My A7R broke and now I'm left with the insurance money to

>>3005913
Canon cameras can install Magic Lantern for
In camera RAW histogram
Dual-ISO (half the image is 1 iso, other half is another ISO merged into one) improves dynamic range.
You won't lose focus peaking because that's in magic lantern as well
In-camera intervalometer
Advanced bracketing... etc

Canons aren't great but magic lantern gives you far more usability out of them than any other camera manufacturer lets you

Nikon gets better performance out of Sony sensors than Sony and has actual professional bodies that don't disintegrate in your hands.

Other FF cameras from Nikon, Canon, and Pentax actually have weather sealing and somewhat rugged bodies.

>>3005933
>>3005929
>>3005928
I appreciate your input. Weather sealing is basically the thing putting me on the ledge.
But the annoying part is that I will have to let go of the EVF which I really miss now that I'm using my old Canon until I get a new system

>>3006001
Pretty sure canon has Exposure Simulation. Also, with magic lantern you have RAW histogram in live view as well

honestly sony sucks. if you don't need FF go for fuji. the jpeg quality alone is better then anything Sony has to offer in the raw files.. there is a slight learning curve with fuji if you have never shot film. but my X-pro 2 is the best camera I've ever owned. I migrated over from canon.. solid all of my canon shit and have a full Fuji eco system now

File: sony meme.png (388KB, 656x368px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 656x368px

>>3005913
>he fall for the sony meme

>>3005913

Wait a few months if you can.

a7iii and a9 will be announced soon.

Honestly I have tried everything (okay, i lie. everything but pentax) but keep coming back to Sony.

Fuji makes cool looking bodies and decent enough lenses, but are priced ridiculously.

Canon and Nikon are good, but both stuck in the past. You have to hack a Canon to give it features the Sony has by default.

>>3006208
>features
You have to throw a Sony in the bin and buy a Canon to get a functional camera tho

>>3005913
I ripped on Sony so hard when they had their dSLRs out but now they make the best sensors. I have an A7s and dont regret it, its my favourite and I have owned and used several brands, I am just looking to upgrade for that PDAF adapter compatibility.

>>3006208
>fuji make decent lenses
>none of their lenses resolve as much detail as their $100 sigma dn counterparts

>>3005913
You mean perfect opportunity to get ibis and pdaf! Upgrading to the ii was one of the best things I've done.

>>3006254

So I guess we'll be seeing your sigma meme for a few months then.

>>3006255
>another upset fuji user

Seriously though, when you buy a fuji do you sign a waiver promising to always be a salty little wank rag?

>>3006254

Yea, they make Sony's 16-50mm actually look good when they don't have lens correction applied.

But they are small, wide aperture, and not terribly sharp. That is all Fuji users really need since all they do is sooc jpegs.

>>3006208

What could they add to the a7iii if it's real? Anything more and you might as well get an R

>>3006281

Dual card slots, 4k video, a6500 level autofocus.

Weather sealing would be nice too.

The yearly sensor and electronics updates too of course.

>>3006254
I'm looking at the A7R II as well but the question is if all that money will be a worthwhile investment seeing as there will be a new one every two years and it still does not have weather sealing.

>>3006282

Dual cards would be great.

4k is okay, but we both know it'll last a whopping ten minutes in that mode before it melts

>>3006284
>but we both know it'll last a whopping ten minutes in that mode before it melts

Nah, Sony has cooling down now.

The a6500 is indefinite.

>>3005913
Just save up your money and get the Fuji GFX.

>>3005913

How the fuck did you do that OP?

Is the EVF still functional?

>>3005913

Here OP, fix it for $20.

>https://sony.encompass.com/item/10387213/Sony/X-2591-930-1/Coverassy(795),finder

>>3006296
It fell of a tripod (bad screw) and hit the area around the hotshoe.
The screen still worked but it was set to EVF only so it wouldn't switch back. It's utterly retarded by Sony to not include some sort of button for hard resets on the camera

>>3006415

Try this:
>http://community.sony.com/t5/Alpha-NEX-Cameras/How-to-hard-reset-manually-a-Sony-A7r/td-p/282977

Pulling the battery for a long enough time will reset all settings too I think, but it is a long time.

>>3006160
I agree with this guy, get an XP2 or XT2

>>3006497

Fuji bodies are damn neat, but all their lenses suck and are stupid overpriced.

>>3006160
>>3006497
Not that guy, but was thinking of just getting a used XT-1 for cheap and selling my Nikon shit to get good glass.

