December 21, 2014, 09:59:38 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - mkabi

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25
No doubt this may be the future.

But, it still begs the question... is this really adding to the art of photography? Or is it adding to the art of photoshoping?

When light meters were added to cameras, the question was asked.
When Autofocus was added, once again, it was asked
When Digital Cameras first came out, they were panned as toys.
Only time will tell, but I suspect that funds to keep going are getting tight.

Sorry for bringing back an old thread, but after watching the following:

It reminded me of this thread and what Mt. Spokane said.
But really, I would have loved to be a part of this challenge.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]
« on: December 19, 2014, 10:03:54 PM »
How do I work out how many minutes of video I can get into 1 GB of SD card space?


Depends on resolution and/or framerate.
I believe 1080/24p is 12 min (plus/minus a few seconds) for 4Gb.
So about 3 min. per Gb.

Here is a t3i manual (go to page 151):

Lenses / Re: $600 burning a hole in your pocket?
« on: December 19, 2014, 06:06:57 PM »
Sell the 18-55 & the 55-250 (in my opinion, 2 of the worst lenses in Canon's arsenal; in fact, anything is better). Reinvest the $100-$200 that you make off of those lenses to buy better lenses.

If you are staying crop (with whatever your wife is getting in 2015), look at sigma 18-35mm 1.8 (used) & Canon 50mm 1.8 (new).

If you upgrading to FF, then buy Canon 24-105 (used) and a Canon 50 mm 1.8 (new).

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]
« on: December 18, 2014, 09:00:51 AM »
All of those things are coming sooner than later.
If I was starting from scratch I might not go with Canon right now, but I don't see anything tempting enough to make me risk selling my and replacing it with another brand, especially since this is all a game of leapfrog and Canon is not sleeping.

The 5D3 is still the best all around combo video/photo option I think: it does great low light for both video and photo, it has good AF for photos, lots of lenses, built like a tank, great ergonomics, has magic lantern. I am tempted a bit by the Sony A7s (although some say it's a bit fiddly), but I'll wait and see what they do with the mark II. In the meantime Canon may leap ahead. I am actually considering the C100 markII ... the new viewfinder and LCD look great, and that is a really useable camera.

Some people love the GH4, but working alone in a variety of poorly lit environments where I can't control the lighting, it's just not going to do the job. The 5D3 can deliver great video without intruding on anyone or announcing itself with lights, the C100 even more so, and that's really important for documentary and ENG.

I hope Sony updates the A7s with IS and beefier grip like the A7II ... that might be interesting!

I'm not keen on replacing any of my gear either.
But, Sony is making it easy so that we don't have to... just body + adapter right?
It looks like Magic Lantern is already preloaded on it. Yet, I have to agree, current models are kinda "fiddly."
Still... add that 5-axis and it makes every one of my primes into ISed lenses... who wouldn't want that? 
Only other problem is its only UHD and not true 4K, but they can upgrade that in the mark 2.
May be even add 2.5K @ 60p and 1080/240p?

You know whats funny, my cousin was asking about boxing day and the Nikon d610.
I told him that I don't know anything about Nikon, and that I'm a Canon guy myself, and that oddly enough... many people from both camps are looking at Sony a7 cameras and that he should seriously consider that as an option. I also told him that no matter which camera he chooses, on any side, there are going to be flaws that he has to learn to live with...

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2014, 08:31:48 PM »
Low light performance is just happens to be the most important video feature, it is the one feature that can get you the shot or miss it. The GH4 is basically useless for video past ISO 1600, and not that great at 1600 either. The 5D3 gives great results up to about ISO 10,000 and with Magic Lantern you get zebras, peaking, magic zoom, and a ton of other goodies, so the GH4 doesn't cut it for me. The Sony A7s will be a great option when they get a good selection of native FF lenses, but Canon will probably have an offering before Sony gets the lenses made.

Also, is there DOF on the Gh4 without the speedbooster? Just curious.

Aaaaand that's why I wait for the Sony a7sII ... likely adding the 3-5 axis sensor stabilization and maybe fix that rolling shutter issue.  I could care less what glass Sony makes for it. Hello metabones and Canon EF glass.


