December 20, 2014, 12:36:48 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] 4 5 ... 52
31
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

32
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.

33
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.

34
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.






35
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

36
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.

37
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.


38
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.

39
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 08:42:56 PM »
Do you know if dot_tune will tell me if my 60D is out of whack?

Yes, I know.

Feel free to tell me to RTFM (or just try it), which I'd planned to do.

Nononono, what are we here for :-p? Canon (thanks!) removed the whole afma firmware part from 50d->60d, there's no way to recover it even with ML. This means the 60d has not only no gui to set afma, it lacks any ability to tell you about it.

Thanks, that'll save me wasted time and effort.

40
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 10:07:43 AM »
you can also try Magic Lantern's free dot_tune module which also automatically adjusts afma. Opinions are divided abut how precise it is, but for me (using a 6d) it's working just fine.

Do you know if dot_tune will tell me if my 60D is out of whack?  I'm very much aware that the 60D does not support AFMA, but it would be nice to have it call to my attention how far out of tune it is.

Feel free to tell me to RTFM (or just try it), which I'd planned to do.

Thanks.

41
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 06, 2014, 10:22:00 PM »
I'm sorry if this was already posted, I didn't read the 14 pages that came before me. But I think the box-logo has some similarities with the ImageRunner logo http://www.imagerunneradvance.com/images/imagerunner_advance_logo.png

Maybe they are announcing new printers.

Looks like a cross between that logo and a nuclear reactor, so it must be a nuclear-powered home 3-D printer.  It will be called the ObjectRunner, or something equally lame.   ;D

42
Post Processing / Re: How to start using Photoshop
« on: October 06, 2014, 04:10:47 PM »
#1 Never edit your original files, always work on copies. (especially if you shoot JPEG rather than raw)

#2 Consider starting with Photoshop Elements -- it's simpler and cheaper.

#3 If your compuer skills are pretty strong, consider using The GIMP instead of Photoshop: it's very powerful and costs nothing.

There are many Photoshop "how-to's" on the Internet, and lots of books as well.  I'd suggest you search for "introduction to photoshop" or "getting started with photoshop."  You'll find plenty to keep you busy.

43
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 05, 2014, 02:52:07 PM »
It is the announcement of a new high MP, high DR pro body  :P

Ready for delivery on December 23 ...

No, delivery on November 31.

44
Don't think Canon can do that unfortunately

But we don't know for certain without good tests.  If anyone knows of any well-designed, well-executed and meaningful side-by-side tests, please post links.

45
Maybe Canon is addressing this thread here:
http://www.seeimpossible.usa.canon.com/

Hmm. Canon only sees "impossible", eh? Does that mean, they see that making a better sensor is impossible for them, so they aren't bothering? Or, they see impossible, and intend to make the impossible possible?

Eh, I'll believe Canon has improved their sensors when I see it. :P

A bit ambiguous, eh?  Someone in marketing has some 'splainin' to do.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 52