ET2

ET2

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 729, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony G Series XQD format v.2 memory cards introduced article (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Just a Photographer: I thought this format is as dead as a dodo.

The only camera that uses this format is the D4.

Memorystick work on all Sony cameras and PS portable, even today, including the newest cameras like A7s. My desktop memory reader reads them. Weird definition of "failure".

atrac ia audio compression, software algorithm, not a hardware that anyone bought. Maybe you will proclaim next that AVCHD was a failure as now it's replaced with XAVC.

All the rest of tape and optical format maybe dead now, just as VHS is dead now. They were replaced by DVD and then Blu-ray. They all will be replaced too with online streaming.

Big Fing deal. Welcome to ever changing world. Are you still using VHS tapes and 3.5" disks in your computer (that was Sony format too) , luddite?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 09:29 UTC
On Sony G Series XQD format v.2 memory cards introduced article (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: If I were a camera company I would stick with SD cards and go with UHS-II. Those things are FAST! If you have a D4 or a D4s though . . . I guess a couple of those ridiculously expensive 64 GB QXD cards might make sense. For now though, I think I'm going to stick with much slower but more universal and compatible cards, like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/945286-REG/sandisk_sdsdqx_064g_a46a_64gb_extreme_micro_sdxc_uhs_1.html

What kind of post is that? People will buy a card that can be used in their camera. D4 can't use SD card. Why on earth D4 owners buy SD card?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 05:27 UTC
On Sony G Series XQD format v.2 memory cards introduced article (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Just a Photographer: I thought this format is as dead as a dodo.

The only camera that uses this format is the D4.

Yeah, "Failed Formats" like Blu-ray Disc.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 05:22 UTC
On Sony G Series XQD format v.2 memory cards introduced article (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike_V: These are for the FS7

FS7 doesn't really need G series as S series is fast enough (max data rate on FS7 is 600 Mbits / second). S series are cheaper.

Factory modified F5 and F55 also can also use XQD cards. Max data rate on those is also 600 mbits/s

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 18:27 UTC
On Sony G Series XQD format v.2 memory cards introduced article (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Just a Photographer: I thought this format is as dead as a dodo.

The only camera that uses this format is the D4.

Arri Alexa uses Sony's SxS cards which is even more expensive than XQD. They would have used XQD if it was available back in 2010

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 18:23 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: lol.
too many folks confuse needs differ between Cinematography and regular videography
e.g. the look of AF, wobbly like Pany GH4/GH3, no AF in 4k (GH4), or fast AF in sports (dSLRs, EOS 7DMkII), or smooth-n-slow pull focus as in Cine (EOS 70D) or fast smooth 'no wobble' AF in Cine/videography (EOS 70D), etc

e.g.
Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4
EunJae Im
http://vimeo.com/96882002
"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

sam james. " beautiful image quality"

That's pretty subjective. Doesn't change the fact that codec on the camera is consumer level.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2014 at 04:27 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: lol.
too many folks confuse needs differ between Cinematography and regular videography
e.g. the look of AF, wobbly like Pany GH4/GH3, no AF in 4k (GH4), or fast AF in sports (dSLRs, EOS 7DMkII), or smooth-n-slow pull focus as in Cine (EOS 70D) or fast smooth 'no wobble' AF in Cine/videography (EOS 70D), etc

e.g.
Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4
EunJae Im
http://vimeo.com/96882002
"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

"nobody could for Cine, because AF was never available before EOS C"

This isn't true. FS700 has AF. It also has very fast PDAF AF with SLT adapter. AF is just not used by professional videographers.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2014 at 18:47 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (2702 comments in total)
In reply to:

hippo84: Why does A77II has the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture as shots from 7D and other non-transluscend mirror cameras? Wasn't shots from A77II darker and then corrected?

So where is A77 II review?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2014 at 07:19 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

JJ Rodin: What is it with Sony fanboys and xavc/-s codec fetish ?

The xavc codec/definition is a Sony specific spec. Why would Canon or Nikon or ARRI or any other maker necessarily use xavc/-s or even want to use it ?

I am not saying the codec is good or bad (as compared to which other?), but Sony guys, there are oodles of codecs at least equal codecs to Sony's, I suspect pros would not touch xavc-s or whatever (ProRes 444 or 422 better?) - much better codecs - does an ARRI alexa 65 use xavc codecs - NOPE!

Of course the pro cams (which this is a low end model) should offer multiple codecs beyond RAW - not likely xavc me thinks.

If you read PhilipBloom and other pro blogs, a lot of them (vast majority) don't even like raw. Too much disk space (costs add up), too much work in post editing and encoding.

So raw is not the answer for many people. Even TV dramas shot on Alexa are mostly shot in ProRes, not raw.

