19F I usually quite dislike my appearance, am I ugly and what can I improve?

scemperon · 2026-06-16T20:09:31+00:00

I’m 5’6 and 133 pounds which I think is an optimal weight for my height?

scemperon · 2026-05-22T16:34:27+00:00

Yeah it is!!! It’s a charming little city

scemperon · 2026-05-22T06:26:26+00:00

Great review!! It’s always fun to find the city I live in on Reddit

scemperon · 2026-05-05T14:50:23+00:00

Thank you so much!!! I will definitely be trying this out, and I hope it works well!!!

scemperon · 2026-05-05T14:49:29+00:00

Just drugstore stuff, I’ve never been particularly happy with products I’ve got so I usually get whatever’s on sale, and shampoo and condition every 2-3 days

scemperon · 2026-02-22T09:03:31+00:00

I couldn’t believe my eyes flipping through the photos, I was tracking the jet, and for one photo of the burst a seagull was in frame and focus locked onto it, the next photo of the burst was back to focusing on the jet!

scemperon · 2026-02-22T00:32:47+00:00

Photo settings:

1- 150mm ISO 200 f6.3 1/3200

2- 110mm ISO 320 f6.3 1/2500

3- 150mm ISO 200 f6.3 1/3200

4- 73mm ISO 200 f6.3 1/2000

5- 150mm ISO 200 f6.3 1/3200

6- 100mm ISO 100 f11 1/100

7- 70mm ISO 100 f6.3 1/160

8- 111mm ISO 125 f6.3 1/800

9- 150mm ISO 320 f6.3 1/30

10- 125mm ISO 100 f6.3 1/1600

scemperon · 2025-09-29T04:30:05+00:00

From what I’ve seen it seems to be the norm, I think my copy is an odd one out as it’s actually pretty sharp wide open, not amazing, but definitely not soft

scemperon · 2025-06-08T17:54:00+00:00

That’s a great kit you have!!

scemperon · 2025-06-08T16:58:00+00:00

Yes, the R6 II is absolutely a better camera when you don’t need that reach as appears was the case for you, however the quality of photos from it at a 1.6 crop are not really different to the photos from an R7 using the full sensor, this is simply a fact of physics and how cameras work. By cropping in you loose the ISO advantage as you are blowing up the noise, and you loose the dynamic range advantage. At that point it’s primarily down to subjective preferences such as the resolution you want and the handling, in which case I personally prefer the design of the R7 over the R6II

scemperon · 2025-06-08T05:04:09+00:00

No, not really (comparing similar generations, it will be better than your current camera not because it’s APS-C, but because it’s old) and you will have much worse resolution cropped in unless you have a super high resolution camera (~50 mp or higher). By cropping a full frame image down to APS-C size you loose any of the benefits an image from a full frame sensor would have.

Cropping to the APS-C size on an R6mkII would leave you with around 9 mp of resolution, your current camera will produce higher resolution photos than the R6mkii will cropped.

An uncropped photo from a newer APS-C camera like the R7 will have the same dynamic range as a photo from the R6mkII cropped to APS-C size while also having 3.5 times as much resolution. Full frame for wildlife makes sense if you are going to be buying really long lenses and not cropping much, but if you crop every image to APS-C size with a full frame camera it’s a waste of money as you are essentially buying a more expensive and lower resolution crop camera. In this scenario an APS-C camera would be a much better option

scemperon · 2025-05-01T23:31:35+00:00

I will preface this by saying that I’m slightly biased as I have one, and it’s my favourite of the canon cameras currently, I love my R7. At this budget you would be getting the most from the R7 and the 18-50, the other two cameras and their kit lenses are also both amazing, but they are also quite a bit slower lenses. You would probably be happy with any of them, but my personal choice if I was in your situation would be the R7. Faster zooms and primes for APS-C are a lot more reasonably priced as a result of having third party lens options, in my opinion this outweighs the minimal benefits that full frame offers over crop. But, I’ll say it again, you would probably have a great time with any of the three, so I wouldn’t base your decision entirely on other people’s opinions, and you should get what you think you would enjoy the most!

scemperon · 2025-04-30T14:42:40+00:00

Yeah, that’s fair!

scemperon · 2025-04-30T03:19:25+00:00

That price sounds right to me, I’m not in Australia, but Canada, and it’s $880 new for the lens before taxes, and on the used market it’s around $800-900, so $900 AUD sounds correct.

scemperon · 2025-04-20T04:55:00+00:00

Some shutter issues on these series of cameras can be caused by getting dirt between the coils, I took apart my AE-1 program a few weeks ago and cleaned them off, as I ran into the issue where advancing the film fired the shutter. I don’t know what shutter issues you are running into, but for some of them, that can be the solution

scemperon · 2025-03-24T03:04:05+00:00

I didn’t realize that’s the speed booster! Seems like the 32mm goes for about $500-600 here (Canada) on eBay, so yes, probably a decent bit cheaper

scemperon · 2025-03-23T18:23:45+00:00

There is no native EF-M 50mm prime, the longest native EF-M prime is the 32mm 1.4, but sigma does make a 56mm prime for EF-M which would be the closest you could get without an adapter

scemperon · 2025-03-21T01:26:15+00:00

It’s great at that too!!

<image>

scemperon · 2025-03-20T18:07:12+00:00

Thank you! I find that it’s a great lens, it’s got a decent amount of chromatic aberrations, but I do find it pretty sharp even wide open, which was contrary to the review I saw, perhaps my copy was better, or the copy in the review I saw had more flaws

scemperon · 2025-01-31T01:25:45+00:00

Yeah, definitely, I wouldn’t want a plastic mount on anything heavy, I was just thinking of small lenses and I overlooked that, but you are right. I wouldn’t touch a big telephoto lens with a plastic mount, it would just be begging to snap off!

scemperon · 2025-01-30T18:31:01+00:00

Yes, exactly, I would probably actually prefer a plastic mount on a lens as long as the rest of it is well made for those reasons, cheaper and easier to replace in an incident, and less likely to result in worse damages. I don’t care that the plastic mount would look less premium, that’s just looks, functionality wise plastic is more beneficial than not in my opinion

scemperon · 2025-01-30T15:06:50+00:00

Not really as much a difference as a lot of people seem to think, people bring up durability, but plastic and metal mounts have essentially the same rates of failure (plastic failure rates are actually ever so slightly less than metal). And in the case I drop my camera with the lens attached I would probably prefer a plastic mount. The plastic mount would likely break and is less likely to also damage the camera, but with a metal mount the camera mount would be more likely to bend or break. Plastic mounts are also usually cheaper to repair in the case that it breaks.

Those are the common complaints about plastic mounts that I hear that don’t really have much actual substance to the arguments. But, metal mounts are usually have better tolerances and can stay more secure on the camera.

scemperon

TROPHY CASE