Dester Wallaboo: My biggest complaint with the Sony cams is that they are mirrorless.... yes.... I know the advantages, but the disadvantages outweigh the advantages in my book. Being at the mercy of a monitor to know what is coming through the lens is a not what I would call a great method for shooting. Yes, I use ML so I can get full histograms while shooting using a monitor. But at the end of the day the only real way to see what is coming through that lens, outside of long-exposure photography, is to look through the lens itself with your eye. Unless Sony has recently put in screens that can display full RAW dynamic range, which I'm certain they haven't, you are at the mercy of a monitor that cannot even display full sRGB, let alone ProPhotoRGB, and certainly not RAW.
I'm not pounding the Canon drum... I'm agnostic when it comes to manufacturers. Cameras are purely tools to be used. Obviously the camera aperture is wide open when not pushing aperture preview. But to say your screen is showing you EXACTLY what you are capturing is utter nonsense. No screen can display what your aperture is capturing. That includes Wide Gamut pro monitors like Eizo. My point is that I like to see what a screen cannot.
Let's hope that monitor technology finally catches up to sensor technology.... because they are worlds apart right now.
I use my screen for dialing in my focus. Then shift to optical/mirror viewing so I can see all of the light as it is coming through the lens. I don't like the limitation of the screen's ability. Once screens become wide gamut, it will likely be less of an issue.
Well.... since I actually work in the film/digital video arena. And more than that, own an 8500 sq foot sound stage and shoot regularly on RED. Yes, I could say I'm intimately familiar with the process. I'm talking about still photography where you have the luxury of time dealing with a single frame.
My biggest complaint with the Sony cams is that they are mirrorless.... yes.... I know the advantages, but the disadvantages outweigh the advantages in my book. Being at the mercy of a monitor to know what is coming through the lens is a not what I would call a great method for shooting. Yes, I use ML so I can get full histograms while shooting using a monitor. But at the end of the day the only real way to see what is coming through that lens, outside of long-exposure photography, is to look through the lens itself with your eye. Unless Sony has recently put in screens that can display full RAW dynamic range, which I'm certain they haven't, you are at the mercy of a monitor that cannot even display full sRGB, let alone ProPhotoRGB, and certainly not RAW.
Jun2: The camera is mainly designed for video, competing with GH4, 5D III etc.
Let's make it clear... shooting "4K video", most of which isn't actually 4K but UHD (but I digress) ≠ superior video. There are so many factors involved including file compression, color compression, artifacting, motion estimation in compression, shutter roll, etc. In fact, I'd pick a 1080p or 2K camera with a universal sensor shooting RAW over a 4K camera with decent compressed image.
No.... That's recording to a 1050x or faster CF card internally.
The Mick: Hi Dester,I failed to ask before, but can you share with your creeped out fans how you achieved the very bloodshot eyes? I noticed that technique was applied to your other zombie pics as well. Was this part done in post processing or did you have your daughter rub her eyes for 20 minutes before the shoot? Just kidding, of course, but this photo is so detailed, I had to ask.Thank you again for your commentary (and patience). ;o)Best regards,Mick
The eye effects were accomplished all in post. Knowing these were going to be stills only, I knew post-effects would be simplest, and least traumatic for everyone involved. Had this been for video/film, I would have approached it differently.
The Mick: This one creeped me out from the beginning... and still does. One of my favorites!
One of my editor's in my studio has a fair amount of experience doing realistic monster makeup..... so I asked her if she would do some makeup for our family zombie pics. She does pretty amazing work. :-)
Stefano M: Wow, terrific!!! Congratulations!
l_objectif: very nice! Well deserved!
Thank you... :-)
This is our daughter. We were shooting family pics as zombies. At first she was a bit reticent to do it. But once she got all of her costume and makeup on.... she was totally 'in the zone'..... as you can see here.
Thanks! Very much appreciated.
jimbojames: this is my fav of all of these.. very cool eye effect!
Thanks! Much appreciated.
We were shooting a big family photo for Halloween. I decided to pull everyone into the studio before going into location so I could snap a couple of controlled-lighting shots. :-)
Size limitation is an odd requirement.... not sure why that was included in the challenge.
Sorry guys... this is one field I'm intimately familiar with.... and there is no way this camera is worth this amount of money. I'd buy a Red Scarlet before buying this camera.
HealingHands111: AWESOME JOB! Esp with that many subjects!
OK... seriously.... I look at the contest entries in this series and was totally surprised to see the winning image... this image is pretty awesome. You definitely deserved to have gotten a much higher rating. I don't think voting in the contests really reflects the best work on this site.
R Hyde: This was my favourite, it really shows guns in todays society, like it or not.5 stars
I totally agree. In fact.... I think that much of the gun marketing is misdirected. It should be targeting real middle America instead of the typically testosterone type advertising they love to through out there. Most people are looking for a firearm for basic self and family protection. We're talking about average parents who don't want to be victims.