November 22, 2014, 05:14:24 AM

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 - expatinasia

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 65
31
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:26:35 AM »
I think manufacturers decide which are the pro models, whether it be a set of knives, a camera or laptop (though in the latter they are called business models rather than pro).

But what criteria do they use to make that determination?  For any pro criterion you choose I can probably find a counter-example.  About the only criteria I can think of that might have no exceptions would be profit margin and level of support from the manufacturer.  Here are some proposed criteria and why each doesn't hold.

Image quality: 6D arguably has equal/better IQ compared to 1DX

Physical toughness: Pro studio photographers don't need this (e.g. MFD)

Speed: Pro landscape or studio photographers don't need this (e.g. MFD)

You get the idea.

The manufacturer sets the pro level, and I do not know what that is. But generally speaking it is the best overall performance and life of product etc. Whether it be kitchen knives or cameras, the manufacturer will more often than not say that this model is aimed more at pros over an inferior product etc. That's just the way it is. If a new set of knives comes out and has one benefit, or even two over the pro set then I would imagine that most manufacturers would consider putting those benefits into their new pro line when the time comes to do so.

Same applies for everything, pans, ovens, laptops, cars. etc.

I think manufacturers decide which are the pro models, whether it be a set of knives, a camera or laptop (though in the latter they are called business models rather than pro).
Errm, being pedantic for just a moment...I have a Macbook Pro laptop. Must make me a pro! Whoo-hoo!
This is an entertaining thread!  8)   I hope the OP has got something out of it.

-pw

Haha! But now you are confusing a name for a product line. Manufacturers like Dell and Lenovo have business lines (the pro equivalent of a camera) which are made to last longer and more often than not have much higher quality build and components than their consumer lines. Even though those consumer lines may have some advantages (lighter, more stylish etc).

But for some to say it is the people behind the camera that makes the camera a pro camera makes no sense to me. Like I said before a 50D does not become a pro camera because it is used by a pro, it is just a pro's camera.

32
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 12:53:42 AM »
I do not think a pro camera has anything to do with the person holding it.

A pro will choose the best he can use (buy/borrow/etc) for the job in front of him/her. If that person can only get his hands on a Samsung Galaxy Note 3 to take pics, that does not make that phone a pro camera.

I think manufacturers decide which are the pro models, whether it be a set of knives, a camera or laptop (though in the latter they are called business models rather than pro).

Just look at cars. All Mercedes-Benz will get you from a to b, but the S series may do it in a lot more comfort and style than the lowly C series.

If you shoot sports, then it would be the top of the range Nikon or Canon combined with the best glass you can get. If you shoot landscape or architecture, you may be more tempted by the 5D Mark III then the 1D X for example.

If a pro shoots with a 50D that does not make the 50D a pro model, it does however make it that pro's model.

33
Lenses / Re: Shootout: EF 16-35 f/4L IS vs EF 17-40 f/4L
« on: September 28, 2014, 09:54:14 PM »
Stopped watching after a few seconds. A photographer that uses a white background while wearing a white and blue t-shirt, and is himself very pale white. Weird. All far too bright, I would need sunglasses to watch that.

And not even a few seconds of intro to ease you into the video.

I will stick to TDP for my reviews as Bryan knows what he is doing.

Wasn't focusing on the t-shirt this time around, rather the lens

My comment had nothing to do with your choice of t-shirt. Seriously?! That's what you took from my comment. lol.

Choosing a bright white background like that is not wise. Plus you need a 2 or 3 second intro of something.

Very poor video, and I personally would not take any camera advice from someone that produces someone like that about a camera product.

Oh no... I'm heartbroken  ;D

Graham

You seem to have a problem taking constructive criticism.

34
Lenses / Re: Shootout: EF 16-35 f/4L IS vs EF 17-40 f/4L
« on: September 28, 2014, 07:34:40 AM »
WOW...after your first comment, I didn't think that you could be any ruder....but guess what, you proved me wrong!

Rude?! Pray tell, how have I been rude?


35
Lenses / Re: Shootout: EF 16-35 f/4L IS vs EF 17-40 f/4L
« on: September 28, 2014, 07:07:47 AM »
Stopped watching after a few seconds. A photographer that uses a white background while wearing a white and blue t-shirt, and is himself very pale white. Weird. All far too bright, I would need sunglasses to watch that.

And not even a few seconds of intro to ease you into the video.

I will stick to TDP for my reviews as Bryan knows what he is doing.

Wasn't focusing on the t-shirt this time around, rather the lens

My comment had nothing to do with your choice of t-shirt. Seriously?! That's what you took from my comment. lol.

Choosing a bright white background like that is not wise. Plus you need a 2 or 3 second intro of something.

Very poor video, and I personally would not take any camera advice from someone that produces someone like that about a camera product.


36
Lenses / Re: Shootout: EF 16-35 f/4L IS vs EF 17-40 f/4L
« on: September 27, 2014, 08:19:09 PM »
Stopped watching after a few seconds. A photographer that uses a white background while wearing a white and blue t-shirt, and is himself very pale white. Weird. All far too bright, I would need sunglasses to watch that.

And not even a few seconds of intro to ease you into the video.

I will stick to TDP for my reviews as Bryan knows what he is doing.

37
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why haven't you left canon?
« on: September 27, 2014, 04:08:22 AM »
This is a very bizarre question.

