all the "every now and then" shit is in the quick menu that takes one button press to access and then adjust stuff with the d-pad.

>>4397728
Sony menus have more items, literally no other difference. On the other hand I have had to google the location of some nikon settings because i didnt feel like diving into their submenus that day.

The camera with the worst menu system is the camera with no customization so you need the menu system. Don’t need menus beyond initial setup and making new folders on any canon or sony bodies, even the a7c is good because of the dpad and standardized lens fn button, dont need menus on nikon blobs. Did need menus on the ZF so i traded back down to a z6ii asap

the menu situation is very simple
>if your camera is not a professional model and doesn't have all the controls in the form of buttons and shortcuts then you are an amateur and you should simply set the camera once and learn to take some fucking photos
>if you are a professional with a professional model you will never see the menus again because after setting them you'll do everything with buttons

>>4397739
professional is being able to adjust aperture, ISO, SS, and focus settings as needed
everything else is autist min/maxing settings that don't actually need to be adjusted beyond initial camera setup

see >>4397733 for example, downgrading cameras because the priority is pressing many different buttons, not actually taking pictures

>>4397137
>>4397657
Does the same go for the a6700? iirc they have quite similar bodies?

>>4397639
>anon that's the 2018 lx100
yeah well that's the closest you're gonna get, compacts are dead.

>>4397748
You are speaking to niggas who hate sony because sony is not a "traditional" photography brand. Notice, they instantly praised canon saying that if it had the same UI and controls it would be better than a sony.
And then up comes the picture showing canon's UI looks the same. Canon controls are also basically the same as sony's. Two wheels on the back, pasm dial, one wheel on the front. Canon invented the control scheme everyone else including nikon, panasonic, and fuji (xh/xs series) uses. Having used both extensively (i have an R5 as my work camera and an a7c as my personal camera) they are really basically the same fucking device at the core but canon's reds run oranger and their blues tealer and sony's reds are more realistic and their blues are actually a bit magenta.

In the hand, canon's are designed to be used for work. If you load an R5 with a massive zoom and a powerful speedlight like a godox v1, on top of an x series trigger, you don't really feel it. Even the more professional sony bodies don't have this feel, but they really pack well and sony sells it with their more compact lens lineup.

There is a certain kind of person in every hobby who doesn't really give a shit about what a tool does. They give a shit about what a tool is and derive all of their inspiration from its authenticity, originality, heritage, who else has used it, and their predominantly male/geeky self-opinion of how they look using it. Shit, you will even find people applying this to sony these days. That's where you get the shutter sound snobs, "sony is a computer, not a real photographic tool" posting, "mirrorless arent real cameras" opinions, and general pretentious gearfaggotry.

>>4397788
>mirrorless arent real cameras
who TF is saying this lol

>>4397747
>autist min/maxing
Imagine that not everyone shoots building corners, rocks and leaves, and zone focused 28mm hobos and toggling things like af-c and af-s, subject detect and spot tracking, live view preview on/off (histogram on canikon because sony uses the preview for highlight indicators), and drive mode might be useful

Yes a street wanker can get by with a film leica, for everything else playing camera skill games gets in the way of good photography and modern cameras are built a certain way for a reason. the term is photographer, not camera ninja.

For normal use not pretentious leicaman purist use, all of these need to be accessible in one single physical action, not counting press and hold actions to change a wheel (thats two actions)
>on/off
>shutter release
>pasm
>user modes
>aperture
>shutter
>iso
>auto iso on/off
>exposure compensation
>focus mode
>focus area
>move focus point
>drive mode
>subject detect selection/disable
>preview or live preview toggle
And a dedicated spot metering button is just really nice.

>>4397788
Meds

>>4397808
You only need stuff like live preview if you are a beginner
If you're changing drive mode often, you can just leave in continuous and practice shutter discipline
>>4397810
It's okay to just say you're a beginner so you need access to as much help as possible

>>4397788
I don't care about that autism, I just wanna know if the a6700 has the same problems as the a7cii or not

>>4397848
There are no problems

>>4397843
Meters dont accurately show highlight blow. Or let me guess, mgentleman always spot meters the highlights before shooting because he is the most skilled at using minimal camera features to capture building corners.

