• FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ah, I see where you’re confused.

    See my first post: I’m referring to a ‘simple point and shoot’ as in: a compact camera which only offers automatic modes and doesn’t shoot raw. Like my old Ixus for example.

    Of course there’s MFT’s and APS-C’s with manual modes too, obviously. Those would be the step up from said P&S’s.

    • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m not confused, and you didn’t suggest either of those in your comment. My point is that you are the cause of the problem in the OP. People already in the hobby suggesting you need x to do photography, when x is significantly more expensive than y which is a more appropriately priced entry with similar features. DSLR bodies are about twice the price of an MFT body with similar specs. I’ve never used a P&S without manual mode either. Just let people enjoy hobbies, not everyone earns a wage that’s enough to drop a couple of thousand just to have fun.

        • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          What do you think this platform is for other than having discussions, which naturally lead to differing opinions. Why are you being a jerk? You said:

          > You don’t need a $5000 pro camera to get started, but at leat something better than a simple point and shoot would be preferable to start. Like a decent prosumer DSLR.

          I agreed with the first part, a P&S isn’t great. I disagreed with the second point, as a DSLR is already on the high end. There’s a happy medium. You then tried to tell me I was confused? About what? I don’t consider it an entry-level suggestion?

          Chill out mate.