obsolescence: Nice metal construction instead of the cheap plastic ones currently available, this should be able to hold a fairly large softbox safely.
Softboxes produce more even light when used with bare bulb flash, though.
The "cheap plastic one" I use holds a large umbrella quite nicely. I don't think it's the material but the weight/strength that matters.
Uh... such products have been around for a while now. I bought one last year and have both metal and plastic versions. I think the only difference is this one uses slightly better materials.
+1 for innovation and thinking way outside the box!
CameraLabTester: Just when you thought cameras were getting smaller and pocketable...
Along comes a Lazarus to change your mindset and your biceps.
Huge is not dead. It was just hibernating.
Keep in mind this is not a field camera, so weight isn't really an issue. You're not supposed to run around with this thing. Anyway, I'm one of those people who prefer heavier cameras for the stability.
+1 for the humor, but these things will change your wallet more than your biceps. Not "that" heavy. ;)
If I had a hands-on experience with one of these, I'd plot with my friends to kill the power to the facility and make off with this camera. Nevermind that I'll be forced to live underground with a new identity for the rest of my life...
Seriously, if it's a lot better than the H3D I had in the past, I'd not hesitate to have my mates go to prison for me after we boost one (or ten) of these. Seriously.
I may never actually use this technology (light field video, that is), but I'm always big on innovation. This is going to change the way movies are shot and edited the way S-Log changed things many years ago. The possibilities are endless. Actually, put these two together and an editor will wet his pants from ecstasy.
mailman88: A camera for the Rich and Shameless
@NDT, good point.
riman: man i could take some great selfies of me and my Ferrari!
Might need to sell the Ferrari to fund this.
@NDT, actually FF DSLRs are good "enough," but MF makes things a lot easier. While I would always choose me Pentax over me 1DX if I could, I don't look at my FF DSLR and think "shoddy pictures." It's just a bit more work.
Frank in Bridgewater: I guess people must buy a camera like this for the same reason that they buy a Rolex watch. Because they can?
+1 BarnET (or is it BamET). I assisted on fashion shoots where the photog insisted on using medium format for greater detail and the fact that the pics had to be printed at extraordinary sizes. A top-of-the-line DSLR definitely would have been good "enough," but brands like Swarovsky and Tiffany don't mess around.
dash2k8: Shooting video through optical viewfinder will be really awesome and a deal-breaker for me.
I'm not arguing with you, per se. I'm just saying that "never" is a big word in this world where new technology crops up at amazing speeds. My OP is just that if I am able to shoot video through the OVF, that's a dream come true. All my current video cameras/DSLRs use EVF (obviously) and that hasn't stopped me from getting some (IMO) great footage, but I still would love to use OVF someday.
email@example.com: We're one big accident away from the ban of drones.
So we only ban things that are non-essential, is that it? I guess that explains why guns are allowed and weed isn't.
brazzy: DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS. NEVER.I do not know about FAA rules, as I don't live in the US, but this is the first unwritten requirement that every operator should have in his mind.Mr. Johnson did something very good by going at dawn on Friday to take his footage, then something very wrong by flying above people on Saturday afternoon. He has been unlucky he couldn't get what he wanted on the very first time, but hey, this happens to all landscape photographers.I am not against drone photography and I appreciate his work. I fly my Phantom 4 in Tokyo area and I get the same smooth videos - it works just great. But it's just too dangerous, you never know what may happen: Phantom 4 is reliable but the unexpected is always behind the corner.I do hope that watching this beautiful video and picture won't stimulate other people to do the same. Dpreview should be careful about promoting this kind of footage.DO NOT FLY DRONES ABOVE CROWDS.
Are the planes at fault here, or the pilots?
Regarding drones that go rogue, I've witnessed first hand a genius who took off without reading the manual or studying the tutorials. First day he bought it, he sends it up to the sky at full throttle under perfect conditions and it goes bye-bye forever. Hardware was perfectly fine, it was the guy's head that's not wired right.
There was another guy who took his drone up to the sky under blustery conditions. It ended up in a tree. I could go on with such stories, and none of them were the drones' fault.
Let a 5-year-old drive a car and see how safe that is. Then let a 20-year-experienced-driver handle the same car. That's the point I've been preaching. It's not the car, it's the driver.
Good point on the risk-benefit angle. Then again, drones are so scarce in relation to cars that the risk factor also drops significantly. With over a billion cars in the world and not 0.1% of that in drones, car-related accidents are exponentially more frequent. Your point?
Regarding your cute links, I could post a lot more on motorcycle/car-related events. Did I ever claim drones are 100% fail-proof? Handled responsibly and skillfully, a drone's likelihood to fail is very low just like anything else. Chase himself packs back-up camera bodies in case they break down. I'm sure he understands equipment sometimes fails.
Faulty hardware happens in everything, is this news? Remember this next time your car breaks down or your phone dies.
Keep in mind I have never once disagreed that flying over people "for an extended period of time" is unsafe, but some of the posters here make it sound like drones are flying bricks. Fly it right and the risk % is on par with everything else.
I know because I was hired for such a shoot in my area. I also was asked to fly through the evening party at the hotel pool with tons of people in the vicinity. All safety precautions were observed (tethered flying, protective shields on rotors, etc.) and the shoot went without a hitch.
Windeguy: Was it just me or is this video only interesting for about 30 seconds?
Aerial shots can get boring real fast in the same venue. Gotta keep moving or mix with ground footage.
bondiblue: Now what could possibly go wrong... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/04/killerdrone/
I saw this one and thought it insane. No way to justify something like this, even if it's in a remote area.
KrisAK: While I'm not anti-drone, I do think that prospective drone operators should be required to log a few dozen hours in an actual aircraft.
Having your own ass in the seat does wonders for judgment.
What does the crappy camera have to do with safety? Maybe if we mounted a 1DX2 or D5, it would be a lot safer? ;P