Also, C100 Mark II can't shoot raw, not even with external recorder. It does 8-bit uncompressed video to external recorder, but that isn't raw.Yes that can be converted to other formats, but don't call it raw. It's 8-bit uncompressed video.

raw is pure sensor data before debayering and it's usually 12 bit or higher.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 20:47 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: It's 4K capable, why is it not enabled?

http://www.newsshooter.com/2014/09/12/sony-give-f5-an-official-998-4k-upgrade-option-f55f5-to-get-prores-recording-for-2250/

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 20:26 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: It's 4K capable, why is it not enabled?

F5 did 4K only with R5 recorder, but firmware changed that. Now both can do 4K internally or with the R5 recorder.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 19:42 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: It's 4K capable, why is it not enabled?

F5 does 4K

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 13:49 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

JJ Rodin: What is it with Sony fanboys and xavc/-s codec fetish ?

The xavc codec/definition is a Sony specific spec. Why would Canon or Nikon or ARRI or any other maker necessarily use xavc/-s or even want to use it ?

I am not saying the codec is good or bad (as compared to which other?), but Sony guys, there are oodles of codecs at least equal codecs to Sony's, I suspect pros would not touch xavc-s or whatever (ProRes 444 or 422 better?) - much better codecs - does an ARRI alexa 65 use xavc codecs - NOPE!

Of course the pro cams (which this is a low end model) should offer multiple codecs beyond RAW - not likely xavc me thinks.

AVCHD is also codec jointly owned by Sony and Panasonic. AVCHD and its logo are trademarks of Sony and Panasonic

So why is Canon using AVCHD? The answer is that Canon licenses (pays money) to use AVCHD in C100 Mark II

The better choice would have been prores, but again, Canon would be paying Apple to use that codec, just like Blackmagic and others (like Arri Alexa) pay Apple for that codec.

The real issue is that XAVC is so new, Canon probably doesn't even have chip that can do XAVC. Things like this require hardware chip on the camera motherboard.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 25, 2014 at 08:25 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: lol.
too many folks confuse needs differ between Cinematography and regular videography
e.g. the look of AF, wobbly like Pany GH4/GH3, no AF in 4k (GH4), or fast AF in sports (dSLRs, EOS 7DMkII), or smooth-n-slow pull focus as in Cine (EOS 70D) or fast smooth 'no wobble' AF in Cine/videography (EOS 70D), etc

e.g.
Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4
EunJae Im
http://vimeo.com/96882002
"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

C100 mkII still has no raw and no 4K, not even with external recorder.

As for AF, this camera is independent pro filmakers, right? AF is not important in that market. Alexa and Red don't even have AF

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2014 at 18:38 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: So, no 4K, despite it having an 8.3MP sensor? Or did I miss something (again)?

At one third the price, the GH4 would be a much better buy for most people, and it does 4K.

AF matters for consumers, but real filmmakers don't use AF in video.

Red, Alexa, F55, F65, - none of these cameras even have AF.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2014 at 18:33 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II First Impressions Review preview (2702 comments in total)
In reply to:

shadowz: The Sony A77 mark2 is almost as good ...while wearing a significantly lower price tag .........

but what do I know .....

Where is A77? Looks like DPR not only have no plans to review it, but they didn't even bother to do do studio shots

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2014 at 06:40 UTC
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)

Funny DPR never posted anything about FS7 that totally kills this in features (internal 4K, 10-bit video, 180 fps, XAVC, 12-bit raw to external recorder, etc) and ergonomics.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 09:31 UTC as 50th comment | 2 replies
On Canon announces EOS C100 Mark II article (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: So, no 4K, despite it having an 8.3MP sensor? Or did I miss something (again)?

At one third the price, the GH4 would be a much better buy for most people, and it does 4K.

Nonsense. 8.85 MP sensor in C500 records 4K with external recorder.

I am pretty sure the sensor could have done at least UHD if Canon wanted to include that feature.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 09:25 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 First Impressions Review preview (1864 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: First the amazing GX7, now LX100.
This is brilliant; real thinking outside the box.

RX100 is a pocket camera. LX100 isn't. They aren't in the same category. If someone wants a pocket camera to add to their ILC gear, RX100 wins, as RX100 is a pocket camera, period.

LX100 is comparable to Canon G1X series.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 06:13 UTC
In reply to:

Curtox: I was all in on this phone. Then I saw that price. If that's for real, this thing is destined to barely make a dent in terms of sales. That's an incredibly steep asking price. Just wow.

Yeah, 128 GB IPhone plus is $950, $100 cheaper than this phone which is only 16 GB. IPhone 6 16GB $650, half the price

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 19:10 UTC
Total: 729, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »