Tuloom

Spectacular rendering. Great examples. I have it, too. Get it. I've not been using it, owning the Zeiss ZE 25mm 2.0, but will rethink that.

(1) FF mirrorless with a RAW histogram (2) 42MP+ (3) Works perfectly with Leica M and Zeiss ZM lenses

(1) Roller rinks in the 70's (2) Hells Angles of the 40's/50's (3) Black Death (Plague) (4) During the filming of Fitzc ...

Yep, silly clickbait. Chicken littling and stating the bloody obvious. Stating the obvious is the catch, though. Forumiters seem to devour that kind of oily dung.

In real life, outside of pedantic forums, everyone will know exactly what you're talking about if they have a brain. No one cares that P&S's and stonehenge film cameras are mirrorless.

I own a phone. Everyone has one. There's no way anyone does not have an idea.

You are here meaning to tell me a camera phone, in the hands of a reasonable intelligent artist, can make a good enough photo to post online at all of 973 pixels. Shocking! Stop it! Call big media, ...

Contax 35-70mm. If you want something rather spectacular. 300-400$ for pure amazing. Don't penny pinch on the lens with a great full frame camera.

Loxia 21mm.

Will be a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction. Won't matter a bit.

Here's the common excuses: 1. I only have photos of my rich clients and kids. 2. They're gonna get stolen! 3. OMG Flash! 4. I don't gotta.

100% it is. 5000 posts on equivenaly and a 19 hundred join date mean jack squat at far as actual photography is concerned.

Both are utterly useless on the internet in 2018.

Amazon, of course.

Oh the drama. You ordered a camera, not a Jarvik heart.

It the same crap from the internet- enlightened.  Yada Yada Yada, blah blah blah.... ....and nary a thumbnail of their own photos.

Nah, better to whine on the internet.

Care to show us some of your work? Or, should I say, creations?

Yes you are. And it is.

That has been repeated, parroted, copied, plagiarized and rehashed thousands of times on this forum. Go preach on Facebook. That's what it's there for.