pgb

pgb

Lives in Australia sydney, Australia
Works as a Video editor
Joined on Sep 7, 2003
About me:

Take more photos and switch off the computer.

Comments

Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: finally! Canon is listening!
XC10 is like a prosumer Powershot G, albeit with:
1) 4k (built-in cooling for normal everyday 4k length recordings)
2) Tilt/Flip Screen; can operate as a Tilt-Angle EVF (Eye-Loupe included) like pro cine/video cams
3) 1" 12mp sensor pixels sized for low-light rather than higher-res best only in better light
4) Tilt-Grip; like prosumer compact video cams
5) Canon ES-LV (Powershot Exposure Simulation Live View)
6) Built-In sealed integrated compact wide-long zoom lens with ff.fov.eq 24-240mm (eliminates changing lenses for different focal lengths)

Misc: IBIS ... has been around in Powershots since Pro90IS

Missing:
Modular VASS (Vari-Angle Swivel Screen)*
Modular VA-EVF (Vari-Angle EVF)*

*no ... smartphones make for poor ergonomics if serving remote vari-angle swivel viewers (they all lack proper built-in hand controls)

I don't think it's main market is serious still shooters. Plenty of other cameras for that.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 09:49 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Uschold: For those of you wondering whether you want to get the CC version or upgrade, here are some numbers. This is most relevant for those who already own a desktop version of LR, like to upgrade regularly and cannot or do not want to pay for a PS desktop version.

LR5 came out June 9, 2013, which is 681 days (22.37 months) before LR6 came out. It was only 461 days or 15.14 from LR4 to LR5.

1. CC: LR + PS $9.99/month

2a. Desktop: LR5 to LR6 average cost was $3.53/month ($79 / 22.37)
2b: Desktop: LR4 to LR5 average cost was $5.21/month ($79 / 15.14)
2c: Deskt op: LR4 to LR6 average cost was $4.21/month ($158/ 37.52)

So if having PS is worth $5.78 or so per month ($9.99 - $4.21) and you like small monthly payments, it may be worth considering PS + LR CC.

I generally don't like subscription software, but these numbers kind of surprised me. I don't happen to need PS, but for those that do, price does not seem to be a significant deterant from getting PS + LR CC.

`4 million CC memberships' what's that, $40 million revenue a month or a lot more? Goldmine.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 00:02 UTC
In reply to:

Valiant Thor: Two of my happiest days:
1. The day I purchased my Apple computer.
2. The day I sold my Apple computer.

I don't get the `Windows always crashes' mantra. We have equal numbers at work and they both crash the same amount which is not very often.
Win8, can't you just click `desktop' and your back in Win7.
Unix, that's pretty old too.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2015 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

marianco: AARGGGG. Photos is inadequate. The worse part is that your photos a trapped in its library. You cannot edit them in another app like with PHOTOS for the iPhone. I think Photos will mature and more features will come in to allow editing in other apps.

Apple IS A BRAND FOR PROFESSIONAL USE. However, for Apple is also a company of EXTREME FOCUS. Apple generally will only create a product only if it can do better than the competition.

For example, when it comes to pro video software, there is NOTHING BETTER THAN FINAL CUT PRO. And Apple continues to go whole hog in supporting it.

When it comes to professional photography apps, Apple has decided that it cannot do better than the competition - which is Adobe. Adobe - scared shitless - competed well against Apple's Aperture. And Apple acknowledged Adobe's win. Adobe even cloned the Aperture workflow so much the newest Lightroom acts like Aperture compared with old versions of LR. I was shocked and pleased.

@thorn That's correct Apples been getting out of pro video and pro anything markets for a while now. It's becoming the McDonalds of computing, more money in the masses, nothing wrong with that.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2015 at 00:13 UTC
In reply to:

Alec: On a related note I just got a fancy wooden toilet seat. Anyone want to take a look?

I'll raise your wooden seat with a full metal toilet.

Not too bad at $59, Hasselblad re-sale value must be plummeting.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 03:43 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

pgb: I think that should be 305mbps, if it can do 305 mBps , Bytes then I hope it uses SSD drives. Pretty impressive 305mbps, starting to get into some serious low compression with 4K.