Expert button pressing is a gay and worthless skill and doesn’t make your photos better. I look down on you. I see you like the dimwits that think they’re better drivers for having a manual transmission. You’re just another dumb "car guy" - go play some football instead you might actually make friends.

>>4397867
>Meters dont accurately show highlight blow.
It doesn't take much practice to know if you'll blow highlights based on the scene and your settings, regardless of metering or exposure preview.
Needing a dedicated button for previewing to avoid highlight clipping is very much a beginner thing. If you need that much help, just leave it on and use your precious button for something else.
>features to capture building corners
I mostly shoot people and events, but pick whatever genre you want and I'll post 3 for each 1 of yours
I look down on people who prioritize how many buttons they can press over actually just taking pictures.

>>4397868
>i mostly randomly overexpose whenever i see light and have to shoot raw
K lol, snobbyist. Its always the wedding and birthday party photographers being fucking retards and thinking they’re hot shit for not doing anything properly.
>MUH AIDS! IM SUPER CAMERA OPERATOR MAN!
A gay and useless skill that doesnt make your photos better. I look down on you.

>>4397871
Why do you assume I randomly overexpose?
Its not like every scene is a completely unique and never shot before situation. If you shoot in the same environments or lighting enough, it's pretty trivial to know what settings to use.

What are you shooting where you find yourself having to frequently meter and change settings often?

>>4397877
Real life, wedding boy. Explaining it to some purist mentality fag who thinks he possesses a valuable skill is a waste of time.

>>4397879
>Real life
Cool! I do lots of photos in real life too, but could you give an actual example? Or how about some photos from an environment where you had to meter and change settings frequently like you implied? I'd like to understand your shooting better. Hate to think you're another larping nophoto, so hoping you can prove me wrong!

Our disagreement is really just
>I need camera to tell me what settings to use
vs
>I have enough experience to know what settings to use

>>4397884
>focus modes and auto modes dont matter because i have a heckin skill
You don’t. Go scamper back to your stick shift honda civic, tryhard. I’m sick of listening to you cope with your crappy camera.

>>4397886
>I need the camera to do everything for me because I don't know what I'm doing
Whatever you say nophoto
>cope with your crappy camera
I have a few cameras and most have all sorts of buttons, I just don't find them necessary to make a good picture like you do. What cameras do you use?

>>4397884
>gets angry because someone demands that their hundreds of dollars enables doing things the faster and easier way (canon W, foolji L, even eos m wins jej)
>tries to claim he s a better photographer for guessing settings
>muh post photos for a gear thread to prove you didnt feel like changing settings manually
lol imagine your entire personality being having something to prove

leica cucks and foolji fags are so insecure

>>4397888
You have so much to prove. And such a small cock.
>I AM SO SKILLED I CHANGE MY OWN SHUTTER SPEED! PROVE YOUR WORTH TO ME! I AM BETTER THAN YOU!
Such a small, small cock. Tiny.

>>4397889
Never claimed I'm better, just that as you get more experienced, you can become less reliant on aids. Why do you think it's "guessing" settings? Is it a guess when I pick which lens to use?

Was just hoping for photos to explain what you mean, but I'd take actual examples in text too. I've asked a few times now and all you've said is "real life" (but not buildings or people), so I'm wondering what you actually shoot? I'm trying to build bridges here, but you aren't even engaging.

>lol, imagine having to pretend you take photos

>>4397892
Wow you have so much to prove
>want to do things faster and easier huh? im not better than you im just more good thing than you. i prove my worth by changing my own shutter speed and ISO. now prove yours!

See a shrink. You clearly have narcissism or some kind of complex.

>>4397893
Not about anything to prove and my method isn't any better or worse. I've asked simple, direct questions (what do you shoot? what kind of camera do you use?), and the other side just pivots to name calling.

I do often ask for photos, because I think people posting relevant photos makes the board better. Do you think the photo board is better if people don't post?
>>4397890
Do have tiny cock, but not a larping nophoto at least.

>>4397810
Name one camera that does all of this

>>4397896
Any canon

>>4397895
>durr ur inexperienced and bad because you want to do things the easy way durrr im so experienced and good at photography because i change settings its not my fault im a narcissist im innocent here everyone else is always the problem
Silence tryhard

>>4397898
silence nophoto

>>4397900
Look in a mirror, dog.

>>4397896
Any camera that isnt a Sony

>>4397896
Any sony.

>>4397947
Liar.

>Picked up a very nice compact camera and take some great pictures
>Realize I love photography, even have fun trying to work around the limitations of the shitty sensor
>Wanted to upgrade to a digital fullframe for muh bokeh and low light
>do it and keep my compact for when I don't want to take out my FF
>End up taking the FF usually or no camera at all
>Compact is collecting dust
>Taking less pictures than before

Gear fagging is scary

>>4398540
yeah I took more pics with my mft cam than I have with my ff cam.

>>4398540
most pics taken anywbere are phone tier trash with bad light and bad environments, take a real camera for special times and a ricoh gr or pocket zoom for the rest and just in case. this is the only way. anything else is miserable including not so compacts like the x100 and micro four thirds. if its too big to pocket the only justification is flying out to do bird photography and ff 600mms not fitting in the carryon bag (checked bags = decentered lenses and stolen $4009 gear)

>>4398549
>ricoh gr

I heard they have really bad issues with sucking in dust + I don't like 35mm

>>4398550
Nothing that actually fits in a pocket comes without compromises. In this case the compromise is "ricoh is incompetent".

Is full frame worth it over apsc (in a compact)? I've only ever shot with micro four thirds and full frame (both primarily for video rather than photo, and this would be as well) before so I don't really know how apsc compares to those

>>4398576
You can crop a lot more which will add more to your photography than better bokeh or low light

The low light difference is huge though, f2.8 on crop is more like f4 on FF. I use a kit lens on my FF and still get good results

>>4398576
If you want better noise handling, / lowlight potential for shallower depth of field, and more functional compatibility with adapting older lenses, go for it
If you shoot mostly in good light, and rarely shoot wide open, won't make much difference
In either case, skill / technique, lens choice, processing, etc all can matter even more for the actual look of an image
>>4398589
Cropping potential is a function of resolution, not sensor size, but FF does have more high res options

>>4398599
No actually. Megapixels aren’t resolution. Optics are. The larger photosites of a 24mp ff will show fewer lens aberrations and result in a sharper image, unless you go full retard and buy $1000 primes for aps-c. So you can actually crop FF more, and aps-c with a normal lens will have that characteristic smeary to linear blur of overstressed optics if you crop. Generally.

The big sensor = sharper effect is also 3d pop. More sharpness out of basic lens designs with lots of spherical aberration looks 3d.

>>4398599
>cropping HR apsc
would look worse than micro four thirds (mft lenses are sharper, easy to do with a tiny image circle, and the sensors have better DR than the r7)
yes and only two hr apsc exist, the r7 and 90d. xt5 doesnt count because xtrans cuts resolution by a third.

>>4398621
Yeah but film is over 100MP of resolution, rekt.

>>4398623
35mm film is at most 20mp if you shoot iso 50 slide film with worse dynamic range than mft and use a rangefinder with modern lenses, and them scan it on a high end digital camera setup.

Film is pointless.
>if i take a picture of a picture with this camera it looks almost as good as this camera!
And filmfags will buy primitive line by line scanning cameras to pretend it isnt

>>4398621
>Optics are
Optics certainly affects the amount of visible detail, but how far you can actually crop in is going to be resolution dependent. Having better optics doesn't really mean you can crop more, just that the detail present when cropping is hire (but that's also true of resolution).
> The larger photosites of a 24mp ff will show fewer lens aberrations
This is just an assumption though. You are generally correct, but there are lenses with good aberration control and poor aberration control, regardless of format.
>unless you go full retard and buy $1000 primes for aps-c
So you agree with me then.
>So you can actually crop FF more
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
>sharper effect is also 3d pop
Also mostly lens dependent, but here's an actual photo example (since we are a photo board).

If you just mean most FF lenses can resolve more detail than most aps-c lenses, I agree with you.

>>4398622
Nope, maybe in your head.

Anons post pictures

It's been 200 posts of gearfagging and nobody apart from the rx100 anon has posted anything

>>4398829
Sir this is an image board.
nobody posts images, they just vomit words forever

>>4398854
We don't post images, we post arguments about posting images.

