For OCD symmetry, I would have walked a meter or so to your left and lined up with the bricks that lead to the light pole. This would let you be square to the building across the street too, assuming the bricks run at a right angle to it.
Nice picture otherwise! People are always interesting subjects.
Homes in Detroit look awesome and are super cheap, especially for what they could be. They’re going to be a ton of work and if you have kids the schools are horrible though :(
The gentrified pockets look amazing, but drive quite a premium.
<e>I meant to reply to your reply further down. oh well</e>
I wonder if it’s just the era of architecture. Detroit has some truly interesting looking homes. Here’s a random collection from a quick trip around street view:
That was absolutely the case until very recently. Qualcomm bought Nuvia, a start-up that was stacked with former Apple engineers, a few years ago. These processors are just now coming to market. Laptops with these processors are benchmarking around MacBook levels (slightly behind single core, slightly ahead in multi core).
It’s very hard to argue against Apple hardware and battery life. Maybe with windows moving slowly toward ARM they’ll catch up some. It’s going to be very tough though - Apple has full control over their hardware, which meat they can optimize their OS for it.
I really hope the snapdragon x laptops gain some traction. I recently went laptop shopping and what I wanted (good to great display, stays cold, good battery life) line up really well with a MacBook/MB air. I just couldn’t stomach the stupid mark-ups for memory and storage. I wound up with a Lenovo 7x slim. Upgrading to 32 GB memory and 1 TB storage was around $115. The non-emulated performance on windows is solid. Emulated is generally ok for my usage. I’m probably going to try Linux on it when I have a light week, but I’m somewhat wary of the impact that will have on battery life.
There’s absolutely zero wrong with older cameras, they really highlight that good photos are all about finding interesting subjects and framing (your first shot is tops). I say this as someone with an A9, but IMO the biggest benefit of a more modern body is the AF and potential the burst rate. It’s always nice seeing photos from my D40 pop up on our digital frame. Other than me knowing what camera took them, you would never know.
Do you mean an A7 III with kit lens for 500€ and A7 IV for 600€?
If yes, those numbers are way too low - at least for my market (USA). I would suspect scam/stolen/broken.
That said, if they’re close to you and you can meet up to try the cameras out you might score a good deal. If the post is legit, and the cameras aren’t broken, these will move fast. How long has the listing been up? If it’s been up for more than a day or two and you’re in a densely populated area then it’s not looking good.
If you were trying to get in and out quickly, that could explain the soft photo. You might be able to figure out where the camera was trying to focus using Canon’s image editing software, whatever that might be (sorry, not a canon person).
I agree with the sentiment of the post above this one, so I’m chiming in here.
At 55mm and 1/125, this photo stood a good chance of being sharp unless you have very unsteady hands. Where was your intended focal point? That could help point to what went wrong (eg the intended focal point could be better located, the camera missed focus, the camera moved during the exposure causing blur, etc).
Glad you found the site useful! Good luck in your quest.
If volume is your sole consideration, the G1X III will be hard to beat. if you didn’t already try it, here it is dropped into the comparison.
As for advances in IQ, IMO the gains haven’t been that large. The big changes are:
Other than that, everything else is largely quality of life. Easier AF, faster sensor readout that enabled me to keep my A9 in electronics shutter mode basically all the time, overall speed (focus fast and take a ton of photos), computational photography (like high resolution shots, etc).
I have a 3k digital picture frame and when photos from my old D40 show up on it, I’m always surprised by how well they hold up. Great colors, good dynamic range, etc.
For anyone scratching their heads (my D5300 had a built in GPS!) - most current cameras rely on a companion phone app for GPS coordinates. Some do this better than others. Here’s my experience, based on my understanding of how each system works.
Three ideas.
First, are you taking photos of static or dynamic subjects? In other words, can you push your shutter speed down to make up for lost light? If yes, it doesn’t really matter which sensor format you go with. As an added bonus, M43 stabilization is stupid good so you might even be able to skip the tripod.
Second, there’s no beating a fast FF lens on a FF body but those are going to be big and expensive. Here’s a quick comparison. The Sony lens is 1.7 pounds and costs $2,000 new vs the Oly’s 0.9 pounds and $1,200 price tag. There are super fast third party E-mount options that will save some $$, but no weight (hi Sigma), and slower first and third party options that will save $$ and weight, but will also start to eat into the two stop advantage FF sensors enjoy in low light. For example, Sigma’s 50mm f/2 lens, which weighs 0.75 pounds and costs $640, will leave you with around 2/3 stop advantage in low light. It’s still an advantage, and it even costs and weighs less than the Oly, but it’s not a large advantage in terms of dynamic range.
Finally, with a fast FF lens you’re going to be facing a fairly narrow depth of field wide open. That 50mm f/1.2 FF lens will give you a 0.11m depth of field wide open with a subject that’s 2m away. If you want the extreme background of your image sharp, everything closer than 35m will be out of focus. Conversely, that 25mm f/1.2 MFT lens will give you a 0.23m depth of field with a subject that’s 2m away and with infinity acceptably sharp you’ll have a sharp foreground subjects 17.5m and further away from the camera. Stopping down the FF lens will increase its depth of field, but will again eat into the inherent advantage a FF body has over a M43 body.
There aren’t many DSLR like fixed lens cameras out on the market today as that segment has basically evaporated.
The remaining players are:
What are you looking for that the G1X mkIII doesn’t offer? Buying a used copy might be the way to go, especially since it sounds like what you’re looking for.
As far as currently in production options, in addition to the three above, you could also look at mirrorless. Both their bodies and lenses are more compact than their DSLR counterparts. As far as sensor size goes, Micro Four Thirds (micro four thirds) can offer the most compact glass, followed by APS-C and then FF. That said a compact FF body, with a slower (read: smaller) lens will generally be close in size to a MFT camera with a fast lens. For outdoor and sunny, there will be no image quality tradeoff and when it gets dark the FF camera with a slower lens and a MFT sensor with a faster lens will be more or less on par thanks to the FF sensor’s two stop improvement in low light. For example (scroll down if you don’t see the two cameras and lenses). This does start to fall apart at longer focal lengths though - there’s no substitute for the crop factor advantage beyond say 100mm of FF EQ focal length.
So… What are you looking for?
Ditto for mobile. IMO the mobile site wasn’t great, but I haven’t been on much lately.
My electric chainsaws and weed whacker always start. Eventually our lawn tractor will kick the bucket and I’ll either convert it to electric or buy one.
I like this photo a lot more than the other one! I think it’s the symmetry of the foliage creating a frame for the coaster.
No worries! It’s something I finally noticed in other people’s photos recently and now I’m trying to duplicate it in my own. I don’t want to tell you how long I’ve been dabbling in photography before coming to this realization.