Octane

Lives in United States Los Angeles, United States
Joined on May 9, 2004

Comments

Total: 261, showing: 161 – 180
« First‹ Previous7891011Next ›Last »

sweet! Great idea, great features! And great price.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2012 at 21:21 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Octane: I find it telling that Canon is so desperate trying to explain this camera to end users. Thanks, but we get it. It's too expensive and the market for 4K footage is almost non-existent.

@graybalanced
Apples and oranges. You can, and have been for many years been able to, print resolutions higher than your monitor. The resolution has been used for a long time already.

Video is quite different. There simply is no way to view 4K video yet expect movie theaters. Actually many of them are not able to project 4k. They all went with 3D (stereo) projectors which are designed to deliver higher frame rates rather than higher resolution. James Cameron (Avatar, Titanic, ...) said, after doing many tests, that he prefers higher frame rates for movies over higher resolution.

I'm not saying 4K is pointless. I have no doubt that 4K will eventually come, and it has advantages, but the lack of display/output devices at the moment makes any 4K camera a niche product for now. My point is more that the number of professionals is very small that can financially justify investing that much money in a photo camera that has a cheap version of 8bit 4K 'frankensteined' into it's body.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2012 at 03:56 UTC

I find it telling that Canon is so desperate trying to explain this camera to end users. Thanks, but we get it. It's too expensive and the market for 4K footage is almost non-existent.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 04:25 UTC as 40th comment | 7 replies

The WiFi adapter sells for $60. Seems reasonable. But it makes the WT5 for the D4 look like ridiculous rip off. Sorry Nikon, that's just messed up.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 04:14 UTC as 177th comment
In reply to:

IcyVeins: Why are cine lenses measured in T stops and regular lenses in f stops?

The t-stop includes the light transmission of the lens. On a camera that measures light through the lens, you don't have to worry about light transmission, as the internal light meter will always see through the lens.

Traditional movie camera did not have a light meter built in, or if they had it was hardly used. The light was measured using a hand held light meter which obviously did not know of light loss inside any lens. In order to set the right aperture the lenses for movie cameras all combined f-stop and light transmission in what they call t-stop.

With today's digital movie cameras the t-stop becomes unimportant again as you adjust the exposure from the signal/image coming directly from the sensor, so the light transmission is automatically accounted for again.

But the t-stop has become such a standard in the movie industry that they still label lenses that way.

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2012 at 20:43 UTC
On article Making sense of Canon's 4K cameras with EOSHD (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

offtherecord: Some strange explanations in Mr. Reid´s article. Coming from the industry, this is not a camera that is to compete with RED or Alexa. If you can´t create LUTs, control colour and levels through the process, it is not something any DP would go for. Grading possibilities? Building the light for the film is something completely different from doing dslr video today. Audio? If it is a B, why audio monitoring. It´s not being done on B. This is interesting, but it is not THE camera to be used as a B, at least not with RED-s or Arri-s.

very true.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2012 at 07:18 UTC
On article Making sense of Canon's 4K cameras with EOSHD (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jun2: 4K basically is about 8M per image. For most of purpose, you don't need to take still. Just take the video and extract 8M still from that.

Take a still from any good quality HD camera, then take the same shot with a still camera and downsize it to the same resolution. You will be surprised how bad the video still looks.

Grabbing stills out of a video has never been a good idea. It's much worse than shooting in low quality JPG mode.

You also have little control over shutter speed in video mode. No phase detection AF, no viewfinder, ...

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2012 at 07:13 UTC
On article Making sense of Canon's 4K cameras with EOSHD (225 comments in total)

Kind of funny how this camera needs that amount of explanation to experienced and intelligent people like photographers.

The issue is not that we 'don't get it', it's more that this camera combines features, functional design and a price in a way that makes little sense in this specific mix.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2012 at 01:57 UTC as 71st comment
In reply to:

Francis Carver: Anybody half-way serious about shooting a project in 4K will not be doing it with such a typical still photography form factor camera as what this latest "Canon Announcement-Cam" appears to be.

"The camera, which shares the majority of its specifications with the still-awaited EOS 1D X."

Come on, Cannon. Quickly, make three more camera announcements this week, okay? We need more Canon camera announcements, we really need them, you know. The more, the better.

"Output it uncompressed over its HDMI connector."

Yeah, right. That is what Nikon has also said (D800, D4). But their cameras could not do it as of yet, so why would Canon's be able to?

"A smaller, APS-C-like Super 35mm sub-frame that allows the use of Canon's EF Cinema Zoom lenses."

I see. Since these new Canon EF cinema zooms and primes are mighty slow sellers indeed, Canon had hit upon the swell idea that maybe after this strategic announcement, folks will line up for these far-out "cinema" lenses of theirs?

The Super35 format is not a random idea. There are a large amount of these lenses available and used in the movie industry. This camera clearly aims at professional movie producers so offering a format that allows them to use their lineup of lenses makes a lot of sense.

But I agree in general, the SLR design makes no sense for a movie production. It's actually counter productive when it comes to integrating it.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

gillamoto: while I'm okay with every news about video/cinematography announced here, I will suggest dpreview to change it's name to dcreview (digital camera review) or direview (digital imaging review). serioulsy.. there no boundaries now between photography and cinematography in terms of equipment.

Look at the credits of any major movie. Look for the person called DoP/DP. Yes the person shooting a movie is called 'director of photography'. So I would say DPReview is still OK :)

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 20:30 UTC

Interesting specs, but I'm a little confused at the customer they are going for. Professional movie production don't particularly appreciate a camera body that is designed as still SLR camera. Professional movie cameras are designed and built to match their needs which is quite different.

The great success of SLR camera for video productions (in the past three years) was because these SLRs were inexpensive, delivered good video quality and allowed you to use your existing lenses. So that was a win situation. But this camera is priced out of reach for all those who jumped on the SLR video trend because of the low price.

Currently the only widely available 4K displays are projectors in movie theaters which is only available for large movie productions/distributions.

I'm really not sure what customer base they are aiming for with this camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 16:23 UTC as 96th comment | 3 replies
On article Facebook buys photo sharing service Instagram for $1bn (144 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: Why would anyone want to waste time sharing pictures using a service which can't be accessed from a PC?

And what Instagram feature exactly can't Facebook implement themselves for 1/1000 of the cost? They may be paying for the Instagram user-base, but it's not like their own user-base is so small that they can't become Instagram-killers as soon as they have comparable features.

You just show that you don't understand social media. Zuckerberg and his team are some of the smartest people. You can be sure they do not throw money at something that isn't worth the investment.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2012 at 21:14 UTC

Yay for a healthy competition!

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2012 at 20:39 UTC as 51st comment

I was excited at first, but after reading the article I'm like, OK I guess I'm keeping my Nikon J1.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2012 at 05:49 UTC as 81st comment | 2 replies
On article Dan Chung posts 5D Mark III vs. D800 video shootout (203 comments in total)
In reply to:

lindner: You guys should test less cameras and test those quick. Huge amounts of previews (and 'overviews' and shootouts and whatnot) in the 'recents' but very few actual reviews. Fewer but actual 'reviews' would be So Much Better.

@Simon, while I totally agree with your point, you tend (this is not the only time) to have a condescending and belittling tone when you reply. This is exactly the type of attitude and tone that make forum discussions turn foul.

As an editor I wish you would not respond on the low level that some of these questions are asked.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2012 at 04:35 UTC
On article Dan Chung posts 5D Mark III vs. D800 video shootout (203 comments in total)

Can we just stop that silly quest of finding a 'winner'? Yes these cameras are not identical but it seems there is an obsession to find the marginal differences and amplify them for the sake of declaring a winner.

Truth is, if I was a Nikon shooter I'd be happy with the D800 and if I was a Canon shooter I'd be happy with the 5D III.

Neither one is missing out something significant by being with their brand. Thanks to Canon and Nikon for making excellent cameras! Now that we don't have to argue any more about who is better we can spend more time talking to each other rather then at each other or even arguing.

In the end we all have the same goal, we want to create beautiful images (moving or stills).

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2012 at 20:10 UTC as 47th comment | 1 reply
On article Instagram app arrives for Android (29 comments in total)

It was about time!

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2012 at 19:48 UTC as 19th comment
On article Instagram app arrives for Android (29 comments in total)
In reply to:

samhain: Instagram used to be really cool until it was taken over by teenagers, celebraties & companies using it for marketing. There's still some really good photographers on there, but they're hard to find as the popular page is no longer about good photos.

and who made you the judge of what Instagram was meant to be or is supposed to be?

That's exactly the beauty of social media. The users decide what they want to use it for.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2012 at 19:47 UTC
On article Canon launches EOS 60Da DSLR for astrophotography (229 comments in total)

I applaud Canon for coming out with such a camera. Yes it's a product for a small group of people, but that's exactly why it's great to see that Canon makes it. They are not going to make a lot of money on those, but it creates a level of trust in a brand.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2012 at 16:21 UTC as 33rd comment
On article Dpreview product database now mobile (37 comments in total)

it took us 10-15 years to get web pages to look interesting and make them useful and use features our computers offer.

Now we have to find ways to get it all 'dumbed down' for mobile devices again (and create parallel mobile versions) until they become powerful enough to handle good web sites again. History repeats itself. :)

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2012 at 06:26 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies
Total: 261, showing: 161 – 180
« First‹ Previous7891011Next ›Last »