I wasn't too keen with mark 1, but that 5-axis man...
In fact, add 1080/120 and you have gold... pure gold :)

I use to think high ISO was super important, but then I learned how to light things. Now I think anything clean over 3,200 is nice, but not necessary. Maybe if all one has is a kit lens at f/5.6 I can see the importance.

Also, don't forget that a Speedbooster on the GH4 gives you both a Super35 (~APS-C) FOV AND an extra stop of light. When other cameras need ISO 3,200 for a given scene, the GH4 with Speedbooster will give you the same exposure at ISO 1,600. And that combo is still $400 cheaper than the A7s and $1000 cheaper than the Mark III.

And the A7s can mount any type of glass in the world. Not sure why you'd hold out for native Sony glass....


Yeah, but just to add... with regards to lighting... its a drag to lug around a generator all the time (if you are outside). And, if you're talking about battery LEDs... those sony batteries are expensive!

I'm hearing a lot good things about that speedbooster, never thought it can do super 35 FOV...
I have a friend who got the speedbooster with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 (turned it into 1.2 - Have you ever heard a zoom with 1.2???)

Great Story.

+1 & Great Lesson.
Back out when there are too many changes in contract that you can't understand.
Not worth the hassle. And, if there is a lawyer, have a tape recorder on hand to record every verbal contract.

I don't know if someone has already put this up, but TheCameraStoreTV has up Hand-On Field Test for both NX1 & 7DII:

NX1 -

7DII -

They each have their flaws, but call me biased but I'm feeling the 7DII as being a superior overall product.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Co-worker dumps $5k on Nikon
« on: December 08, 2014, 02:50:42 PM »
When asked why she wanted the Nikon D810 her answer was simple: "I just want the best IQ."
It could be because of a sales pitch, or simply she knows what she is doing and didn't tell you enough.

I am not surprised at all, what she is going to use the camera for.
Someone asked me on the street once on how to configure his camera when shooting in churches.
He said he spent 10 000$ on gear and all photos are blurred during a communion.
Apparently, he approached me because I had the same gear and I was with a 5D iii and a rented 200mm f2.0

Im curious, was it exactly the same equipment?
And, what did you tell him? To help him?


Please explain: how can a sensor compensate for inappropriate or low-quality lens?  How can a sensor compensate for very poor focus?  How can a sensor compensate for poor composition?

Composition is a poor comparison, because it's not really a measurable, repeatable technology like a sensor.

A lens is only as good as the sensor. The sensor is the foundation. A mediocre lens will come to life when swapping from APS-C to FF.

The goal of all of this, of Canon Rumors, of camera tech chat forums, of speculation, is the holy grail of IQ. This reveals itself in having to perform less post processing on original RAW images. Lenses do play a role, but not in noise and DR.

Question: Would you be happy with a camera, with a single button (mainly the shutter button) and a fixed lens? It can have an amazing sensor, whatever specification you like. Then you can post-process everything after taking the picture.

EOS Bodies / Re: Hyperfocal Distance
« on: December 07, 2014, 10:28:28 PM »
Being a dinosaur, I don't own a smart phone.  Also, why require a second piece of equipment to do something the first piece should do for you?

Imo canon & Nikon are being dinosaurs by not innovating Some things. The ability to download a app on your camera to do what you want should be possible. Personality I don't think I'd use it but it be nice to have the ability to put some custom things like that on your if you wanted too.

Its not that it is impossible, someone needs to write the app.
Most phone apps are not written by the manufacturer, its mostly open source (independent, third party - mobile software engineers thats creating those apps).

Canon is openly sharing its code, hence the reason Magic Lantern exists. I think you can play arkanoid on most models (except probably the 7DII), so its possible... any software engineer willing to sacrifice their time to create this app. for Canon cams?

Canon isn't a dinosaur, may be we are a little spoiled with phone apps?

EOS Bodies / Re: Hyperfocal Distance
« on: December 07, 2014, 09:21:21 PM »
Well our smart phones have touch screens, wifi, gps, the ability to put our pictures online immediately, any apps we want to download, a operating system that doesn't look like the old Dos computer systems like our cameras do, etc. so I'm sure they could incorporate that if they wanted to and over stuff I mentioned but will they? Maybe someday. I love my cameras but you'd think canon and nikon would start to incorporate that stuff and make it a new fun user experience. i think they really need to put features in our cameras like that in the future. Like I said I love my cameras but I think some new innovation would add to them. The 5d3 with that stuff would be awesome to me.