Better to get Xpro2 or save for XT-2?

>>3008065
Bare in mind if you want an equivalent level of sharpness from a 24mp crop camera (xp2, xt2) than a 24mp ff (a7ii) your lenses need to be able to resolve 130% more detail. (oh and you need to use sooc jpegs on fuji as it renders super soft on adobe/dxo/cap1).

The biggest jump in lens quality you can do is go from crop to ff.

Also, look at the price/performance for fuji glass, it's just about as bad as it gets and the mount is being phased out due to lack of support. Whilst e mount has not only been heavily adopted by photographers but also the professional video market, and has more 3rd party support than any other system.

If you want a fancy looking, underperforming point and shoot you're happy to lose your money on, go ahead and get the fuji.

If you want a photographers tool, look at anything else.

>>3008067
So, what, go for broke and spring for the A7R ii?

>>3006254

When will the meme end. Fuji lenses are razor sharp you absolute wankstain. Do you even 90 F2?

>>3008072
If you feel you need 42mp and 1 stop better low light and pdaf across the whole frame. Personally I'd save enough for a 55mm f1.8 by getting the base a7ii.

>>3008074
>fuji 90mm tops out at 3200 lwph, beaten by £100 sigma 90mm (1/7th of the price of the fuji)
>sony 90mm goes over 5000, 2nd sharpest lens dxo have ever tested

Lel, the meme will end when fuji becomes competitive.

File: hyyi.jpg (72KB, 621x621px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 621x621px

>>3006001
EVF

>>3008076
how about end yourself you autistic gearfag

File: Screenshot_2017-01-23-11-49-19.png (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

>>3008078
Heres screenshots of lens tests of the fuji and sony 90mm, both at 100%

First up, the foojee, not bad, you can almost make out texture in the fabric behind the bottle.

File: Screenshot_2017-01-23-11-51-27.png (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

>>3008079
And here's the sony
>OBNOXIOUSAIRHORN.WAV

File: Screenshot_2017-01-23-12-01-24.png (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

>>3008079
And here's the sony 55,if you though the previous was just lucky.

File: Screenshot_2017-01-23-12-03-40.png (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

>>3008079
Fujis flagship 56mm did slightly better than the 90, still well behind sony though.

>>3008078
>what camera?
>this one objectively gives better image quality than that one
>eughhhhh you're so autistic, how do you know op wants the best quality for his money?

Every thread fujicucks cry, why. They should just sell up or quit.

>>3008079
>thought i was being bamboozled so went to check the review
>whole review gushes about how sharp it is, how it doesn't get better
>almost 100% sure I'm about to swerve a memeing and call out moop
>view test shots
>fuji senpai, why do you let me down so often

>>3008083
>>3008082
>>3008080
>>3008079

Jesus Christ.

Normally when someone says something is soft I can't see it.

But this is like night and day.

I,keep hearing how good the Fuji lenses are and how shitty the Sony ones are. It seems like the opposite is true. Does Fuji just have better marketing?

>>3005913
how much in total did you pay for insurance?
how much did they compensate you?

>>3006001
bentax k01
or
bentax k1.

fujifilm xt2, xt20.
eos m5.
gh5
em1ii.

>>3008079
>>3008080
>>3008082
>>3008083
>screencapped his phone
dump phone poster.
is that even 1:1 pixel?

>>3008109
Yes it is 1:1

I can make a collage of fuji's failures in photoshop if you really want me to now I'm off the shitter.

>>3008115

If you do so, be aware it will be posted everytime a fujifag starts shitposting.

And since it compares with Sony, it will draw out the Sonyfags.

That image will ruin every thread it gets posted in.

>>3008116
>ruin every thread it's posted in
Only for those that use the inferior system. For sony users it will be a reassuring pat on the back, cameras aren't cheap and it's good to know you've made the most out of your money.

>>3005913
If you wanna keep good video capture either a Lumix G85 (I know, small sensor, whatever) or Canon with magiclantern.

>>3008079
>>3008080
>>3008082
>>3008083
This isn't the fault of the lenses actually, this all has to do with Fuji's completely retarded X-trans processing which removes all high frequench information. I love Fuji's design and lenses to death but I had to jump system because I was so damn sick of having high frequency noise thrown away.

I had an X-Pro 1, and an X-E2. They were both wonderful and I am very tempted to get an X-pro 1 again someday because I'm besotted with Contax G lenses and it's the perfect camera to use them on, but I can never again use them as a main camera because of X-trans.

