>he bought a lolympus pen f memecro four turds camera >paid

I don't get why Olympus and Panasonic can't just switch over to APS-C. MFT was pretty great ten years ago, but it's like the modern equivalent of APS or 126 film in terms of obsolescence.

>>3109617
They might as well do FF or MF... but they'd still not have the lenses and sensors required.

>>3109593
oh you again >>3104603

did a PEN F fuck your girl or something?

>>3109617
APS-C isn't that much of an improvement, at least not enough to justify killing off all their m43 bodies and lenses. and it's really the smaller and lighter lenses that is still attractive about the format

I would definitely like to see Oly try a FF tho, to replace the E-M1 as its flagship. no way should a m43 body cost $2k (unless you are really a 4k video camera and not a photo camera like the GH4/GH5)

File: leicam10desk.jpg (103KB, 1104x733px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1104x733px

>he bought a lolca m10 fullfag camera
>he paid more than a full frame Sony a7ii would cost
>he purposely gimped himself with no af, no weather-sealing, no IBIS, no lenses
>costs as much as the sony naming scheme
>all for the red dot

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4738
Image Height	3159
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:01:18 12:32:55
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1104
Image Height	733

>>3109627
>no lenses

you were so close to credible bait.

Thingken bout picking up a gx85 tomorrow just to piss you faggots off.

>stuck between Fuji X-E2 and Oly E-M10 II
I'm leaning heavily towards the Oly, but I shoot a lot of moving subjects at night... So IDK... IBIS wont help with that

>>3109639

Neither will the x-e2 desu

>>3109641
X-E2 has better ISO performance tho.
I can crank it up to 3200 ISO, NP.
Whereas Lolympus is intolerable past 1600 ISO

>>3109650

You'd be surprised how little one stop matters my dude. I say this as a guy with a full frame camera that can get it up until about 12,800.

>>3109652
I'm confused as to what you're implying.
Are you saying the Olympus has one more stop?

>>3109657

No, the Fuji does. I have a camera that thwomps both of them and I'm still not getting great low-light action shots. No camera on the market is going to give you clean frozen action in low light.

>>3109650
iso 3200?
you mean 1600 right?
protip: they expose darker than other manufacturers.

>>3109650
I can get like 1/100th of a second shutter speed on a pen f with iso 1600 in a mall parking lot

>>3109625
Oly are making fe mount gear.

>>3109629
Show me a leica lens that you can use one handed

>>3109650
If the iso, shutter speed and aperture were the same on both cameras, the fuji shot would be a stop darker, fuji lie about their iso.

A 2nd hand a7 easily falls into your budget though and that does have over a stop better low light performance than the fuji.

>>3109657
They have similar low light performance, fuji just fudge their numbers to mislead people like yourself, fuji files also go soft in all popular image editing software as they won't release their demosaic algorithm. Bunch of tards basically.

>>3109672
>Show me a leica lens that you can use one handed

I don't have to. AF is not in the system specs.

>>3109660
I mean, I'm not going to be shooting cars or birds at night or anything.
Mostly friends and family in settings with low light like uh... I guess Vegas would be a decent example.

>>3109668
No, I mean 3200. I wouldn't use any of those shots for prints, but for websites and sharing they are more than acceptable.

Whereas owners of M43 have told me that 800 ISO is already pushing it. Whereas 1600 is just atrocious.

>>3109671
Post it.

>>3109672
I believe the X-trans issues in RAW editors has been mostly fixed in updated versions. Either way, I feel like it's a little overblown

File: 1478958585424.jpg (213KB, 798x770px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 798x770px

>>3109593
>he fell for the sony meme

[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	798
Image Height	770
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3109678
>xtrans has been fixed
But it hasn't, iridient is still miles and miles ahead
>a little overblown
Not really, people are prepared to spend £4k on a 50mm otus just to squeeze a tiny bit of extra detail, fuji & adobe make every lens look like it was found in the bargain bin.

If you value the aesthetics of your camera more than the photos it produces, sure, go for fuji.

>>3109681
Dumb fucking fogposter

File: 1.png (1MB, 908x556px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 908x556px

>>3109689
Yeah man, just look at this blurry mess @100% magnification. Unusable.

>>3109707
Ignore the sonygger deflecting attention from the appalling job adobe does with Sony files. They bundle C1 for a reason....

>>3109672

>one handed leica lens

Just because you need a hand to focus doesn't mean it is a bad lens.

And I can one hand m-mount lenses with my a7ii....