July 28, 2014, 03:54:41 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 - sanj

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 97
481
Dear Canon.
You are totally stupid. You do not know how to run a company. You do not do any research on product needs and costings. You just make products that CR members do not like.

You do not bother about the post production houses who can afford and need 4k resolution monitors for their Digital Intermediate coloring work or to check their high end compositing/graphics work.

Stupid stupid stupid.

Sanjay

482
And do those cams have af sanj?  And if so does the dop or cameraman use it?

No Paul the cameras I use come with manual focus lenses and my focus puller has worked with me now over 16 years through several main steam movies.

483
EOS Bodies / Re: Get the 1DX or wait for the 7D Mark II?!
« on: November 07, 2013, 09:07:34 AM »
Hi again everybody,

By reading and re-reading all your thoughts and comments, I guess I have a clearer picture in my mind now. The only thing that made me consider the (rumoured) 7D Mark II is the fact that, being it a crop sensor, it might give me more reach, but then I will have to compromise, somehow, on IQ. The 1DX has got it all, so I guess I'll go for it. Also, I think I'll get rid of the 7D, since I rarely use it now (only in bright, sunny days) and, moreover, I don't need 3 cameras.

Dave, congratulations on your decision!  I think you made the very best choice!  Also, I think once you start shooting with your new 1DX, you'll be surprised how much reach you're not needing, the AF and the IQ being so much better than your 7D, you'll be able to very easily crop for your extra reach without any issues in quality degradation. 

Also, be careful, seems like lot's of 1DX owners get some sort of itch for 500mm - 800mm L glass! 

Congratulations again on your decision, I'm looking forward to seeing your 1DX images!! 

All the best!  8)

Thanks Krob. :-) I guess, my 5D Mark III will see less and less use, too. ... Hahahahahah ... Well, to be honest, ever since I purchased my first L glass (the 70-200 f4), I've developed a serious case of "L" addiction. :-)

I always reach out for my 1dx over the 5d3 for most things. Enjoy!

484
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 09:05:33 AM »
I like the concept of the camera. No video, only stills. I have not ever used the video mode on my camera. Actually, it would be nice if Canon could have used that space for more still photography features. Thats why I bought the camera in the first place.

Sorry, that's just a ridiculous statement, video doesn't "take up photo space", it's not extra hardware or neither does it take away from overall ability/quality or is in place of having "more photo features" (like, what more do you want??). It's just the live view mode made possible with the type of sensor that later lead to a recording ability, video. Taking video out doesn't help a stills oriented camera be any better at taking photos, it just can't do another basic feature technology today is expected to have.

As for how the Nikon DF is, well, they came close but it's still too fat and reminiscent of a very modern camera. Where's the slim, not too tall and simple film camera? Even if Nikon were to nail the look of an FM series camera better, that price! Sure, Canon sold tons of 5DIIs around that price, and this camera is probably better, but it's not cutting edge, and nor is this 2008, it's gone down in spec compared to modern releases but demands a premium. Meanwhile Fujifilm with their excellent cameras with sensible pricing. Not FF? Well the X100 rivals or even beats my 5DII for image quality and ISO performance, and the X series don't resemble any true retro camera, but they got the design right, it's nice to use and looks nostalgic enough, I did insult it for a while until I picked one up, used it a little, and fell in love~
If Canon made one, I always liked the New F1 but that's a lot of bulk and weight, something today's DSLRs already have, so like what a lot people seem to want, an AE-1? But seriously, if Canon did something similar they'd be bashed for copying Nikon AND be insulted for being late to the game...

In all fairness, it is not a 'ridiculous' statement. Lack of video would certainly simplify menu and button layout.

485
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 09:03:41 AM »
I wonder if age has something to do with who will like this camera. I strongly suspect it is the 40+ people who will like it more. And I suspect it is made keeping them in mind.

486
And in the cinema world, believe me some pretty damn serious pros talk about stuff like DR all the time and they take it very seriously.
For the formats used in the cinema world, DR is very important and taken seriously.  So it is interesting that Canon has a significant presence in the cinema world, and in the video world generally.  For the past few years I've regularly seen videographers using Canon DSLRs and have yet to see one using Nikon or Sony.

+1

Cinematographers are concerned about DR, sure.  But just as they don't rely on a camera's autofocus to control where the camera is focused, they don't rely on the image capture medium to control the DR at capture. Rather, they control the DR of the scene by managing the lighting (floods, diffuser 'tents', grad NDs, etc.). 

Canon has Ron Howard, Nikon has.......Ashton Kutcher.  :P

Still photographers use the same methods to control DR as cinematographers. Of course.

