b0k3h

This is the photographic analog to buying pre-distressed trousers (=the ones with holes)

Interesting how most people vote for tech-centric stuff (high res sensor), and capabilities that they likely wouldnt need ("sports AF").

My personal priorities are almost at the bottom of that...

on long focal length lenses, with fine-scale high contrast objects just outside the focus zone, a jittery "nervous" bokeh can be distracting and obvious.

not saying this lens or the RX10x exhibits...

Rubbish. My pictures are better because my camera is larger, heavier, and has more off-axis lines-per-millimeter.

Now who wants to see more Cat Portraits?

so you wrote >Downplaying the advantages to "just" high ISO noise and shallower DoF is almost as bad, and indicates a rather limited level of expertise when it comes to producing photos.< and when ...

You wrote all that and yet not proferred an explanation of what this so-called look is supposed to be. I - and surely like others here - have or have had everything from 1/2.3" 1/1.7" 1" 4/3 aps-c ...

shouting about MTF curves and ISO ramps get boring after a while ... :P

soft wouldnt make this photo better because there wouldnt be any other element or color to fill the bottom / bottom left space..... or any other visuals to convey the calming soft emotion but the ...

From a visual point of view, the chaotic and random nature of the water produces a texture that is not appealing. The backdrop is usually jagged rocks or foliage with a similar image texture.... Bl ...

When I was a young boy leafing through the pages of National Geographic I was struck by awe of the exoticism of the landscapes and peoples..... I imagine some grizzled photographer hiking around...

empty apartment amenities = cloned out;
city reflection = flipped and superimposed

distant subjects are fine.  but then again, in those sorts of scenarios im rarely ever looking for focus-based isolation. its the occasional close-up where i venture into that aperture range and ...

it's not nonsense at all.  F2 is soft , especially with nearby subjects.  F2.8 is eminently usable and F4 is sharp. just do an aperture step test and you'll see. not saying that that's a problem ...

Panasonic G9, probably. #Make Olympus Great Again.

well, not really to pasture, just to the bookshelf because it looks nice there. I have the X100S and strangely, it seems to have developed a case of grid-artifact. If you run the googley-search for ...

i probably favor 3:2 the most, but shoot in 4:3, and crop IF later deemed necessary. 4:3 is best for verticals. exception is shooting with the LX100, which has a multi-aspect sensor.  so decisions ...

not much really beneficial or standout on the color, but the monochrome is lacking a range of tones or dynamism and looks rather like a charcoal sketch

It's interesting to see how far they've come. All of their products predating the introduction of the NEX line, was just abjectly horrible. All of those Cybershots P&S models really were an...

Moderately useful.  It depends what you're trying to do with your photos.  Polarized does not automatically = better. Many times I actually *want* surfaces such as water to be reflective.  As for ...

mate, you've been at Burning Man for too long.

there are pockets of the jungle where such collectives exist. although i still think they're run by chiefs.