X-trans nauseated me such that I had to get as far away from it as possible, and the DP2 Merrill was my salvation, with a cheap, good condition £500 5D MII combined with Zeiss 50mm f/1.7 for video and enjoyment of Magic Lantern to sooth my nostalgia for my old 500D.

>>3008079
>>3008080
>>3008082
>>3008083
>>3008085
how about for starters that:
1. 16mpix vs 24mpix
2. Fuji file is sooc jpeg which is generally softer than its raw output.

sooo can you stop sperging the disinformation, sonycuck?
>inb4 fuji cant into lightroom
for ultimate sharpness we now have iridient x-transformer that converts rafs to DNG's in an instant, and can use those files with either acr or lr without any loss of quality.

>>3006001
EVF is good for macro and product, everything else your eye is more important.

>>3008104
Full frame

>>3008079
oh boy

>>3008079
>>3008080

>this kills the fujicuck

>>3008115
pls do, make buyers aware before they buy


include the fact that fuji applies NR to raw to make iq comparisons look good

include fuji cant into IBIS

include Xtrans failure and overpriced lenses

>>3008191
>apply NR to RAW
>modify RAW in any way
THEN WHY CALL IT RAW?

File: Capsdasdadture.jpg (170KB, 1013x704px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1013x704px

>>3008194
whats the point of being honest when you can sell hipster cameras at 2x price of comparable cameras ;^)

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Comp
Image-Specific Properties:

>>3008198
Don't forget how Fuji also lie about their iso so they look a stop better than the competition.

what a mess of a company.

>>3008222
they are not the only ones, most of camera manufacturers lie about iso
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtDotqLx6nA

>>3008238
Sony users latch onto Fuji "lying" to make up for the fact that it's now quite obvious you can shoot basic bitch jpegs with a Fuji and outdo Sony users on creating images that are simply beautiful rather than technical exercises.

Sony users are like photorealistic painters. No one cares about their delusions except for they.

>>3008246
>pointed out fuji cheats on iso and raw processing
>wahhhh jpegs are "simply beautiful "

please, please do not breed

>>3008251
Post your photography and I'll post mine, bucko.

>>3008259
>proven wrong
>hurr durr my photos r bettr
go back to your containment boards please

>>3008238
Not really part of the point of the video, but something is WEIRD about the sound, as if they vut off the first few waves of each word. Sounds sudden and jumpy.

>>3008284
>>3008238
And another thing about video: when the frame is showing the full head, the focus seems to be set on the hair of the guy, not the eyes.
WTF dude? can't you operate a fucking camera?

File: 1483980415677.png (80KB, 246x263px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 246x263px

>>3008246
I don't particularily like Sony, but this argument is all kinds of retarded. You can't honestly believe this.

>>3006160
This, I've used the Fuji systems a bit and I really like them, the only problem is that the durability of a camera is really important to me so it's hard for me to switch from damn near bulletproof canon cameras

>>3008478
what is so attractive about a tiny ass sensor

>>3006257
Dude do you even read your own posts?

Seriously, any time somebody even MENTIONS Fuji it provokes a flood of anti-Fuji shitposting, and any time there's any criticism of Sony at all it turns into a dozen posts attacking Fuji even though nobody mentioned them at all.

I mean shit, just look at >>3006208, he's even a Sony shooter and just said that Fuji lenses were "decent enough," and yet even that resulted in an anti-Fuji shitpost.

I'm really starting to think that Sony users all have some kind of bizarre inferiority complex about Fuji.

Meanwhile, I've pretty much never seen a Fuji user attack any other brand, the most they do is defend their own choice and cite reasons they prefer it.

>>3008508

>never seen a Fuji user attack any other brand

New here?

Fuji users are just as bad as the Sony users. They both needlessly attack and provoke each other. If one shows up, the other is not far behind and always comes slinging shit.

Meanwhile, Canon and Nikon users don't seem to give a shit.

Every now and then a Pentax shitposter shows up, but they are rather rare.

>>3008522
>any other brand
Butthurt sonygger spotted

>>3008523

See? Typical shit flinging Fuji response.

If you disagree, tou are a sonygger

>>3008077
Being able to see your image before taking it speeds up every type of shoot significantly. No more taking a pic and pausing to look down at the screen like a caveman

>>3008106
Well in total after all this is done I'll have about 679 USD to spend on a new camera.
Luckily I know a guy at Sony so I'll be able to pick up a brand new A7R for a little over 1000 USD.