>>4398829
be part of the change you want to see

>>4398829
>doesn't post an image, just complains
epic

>>4396905
I have the ZV1-M2 and it hardly competes with my fold 6 camera. I just use it to learn before getting into a more serious camera.

My current compacts. What I carry will depend on the size of the pockets in what I'm wearing that day.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Google
Camera Model	Pixel 5
Camera Software	HDR+ 1.0.604778939zd
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3371
Image Height	2527
Image Created	2025:01:12 14:32:55
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
ISO Speed Rating	131
Exposure Program	Normal Program
F-Number	f/1.7
Exposure Time	2789/125000 sec
Subject Distance Range	Macro
Sharpness	Normal
Focal Length	4.38 mm
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance	0.16 m
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Image Height	3024
White Balance	Auto
Brightness	1.7 EV
Image Width	4032
Exposure Mode	Auto
Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Custom

Fuck it I'm gonna buy the Fuji X-M5!!!

>>4398989
>43mm f/6.9 equiv
do snoyfags really? Your phone will take better pics lmao

>>4399092
Ok no I'm actually still conflicted between it and the a6700 - is the ibis and viewfinder and better ergonomics worth the 500 eur higher cost?

>>4399099
They're both overpriced trash.

>>4399100
The Fuji is cheap af though
What would you recommend instead?

>>4397052
>>4397099
>>4397137
x100v/vi lens is extremely sharp. People who say its a soft lens either never used one and get their opinions from /p/ shitposters or dont know how to take a sharp photo with x-tranny sensor.

>Duplicating a post from the gear thread because someone in /compact/ might have different input:

Yo, I've got an R8 as a proper ILC for planned stuff but want a compact as an alternative for just chucking in the car.
I need recs on a non retarded buy, preferably used as this isn't supposed to be a big purchase. My phone is modern with a 1/1.54" sensor and is passable, but I'm wondering if an actual compact camera could btfo it.
Needs:
>Bigger than a 1/2.3" sensor, as at that point I'm just going to use the phone
>Optical zoom is desirable but I don't need some retarded 20x nonsense
>Priority on form-factor over optical performance
Was looking at a1st gen RX100, but I want anon to do what they do best and convince me I'm a retard and offer superior suggestions from their superior minds.

>>4399116
Why not a later gen rx100? Before they increased the focal range and cucked it to f2.8.

The autofocus will be better and you get a viewfinder on the mk4

>>4399116
>>4399119
Yeah the III, IV, and V/VA have better lenses and the built in EVF (II had an optional one). The V/VA also gets you better AF with phase detect and more points. The III only does 1080p60 where as the others are 2160p30 if that matters to you, also the continuous burst rate increases with each model but even the 10fps of the III should be enough.

>>4399119
>>4399121
Yeah I've actually found a V for $600 AUD that I'm strongly considering. f/1.8 lens with an equiv. 24-70mm focal distance and inbuild ND? Basically ticks all the boxes. I'm in no rush to buy and want some input, but it's a great deal sitting there.

>>4398829
okay

>>4398829
Having to resize pictures to under 5MiBs is a real handicap on a picture board.

>>4399133
>wahh I can't post my 8000x5000 ooc jpegs to the board
>Most people view at 1920x1080 on a phone screen
>Even fewer people view at 2k or 4k.
A basic resize takes a whopping 20 seconds of effort with a batch software program

>>4399096
>>4399096
You multiply the focal length but divide the f number. 43mm, f3. Picrel.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ZV-E10
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	42 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2025:01:13 08:19:28
Exposure Time	1/3200 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	11.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5709
Image Height	3223
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4399138
>divide the f/stop
What the fuck? No. Oh sick, by that logic my shitter phone camera with an f/2.2 is actually f/0.3 wow! Ultimate bokeh!

>>4399142
Allow me to explain this to you in terms you will understand. Assume you have a 7" er that's as wide as a needle. Assume I have a 6" er that's as wide as your boyfriends fist. Which one do you think your mom would enjoy more?

>>4399138
it's f4.5 in terms of light gathering, but same DoF as you'd get with a 43mm f6.8 on FF

>>4399146
Accurate. However, I won't have my FF with me as it doesn't fit in my coat pocket, so I'll get nothing.

