So, for those that aren't aware, the NEX-VG10 was a camera developed by Sony with the idea in mind, to get a DSLR style camera into a video body.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/818266-REG/Sony_NEXVG20_NEX_VG20_Interchangeable_Lens_HD.html
And I personally think that it's a great idea. You basically get the brain of a DSLR, and tack on a Mic, mobileLCD, and buttons to fit a camcorder, and voila!
It goes into the prosumer category, lightweight, ready for narratives or documentary style films, for a pretty low budget and no need to expand into rigs and mics.
An easier way to visualize it, is to imagine the canon camcorder with interchangeable lens.

Now why hasn't canon caught up to this, is my question?
It would be a great entry level camera for up coming filmarkers, get consumers caught with using canon lens (teehee), but at the same time offering a true DSLR like camera that doesn't require the whole need of body's and mics, or external recorders...
Thing is, Sony kinda sucked at developing the NEX-VG10 at first. It wasn't well though out, but I think canon could pretty much pull it off.

What are you thoughts on the idea?
And why hasn't canon got into this 'new' market yet?

Your tripod isn't crap - 400mm just intensifies any shake. It's basic trigonometry.

halfwake said:

Funny how Kai commented that 18MP of 1DX might not be enough, but he didn't make any comments on the Nikon D4's even lower 16MP.

Click to expand...

I guess it's because the d4 doesn't replace a high mp camera..there the d800 for that..the 1dx however does and there isn't any high mp camera yet....

I'm grumpy because it's Sunday night and I have to go to work tomorrow

JRS said:

Kernuak said:

Classic example of why you need grad filters for landscapes. At a guess, a 3 stop grad on the sky and maybe a 1 stop on the sea would have helped with the light around the ship. Overall, the image is underexposed by around a stop, so with the grads 4 stop extra light would have helped lift the photo, with less need for over the top processing. If you have Lightroom, a slight increase in the highlight saturation only, would have prevented the weird colours in the blue sky.

Click to expand...

Can't I get the same effect of grad filters using HDR?

Click to expand...

Nope, totally different look.

It is an excellent capture. I would suggest converting to monochrome though, it might have more impact that way.

Pompo said:

In af point expansion, when you use only the cross points, the af points used in the expansion area corresponding to the middle empty columns blink! Im sure you all are aware of that, but why those unavailable couldn't just disappear? Another aggravating feature of this "intelligent viewfinder"

Click to expand...

Does it only blink when you press the AF Area Selection button, but stay lit when you AF? I don't think you could stop the AF Area Selection notification because that's showing you all of the other possible AF Area selections.

If you mean that the AF points are all lit up, then in the AF Menu: Look Under (AF5) the 2nd choice "AF point Display during focus" do you have "Selected (constant)" or All "(constant) as your choice. If I understand you correctly, if you change to Selected (constant) then all the AF points will go away. If you keep it on All (constant) then all of the AF points will show.

Rich

Thank you but I dont think he's ready for lighting just yet. For now he is doing a fine job getting use to the cameras and setting very soon I think he will able to achieve much more.

Ok, so - replicated indoor with room lights, not the best test as the servo has issues in this room focusing normally. Remembering issue occurs during midday light on my unit.

-When it locks up, flash fires from test button.
-If i continue to mash the shutter over and over after a good 15-20 presses the lens suddenly springs to life.
-It did however take 23 shots before the issue occurred - i started at -3fec and ramped up to -1fec (not that it really matters)

Indoor settings, M: 1/[email protected], iso 6400 (I wasn't paying attention to shutter speed too much was just getting it to +1EV)

I will try my other 600 EX and see if that is the culprit tomorrow if I get the time.

Ellen Schmidtee said:

My impression from reviews is that Nikon's equivalents to the EF 16-35mm f/2.8 (the 17-35mm f/2.8) and EF 17-40mm f/4 (the 16–35 mm f/4 VR) do not have the kind of advantage which would make people switch to Nikon, or prefer it in the first place.

Though the 16-35 & 17-40 would benefit from an upgrade, IMHO Canon's priority would be a lens to compete with the 14-24mm.

Click to expand...

Looking on TDP at comparisons between those lenses it looks like Nikons are worse than Canons in edges (less resolution, more CA) but slightly better in midframe. Tests are achieved with the use of different cameras, but intending the switch, one should consider the combo, not lenses alone.

N 14-24 F2.8 vs C 16-35 F.28 II, N 16-35 F4 vs C 17-40 F4
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=100&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=2&LensComp=689&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=412&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=2&LensComp=615&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

As I read those resolutions charts I conclude, that N 17-35 2.8 is a complete disaster.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=412&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=2&LensComp=616&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=2

LetTheRightLensIn said:

Kernuak said:

I'm intrigued though why the 100mm macro USM is the only f/2,8 lens in group E, when even the older non-USM macro is in group C. I notice it's even worse with the 180mm macro, as it is in group G with or without the 1.4x extender.

Click to expand...

Yeah it is odd. Glad I upgraded to L.

Maybe it is to sell more L versions. ;D ;D

If not then maybe something about the internal baffles and how it heads into macro mode as a non-extending lens, maybe the larger elements in the L get around this. The older non-USM uses an extended barrel type macro design. It is interesting that even the 100L is one of the few lenses faster than f/4 that does not get the central point to work as a super precision double cross point. Gotta be something to do with the way macro lenses are designed. Once you are at 1:1 I think they act more like f/5.6 in how much light they let in even when set to f/2.8 too, not sure where they decided to class the AF rating for it, at normal distance or macro.

Click to expand...

Could be something like that, certainly you're losing around two stops at 1:1. I know some of that is due to light loss within the lens, due to the design and physics, as well as some light loss from being in your own light . Also, there is no way anyone would be daft enough to want to use zone AF for macro work, so they could have left them selectable for non-macro work, considering it also makes a useful portrait lens among other things.

gshocked said:

Dear all,

Just looking for an opinion. I want to get my first L lens and I'm tossing between Canon 70 - 200 f/4 IS vs. 70 - 200 F2.8 non IS. I'm looking to use it for sports photography, mainly outdoors but sometime indoors. I've heard lost of pros for both but I haven't read a review that has given me an opinion between these two lenses. I'm leaning towards the f/4 IS but would the 2.8 compensate for hot having IS?

Has anyone used or have both? Which would people choose - larger aperture or image stabilization?
Any thoughts?

(Thanks in advance!)

Click to expand...

for sports as the primary goal = the 2.8 non-IS all the way, you want the extra stop of speed and less DOF to help isolate background just a little more

for a general walk-around/travel/landscape/etc. lens the f/4 IS all the way (smaller, lighter, has IS, a bit sharper (the 2.8 non-IS is plenty good though))

i had the 2.8 non-IS when I did lots of sports, once I stopped doing indoor sports i switched


what body, what sports, what scenarios though?

RunAndGun said:

I can't recommend anything in that low price range, but I can tell you NOT to go cheap on wireless gear. Like anything else, you get what you pay. I work in television and all of my wireless gear, since I started freelancing in the 90's, is Lectrosonics and it's the majority of what you will see in the field being used professionally(for a reason). Audio, unfortunately, is an afterthought a lot of times. It's not "sexy" like a camera or lens, but it is just as important. Lectro gear is not cheap. For someone with my needs, you are looking at about $7K or so for a complete two-channel system. But they have "entry level" systems, too. You can get into a single channel set-up for under $1,500. You are much better off spending a little more on an entry level Lectro system that is built to last than a plastic Azden or Sennheiser or Shure system that's in the "$600" range.

Click to expand...

Haha wow!! Your right about audio as an after thought!! Hmm haha dang well, is there one in particular you would recomened for filming outdoors?? So wind, noises, etc that doesn't go over $1,500?

I'm selling the broken one as is if anyone wants to buy it.

I would hardly call the 5D3 prosumer. I think the gray area body where lines are blurred is the 7D.

Add in another vote for the Sigma 8-16mm.

Basically, there's 3 Ultrawides worth looking at:
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. Get this for indoors, or where you need fast-shutter or low-light. Apparently bad CA (which can be removed in PP if you really want. the mk2 version will allegedly be out this year, with Tokina themselves acknowledging the CA and promising the mk2 will get be better)
Sigma 8-16 f/(we may as well call it a constant f/5.6). Use it outdoors or on a tripod, don't even think about indoors. Widest framing you'll get on any format (shared with the sigma 12-24s on FF).
Canon 10-22. Bit of a compromise between the two, good IQ and medium aperture.

The canon goes for $7-800 on ebay, lucky if you can get one for $600. The Sigma and Tokina go for $5-600, I got my sigma for $475. Yes, there's other versions (2 more sigmas and a tamron), don't bother unless you want to save money (although i'd consider the tamron 'wasting' money, not saving).
The Tokina and Canon you can put filters on, Sigma not (although I do plan on trying with some 4x6 filters when I can afford them.
The canon you can't put on FF, the Tokina I don't know, but the sigma i've taken shots on FF at 15-16mm (when the hood is *just* out of the frame).


As for stitching: been there, done that, got the Ninja. It's really annoying when clouds move and trees shake, which seems to be every frickin time I try to stitch. It also mucks your exposures a lot, and I've had one case of white balance being completely thrown out from flare washing out one frame.
If you like PP, fine, go ahead. But i'm kinda over it...

Still have a 40D as backup to my 5DII

Hi!

Check (adjust) the horizontal sea level. Neither shot has it straight.

K-amps said:

Marine03 said:

Why not get a Canon Loyalty Program referb 7D? Costs less or same and 90 day warranty

Click to expand...

To get into CLP, don't I have to trade something in?

Click to expand...

A junk 35mm film slr or old powershot will do it. Just give them the serial number. They e-mail you a shipping label so you can send it to the recycling center where is will be crushed. I doubt if anyone really cares if you actually send one, they just want a serial number.
I pick up old Canon film SLR bodies just for the lens for $5 or $10 at garage sales, and save the body for CLP. Check your local craigslist for old $10 powershots, broken is preferred. You can usually get one for $10 or less.

impressive. quote from the press release:

The advanced Sony TX200V digital camera offers extreme fast AutoFocus speeds of approximately 0.13 seconds in daytime and 0.25 seconds in low-light situations (speeds may vary based on shooting conditions), helping to ensure you never miss the moment. The new Sony CyberShot DSC-TX200 camera features a new "Extra High Sensitivity" technology, which minimizes unwanted noise in low-light shooting conditions. The Sony DSC-TX200V digital camera also offers image stabilization during video and still shooting. Using technology borrowed from the Sony Handycam line-up, the "Optical Steady Shot Active Mode" drastically reduces blurring caused by camera shake while on the move. The Sony TX200V can shoot video in Full HD 1080p resolution at 60fps. For consumers who want to get closer to their subjects without losing quality, the Sony DSC-TX200V offers "Clear Image Zoom" technology, which boosts optical zoom to 2x virtual capability (becoming 10x virtual zoom) at Full camera resolution

What would be really cool, and inexpensive+easy, would be for canon to come out with a hotshoe receiver (like a pocket wizard) that could use the signal that the 600ex transmits to use older 580ex's and 430's. also having a port on the side to plug into stobes . FunPhotons
, get on that lol. getting advanced they could also make a trigger that could plug into one of the einseins like the PowerMC2 that could control flash compensation and trigger it.

I would like my cut of the royalties canon. lol

Well done Sir

here's more reflector shot

ihans said:

Just got my 1Dx with a MacbookPro retina and just wanted to say that the FTP transfer is very fast.

Click to expand...

Could you be so kind to share the set up of the 1DX with the macbook pro retina
are trying since this morning with no success!!!!

Thanks so much
Ettore

As a Nex 5n owner wanting FF as well as crop, I originally thought this news was pretty interesting as using the same set of lenses on my 5n and on the full frame would be great. But more likely whatever comes out, you would have to buy new lenses [A-mount or other] for the FF.
So it makes sense to see what new canon and nikon FF offerings come out and weight them all up as solid specs are announced. The only advantage of a ff nex would be size and that kinda goes away if you have to use A-mount lenses. Would be a good choice for landscapers with manual lenses tho.

They look pretty good overall. Some comments:

(1) (crowns). The guy is out of focus -- you need more depth of field for this shot (two subjects different distance from the camera), and maybe focus on the closer of the two subjects.

(2) (kiss) composition maybe a little tight. Very tight composition tends to remove the feeling of motion from a picture.

(3) (dance) composition a little tight again -- not tight enough to look intimate, yet too tight to make it look like they're dancing. Also very centered.

(4) second last portrait shot -- composition is a bit awkward -- subjects are centered, the big light is in the center and the path kind of pulls the eye out of the frame.

Besides practice, would recommend some reading on composition (try "The Photographers eye", Michael Freeman)