October 25, 2014, 02:42:11 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 - Orangutan

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 50
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 17, 2014, 09:58:31 AM »
   
  • In general, the more expensive the (digital) camera, the more abuse it can take without losing function.
I would not want to take a Hassy out in the damp dirty woods. More expensive does not necessarly mean more rugged.


I've never used one, but a previous poster asserted that Hasselblads were quite durable.

Of course, if you have a Hassy, you probably also have two assistants to set up a tent and hold umbrellas, right?   :P

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 17, 2014, 09:21:25 AM »
Canon's websites which break down pro vs. enthusiast bodies list the 6D among the latter.  Arbitrary marketing decisions.

This.

I've seen a fair number of assertions on this forum that the 1D-series are Canon's only pro bodies, and the 5D-series and below are consumer or prosumer cameras.  There's no dispute that more expensive models in the product line tend to have better features on average.  The question, however, is whether there are certain specific characteristics which distinguish a "pro" camera from a "consumer" camera.  So far just two assertions seem to have gone unrefuted:

  • Pros seem to be able to make a living with a range of cameras, from smartphones to FF to MFD to large format film.  A photographer's needs will determine which is the appropriate tool.
  • In general, the more expensive the (digital) camera, the more abuse it can take without losing function.



3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 04:27:04 PM »
My point is that "pro" (or "pro-level" or "pro-targeted") is a characteristic of the camera and not the person using it. The user doesn't determine whether a camera is a "pro camera" any more than the camera determines whether the user is a pro. I think that we would all agree that a 1DX is a "pro camera",

I get your point; however, the reason I disagree with your conclusion is that there's no objective criteria to separate pro from non-pro.  At the extremes, e.g. 1DX vs Rebel, we will probably agree.  But what about in the middle?

In the end, it devolves into the famous Potter Stewart test.

Which camera would a professional choose today:
EOS-1D or Rebel T5i

6D or 7DMkII?

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 02:55:55 PM »
My point is that "pro" (or "pro-level" or "pro-targeted") is a characteristic of the camera and not the person using it. The user doesn't determine whether a camera is a "pro camera" any more than the camera determines whether the user is a pro. I think that we would all agree that a 1DX is a "pro camera",

I get your point; however, the reason I disagree with your conclusion is that there's no objective criteria to separate pro from non-pro.  At the extremes, e.g. 1DX vs Rebel, we will probably agree.  But what about in the middle?

In the end, it devolves into the famous Potter Stewart test.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 11:40:11 AM »
If the gear doesn't matter, then I change my 1100d for your 1Dx  :P

No one said gear doesn't matter.  The point is that there is no objective, indisputable definition of the dividing line between pro and non-pro gear.  Therefore, the only thing that can be said is that any camera used by a competent pro for professional work is a pro camera.

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 11:31:41 AM »
The features. Pro cameras have advanced features that pros need and/or know how to take advantage of. Manufacturers generally have more than one "pro" camera because there is more than one kind of pro and they may need different (but overlapping) sets of features. These include things like:

- high durability
- high frame rate
- high performance, highly configurable AF
- mirror lockup
- high dynamic range
- better noise performance
- 100% viewfinder
- usability features (e.g. extra buttons/wheels/etc. that make it fast and easy to change settings

Does a pro body need all of them?  Some of them?  Certain specific combinations? 


Quote
Saying "the person behind the camera" is glib, but wrong.

No, it's a way of saying that each pro needs a different subset of the features you have in your list above, and that each pro will choose a camera that meets their needs.

I once met a pro photojournalist who used to travel to unstable areas.  He would take several cheap DLSRs because he knew one or more would be taken from him (requested).  He'd pull out (and hide) his flash cards frequently, and be prepared to surrender the camera.  It was his choice to use cheap gear because in the end he'd have his photos.

"the person behind the camera" is the one who chooses the right tool for the job, and uses it to produce professional work.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Variable Diffusion Focusing Screen
« on: October 15, 2014, 09:30:03 AM »
That kind of detailed focus info would require a lot of data -- wouldn't this make sense only if there are a very large number of focus detection points?

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 09:24:27 AM »
Generally speaking, a manufacturers top of the range product is aimed at pros. Take knives, pans, laptops (the business lines), and I presume microscopes etc.
The top end is aimed at people who are willing and able to pay the higher price.

I think we're having another one of those "is" vs "ought" arguments.

The "is" group asserts (and I agree) that a high-end camera is largely bought by people willing to pay for it, most of whom will not use it for professional work.

The "ought" group asserts that a high-end camera ought to be built and marketed to professionals, and it's fine if wealthy amateurs also want to buy one.

I don't believe there's a clear definition of a pro camera, but I'm pretty sure Canon has a pro marketing department.   :P

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 08:45:39 AM »
It has to be able to take that abuse and keep working, same for lenses. It also has to function satisfactorily under stressful, rushed situations.

Is a Hasselblad MFD a "pro" camera?  Does it meet your above criteria?  If the answer the first is yes, and to the second is no, then your criteria may be indicative, but are not definitive.

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 07:02:25 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? 

Quote
The manufacturer sets the pro level
Quote
But generally speaking it is the best overall performance and life of product etc.

These seem like two distinct, sometimes contradictory criteria.  The first one is purely marketing, meaning there's not really any objective criterion.  The second seems vague.  These criteria are more likely to tell us useful information about the marketing department than the products.

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:10:11 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.






12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 07:10:42 PM »
Too many folks here are equating a 'pro camera' with a 'pro photographer'.  A pro photographer can use the tools available to create a great image.  A pro camera is a camera designed with durable components and has a longer R&D cycle compared to a consumer camera.  A pro camera should work in any condition, take a licking and keep on ticking.  A pro photographer can plot their way through a situation and will select gear based on their experience, not based on what is advertised as 'pro'.

IMHO 5D mk3 is a low end pro camera, with a lot of advanced technology, while the 1Dmk4/1Dx are pro cameras.

There are pro photographers who would never choose a 1D-series for their studio work.   Some studio photographers believe that anything short of MFD is not a pro camera, yet a Hasselblad probably can't take the same "licking" that a 1D can.

Furthermore, longer R&D cycles are irrelevant: if Sony releases a FF SLR next week with 80MP and 16 stops of DR (with other expected performance) on a $3k body made from plastic, you can bet a bunch of pros are going to grab one and make money from it.

A pro camera is any device a pro photographer uses to accomplish professional work  Beyond that, it's a question of which professional camera suits a particular area of photography

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 06:20:43 PM »
The question is missing context.   The preliminary question is to define what "professional photographic work" is.  After you answer that question you can answer the equipment question: it's the gear needed to accomplish professional photographic work to the satisfaction of both the photographer and the client.

14
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Buying 2nd hand 70D, what to check?
« on: October 12, 2014, 10:13:06 PM »
brand new 70d kit for approx. USD200, which doesnt make sense.
If its too good to be true, its a scam.

That's much too cheap to be real, I'd say 99.44% chance it's a scam.  Unless it's an in-person, local buy, I'd  run away.  They will likely try to get you to send money to their favorite "escrow service," which is another way of having you send money to their pockets with no guarantee of receiving legitimate goods.

If it's a local buy it could be stolen.


15
Reviews / THE APS-C DSLR KING .
« on: October 09, 2014, 11:55:25 AM »
Chuck's camera makes images of how he wants the world to be, not how it actually is.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 50