A different interview than the Canon ones where the CEO seems delusional (or disingenuous).
They REALLY do need to get it a true RAW mode though.It's kinda insane they didn't ship it like that and even moreso if it proves impossible for firmware to fix that.
bear740: This may be a great camera, but it is butt ugly. Why does Sony make some good looking camera's then their full frame camera's are just plain ugly? I guess the looks of a camera is not that important to taking good pics, but you do like to have a nice looking camera, or at least I do. This camera looks like someone just slapped parts on a box.
It looks like a 1960s SLR. I don't care other than it's so boxy it's not as nice in the hand either.
Rexgig0: Interestingly, "FTW" meant something considerably different, in American slang, at least well into the 'Nineties. Only the "T" remained the same. This post represents the first time I have typed "FTW," as it still seems like using an obscenity.
I actually had to look up with the old meaning and it said it was mostly used by radical/anarchist/rebel types. I'm not sure if I relaly remember seeing or hearing it back then. The modern meaning though, widespread usage for 15 years.
maxnimo: It would be cool to have a real-world shootout between the Canon EOS 5DS and the Sony a7R II using the same subjects at same distance using their best prime and zoom lenses, and just see which generates the best image.
shoot sports with a P&S and then with a 1DX + 300 2.8 and tell me that an equipment change can never make anyone instantly better.
JamesMor: "42 is a good number - as well as being the answer to life, the universe and everything,"
But what is the question????????
No, no, what's on second.
AlexisH: "An ideal match for Sony’s extensive collection of FE lenses..."
It was a typo. They meant an ideal match for the extensive collection of EF lenses ;).
Couscousdelight: The best sensor coupled to the worst image compression.This is stupid, this is Sony.
Yeah AAC was better, but it was worse than uncompressed CD and even more compared to beyond CD stuff.
GatanoII: For Canon EF users there is now a FF mirrorless camera, if the metabones adapter will work with all EF lenses flawlessly , but looking at their website the incompatibility issues are way to long to be a real substitute for a proper Canon camera and if you don't need/want a mirrorless, Canon has plenty of better FF cameras with way faster speed or better resolution or 4K raw video and zero issues (if any a firmware wlil fix) with Canon glasse, not just i none "cheap" camrera but i ndiferent models, still once you put the glass cost i nthe game the cameras costs makes a lot less difference.
Anyway Sony a7R II looks a good advancement, competition is good, Canon will (should) take notes, it should not compete only with many models but with one that embodies most features as the a7R II do
But the A7R II gets you better reach, more MP, better low ISO DR stills and the 4k video has basic usability features like focus peaking, zebras, etc. and costs a lot less than a 1DC. I wouldn't be surprised if it produces better 4k quality too.
(of course the 1DC gets you way more fps and better action/AF/buffer, etc. but you could keep your current say 5D3 and add an A7R II for less than swithcing to a 1DC or you could get a 7D2+A7R II for like the same price)
Nanospeed1: Guys, here is a petition for Sony for the uncompressed RAW implementation.... Please sign it if that's a critical issue for you (as it certainly is for me!)
p.s. to censor: Yes, I posted it under the other article too but the more signatures, the more voice and (hopefully) more happy Sony-photographers in the future! :-)
Impressive. MOST, impressive.
Canon sees impossible & Sony does impossible.(and now maybe some see that much stuff we said Canon could do, actually is stuff that can be done if the MBAs allow it)
Great stuff. Some nice options now for people with a big Canon lens collection to get all these other video features and qualiy and all this stills quality without having to spend a lot of money doing a total system swap right away.
And maybe it even wakes up Canon?1 can hope(although they do need to think about changing the firmware to get a real non-lossy RAW in there, it's kinda nuts they don't have the options, there is nothing it protects marketing-wise so it's just rather bizarre; a crop mode RAW for more fps wouldn't hurt either, although this probably won't be much of an action camera anyway, at least not for those using adapted lenses, but it would save space when using it for perched birds and the wildlife and the increased fps and buffer could help for that stuff at times too)
I wonder if this is an excuse to not put 4k in the 5D4. What? You can't complain about 4k for the consumer add our XC10!
(What? You shouldn't complain that the 5Ds has a bungled crop mode that provides nothing! If you want some speed and reach add our 7D2!
