August 01, 2014, 05:04:54 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 - Lawliet

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 23
Nikon did (with help from Sony), and the Canon model in the same price bracket sells better.  You can ignore the realities of the market if you want, Canon will not.  There's your 'why' right there.

Thats a very simplified view of "market".  For example does the 5D3 sell better because people feel its in a sweet spot, or are there factors like depreciation rules that make a quick switch unviable?
The idea that sales of one particular item within a complete system in the context of a long term commitment is an accurate reflection of how well it fits unbiased customer demands(i.e. thats all we get, so it has to fit) is somewhere between naive and intentionally bad science.

We just got back a damaged pelican case at work.... Air Canada ran a forklift through it.
We once had a case fall overboard - and promptly having an argument with the boats propeller. Ended not that pretty for either, but the gear inside the case was fine.

Lenses / Re: EF 50 f/1.2L II Gets a Mention by Canon
« on: May 20, 2014, 05:10:55 AM »
Why has the video & link disappeared?  :o
Either because having a (confusing) typo around leaves a bad impression, or they've got the attention they wanted.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: May 05, 2014, 11:15:07 PM »

The 6D has 11 AF points. 

Alas...9 points and that 8way+center controller actually made it had to be changed.


Cropping does not change anything I've stated. A cropped photo is still a conglomerate of millions of pixels. Maybe not the tens of millions your sensor has, but still millions. If you are cropping so much that your final image can only be printed at native size on a 4x6, or cannot be downsampled, then your cropping way too much, and you seriously need a better camera. :P

As for detail to draw viewers in, sure, but are either downsampling to some acceptable "web size", or printing, and in both cases, the amount of detail that can be effectively displayed at a comfortable viewing distance is generally going to be significantly less than what your photo started out with at 100%.

Thats unless you do, for example, commercials - first the final crop will depend on the layout, framing tight might make the image unuseable. Second the file is expected to hold up when zoomed in, because you have details from the overall image enlarged in dead spaces. The whole image to set the mood, the and enlargements to sell the actual product or draw attention to specific details. Enough resolution is approximatly when you can go from a full length shot with some scenery to a closeup of a piece of jewellery...


I didn't know Tamron and Sigma make lenses for the Sony E-mount. Now, if you are talking about an adapter (read: bulk), then what is the point of getting an A7?
Well, the battery grip is mandatory anyway, just to make it big enough to hold for exended times, or that the additional bulk compared to some Moves plus their heads/LSTs is nonexistent...
The point is obviously to get more sellable images, preferable for the same or less production costs, partially because of the sensor, partially because of things Canon just could throw into a firmware update, plus a bit of this and that.


I don't know if designing one camera after another thinking third party manufacturers will cover the lens end (pun unintended) is a sound business strategy.
They're actually releasing native lenses quite rapidly. About as fast as the overhead of changing production lines for different models would likely permit.
From the users perspective - what gives me the most sellable image? ATM files from the A7r net me the most money...

The A7/r can be someone's second or third body, and definitely is (e.g., Dylan). But I doubt any high-end photographer will invest entirely in the A7/r. That is losing a big market share, right there.
Considering that(aside from brand ambassadors) I don't know a single high end photographer who is invested entirely in a single brand...

a body is not a system.  What about lenses, flashes, migration path

Factor in 3rd party devices - eg. Tamrons 24-70/70-200, an Odin and a A7(7/r) are about as much as a 5D3 kit. Or go for Sigmas new primes, perhaps an adapter for lenses you already own.
Basically you can get the equipment to do almost any job for the price of just the Canon body. This makes migration, even system stability a rather moot point as you don't loose money even in the case of a complete change. Anything less is your gain. Just from a utility maximizing perspective.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Replacement Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: April 26, 2014, 05:45:51 PM »
The surprise might be that there is no surprise, Canon keeps being Canon, juggling features and trickling down tech and they simply cannot find a position for a 7d2 in their lineup between 70d and 5d3 and in comparison to the crop competition.
How about avoiding the "between" by making a step to the side?
I.E. take the dual photodiodes concept to its logical conclusion by pairing it with state of the art readout rates and enough processing power. For the next small frame body two foveon-like sensels. perhaps each cell read at an setting that yields the best data. Lets say half at the set/base ISO, half at the amplfication that based on metered light flux would just avoid clipping. As a bonus one could do painfree compositing off footage recorded with such a sensor.
And while we're at it - how about making the flashfrozen- and moving picture fractions equally happy at the same time? 8)

Its not that there is no room for improvement, more a matter of willingness to try the road not taken. Ask the Roxolani. :-X

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Pentax 645z
« on: April 23, 2014, 02:00:04 AM »
This would have been a shut up and take my money moment until I saw that sync speed. :P
Why?  Light it with HMI's or LED's and roll with it. 