>>3008612

>a7r for 1k

How much for a7r2?

>>3008612
My dad works for nintendo

>>3008612
you didn't answer how much did you pay for insurance?
i just want to know if it's a scam or not.

>>3008635
About 2800 USD
Unreal deal but that investment is not something I can do at this stage of my life

>>3008667
It's a standard home insurance with 170 usd deductible (the fee you pay when you break something and want money)

>>3008672

Fuck, I want one for 2800.

Understandable though. It is getting a little old.

>>3008681
Me too believe me but at some point you have to stop yourself and be happy with what you have for a few years, especially with Sony who'll be releasing new versions more often.

>>3008686

You'd be bettwr off getting lenses anyway.

The 1800 you'd save is most of the way to the new GM if you could ever find it in stock.

>>3008508
>I'm really starting to think that Sony users all have some kind of bizarre inferiority complex about Fuji.

I have also noticed this find it puzzling: why do those that shoot full frame sony's, or at least talk them up endlessly here and there, feel so threatened by an apsc sensored alternative?

This is several levels of autism at work.
It's not just on /p/, either.
It's scary-rabid shit and goes way beyond the historical and customary nikon/canon shitposting I'm used to.

Seriously wtf?

>>3008508
>>3008906
Is this autism?

>>3008612
>broke a7r
>buy another a7r
you will break it again.
just get a bentax k-1.

regardless of your system your pictures will continue to be shit

sorry about that :/

>>3008934
No. It's something like a misguided tribality projected onto one's choice in consumer goods and branding. Never does the poster ever discuss photography, and he'll fight both sides just to entertain himself.

Autism would be something like insisting that every thread that mentions Sony-branded Digital Camera Technology, invented by Engineers in Japan, must reference it as I just jokingly did. You know that kid who'll always say Apple Corporation, and Apple Macintosh? When this stuff gets pathological, we say it's autism. But also when it irritates us, because it's fucking silly, we also call it autism. None of us are doctors, and doctors don't diagnose people over the Internet, so the nomenclature is about as moot as calling someone an oblivious psychopath.

Me, I just like to insist that my camera's AA cells go in exactly the right way around: + to -, no exceptions.

>>3008906
it's almost certainly Pajeets paid by Sony. Make sure you remind them to POO IN LOO

>>3008906
It comes from people asking for advice on what camera to buy, obviously newbies greatly benefit from an evf which limits it to sony vs fuji.

I just don't want to see noobs be put off the hobby because they bought into a dead mount with no af lenses that they will justify the purchase of as opposed to the most affordable cameras, highest quality lenses ranging from £100 to £3000, best featureset, best af, an upgrade path, a flash that costs less than £450, etc.

OP here,
Something great happened. I just got the camera back from the repairshop (they've checked it for the insurance company) and it turns out they reset the camera software. In other words the viewfinder is still dead but the display works!
My new A7R is already on the way so I'll be sitting here with a that one and a fully functional one -viewfinder

>>3009424

You could try to find parts or another a7r that died in a different way to fix it.

I'd give it a shot.

BTW, what company did you get your insurance through? I realized I have $4k in equipment and would hate to lose it.

get the canon EOS 7D or 8D or simply end yur life right now

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NEWZDRG/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=marketorder-20&camp=1789&creative=9325&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=B00NEWZDRG&linkId=4a6176531fef12db299f74920a8dc0cb

>>3009424
>sell them both
>get an a7ii

Or do you value an extra 16MP over IBIS and better AF?

>>3009429
Good idea!

I have a standard Swedish home insurance which covers accidental damage. As previously stated you pay 170 bucks to get your money for a broken product.

I don't have the exact figure I pay every month for it

>>3008934
First guy you quoted here.

I'm just sick of Sony shitters/shills/trolls/whatever inserting themselves into every single discussion we try to have about any other camera brand, and then flipping out into bouts of anti-Fuji rage when they're argued with or when somebody tells them to go away.

>>3009359
This is exactly the kind of ridiculous shit that bothers me. Even when they act civil, Sony supporters load their posts with a bunch of nonsensical slander. I mean, seriously...

>Dead mount
In what way? Three new bodies in the last 12 months and multiple new lenses somehow counts as dead?

>No AF lenses that they will justify the purchase of
What is this even supposed to mean? If you're saying that all of Fuji's AF lenses are too expensive, that's simply not true, especially with their frequent instant rebates. (Which put them at or below the prices of third-party AF lenses for Sony.)