>>4399145
>Explains the easily understood idea of aperture f/stop with cock sizes
Anon I think you might be on the wrong board.

>>easily understood
Apparently not, especially when mounting a lens with markings for one sensor size on a sensor of a different size.

>>4399096
No one else makes a smaller pancake without an extending front and tons of focus breathing. Snoyfags use that one because it has almost no focus breathing. If nikon wants to retry the z 26mm and make it usable for video this time around, they are welcome to, but until then its essentially a shitty zoom lens. But they won't because they couldn't even make their pancake sharper than canon's cheap non weather sealed one despite the supposed magical mount.

>>4399109
>"Extremely sharp"
Dear fucking lord you have never seen a sharp lens in your life. This is sharp to the standard of a 1950s double gauss prime because it is one. Learn when to call a lens "quirky and full of character" instead of embarrassing yourself. Fuji makes this camera specifically to copy 1950s gear, it is not even meant to be sharp. You are disrespecting fuji by claiming they make sharp kit. They actively try not to.

>>4399159
Because sensor size doesnt change the lens. An f4.5 is an f4.5 regardless of sensor size. The sensor size can only change the tstop measurement by cropping out some vignetting.

>>4399146
the lens does retain the same "light gathering"
but the sensor crops out a bunch of the light it gathers

thats why micro four thirds is terrible

>>4399159
what markings? aperture and focal length markings are independent of sensor size

>>4399277
at least 1” cameras like the panasonic zs200d justify their shit quality and meh autofocus by actually fitting in a pocket so you dont have to be that camera guy all day if you want a decent picture

m43 is just normal strap-bound cameras but for impoverished wimps
>my big bazooka shaped camera is slightly less big. that extra pound would have broke my wimpy wrists.
sometimes theyre the same size as full frame lol

>>4399292
I consneed to your points after you've expounded on them.
I originally bought an oly for a smaller camera thinking I'd just slap a pancake prime on it and that would be great, but in honesty it's still not exactly pocketable. I'm probably getting an RX100V soon and the size difference is enough to make it work.
BUT THEN you get the absolute faggots that buy an EM5 IV for "muh grams and muh reech" then insist the IQ is excellent as long as you buy $1500 pro lenses that also conveniently make it as big as an EF EF 70-200 f/2.8.

>>4399303
>thinking I'd just slap a pancake prime on it and that would be great, but in honesty it's still not exactly pocketable
my GM1 with the 20mm perfectly fits in my coat pocket in the winter
>insist the IQ is excellent as long as you buy $1500 pro lenses
since the IQ of a photo for the last 20 years has been the sole job of the lens, what exactly is wrong with this statement? excellent IQ needs excellent glass, there is no getting around that.
>inb4 I meant pocketable in the sense that it fits my tight short jeans in the cali summer
then you have a warped perception of the compromise between sensor size and len/body sizes

>>4399308
>this camera fits in my coat pocket in the winter
Cool. It's 39*C here. Guess I'm not supposed to have a compact camera if it's hot
>IQ is great because my lens costs a lot of money
While conveniently ignoring the noise and DR at base ISO is dog shit regardless of the body. Expensive lenses don't suddenly make your sensor better.
>Oh you want a pocketable camera? Nah that's not what anyone means when we claim a camera is pocketable.
Wow that would be a stellar point if anon didn't already post the RX100 that can absolutely fit inside a jeans pocket.

>>4399314
>Guess I'm not supposed to have a compact camera if it's hot
thanks for discovering that the world isn't your basement and that outside conditions change requirements
>While conveniently ignoring the noise and DR at base ISO is dog shit regardless of the body
spoiled faggot, all sensors for the last 20 years are clean at base ISO
>RX100 that can absolutely fit inside a jeans pocket.
no it can't lmao the RX100 is still too big. unless you mean cargo pants, but then
>Nah that's not what anyone means when we claim a camera is pocketable

>>4399317
>Watch as the MFTurd shill seethes when he is btfo'd on the Arabian wallet weaving forum.
anon I think you need to chill the fuck out lmao. M43 is garbage, go make a thread to complain

Might get the Fuji X-S20, seems to be almost identical to the a6700 but quite a bit cheaper
Anyone have it or know anything about it?

