why are cameras shown on rocks?
years ago, digital camera adverts had kids with food on their faces, usually melted ice cream.
Now it's rocks.
I better not whinge too much or they'll bring back the food covered kids.
Prefer a VF
motobobp: I tend to agree. Many people would like a camera that takes excellent pictures but is intuitive to use. Rather than eliminating capabilities, how about making a menu portal that guides the user into what ever level they want to work at, ie.; "Snapshot", "Basic Still", Intermediate Still", etc. Buttons and functions would be deactivated depending on what level you are at. This would avoid the dreaded "I must have pushed a button by mistake and now the camera is doing something I don't want! Help!!!!"
many cameras have a factory reset function but I like a less drastic way to return the default functions.Even if default settings were merely listed in the manual, yet this is not always done.I like the Canon's C1 C2 C3 dial positions and you have the option to remember changes or lock them and not remember changes.Even more experienced people can forget the original setting of some obscure setting
photoeng: Last I checked... The world is swimming in images lately, and that's what matters.
But will these images be around in 50 years? Like film?
fairfaxian: I love using my iPhone 6+ -esp for slo-mo panoramas. But I almost always carry a real camera.I just returned from backpacking in Yosemite high country -where I opted for the added weight of my wonderful Canon 7DII. I even carried it rock scrambling up a (steep!) peak at just over 10k' -just for the quality of the images. I am editing those images now and the IQ is magnificent. I'm a pro retoucher -and yes I scrutinize to the pixel level. I have pocket cams, midsize and DSLRs. And the more important the content, the bigger the hardware that I will lug out there.iPhones are a marvel of engineering -but there's (currently) no substitute IMO for quality glass on a cam that will bang out 10fps and IQ that looks terrific as a large print. I choose to support the makers of the excellent cameras that I use daily -in hopes that they will thrive and have capital for continued R&D. And when they come out with new gear, I often buy it. I choose carefully, and rarely regret my purchases.
i agree, I never use my iphone camera, if I have gone to some trouble to get somewhere, I would rather use quality gear to take the photos, such as a 5DMk III for example, even if it is heavier.I have also got the Sony RX100M4 as the camera I take on my commute to work or when cycling.
derekkite: Yes! What I need is a dslr that is wide angle and small aperture with an automatic flash. Then I can have fun!
Come on. I take photos with my phone, sure. Fun, not really. It doesn't focus in low light, it doesn't freeze movement with a fast shutter speed, I can't control a flash detached from the phone, I can't take a shot of the bear or otter up the river. I can't photograph the milky way.
Canon has how many options to set up autofocus, and if done to the circumstances of the shot, gets amazing results. Could it be simpler? I suppose, but Apple's simplicity is 80% due to limiting what you can do. Could some phone manufacturer put together a focus mechanism, lens and sensor that can capture a football game from the sidelines? Nope.
This is nonsense. Phones are wide small aperture photographic devices. I don't consider that to be very much fun.
I agree, phone cameras have a very small lens and no variable aperture. The novices who take phone pictures don't care about that.At least phone cameras eliminate the flash photos outdoors like at sporting events.
MrTaikitso: Sony are superb at miniaturisation, but need to work on their ergonomics, the one reason I would not choose an RX-100 series and sadly got rid of my NEX. (A-6000 better, but not perfect.) On the RX-100 series, the controls are too small, there is no top right multi-use dial and the case is too slippery. Sony could learn from the Panasonic LX-100, which would be perfect it it had an articulating display.
The quest for the perfect compact continues!
You also need the U3 card for the slo-mo which cost $200 for the 64GB.
justmeMN: Sony includes 4K in their cameras, because they want to promote the sale of their 4K televisions. Camera companies that don't make televisions don't have that financial incentive.
A Hasselblad TV with wooden panelling costing $90K
straylightrun: First they have conquered Mirrorless, and now the enthusiast digital camera market. What's next for Sony?
Sony MD player
I just got one, big learning curve.On the first day, I'd take a photo, zoom and then take another photo but I'd be zooming in the previous photo on preview. D'oh!So I disabled the preview and things are better but no chimping. No biggie really.
be nice... Blizzard named a wow zone after him
That's what happens if you don't sweep the floor
Re: superzooms, I think it is a selling point to say 10x or 20x zooms and I tend to think the smaller the zoom, the better the lens.Still, the huge size of this lens shows it's not just a marketing camera
I don't have a dishwasher, can I just put the gopro in the sink and push it around with a brush.
I already have a smartphone in which I don't use the camera but use a 'real' camera.I'm interested in the camera but don't need another phone.It does allow the telcos to be part of the distribution but can I get one without having a phone plan?If I want to use the Nokia 1020 or some advanced imaging device I buy a phone I don't use or make yet another switch to another phone plan.But an advanced imaging device can be connected to some communications system or use WiFi.I'm thinking, will there be small computers carried by people which will handle imaging and communications and avoid the need to cram it all in one device.The Google modular phone seems to be a step in this direction where camera modules are swapped on a chassis which has a phone and so on.
maybe have an unboxing of a blurry object and then substitute with the Next Best Thing in the last frame.use for everything
Small cameras with non removeable primes can be fine tuned but the future is with cheaper lenses and sharpened with software. I hope camera makers don't pass off the cheaper lenses as more expensive ones, but DXOMark might show those up.It's an interesting thought that a cheap prime can have the CA and the other defects compensated by faster processors.Sure this lens optimisation is already happening with mobile phone sized lenses and can be scaled up to SLRs.Also as we move away from the 'tyranny of 35mm film' lens sizes and sensor sizes will reach a standard size similar to MFT but it's a format war at the moment.I think of cars as a parallel as they take on the areodynamic 4 cylinder and mostly look the same.The full frame SLRs and lenses were really a sop to film experienced pros and will soon be the new 'large format' as there will always be a need for full frame for the boutique pro market
After I realised I had two of everything, egCanon 5D mkII and mkIIItwo iphones 3GS & 4two ipads 2 & 3and a few more examples, I apply a 'hit the wall' rule. I ask myself if I have hit the wall or have I reached a limitation of the equipment I have.It helps me pause and think.The turning point was realising there was very little difference between the iphones and I won't do minor or incremental upgrades.
I thought the trick which Canon at least have is something like a strip of sticky tape on the bottom of the sensor to collect internal dust.presumably this strip is replaced when the camera is serviced.I dimly recall sometimes emulsion and particles of film would collect inside the camera. Again cleaned out as part of a maintenance plan.