`19MP raw image file, similar to a raw file from a DSLR' Red usually runs about 5:1 compression in raw, does the Epic do uncompressed raw ?

The techos reckon 265 is twice as efficient as 264 but I think that's a bit pessimistic, it's probably around 1/4 the size of 264 so 200mbps equivalent is a fair guess. I doubt the Canon codec would be better than 264.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 15:39 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

regordyoll: Why a 1" sensor when a Sony A7 has a full frame sensor or a Sony A6000 has an APS-C sensor? I'd like to understand the reason. Thanks!

The TV cameras that shoot the Olympics are smaller 2/3".
If your running down an alley shooting a news piece having a smaller sensor with more DOF makes it easier to keep focus, otherwise you need to stop down and lose light. Even Canon should be able to make a decent 12mpx 1" sensor. Easier to make high quality small lenses too.
Different markets have different priorities.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 13:03 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cychen: Only when it's Canon then we call it one beautiful convergence camera of both still and video...

OMG Can't believe an article of this caliber to appear on DPR.

DPR have been bagging Canon for a while now with words such as stale, predictable, a lack of gold medals and possibly rightly so. So I don't see any bias here.

Such vitriol towards Canon and now DPR is new, so this device promises to be great success. That's how it usually works here.

I like a good Canon bash too but not in this case. It's not really aimed at high end photographers or home movie makers. There are other markets.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 12:13 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kjell Olsson: To the DPR-guys:

1. Publish the press release
2. Test the camera carefully
3. Publish the results

That is - do all the things you usually do good.

But don´t destroy your reputation by publishing PR-articles in your own name!

I'm definitely asking DPR for my money back.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 11:33 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stollen1234: when Dpreview writes an article it is not the press..its an information and an opinion on a new Camera..

I dont understand why some people get so mad if Canon release another superior product...

i think they need to get a life

thank you Dpreview...thank you Canon

Atomos $2K
GH4 $1k5 Sony A7s $2500
Lens ?

4k would stabilize nicely to HD or more in post.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 11:28 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

AJC Photography: Looks like a BRILLIANT all-round camera/video device to give to people that are NOT mega enthusiasts and 'film-makers' ... Many/most of the very negative comments about 1" sensor size and layout and 'limited' zoom lens / lack of power zoom (and more) = all equally GREAT things to put in the hands of a TV reporter / sports journalist / other multi media people that simply need to put out very very good quality (average) 720P / 1080P or better video ... QUICKLY !!
The fact that it will provide stills or stills from video frames too = a 'no brainer' for a smaller news / sports gathering outfit. Think how discreet it would be in a war zone or to sneak into many environments where something way more massive with all sorts of 'OTT' add-on Meccano look junk = OVERKILL.

I'm convinced it will sell VERY well in fact.

Think of where GoPro has made a certain sector almost it's own. Canon has also cleverly used the same 60/70D, 5DMkII/III and 6D type battery for this device too. Makes sense.

Yes, this is aimed at people who earn a living from shooting video. Even the indies will be interested in the high end 4K specs, bit rates and 422. It has a fan so it can work all day without stopping.
It's not suitable for Spielberg or home movie makers but most
in between.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 11:12 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dale Baskin: For those who have been following the comments thread, we just updated the article with some additional content in the "Final Thoughts" section that addresses comparisons to cameras that may look similar on paper such as the FZ1000.

Bresson or Spielberg or a BBC sports cameraman

LOL I don't think it's aimed at them. They prefer the $80k cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 10:19 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: It's wonderful to see the trolls whipped up into a feeding frenzy over Canon's XC10 multi-media camera, especially since, on this site, that usually means that Canon has hit another grand slam home run out of the marketplace ballpark. Canon's fresh approach to camera design ergonomics, distilled from their Cinema EOS cameras, is a very clear indication of the form any mirrorless EOS DSLR replacement will take in the future. Imagine a mirrorless EOS Rebel with no need of a battery draining EVF and no need for a mirror box to support an OVF because it would have a simple removable eye loupe that attaches directly to the live view display. You would control the sensor display from the grip via a joystick when the loupe is attached. Ah, but first things first. :))

Why not buy six, their only $20k

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 10:06 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

rallyfan: The best part of the advertorial was the bit about "Even DPReview would benefit from this type of camera." Well, yes, if it sells via the site I suppose DPReview will benefit. Congrats.

Other than that though... Meh... Calling this some sort of revolution is unfounded, and the primary reason the author has to list for whom this device is intended is that it is ostensibly unclear for whom this device in intended...

Will Jackie Treehorn buy 20-30 cameras for his company? I doubt it. Skin tones are poor, and low light performance is unremarkable.

We've shot Canon since the first EOS 6x0 series. The following decade we got the Kodak/Canon hybrids. Then actual Canon DSLRs, and so on, and I'm sure many here have similar backgrounds. If Canon thought this device would be exciting, they've lost the plot.

You mean DPR might make a buck from this review or camera. Shame on you Barney and staff, you should work for free.

Thanks for the article, especially since it's free.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 09:49 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

rallyfan: Could this find a market as an entry-level pro webcam? The browser interface is actually a good choice IMO. Sound could be an issue with no XLRs but I suppose unbalanced lines could work.

Thoughts?

Buy a balance box, or use a radio receiver straight into it.
Short unbalanced lines are fine, especially at line level. Pity there's no XLR's but where would they fit?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 09:40 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

bluevellet: lol

more people claim to have had this camera than those who claim to own it or just want to own it.

It's a way for DPR to log the trouble makers. It's a conspiracy.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 09:37 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

PieterB: The datastreams for 4K are, if I am not mistaken, 16x the datastream of 1080P.
It seems to me that if you want edit videos, you will need a very powerfull computer and a very large HD.

UHD aka 4K is 4x 1080 resolution.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 09:35 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Wise: DPreview writes "If we buy into the idea that photography is about the 'Decisive Moment', what are the implications when we gain the ability to capture all the moments in the scene? It’s an interesting question we may all get to explore some day."

Surely Cartier Bresson's decisive moment has been on the wane since the introduction of motordrives for 35mm film cameras now overtaken by cameras like the Nikon D4S that can shoot 11 frame per second.

100fps vid is really aimed at slo-mo, having a faster shutter, say 1/100, the slowest you can go at 100fps makes the image less blurred when playing back slow. Seems to have worked well up to now.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 09:28 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tugela: FYI for the reviewer - the RX10 does a full sensor read for it's HD video, that is a 20 mpixel sensor so it is quite a bit more than the Canon. So, checking the Canon on the table, but not the RX10, is incorrect (I suspect the FZ1000 does a full sensor read as well).

The RX10 is likely a better camera. My guess is that a Mark II will be arriving soon enough with an updated processor and 4K capability. They wouldn't really need to change anything else since everything needed is already there.

The weight difference is not all that much either. Most of the weight comes from the lens.

Nice being able to pull a closeup from 4K when finishing in HD or less for the web or even TV. Great for the one man band. I think this camera is aimed at multiple markets including indies. There's also 200mbps.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 09:20 UTC
On Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal article (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Wise: DPreview writes "If we buy into the idea that photography is about the 'Decisive Moment', what are the implications when we gain the ability to capture all the moments in the scene? It’s an interesting question we may all get to explore some day."

Surely Cartier Bresson's decisive moment has been on the wane since the introduction of motordrives for 35mm film cameras now overtaken by cameras like the Nikon D4S that can shoot 11 frame per second.

Reducing rolling shutter would be helped by the 12mpx sensor, a lot quicker to read out. Using 20mpx also requires more processing to smooth over the jaggies, easy when down converting stills. Yeah, the 180 rule was needed to provide some motion blur to smooth the judder from 24fps.
Looks like a good semi pro video camera that can also take a photo. 100fps would be great for sports photography.
Will the Canon bashing ever cease.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 08:57 UTC
Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »