Light theme [beta]
We're testing a lighter alternative to the regular DPReview theme. Both options will stay.
For more information, click here. Don't forget to leave some feedback.

Bassman2003

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Videographer/Photographer
Has a website at www.metroplexmultimedia.com
Joined on Mar 2, 2006

Comments

Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Aroart: Its Canons own fault for not giving 4k to cameras less than $3000.. Dave Dugdale from learning video.com summed up Canons demise for videographers with one statement.. He said when he was at NAB this year that he did not see anyone shooting with a Canon when 3-4 yrs ago the 5dm3 was the go to Camera... The camera he saw most people using was the Sony a6300...

Actually, Canon dumbed down the 5DMKIII video to protect sales of their C-line of cinema cameras. This is totally in their right to do, Just does not make you warm and fuzzy.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 13:35 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: Its Canons own fault for not giving 4k to cameras less than $3000.. Dave Dugdale from learning video.com summed up Canons demise for videographers with one statement.. He said when he was at NAB this year that he did not see anyone shooting with a Canon when 3-4 yrs ago the 5dm3 was the go to Camera... The camera he saw most people using was the Sony a6300...

This is regarding video usage only...

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 20:25 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: Its Canons own fault for not giving 4k to cameras less than $3000.. Dave Dugdale from learning video.com summed up Canons demise for videographers with one statement.. He said when he was at NAB this year that he did not see anyone shooting with a Canon when 3-4 yrs ago the 5dm3 was the go to Camera... The camera he saw most people using was the Sony a6300...

I would respectfully disagree. Nobody uses a 5DMKIII anymore because it is soft! And Canon has not brought out a new model yet. If the MKIV is strong a lot of folks will gravitate back, but "strong" these days is probably farther than Canon wants to go...

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

Lawrencew: I believe there is a large pent-up demand for the next wave of Canon cameras that should start arriving later this year.
My bet is lots of people are waiting patiently for models like the 5DMKIV, 6DMKII, M4 to surface.
I know I am, and I can't be alone
The grass might appear greener with the D5/500 or A6300, but Canonites are not about to jump ship when there is green grass on the Canon horizon too.
Patience is a virtue. :-)

I am waiting, but only to see what they come up with. Basically Canon has lost my trust/interest as an innovator. My 5D MKIII & II are great for still work and some of my video work. I will admit that my upgrade decision will be based more on video features than still features. Canon has the video DSLR market IF they want to re-take it. My guess is that they have spent most of their energy on finding a way to gracefully cripple the video on the 5DMKIV rather than knock it out of the park.

I am jaded but it comes from experience.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 15:46 UTC
On article Crossing the Bridge: Canon XC10 Review (259 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kurt_K: 80% seems pretty high for what was called the "worst camera of the year" by the savvy folks at The Camera Store.

The codecs are strong which gets the approval but the lens is just slow. If Canon would have put a constant f2.8 lens like the RX10 MKII it would completely change the usefulness of this camera. But once again, Canon chooses the low road...

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 16:51 UTC
On article Crossing the Bridge: Canon XC10 Review (259 comments in total)

I agree, the concept is great for hybrid use. The execution for the price is sad. This is a perfect example of why people hate on Canon so much these days. How could a world class lens maker put such a mediocre lens on this $2,000 camera? The RX10 MKII wipes the floor with it and the MKIII steps on it even more. Both of which are $800 cheaper.

Small sensors need a lot of light and this lens will not give it too you. So the footage has to be gained up requiring more noise reduction etc...

Another example of Canon under spec'ing and over charging for a camera. Once a fan, now I have totally given up on Canon for video.

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 15:23 UTC as 94th comment
On article Look Sharp: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85/GX80 video preview (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

BostonC: Does the USB just charge the battery or it can power the camera too?

Thanks. Maybe a good way to test would be to have the internal battery on one bar and then use the camera or leave on with USB power plugged in. If it stays alive then the USB power has taken over. If it dies then no USB.

USB power is quite cheap and it is very handy to power the camera for longer video shoots since this camera can record unlimited video time.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 20:38 UTC
On article Look Sharp: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85/GX80 video preview (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

BostonC: Does the USB just charge the battery or it can power the camera too?

Thanks for your test Carey. One question: If you try to power externally with a charged battery will it work? The Sony RX10 II will only run off of external USB power if the internal battery has a charge. When the USB is plugged in a little icon appears like A/C is present. It is strange to think Panny would not let you use external power. Thanks!

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 18:58 UTC
On article Look Sharp: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85/GX80 video preview (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

BostonC: Does the USB just charge the battery or it can power the camera too?

I bet the USB power will override the internal battery to power the camera for longer periods of time. Carey, could you test this as well? Thanks.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 00:37 UTC
In reply to:

Bassman2003: Just to confirm, is the manual focus behavior just as bad as the RX10 MKII? I find it unusable for video. I can't believe they are marketing video around this super duper lens and while keeping this approach for focus.

Also, why are they still playing the 30 minute recording time limit game? Yes, I know all the usual BS about taxes but let get real, I am not buying it because of the 30 minute limitation. How many sales could they add if an unlimited version was offered? I only need 1080p60 to be unlimited, not 4k for this to be a more useful tool for my business.

Thanks for your reply. The manual focus on the MKII is not repeatable. It accelerates and decelerates instead of being constant. Turn a little to the left and you expect a certain amount of change. But with whatever system they are using, a little can be huge change or almost none at all.

Basically unusable for live video. Luckily the AF is good enough but for specialty shots it is often a challenge. I just want a "normal" manual focus like what most expect.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2016 at 13:43 UTC
In reply to:

lapomattiabarambaniviendalmare: Still don't understand the usefulness of focals above 200mm on a camera like this: outdoor sports? Wildlife?

Really?

Yes, I would rather have had an f2.2 lens keeping the 24-200mm range. The 600mm might be useful in some instances but overall looks "showy" to me.

The 1" sensor would benefit from having more light and the option of shallower DOF.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 16:46 UTC

Just to confirm, is the manual focus behavior just as bad as the RX10 MKII? I find it unusable for video. I can't believe they are marketing video around this super duper lens and while keeping this approach for focus.

Also, why are they still playing the 30 minute recording time limit game? Yes, I know all the usual BS about taxes but let get real, I am not buying it because of the 30 minute limitation. How many sales could they add if an unlimited version was offered? I only need 1080p60 to be unlimited, not 4k for this to be a more useful tool for my business.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 12:49 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies

Very nice. I see your point and with careful use, the 35mm is an interesting perspective. Although the model/subject would need to be comfortable with the lens being right up on them. This also requires a 35mm lens with excellent geometry.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 15:00 UTC as 126th comment
In reply to:

Dudeist: Wheel reinvented - 35 mm lens with full frame camera is good for some portraits.

If you leave FF then you leave the 35mm FOV. So the 35mm lens is not a wide angle anymore.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 14:51 UTC
In reply to:

Cheezr: Samsung have "Osborned" the NX line and right before the Holiday season, someone in product management should be fired.

I agree. You do not need to announce "abandoning" a market. You can just stop making new models. Announcing just scares potential buyers away from your existing products.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 22:12 UTC

Can't have those unethical (recovered) blown out highlights when the story is in the shadows. Because we know that modern cameras capture such massive DR.

Photoshop editing - yes, but RAW editing? It is just part of a two step workflow to best represent the scene at hand imho. Basically to make up for the camera's shortcomings. Whatever.

The Reuters workflow is beside the point. They will get a jpeg either way. A good one or a (most likely) better one.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2015 at 23:50 UTC as 57th comment
In reply to:

Bassman2003: Compared the RX10-II to the FZ1000 and the LX100. Both are less money. The clear winner for detail was the LX100 although you lose all of the reach. Amazing how soft the RX10-II was in comparison for almost double the price.

True but when a $1,300 camera with a few more features is much softer than a $700 camera it is worth mentioning.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2015 at 13:24 UTC

Compared the RX10-II to the FZ1000 and the LX100. Both are less money. The clear winner for detail was the LX100 although you lose all of the reach. Amazing how soft the RX10-II was in comparison for almost double the price.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2015 at 22:13 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Bassman2003: Thank you as always for great articles and camera info. After looking at all of the photos I have to say I am underwhelmed. If you had not told me what camera I was looking at I would not have thought it was the most shiny toy on the block. The images were fine but nothing to say I need to move away from my current 5DMKIII. I know the specs are better but I just don't get the feeling from the images. Kind of 'digital' looking to me (which is how all Sony photo & video tends to look for me).

Don't want to be a party pooper as I was pretty excited to see this camera in the wild. Just my opinion though...

OP here. No worries as no offense was taken. I appreciate and agree with Rishi. User experience is very important. If the camera makes it easier to get images then it adds a lot of value for your shooting situation.

I read a little later that the preview gallery might have display issues in slideshow mode, so maybe the images were mis-represented.

But end image quality does matter to me. And if I were to lift a quote from one of Rishi's replies about "not being able to tell camera brands apart" it would show a bit of a failure in my view. At this stage of the game I want a new model camera to improve upon existing image quality or I am likely to stay put with my current gear. (But I admit, I am not shooting at f1.4 on mountain tops!)

I was just offering an opinion about the look of the images and hope my comments were not viewed as trolling, just honest input based upon the images. The IQ did not move me as much as I wanted.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2015 at 12:05 UTC

Thank you as always for great articles and camera info. After looking at all of the photos I have to say I am underwhelmed. If you had not told me what camera I was looking at I would not have thought it was the most shiny toy on the block. The images were fine but nothing to say I need to move away from my current 5DMKIII. I know the specs are better but I just don't get the feeling from the images. Kind of 'digital' looking to me (which is how all Sony photo & video tends to look for me).

Don't want to be a party pooper as I was pretty excited to see this camera in the wild. Just my opinion though...

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2015 at 00:30 UTC as 30th comment | 11 replies
Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »