M W B G: No matter what a company creates, none of you will like it. Luckily these companies don't care what most of you "photographers" think or every company out there would just throw their hands in the air and give up
@MWBGYour comment is not based in fact.If you see the posts below, lots of people say its heavier than previous models and heavier than the completion, and certainly not light weight.
When big companies like Canon and Nikon make duds people here are honest enough to say so.
If they didn't really care they'd move on.
There are lots of news posted that gets lots of positive responses.
Cases in point.
Canon 11-24 (They finally did something right)Kipon adapterBlackmagic micro cinema cameraInterview with Sigma
The negative comments come from "stupidly" designed products etc.
And unfortunately, these days, there are lots of them.
Four entries so far (two advertorials, an "intro" piece, and now an interview) about this cam.
We get it. The world absolutely must take notice of this cam.
OK, noted. Thanks.
I don't get DPReviews decisions to pick "news."
They're all over this camera and completely missed the Blackmagic URSA mini 4.6 from NAB.
But they sure covered the Read Weapon.
Putting on my "I'm confused hat."
God bless Chuck.
He's better at putting lipstick on a pig than I am.
Thank God DPReview is on the internet.
If this were a live press conference some of us would be reaching for our basket of rotten tomatoes and eggs.
Which seems to be required at Canon press conferences these days.
It's about time somebody else got in this business.
Hopefully they won't jam on the camera body or lens or be loose like so many of the Metabones adapters have done.
If they deliver quality at the suggested price, good for them.
They need to invent organic memory that could reproduce itself.Then it could truly take pictures indefinitely.
marcio_napoli: Red knows their market better than me, but as far as I'm concerned, I can't see Hollywood ready for 35mp footage.
Not even Hollywood can handle it. It's just too extra costly for IQ gains that exactly who cares?
35mp moving images, even for the masters at Hollywood, is not a walk in the park.
You get more expensive CG, make up, special make up, props, sets, wardrobe, deadlines, etc.
Blockbusters' budget are average at 100 - 200 million, at 2k.
For 35mp footage, you can bet it will increase another 100 million for extra technical requirements.
PS: if you wonder what I'm talking about, it's possible that you've never made a CG visual effect.
Going from DV resolution, to 1080p is massive in terms of technical skills required.
Jumping to 4k is another massive leap, and then there's this 35mp thing...
Not worthy the extra cost. Not even for Hollywood.
So you're saying a 35mp camera is only good for landscapes and a dermatologist?What are people with D800e's taking pictures of?And people with Pentax 645zs?The list goes on.So when a video camera has the resolution of a still camera it's a no go?The make up artists and actors will walk off the set?
This was my point as well, but I didn't post what you did because I'm wasn't sure Marcio would understand or agree.
So I agree with you, badi.
princecody: Even if it does have 8k what tv or screen can render it?
I have always been an early adopter. I was shooting digital long before most people. Now I shoot RAW video and use LED's for fill (since there is no flash). I can change the shutter angle to match a high shutter speed. I shoot with a global shutter camera so there is no need to worry about jello. I have been doing this for almost a year. I get 12 stops of DR in both stills and video. And I get video I can grade to hell and back. This is the future. In 10 years it will be cellphones and video cameras that shoot raw.
What screens render the images shot with a D800?
Have you heard of IMAX?It was shot on film much bigger.8tb hard drives are only $250Even 4k RAW only does a terabyte an hour.So in 4k its 8 hours in 8k its 1 hour.$250 an hour for the media for shooting a multi million dollar movie isn't that bad. And we're talking pretty uncompressed RAW its even less.
Bernard Carns: Was I reading the specs right?8k is somewhere near 35mp?The Blackmagic URSA mini 4.6K is almost 12MP (pretty close to the A7s) and it can record 4.6 raw internally and has a global shutter, 15 stops DR and takes Canon lenses....hmmm.Add autofocus and flash.Who needs an slr anymore?
The sum of the parts to shoot RAW on the A7s (which isn't real RAW) is less on the Blackmagic URSA mini which was part of my post. :-) And the Blackmagic URSA mini has about the same resolution as the A7s. (Which was also in my original post. :-) :-) And it doesn't need adapter like the A7s to take Canon lenses.......(Which makes the A7s cost a lot more than the URSA mini)
Was I reading the specs right?8k is somewhere near 35mp?The Blackmagic URSA mini 4.6K is almost 12MP (pretty close to the A7s) and it can record 4.6 raw internally and has a global shutter, 15 stops DR and takes Canon lenses....hmmm.Add autofocus and flash.Who needs an slr anymore?
Miki Nemeth: Unfortunately, unlike Sony, Nikon V1 and no other Nikon 1 series cameras are capable of outputting clean HDMI, and they cannot be used with Atomos or any external recorders. I picked the V1 as my very first camera, and I had to learn the sad truth that the Nikon 1 system is practically an abandonned child of Nikon. This made me terribly disappointed with Nikon, and no way I'd buy anything from Nikon again. I kept the V1 and a nice 1Nikkor lens collection, in the hope that eventually Nikon makes at least a half decent Nikon 1 model.Atomos is terribly important for concert and interview videos to override the 30-minute video recording limitations.
You probably aren't interested in changing systems, but Panasonic and I'm sure others, can record nonstop in the camera until the media is full. No 30 minute limitation at all. Its been that way since the GH1.
What was that movie?
Dumb and Dumber?
History repeats itself.
This must be dumb news week.
Maverick_: A fixed lens? 1" Sensor? 3.8fps? No viewfinder? for $2500?
Why would anyone want to buy this, where they have so many other options? Just the fact that you can't change the lens will keep many away from this camera.
Also it's not that small to make it a great drone camera. Who puts a large zoom lens on drones?
As a Panasonic GH user, I am in the market for a new camera, but it will not be this one.
Some of us are Canon users and are still not interested.Some of us also have more than just Canon.We don't see in black white like some others.....So go back to your brick wall......
This kinda looks like an over priced gopro.A drone camera?Oh, no, it's Canon who's the drone.Or is it the zombie company?I'd buy a GH4 before I'd buy this.And I can already use my Canon glass on my BMPC.1" sensor?Bag of bolts.At least a BMPC gives you a great sensor and raw in the bag of bolts.
Interesting how much is done in house.Probably better for QC.Not better for cost though.They have to maintain the chrome plating, injection molding, anodizing, etc systems.Most companies these days would outsource things except for the core talent such as grinding lenses.
alcaher: manufactured landscape... nothing nice about it, very robotic-posthuman enviroment. But that is what it is and we use their products.
Doesn't look very post human to me.Post human would have a lot more robots.I didn't see a single one.
What did the guy say about the football deflation scandal?
If you're not cheating, your not playing?
Well, well, well.
And DPR compares a sample from Tamron to a purchased Nikon lens.
I don't any Sigma lenses.
But what I find interesting is how positive the posts are.
Canon or Nikon posts have tons of bashing.
I've done my share with respect to Canon.
Looks like Sigma is making lenses that customers want and has a CEO who is willing to have a real conversation.
A bit of fresh air!