>>4399319
Bad autofocus especially for video, overpriced lenses with poor IQ.

It has ibis, which is nice.

>>4399317
I don't know what kind of faggot tier skinny jeans with non existent pockets you're wearing anon

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	SM-A326BR
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Software	A326BRZHS4BVI3
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	25 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	4000
Image Height	3000
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2025:01:14 13:41:26
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Height	3000
Brightness	3.5 EV
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
Flash	No Flash
F-Number	f/1.8
Image Width	4000
ISO Speed Rating	200
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	4.60 mm
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Thoughts on the Lumix zs99?

>>4399325
Worth it as a daily carry anon?

Hold up, in the cases of the a6700, xm5, and xs20, are the kit lenses they're bundled with already focal length marked for their apsc sensors? As in they actually are 20-50mm rather than 30-75mm equivalent etc?

>>4399352
"Worth it" is entirely dependent on your disposable income. Personally I wouldn't pay more than 400usd used

Sometimes I think it doesn't offer much in comparison to my FF (only reach and portability). But then I look back at some of my pictures and I refuse to sell it. Having an EVF and flip screen on a tiny camera is also fun.

I use it for a snapshit in good light shooting sooc. Mostly black and white which it's not bad at because it masks the noise from the slow lens.

>>4399358
Focal length is a physical property of a lens, and that doesn't change no matter the camera or sensor size you put behind it
Some brands / sites will list equivalent in description / marketing, but a 20mm will always be 20mm
"crop" lens designation has to do with sensor
coverage, not focal length

>>4399365
But if that focal length is made for a smaller sensor rather than full frame...

>>4399429
The focal length isn't any different, what's different is how large of a sensor it can cover
There are plenty of "designed for smaller sensor" lenses that cover larger sensors, and you'll notice the focal length isn't any different than what's labeled
Any 20mm you put on a crop sensor camera will be "cropped in" compared to a 20mm on a FF camera, since all the "crop" stuff is a camera thing, not lens
Any 20mm you put on a crop sensor camera will look like any other 20mm you put on it (in terms of field of view), regardless if the lens is meant for FF or crop

>>4399358
>are the kit lenses they're bundled with already focal length marked for their apsc sensors? As in they actually are 20-50mm rather than 30-75mm equivalent etc?
Nobody has ever done this. Is this bait?

>>4399436
So the 50mm lens made for that Fuji or that Sony is gonna be 75mm equivalent?

>>4399514
Any 50mm you put on an APS-C camera will be the equivalent of a 75mm on full frame
I don't know how it could possibly be more clear

>>4399516
That's what i assumed but I was thrown off because while watching some reviews for some Fujis it was mentioned that they don't make full frame lenses for them etc etc etc yada yada

>>4399519
A lens being full frame or crop or not has nothing to do with focal length

>>4399524
really nothing competes with the GR.
I've been considering recently an X100VI or Q2/3 but.. why? the only drawback is the best thing about the GR I/II was the flash, now you'd have to add an off camera for a mk III, at which point the Leica or fuji become just as portable so fuck it who knows. stick to my sony i guess. the a7c (any of them) are great for travel/portability with amazing quality. a7c/40mm 2.5 is wonderful

>>4399542
reply was for OP. but I have a whole rant about focal length to sensor size that I won't go into. they're not truly equiv

>>4399543
If everyone is just talking about FoV (which is mostly the case), then it's fine. Most photogs are only going to be concerned with that at a non-prof level. But yeah once you start actually talking optical physics and sheeeit, equivalentcy is gone

>>4399549
please enlighten us
the extent that they can differ, is just the extent that lenses differ, even for the same fl and sensor size
so what are you really getting at?

>>4399549
Oh the diffraction physics and the much forgotten circle of confusion, yes

>>4399163
man go fuck yourself. Seriously. Pretentious fucking loser pixel peeping to microscopic details. Majority of idiots on this board with full frame gear are unable to take a sharper photo but lets fucking shit on it because it's muh hipster tax camera.
Also, fuck off with your double gauss shit. Its a heavily modernized design with aspherical elements.You know what else is a double gauss design? A fucking Nikon Z 35mm 1.8, Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro and a Sony FE 35mm f/1.8. So your point is stupid.