What? You can't complain the 5D4 MP count is modest! Add our 5Ds for landscapes (DR? lalalalalal we can't hear you, we can't hear you, lalalalalalalla) and 7D2 for reach action!)
Other than from a size aspect, which is a real matter true and something that will be legit critical for some absolutely, but other than for size, the BM Ursa Mini blows this away in every possible regard for only a little bit more money. It has a much bigger sensor, much fancier stuff built-in, the quick samples video from each make the IQ look much better too (of course it remains to be seen for sure), does 60p 4k, I think it does 150fps HD, I believe it does HD raw video too, it takes EF lenses, etc.
cgarrard: DPR- Glad you will keep pushing the raw issue as much as you can without hurting your relationship with Canon.
I'm not buying that answer Chuck! :)
Yeah, absurd! The fact is the sensor doesn't deliver a JPG right off it. The JPG is what takes a lot more power and coding to produce! Where do they think the JPGs come from? From an intermediate raw state of some sort which they then do a ton of processing on to produce the JPG.
An absurd answer that says they think their user base is still gullible.
" It’s easy enough to create a jpeg, but creating raw files would have required some different programming on the processor, which we decided was not a cost effective option."
Really so the sensor chip just magically delivers fully processed jpg images straight off the sensor???
The fact is, it's getting JPG out of a camera that adds more processing and coding requirements than RAW.
If the CW 5D4c rumor is correct and they deliver with it fully, Canon be back in the video game with that option though. The XC10 pricing/specs and 1DC and C300II do make one worried they won't quite totally deliver with the 5D4c, but if they do, that at least could bring them back in the game.
meland: This article has certainly brought out Those Who Are Truly Sad.
Darn just tried to delete my response, but missed the timing by 30 seconds.
I don't want to keep getting sucked down to the ugly level of the Canon gang who rules all the tech forums any more.
Mods, feel free to delete my two responses to Meland here.
XC10 still seem like a big deal??
For only 20% more money the new BM camcorder will deliver 4k 60p at 12 stops with fully decked usability features and pro connectors (things the Canon fanboys claim are so expensive they cost $20,000 to produce....) and 150fps 1080P RAW!
Oh and it will also take all of your Canon lenses!
Oh and it will also use an APS-C sized sensor instead of a 1" sensor!
So for only 20% more money it beats the XC10 on every single spec, often by miles, other than for it being a bit bulkier (it's not like the XC10 is GoPro portable though).
This is why some of us have been trying to wake Canon up and push them forward, not because we hate them, but because we have a sense of what is going on and what could be done. Acting all fanboy does not do any favors for any Canon user! It just lets Canon sit back and be lazy.
XC10:$24994k 30P1" sensorslow, fixed lens
BM URSA mini:$29994k 60p150fps HDhas a full-sized APS-C sensortakes Canon EF lenseslooks to have more pro connectors and features
(although it is true that you do need to add another $300 or so to the URSA price to give it a lens since it comes with no lens, so for someone with no Canon gear the entry price is more than 20% higher, for someone already with Canon lenses though....)(and yes the URSA is a bit bulkier and EF lens IS might not be quite as good for video IS as what will be in the XC10 perhaps for the non-tripod, hand-held without aid shots)
You refer to those like yourself who would rather pay $2500 for a 1" sensor, 30p 4k, slow fixed lens than $3000 for an APS-C sensor, 4k 60p, 150fps HD RAW and an EF mount and pro features and connectors, just because the former has the Canon name badge on it?
I probably should not have gone there and lowered myself to the same level as your whole gang you toss the personal insults non-stop for years, but I guess I did. Sorry.
Ben Stonewall: This thread should win some kind of prize for the sheer number of drooling, hate-filled trolls that have emerged from their Mom's basement to pour vitriol on a product that they'll never own, never mind use in any meaningful way.
Or maybe the 'drooling trolls' actually know what is up and how fast the market is moving and would rather see Canon be a player and than get by milking the fanboys company?
Look what just came out today from the competition:
(although it is true that you do need to add another $300 or so to the URSA price to give it a lens since it comes with no lens, so for someone with no Canon gear the entry price is more than 20% higher, for someone already with Canon lenses though....)