I'm sometimes surprised how many of these threads end up focusing on traits of the *output* (like color) instead of the *process* to getting there (ergonomics, user interface, etc).
If the output is what we predominantly care about, there should be a lot more threads about different RAW conversion softwares and white balance settings (for the AI affines in this thread: I can recommend chatting about actual color of light vs visually pleasing white balance settings for things like sunset, blue hour etc ). These things have so much more impact on those traits of the output than the camera used. Esp. since image quality has plateaued hard for almost 10 years now.
Imo if we focused more on the process we'd get much better cameras. Things like differences in the optics of an EVF even if they use the same panel. Or little things like that switch the OM-3 has near your thumb, allowing to instantly switch between two customized AF modes.
It's most apparent for me with Sony cameras: they're objectively often the most competent camera in their bracket (now more challenged by Canon and Nikon vs a few years ago). But I just do not enjoy using them, and since this isn't my job but something I do for fun, why would I grab the camera that is less fun?
I'm sometimes contemplating getting a Panasonic S1R or the Leica SL2 for some of their features. The Panasonic is significantly cheaper but I'd still be tempted to get the Leica instead because of how clean their user interface is (in this case I do like the layout of the S1R too though, so not as clear of a preference as with Leica / Nikon vs Sony)
Jun 29, 2025 at 05:07 AM
Previous versions of fjablo's message #16842036 « Reasons to LIKE the Leica SL system? »
). These things have so much more impact on those traits of the output than the camera used. Esp. since image quality has plateaued hard for almost 10 years now.