>>4396674
they tried that with a FF sensor and nobody bought it, thats why the a7c exists

>>4399596
Is there even a market for compact FF? Nobody buying a compact cares about sensor sizes, and nobody buying FF sensors wants a non-ILC. Sucks because I can see the appeal but the market is so damn small why bother.

Ricoh gr3 is 1k+ in my cunt but there are used nex3's for like 90 euros.Is this a dumb idea to buy a nex3 and one of those pancake lenses or chink 35mm as a budget alternative ?

I checked the size and both cameras are almost identical , both are crop, portable. The nex would be easier to clean too right ?

>>4399596
No one bought it because it was a $3000 a7ii/a7rii sensor and constantly broke.

>>4399615
Yes because the x100 lens and xtrans are dogshit, ricoh and fuji autofocus is dogshit, and m43 looks like an iphone 15 to most people. Canon is releasing a compact ff soon.

>>4399629
The gr3 at least has a sharp lens although awful old sensor and no autofocus whatsoever if you want to use the superior 40mm on something that isnt 15m away

>>4399636
inb4 cope gearfags go nooo skill issue pixel peep standards too high
ok go look at iphone 15 comparisons and tell me crop sensors and cameras under 40mp have a point

everyone already gets the newest iphone for free with the phone and data plan they need to get through life. you cant even hold down many 1st world jobs without an iphone, specifically, because android compatibility and support is poor

and that iphone just got sharper and higher dr than a ricoh gr iii.

>>4399638
zoomer level bait

>>4399639
Sadly its true. Unless you pixel peep to the extreme the iphone 15 is a dead ringer for aps-c and the 14 pro looks exactly like m43. We’re heading towards a world where only 40mp+ ff with tele zooms is worth it and the standard professional camera is 100mp medium format or global shutter FF with a 400mm f2.8.

iPhone photos suck ass you retard
t. 15PM owner

>>4396396
and then theres this putz

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Comment	Screenshot
Image Width	780
Image Height	444

>>4399722
You actually still need to check focus and ensure a high enough shutter speed with a phone, bro.

>>4399763
at least it's got a niggor lens

Let me guess, you need more.

>>4399841
Yes I need you to make me a sandwich, you bitch

>>4399352
it is worth it for the VA version.

>>4399847
No.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Minolta Co., Ltd.
Camera Model	DiMAGE G500
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	39 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/4.7
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	7.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	8.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1200
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4396396
Countless great compact cameras are totally fucking worthless due to a fixed 28mm equivalent lens.

>>4399877
28mm is literally the most versatile focal length and should be the only lens allowed on a compact fixed lens camera

>>4399879
28mm is almost worthless. Everything is always too far away and it's rarely appropriate to get closer. Only good for rocks, leaves, and imitating non-artist non-photographers that didn't deserve to be known to more than 5 people. There's a reason it's on the iphone and that reason is crappy group photos.

i'm really happy with my Pentax Optio VS20. i got it used from eBay for less than $100. it has 20x zoom and it can take decently clear photos of birds and stuff from a distance, and it has a really nice macro setting.
the only thing i don't like is the lack of apeture or shutter speed control. there is a high shutter speed "sport" setting that works well when i need to set a high shutter speed, but other than that you gotta trick the camera with ISO and exposure and little focus tricks to get it to play along with you.

Would you use something with this image quality today?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon IXY DIGITAL 810 IS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Lens Size	5.80 - 23.20 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2010:11:07 15:34:20
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	5.80 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1536
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
ISO Speed Rating	Auto
Sharpness	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Full Auto
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	Single
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Red-Eye Reduction (Auto)
Compression Setting	Superfine
Macro Mode	Normal
Subject Distance	65.530 m
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Image Number	102-2963

>>4396396
Dumb question, but is there a compact camera that does well in low light, at least 800 ISO?

>>4400275
800 is hardly a challenge for 1 inch and larger

Apologies for the dust, I should really stop storing my camera under my desk

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M4
Camera Software	DSC-RX100M4 v2.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2025:01:18 23:48:32
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/20 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Brightness	0.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	13.16 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3840
Image Height	2560
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4400279
cool, thanks!

Any interesting compacts supposed to be released this year?

>>4400154
Looks good to me, but phones are pretty much at that level now too