For HMI - That Arrimax isn't exactly portable, esp. not if you figure in its power supply. Or cheap, they cost much more then the leaf shutter capable alternatives. And thats if you need just one.
And LED? How exactly do you want to put ~200klx on your subject with those? Preferable from a reasonable distance. A superdino suddenly seems tame, and the few dollars for the LS turn out to be a bargain.

Lenses / Re: New TS-E Lenses for Photokina [CR2]
« on: April 21, 2014, 10:15:08 AM »
maybe they've worked out how to get AF to work with tilt-shifts

While PDAF has so many things that can, and will, go wrong: Contrast AF should be trite, from a technical standpoint. And your average subject won't run very fast, no need to hurry.
But fokus peaking from a fully read out sensor would be actually valuable - add some colors, say make 100%-view sharp blink green and within AF tolerance-sharp flash in red. That would be handy. Bonus: Throw in adjustable thresholds.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Pentax 645z
« on: April 17, 2014, 12:00:27 AM »
The lack of interest and excitement for such a versatile high-res machine like this one on this forum is beyond me.

Keep in mind that it sits right between the much cheaper(+lens sharing) A7r which offers almost the same linear resolution and the established MF systems, with the latter offering a much broader selection of backs, lens options and widespread rental to make case-by-case useage feasable.
Its neither for those who are on a budget nor for those who aren't, but in some limbo inbetween.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Is the C500 / C300 worth it anymore?
« on: April 16, 2014, 05:45:29 PM »
Unless Canon does something, fast, I will be forced to go somewhere else - like RED, or CION, or Blackmagic and get equal or better specs and a way better cost. Shame I will have to sell all my Canon glass.

Why sell the Canon lenses? They work just fine in front of a host of 3rd party cameras!
Unless time is a major factor I'd just put a blackmagic production cam in place of a Cwhatever(, update the recorder as needed) and go on.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Pentax 645z
« on: April 15, 2014, 02:25:28 PM »
It's unfortunate that the sensor size isn't even twice that of full frame, I have to wonder what it is that makes the body so much bigger when the sensor is only 10mm taller?
What's the buffer depth in RAW?

Guess in detail that depends on the raw format used. Pentax's own? Or DNG? About 10 framis iirc.
Partially the body dimensions are a result of the lenses. At least the older ones are designed for good old chemical film. Which comes with a certain minimum depth for the mirror box.
Another reason is ergonomics. Despite the larger weight working with a MF is much less tiring thrn with something NEX/A7 sized.

I guess it's a nice product for what it is, but I still don't see it being 3x better than a 5D3/D800.
Those two are not the best comparison - with either the better viewfinder or zebras the MF wins, not because of the technical details, but for the ease of making actual use of them. If you want to take the guesswork ot of the equation the A7r would be the most fitting small frame counterpart.
But yes, at the moment it has a, in linear terms marginal, resolution advantage. The design feature that makes such a camera a no brainer for high end commercial photography is missing though. ???

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Pentax 645z
« on: April 12, 2014, 10:53:20 PM »
On the other hand the 1/125 sync hurts (even if that is good performance for medium-format)

Its more the lack of leaf shutter lenses - all the (relatively) new lenses they introduce, but no one thought of that. Those 1/125s were fine for low sensitivity chemical film and packs that had flash durations like todays cheap china portables/simple monolights...maybe Pentax hopes for a global shutter?

Now without that major selling point mainly detail reproduction remains, considering the current top shelf small frame lenses & the linear resolution differential that's not as much a reason to spend lots of money. That A7r+Metabones for now and the saved money for the next generation is quite reasonable.

not for handheld, steadycam stuff. I can't even imagine it on a crane....

Its highly modular - with that large cine-zoom and all the potentially useful external stuff it gets huge. But so would a A7.
The camera itself plus a photo-prime, w/o external monitoring&remote control(or that on a long tether) and you're back in the man portable ballpark. How global shutter for movement vs. higher payload capacity turns out for drone usage might be interesting, at least for 1080, in 2160 its much closer again.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 23