August 22, 2014, 06:19:51 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 - Sella174

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 45
136
Does Canon's (or anyone else's) camera subdivision play any role in determining its "computer" rankings, the category in question here?   Do cameras, as a category, fit into this particular ranking at all?  If the answer to these questions is "no"....

The type of reasoning is called the curate's egg ...

137
At least try to be honest ...

  • Current rank in computers = 6; previous rank (in 2013) = 4; this means a DROP of 2;
  • Industry rank for innovation = 4; previous rank (in 2013) = 3; a DROP of 1;
  • Long-term investment = 8; previous rank (in 2013) = 3; a DROP of 5;
  • Quality of products/services = 3; previous rank (in 2013) = 4; an INCREASE of 1;
  • Global competitiveness = 9; previous rank (in 2013) = 5; a DROP of 4

So, although the quality of the products became better since last year, overall the company is going backwards.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/most-admired/2014/snapshots/6818.html
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/most-admired/2013/snapshots/6818.html

138
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 12:14:36 PM »
That reminds me…I forgot to add 'turn off autofocus and don't look at the camera's meter' - learn to focus manually and use a light meter!   

You know what, neuroanatomist, you can put me down, make fun of what I write and twist it around all you like, but it doesn't bother me ... because I know why you are doing it. [INSERT DERANGED LAUGH HERE]

139
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 11:56:54 AM »
Any other handicaps you'd like to dump on students of the art?

No, that about covers it.

140
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 11:42:58 AM »
Be careful though, or Sella will start to question your comprehension of simple concepts as well…

Too late!

Although maybe we just don't understand the "challenge" – but if that's the case, it's only because it was not explained adequately or intelligently.

Ah, yes, the old "putting down" post. You should try adding humour, like I did here ...

I understand perfectly, I just don't agree that it's a worthwhile endeavor.

No, you don't. But I understand perfectly ...  ;D

141
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 11:34:58 AM »
Sella, your 'challenge' is plainly short-sighted. In keeping with the spirit of it, perhaps it would be more reasonable to still take RAWs, but processing them to the 'camera default'.  Still pointless, but at least you don't deny yourself the possibility of going back to the picture later en re-edit it to your heart's content.

Look, I am not saying that a professional photographer doing a paying gig should photograph the whole thing in JPEG. If you think that that is what I am saying, then you're simply not thinking. Also, this is not about RAW vs JPEG, so stop waving that flag each time somebody mentions JPEG's out of the camera.

The OP is a student of photography (and this goes for anybody else learning photography), so he is basically mucking about with his camera and lenses. I sincerely doubt whether he is doing any paying gigs (i.e. weddings) and I sincerely doubt whether he will ever have any reason to re-process this "student" output.

Besides, it's only for three months ... and then it's back to RAW!

The guys that think that everything must be done in camera and everything else is not really a photo must surely stick to a disposable Kodak camera where you press the button, we do the rest.

Garbage in, garbage out. Sure, you can do wonders with RAW in post-processing to save your butt when you screw up. But the more the photograph is "optimized" and technically correct, then the more can be achieved with RAW. This means getting it right right there in the camera when the shutter button is pressed.

If you are taking the time looking for an interesting subject, framing, composing, choosing precisely when to press the button, etc, why would you let your camera's CPU take control at a critical part in the process and decide what curves to apply, what levels of saturation, intensity of NR, shadow/highlight clipping, etc?

Again, if you understand the limitations and bugs of the camera in your hand, then so much the more will you be able to produce RAW files that can be optimally post-processed. (As an aside, a lot of the post-processed images on the Internet look pretty much the same to me - seems like a lot of people have simply traded the Canon recipe for the Adobe recipe.)

But ultimately, what do I care whether or not someone becomes a great photographer or not. Go with the flow, follow the wave ... say "Baaaah!"

142
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 11:08:34 AM »
I understand perfectly, I just don't agree that it's a worthwhile endeavor.

No, you don't. But I understand perfectly ...  ;D

143
If consumers can be persuaded to buy and play Angry Birds, I bet they can be persuaded to buy and use P&S cameras.   :D

I have a better idea ... DOOM II Deathmatch over WiFi on all Canon DSLR cameras! It'll be great for those boring press events.

144
Digicams need to offer something of sufficient added value that consumers (I use that word intentionally) will be willing to spend the money, and also willing to carry the camera.

Consumers ... ah, there's the rub.

In my view, digital P&S cameras were a natural progression from film P&S cameras, with both having "consumers" (aka the general public at large) as target market. From this, cameras in 'phones and tablets are the further progression. This effectively means that consumer-orientated digital P&S cameras are a dead market. It's gone and finished.

The future of digital P&S cameras lie in niche markets. Manufacturers must make camera for those enthusiasts (not consumers) who want an actual camera for the simple fact that it can do something that their iPhone can't do. For example, sub-f/2 (fixed-lens) primes, BiF-trackable AF, complete and utter enviromental-sealing, and a nice design.

145
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 09:10:52 AM »
As Neuro said there is no real benefit to the photographer by limiting the file type.

Only problem being that neuroanatomist does not understand the purpose of my "challenge".

146
Easy solution: raise prices ... then you're not selling cheap cameras anymore.  ;D

147
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 07:53:00 AM »
Ah, yes ...  ;D

148
OK, I'll play ...

I'd go for an 8MP sensor (of the same stuff as the EOS 6D), inside the body of the EOS 100D, but with a pentaprism and the AF system of the EOS 70D ... weather-sealed would be nice.

Now, I don't think such a camera would compete with any of those currently on offer from Canon. The megapixels are too few to slice into the "entry-level" market (where Canon's excellent marketing dept. has made megapixel THE thing); the megapixels are also too few for wildlife and sports photographers (not enough "reach"), even though the AF system is sufficient; and it is APS-C, so it won't cut into the "full-frame" market segment.

149
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 02:57:43 AM »
I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

A lot of you seem to agree with sanj on this challenge by me. Maybe clarifying a bit will help, or maybe it won't help an ocean. Oh, well, here goes nothing ...

This is not about RAW vs JPEG. Full stop. Period.

This is about learning the art of photography, and one of the best ways of learning is to appreciate what you have at your disposal. The objective is to limit the student as much as possible (without resorting to film), so that the student can understand that something like post-processing is part of the whole, a cog in the machine; a whole that starts with the correct basically correct creation of the image.

Many people, in their infinite wisdom, view RAW and the camera as simply a means of acquiring data for processing with a computer. This, in my opinion, leads to GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

And obviously, once you've progressed beyond this step in learning the art of photography, you don't need to ever shoot JPEG again.

However, what is pretty interesting, is how many of the "photographers" on CR are so violently opposed to the idea of going JPEG for a few months. Oh, well ...  ;)

150
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:15:16 AM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 45