>Highest quality lenses
More like ranging from $800+, and all of which are FF lenses, even Sony fanboys admit that the APS-C lineup is half-abandoned garbage when they're not trying to one-up Fuji.

>An upgrade path
Fuji has one too, and you can actually keep your APS-C lenses when you upgrade, instead of throwing them away and buying new FF glass

>A flash that costs less than 450
Fuji has at least two of them, along with multiple third party options.

This is the shit I'm talking about. It's the same bullshit repeated over and over again. Next you'll tell me that Fuji files don't work in Adobe software (totally untrue, you just have to use a different sharpening process) or that there's no "upgrade path" because Fuji's low end cameras use the same sensors as the high end ones (how is that a bad thing?) or that there's no studio flash options or whatever. I've heard it all and I'm damn sick of it.

>>3008144
I hate how every fuji user uses Iridient as a crutch for poor image quality but forgets Iridient is for MAC only.

>>3009893

If you were a real photographer you'd be using OSx, so that really isn't an issue.

>>3009859
>Sony shitters/shills/trolls/
It's all Moopco, he's the /p/ village idiot

>>3009893
It's out on Windows now.

>>3009926
Owned.

>>3009859
>dead mount
No 3rd party are interested, they don't sell well, they haven't been picked up by professionals, it will be dead within 5 years unless something massive changes.

>simply not true lens prices
Here's the cheapest prices that amazon have sold at. I looked at all fuji primes that came close on price and weren't trash (sony trash is even cheaper, but it's a moot point, it's trash)

3 sigma dn lenses at £90 each
Sony 28mm - £280
Sony 50mm - £222
Fuji 35 f2 - £287
Fuji 23mm f2 - £389
Fuji 35 1.4 - £333
Fuji 18mm_ £230

As you can see, despite fuji needing glass with less than half the surface area of sony fe, they are still a long way off from being competitive, bare in mind canikon badmouth sony for being overpriced.

>apsc bad lineup
Because the easiest way to get a jump in quality is a jump in sensor size, and sony encourages its keen users to do so with extremely affordable ff options. And $800+ is fine for a pro lens.

>fuji has upgrade path too
Lol, wut? Every body has identical image quality, the af is bad on all of them, do you consider a slightly different hipster aesthetic an upgrade?

>fuji has at least 2 of them
With hss? All that fast glass and your only option to use it with flash is £450

>just have to use a different sharpening process
I read about that, tried it and had to recompose after nearly pissing myself with laughter, it looks trash bruh.

>how is that a bad thing
Take 2 identical lenses that don't outresolve a 24mp ff camera, put one on your fuji xpro2, one on a sony a7ii, the sony a7ii pictures will resolve 130% more detail because of the larger sensor and photosites. Not to mention over a stop better iso noise and more pleasing perspective aesthetic.

>>3009893
And handles like hot trash

>>3009995
>the af is bad on all of them

Fuji has one body with good AF! The X-T2.

Of course it costs as much as a FF Sony body....

>>3010001
But the a6500 has better af than a canon 1dx, especially on af-c.

>>3010005
see
>>3009906

>>3010043
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOUtRfpqJp8

Watch philip bloom desperately trying not to say the Sony is much better.

File: compare1.jpg (59KB, 700x408px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 700x408px

Ditching Sony will be the worst mistake you'll ever make.
With the new A7Riii (60+ MP) and the A9R (100+ MP) right around the corner, adding all they learn from the A6500 and A99ii (better buffer speed, 12+ fps, dual card slots, better battery life, no overheating, better IBIS, fastest AF speed and highest number of AF points, 6k video, higher usable ISO, touch and tilt up screen, new E-mount and A-mount glass with the new LAEA5 adapter) Sony will do a hostile takeover.

So save the money and wait until they come out, keep in mind we are taking about $5k-$10k camera and the new glass will be even more expensive, "Hasselblad H Series expensive"

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Image Created	2016:04:05 09:08:31
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	700
Image Height	408

>>3010053
>Video Auto Focus

You realize the 1DX has an entirely separate PDAF system that absolutely destroys any mirrorless camera out there, right? Of course it sucks here, it's using shitty live view AF.

>>3010078
>not understanding canons new dual pixel af

Lol, oh dear anon.

id get an a7r ii or a7s ii
FF, compact, great performance.
nikon shooter here. hoping to get the a7r ii someday