I like the current interface... but I suppose at the current rate of change, I wouldn't be surprised if phones start putting large sensors with an EF mount on the back. I mean, Nokia had some 40MP cellphone (Lumia something...). And, thats what mirroless people want.... may be I should patent this and give apple a call.

Give me one good reason why you want to jump through hoops finding ways and workarounds to achieve the desired results when there is other equipment that makes the process much easier.

How is the process much easier?
You are still post-processing a lot more.
Its really about pre-production vs. post-production, if you spend a little more time setting up before the shot, then you won't have to spend more time in front of a computer. Or vice-versa.

And there is a reason for that.

The only reason I see that you didn't read beyond what I said, otherwise you would have refrained from repeating what others have said already

First: There are some cell phones already available that have 40+x MP - although I find that ridiculous.

As long as you find it ridiculous...
The second is surely beneficial for consumers, but not the company. A business is a business, and if you don't know how to survive as a business, you will go bankrupt. Sony at 2 Billion dollar loss, is obviously doing something wrong.... your guess is as good as mine as to what they are doing wrong... but obviously you think that what they are doing is right, and if so... they shouldn't be in that much of a financial mess.

So... I will still stand behind my initial statement...

This makes zero sense to me

Whats wrong with their phones?
Whats wrong with their TVs?
Whats wrong with their laptops?

Absolutely nothing! In fact, I would say those markets are more stable than the still camera market, and they are going full throttle in a shrinking market?  ???


And why not. OK, more practical reason would be that the higher MP can then act as a sort of "digital zoom", rather than having to actually fit a teensy-weensy zoom in the phone.

What if you took that picture, and the area you want to zoom in isn't in focus?

The question should rather be which segment of camera sales are shrinking? Obviously the P&S segment. Possibly the entry-level (aka "Rebel") segment. But I do think that the more higher-end will actually show growth.

Lets go back to the graph. I'm looking at the graph provided by Dilbert (first page), lets disseminate it and look at it rationally.

First, the bar graph, it says all (sony's) still camera market will drop from 50,000 (still cameras) to 25,000 (still cameras) by 2017, keeping video camera market relatively constant.

Now, lets look at the pie chart, lets assume ILC: Single reflex is constant from 2014 to 2017, although there might be some growth. Also, there is definite growth in ILC: Mirror-less, but by how much? Its definitely not 25% of the entire pie, so lets give it a good 20%. 20% of 25,000 units sold is only 5,000. If in 2014's pie chart ILC: Mirror-less occupied 10%, its still only 5,000 units sold (10% of 50,000).

And to who must Sony sell these sensors? Canon? So with Nikon being the only potential purchaser in town, it makes sense to then make your own products incorporating your own products.

I know Hasselblad uses Sony sensors, I'm sure other companies other than Nikon uses Sony sensors too.

All I'm saying is that Sony is at a 2 Billion dollar loss already, may be even be hitting bankruptcy anytime soon...
Why invest in something that may be a losing battle?
Sony has made a niche, especially in the sensor world... but lets face it... their bodies suck.
Time to change strategies, Intel makes chips and motherboards... when have you bought an entire computer made by Intel, sold by Intel?

This makes zero sense to me.

You have this forecast (made by Sony), no matter if it is DSLR/ILC, its still a shrinking market for all still cameras. So why is Sony investing in still cameras by creating all these new sensors?

Is this a clue that they are going to 'abort ship' in 2017?
And a cell phone camera does not need any sensor to capture photos?
And R&D for high end sensors may not trickle down into consumer products?

You're like the 5th person to say that.
And I'm not picking on you specifically, this is to answer all of you guys all at the same time.
I understand that cell phones have sensors too, but do you need 50MP or higher in a cell phone?
Also, if it was just sensors, I was talking about... may be I should've been more specific... a7,a7r,a7s,a7II, a9 - what is the point if its a shrinking market? (hence, the question of abandoning ship)
Also, if it is all about the sensor, why not keep it at just sensors (no cameras or lenses, just sensors) and sell to other companies?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25