I enjoy using the Canon products I have, and to be very honest they help me look good. I know and understand the menu systems, have plenty of expensive glass, and plan to stick with their products unless there is a very serious long term reason I shouldn't.

38
Videography Technique / Re: Tascam DR-60D ON TOP of Camera
« on: September 27, 2014, 03:56:59 AM »
I promised I would report back on how this cheap solution has been.

I have now used the newly bought hot shoe adapter and mounted the Tascam DR-60D on top of the camera during quite a lot of recordings and I am very, very pleased.

To test everything, I used it mounted to the camera with the body attached to the tripod, and mounted to the camera using the lens (70-200 f/2.8 ii) attached to the tripod.

Both work well but I prefer the lens to be attached to the tripod (I can tighten the plate in better) with the Tascam attached on top of the camera.

No problems with wires, or anything thus far so I am very pleased with my US$ 12.5 investment.

Hope this helps. Thanks.


39
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Can Canon Cinema EOS Keep Up?
« on: September 25, 2014, 02:25:03 PM »
Definitely agree with you there, but I also remember very clearly when people were saying similar things about 1080p. Things like why bother, shoot in 720p, nobody can tell the difference etc.

Of course, you can see the difference, but its how far you are sitting to see this difference. Not to mention screen size. Apple's retina display, the ratio - screen resolution : screen size is variable to suit minimum viewing distance.

I agree 100%, I was just quoting things I heard when video on the web started becoming just a little popular, which is why I said "when people were saying", as they are the things I heard.

I have always shot video in 1080p as it is always better to future proof whatever you are making. When I have a camera than can shoot 4K I will do the same, as it is better to downsize that to 1080p if necessary or just keep at 4k if the file sizes etc permit.

I think the advancement of technology is great, and while 4K will be around for a long time, I think it will not remain the top res for as long as 1080p has, which is why I would not be surprised to hear about cameras which shoot at even higher than 4k in the not so distant future.

If Windows 9 is going to support 8K resolution then my thinking is that some companies will just jump to that. I, and many others will not buy a 4K TV as my relatively new 1080p TV is fine for now. 4 or 5 years then I may change.

Like I said I am not good at the physics and maths behind all this, I just have a feeling that 4K will not be the "top" res for as long as some think it may be.

40
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Can Canon Cinema EOS Keep Up?
« on: September 24, 2014, 05:44:20 AM »
8K is more or less ridiculous I doubt delivery of motion will exceed 4K at least to consumers.

Definitely agree with you there, but I also remember very clearly when people were saying similar things about 1080p. Things like why bother, shoot in 720p, nobody can tell the difference etc.

I think if Windows 9 is going to support 8k resolution displays, then I am sure that the GPU cards needed will eventually be made, as will the displays themselves, then the cameras and memory cards and all the marketing that goes with this enormous wheel of industry and commerce to tell us how much we need 8k.

We may not need any of this, but it is coming, and probably sooner than we think.

41
Lenses / Re: Do you keep all your boxes?
« on: September 24, 2014, 12:26:28 AM »
I'm currently selling a 2006 1D MkIIn. What is it with boxes? I lost a certain sale last night just because I didn't have the original boxes. That's completely nuts.

Sorry to hear about the loss of a sale, and I fully agree with you.

I do not keep any of the boxes, and if I was buying something second hand (unless it is v. expensive jewellery and/or watches) then I would not care if the seller has the original box or not. I presume I can email CPS and ask whether the serial number of the item has been stolen or not if I am concerned about that.

How much extra was the buyer willing to pay for the box, and how much would it cost for you to buy one off ebay or wherever?

42
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Can Canon Cinema EOS Keep Up?
« on: September 23, 2014, 07:27:30 AM »
A lot of you guys are far more technically savvy than I am in these areas, but could it be that Canon know that 4K is going to go away very fast, and are spending their R&D money on 8k?

It is said that Windows 9 will support 8K resolution:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/windows-9-support-8k-display-resolution-improved-dpi-scaling-1466483

And Dell recently announced a 5K display:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/05/dell-5k-ultrasharp-display/

And yet not many of us at all have got TV that can give us 4K content.

Could Canon be focussing on a market that is not yet here yet, as the 4K market, in my eyes at least, looks like it is going to be swallowed up pretty fast?

43
Videography Technique / Re: 1D X and Manfrotto MVH502AH
« on: September 22, 2014, 11:07:45 PM »
No, it is not counterfeit.

I used it a lot last week, and still couldn't figure it out, though I do understand what you are suggesting.

Thanks.

44
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Card Failure: Lexar CF 32GB 1000x
« on: September 22, 2014, 11:04:37 PM »
In talking with the company that eventually recovered the data, he said they see about equal numbers of Lexar and SanDisk failures.

Thanks for highlight that important fact. I think it is all too easy for threads like this to become a SanDisk v Lexar and ultimately it all boils down to our own experiences with each brand. My cards are mainly Lexar at the moment and so far so good. (probably shouldn't have said that!!  ::) )

45
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC Gets First Test
« on: September 22, 2014, 11:02:08 PM »
Don't really know why, but am not the biggest fan of Granger's videos and reviews.

Regardless of that minor point, this is a lens I am very interested in, and it would be my first non-Canon lens I have ever bought if Canon do not release a 16-40 f/2.8 IS (or similar) soon.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 65