TheDefinitionOfInsanity

Where does it say 2x? The bar being 2 times higher doesn't mean shit if there's no scale. Orochi can be 1x, which makes Summit 1.5x just like on the left chart.

The simple way to achieve similar look to first picture would be to use Detail extractor tool in Analog Effex (part of free Nik Collection). Another way would be Clarity slider in Lightroom. The second picture look like a basic HDR, there are tons of ways to do it.

Here is your answer

It is also a far cry from Nikon and Canon kit lenses in terms of price. I think it is more of a mid-range crop lens like Tamron/Sigma 17-50 2.8. @thekillergazebo Take a look at 18-105 F4. It is rather bulky, but the performance is better than both 16-70 and 24-70 Zeiss lenses and it also costs less.

The first one is just the newer version of the second one and it also has VC (image stabilization).

Most smartphones have 1/3" or 1/2.3" sensor just like your basic point and shoot camera. It's hard to say if smartphone lenses are worse, but i don't think they are better than point and shoot camera lenses. Of course there are other things such as image processing, but i wouldn't expect a smartphone to be better than point and shoot under the same conditions.

This is what i believe as well, but for some reason i can select 10 bit color in Nvidia control panel and i don't have a Quadro. It might be a bug or a very limited 10 bit support, but the option is there.

Neither EF nor A mount lens is a very good option for this particular use case (as well as for wildlife). EF lens will have IS, but the AF will be unuseable on a6000 unless you'll get one of those transparent mirror adapters (i guess Techart III/Saker Falcon is the only one). A mount lens will probably autofocus decently fast, but it will lack IS, which is not ideal for a 150-600mm lens.

If you are not planning to shoot video, i don't see a reason to pay extra for a6300.

Just get Sony FE 28-70 lens, they can be found on german ebay for around 250€ in good condition.

D300 + Tamron 28-75 is a bad choice for beginner. Couple of reasons: 1. A beginner will not use most of the features of the high-end/pro body anyway. 2. The sensor in D300 is inferior to modern entry-level cameras. 3. While 28-75 might have good quality optics and its f/2.8, the focal length is crap on the crop body. I recommend entry level DSLRs for beginners, they are a good starting point. A person who knows nothing about photography will not be able to create significantly better pictures even with $5000 worth of gear.

Canon 10-18 is the way to go, unless you need f2.8. In that case there is Tokina 11-16 or the newer 11-20, but it is more expensive.

Are these for people who pay idiotic amounts of money for cables that supposedly make things sound better?

There is no point in using filters as protection, lens hood is enough. Sure, there are cases where the filter gets shattered by a rock or something, but the lens is fine and people think "good thing i had a filter on, it protects my lens". Thing is, the front element of the lens is much stronger than that overpriced thin piece of glass called filter and wouldn't shatter where the filter will.

By the time DX12 becomes relevant, both 970 and 390 will become irrelevant.