487
I think it's a bit too soon to be saying auto-focus isn't required on a professional video camera. We need to see what the autofocus is capable of first.  Purists don't need to get the upgrade or can set the focus to manual if it keeps them happy. I expect autofocus will be a big selling point for low budget productions and one person companies.

Absolutely correct. And I might add that when I work on a full fledged video job I use cameras better than C100. C100 is aimed at productions with limited budget and in this case this feature is super welcome. Even for documentaries... Lets see what future holds..

489
AF has no place on a serious video camera.

"Just don't use it. Just ignore it. Just put up with it. And no, it won't be cheaper without AF." 
same as video on each and every stills camera.
:P

Haha, yes.  Very good.

The pedant in me would point out that video adds virtually no cost to a live-view enabled DSLR, wheras adding AF to a video camera body requires extra components.  The C-Series must be one of the first professional camcorders to have in body AF.

At a professional level, which is where these cameras are pitched, AF is not required.   It really isn't.  I've chucked folk off my sets for using AF on hdv cameras. 

For shooting crappy family videos, AF makes them a bit less crappy.  If you know how to manually focus video and have a well set up video camera, then AF really is absolutely superflous.

The C100 is aimed at documentary, news, run and gun. Often done by one man band, operating camera while interviewing a subject. As some have pointed out, this can help the videographer concentrate on the interview even while the subject wiggles all over town, instead of having to split attention to keep the subject in focus.

A tool is a tool. If it helps get a better result, then it's a good tool.

Ya man.

490
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 07, 2013, 06:56:23 AM »
Of course full frame is better.

Why would you not shoot full frame? If you do not go overboard and limit yourself to say a 6D and a decent lens what would be the cost difference between this and crop? Not enough to matter in the long run.

However, better lenses are required, though shooting F/2 on APS-C is close to shooting F/2.8 on FF, which means the stopped down performance advantage with equal DOF is there with FF, but lenses tend to perform better on APS-C in regards to taking the good center IQ of a lens. I've compared shots with my 5DII + Sigma 35mm and a friend's X100, the images come so close to performance with image quality and ISO performance, my lens was sharper wide open and of course, I could go twice as shallow, but the colors and overall picture the X100 can put out with plain Jpegs are just marvelous, this made me reconsider the relevance of full frame for a while...
But, I'm comparing an FF from 2008 and a crop from 2010, so, smaller sensor cameras will outperform older larger sensor cameras, but in terms of latest tech the bigger sensor will outperform the smaller in ISO performance, color depth, DR etc. but it's all an eventual catch up game I believe

"All things being equal" implies we compare same manufactures, current sensors, lenses etc. Bottom line: Full frame is better.

491
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 06:50:42 AM »
Mines #2.

This camera could have hit the bullseye but; no interchangeable screens for 'real' manual focus, plastic construction ( with an alloy top plate), unnecessarily 'retro', outdated control placement, far too higher price for a plastic camera and to cap it all - your computer will make a realistic film rewinding noise when you download images !

I mean the FM, FE and even th F3 ( without motordrive ) never had power rewind !

OK so you can disable this 'function' but it says a lot about who Nikon are aiming the camera at  ;)

Really??? I did not know that. Sounds hilarious.
And is it plastic? It looks so solid!

492
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 06:48:10 AM »
I answered #4

I owned a Nikon FM2 back in the 90's and kinda like the retro look of the DF, but for a working camera, I'll take my 6D any day.  I'm not trying to impress anybody with the look of my photography equipment.

I know what you saying. But I will be honest and tell you that every time I buy a new camera or lens I like to look at it, feel it. Should I be ashamed of myself? :) Am I too much of a child?
When I get a new car I do take it for a drive with friends to the ice cream shop. Am I a bigger child for doing that.

When I buy a new lens I move the focus/zoom ring, see the writing on it, see the contacts, even look through the lens without mounting it on the camera. I guess I am hopeless....

493
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 06:43:29 AM »
I kinda like it but I wouldn't buy one, even if canon made one. I'm more interested in the new sony A7 really but even then, I just love the form factor of DSLR's and will probably use them until they stop making them.  :D

God forbid.

494
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Lee 4x4 Big Stopper filter in stock
« on: November 07, 2013, 02:43:00 AM »
Out of stock already

495
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 07, 2013, 01:40:33 AM »
Of course full frame is better.

Why would you not shoot full frame? If you do not go overboard and limit yourself to say a 6D and a decent lens what would be the cost difference between this and crop? Not enough to matter in the long run.

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 97