Archiver

Archiver

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Feb 24, 2005

Comments

Total: 116, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Wow, for the price of these adapter, might as well pick up an extra Rebel SL1 when you want to shoot Canon lenses.

This adapter is aimed at those videographers who already have Canon lenses, and want to use them with m43 cameras. And this adapter would not exist were it not for this market asking Metabones for a viable EF-m43 Speedbooster. The SL1 has none of the benefits of a GH3 or GH4 and would be completely superfluous to someone who uses m43 as their primary video capture system.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 30, 2014 at 05:49 UTC
In reply to:

Poweruser: "Canon EF to Micro Four Thirds Speed Booster will cost $599"

Silly... Get a proper EOS Digital at that price.

The adapter is aimed at videographers and film makers who have Canon EF lenses that they want to adapt to their m43 gear. As of this time of writing, no Canon EOS camera at $599 comes anywhere close to the Panasonic GH3 or GH4 for video quality and functionality.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 30, 2014 at 05:43 UTC
On Opinion: Do we really need the Fuji X30? article (282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlton Foxx: The only problem with this essay is that you're not buying a bunch of specs or a box of metal, plastic, and glass.... You're buying the engineering talent of the people at Fuji who used their experience, education, and judgement to create what in their minds is a camera that best uses the technology that the company has developed over the years. That's what makes this camera different from the nikons and canons and olympii....

Right, and Canon, Olympus and Nikon are just newcomers to the camera game with hardly any experience, talent, education or judgement? Fuji and Canon were both founded in the 30's and Nikon and Olympus in the 1910's. Exchange the name 'Fuji' for Canon, Nikon or Olympus in your statement above and it still holds true.

While the camera may be the product of Fuji's engineering and design talent, the ultimate result is still a camera which competes with others in a similar price range.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2014 at 01:42 UTC
On Opinion: Do we really need the Fuji X30? article (282 comments in total)
In reply to:

MPA1: I used to have an X-Pro 1 but sold it as the AF just was not fast enough for my needs despite firmware upgrades etc.

What I really want is a camera like the Leica M9 which has fast AF. I don't even care if it costs as much as an M9 as long as it has the quality of image and build combined with small form factor and discrete operation.

Once that camera becomes available, my DSLR's are gone.

The Sony A7 series is moving in that direction, but not the rangefinder form factor, nor discreet operation.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2014 at 01:28 UTC
On Olympus PEN E-PL7 compact mirrorless camera announced article (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

papa natas: "...horizontal and vertical angular shifts (yam and pitch)..."
YAM..(?) Yummy?
YAWL...Maybe.
From the aerodynamic trilogy: Pitch, Yawl & Roll.

Don't you mean DHell, with a silent d?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2014 at 00:43 UTC
On Olympus PEN E-PL7 compact mirrorless camera announced article (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

wackybit: I feel bad for whoever bought the black 12mm f2 at 'limited edition' prices

For over two years, they were the only way to get a black 12/2. At least they got a lens hood as well. I'm just glad that I never succumbed to the temptation at the time, as I will be able to buy a normal production black version for the price of the silver.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2014 at 00:41 UTC
In reply to:

Maklike Tier: No red dot? Brand strategy fail. But at least they did the research and found out that there was a market for an even more expensive Leica.

Leica always knew there is a market for a camera without the red dot. Hence, the popularity of the MP, and the M9-P. For Leica to release a M-P with no red dot and include a sapphire screen, at a higher cost, is no surprise. At least this model also includes a 2GB buffer to increase continuous shooting capabilities, rather than being purely a cosmetic upgrade.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2014 at 02:41 UTC
On Sony a7S used to shoot Chevrolet commercial article (275 comments in total)
In reply to:

dark goob: If Hollywood concentrated on making great movies instead of all this fancy-looking gear, we might have more than one great film every three to four years interspersed with schlock-show after schlock-show. The epic scale of this wasteland is only dwarfed by the scale of the money and talent wasted to create it.

"Hollywood" doesn't make the gear. They make movies. Not sure what you term 'schlock' vs 'good', either.

Just about every major award winning or nominated film of the last few years has been shot on an Arri Alexa digital cinema camera that costs 80k for the body alone, or on Panavision or Arriflex film cameras that cost tens of thousands, or the RED Epic that costs 50-60k. High end cine lenses cost upwards of 20k each. Then add the masses of rigging, lighting, set design, props, locations...

Not that good movies cannot be made without all this gear, but many fine movies ARE.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2014 at 02:37 UTC
On Sony a7S used to shoot Chevrolet commercial article (275 comments in total)
In reply to:

pkosewski: They took the A7S and they built this complicated rig, but they used one of Nikon's lenses.
This really tells the whole story about Sony E system...

Yes, so many other companies produce 600mm f4 lenses at a quality level suitable for digital cinema. Sony should have had a whole range of at least Zeiss-level cine anamorphics available the minute the A7S was announced.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2014 at 02:25 UTC
On Sony a7S used to shoot Chevrolet commercial article (275 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mister Joseph: I don't get "high budget" shoots. They use super high-powered lights during broad outdoor daylight then stack a bunch of ND filters on their lenses.

Shooting video requires a shutter speed that is "twice the inverse" of the frame rate. The usual video frame rate in America is 24p, so they need to shoot at a shutter speed of 1/50. Shooting at faster or slower shutter speeds creates choppy motion or excessively blurred motion, respectively. Daylight shoots will require ND's for this reason alone.

Secondly, native ISO of digital cinema cameras is much higher than consumer digital still cameras. Native ISO of the Canon C100/300/500 is 800. So to get best image quality, you already need ND filters to shoot at native ISO in well lit situations.

Thirdly, for maximum image quality and dynamic range, the A7S was probably shot using the super flat profile 'S-Log 2', which has a native ISO of 3200.

Try shooting in bright daylight with a 1/50 shutter speed and ISO 3200, and find out whether you need ND filters or not. Now imagine it with those 'super high-powered lights' you talked about.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2014 at 02:18 UTC
In reply to:

ThePhilips: @abortabort:
> And the aspiring amateur HAS to have 4K?

I think I can answer that, because situation really reminds me of the 5-10 years ago when everybody was buying DSLRs to be able to shoot RAW. And everybody was asking "why the amateurs need the RAW?"

The thing is that amateurs need the extra quality - in still RAW, in video 4K - because they make mistakes more often than pros and enthusiasts. If you have a cooked file - JPEG or highly compressed video - options to correct the mistake are very very limited, or non-existent. While with the uncooked files, one has plethora of possibilities to correct almost any beginner's errors present.

So in a way, I can easily imagine the "aspiring amateur" videographers wanting the 4K. It simply opens up many possibilities that were simply not there before.

One sure can't relieve the moment, but with the RAW images and 4K video one can PP one heck out of it.

An analogy with different cameras:

The difference between the video output of the Olympus EM-5 and the Panasonic GH3 is quite marked. When I first got the EM-5, I thought the video was excellent. But the GH3 showed me what I was missing with 25/50p and a much better codec. And that's just at the level of 1080p. 4K represents a similar kind of jump in quality, at least. It can be hard to imagine something that is better than what you currently think is good until you see it for yourself.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 06:36 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: Another $0.02: after a certain point, AF becomes meaningless if one gets into movie making. Wireless focus racking starts to steal our money, and all that's left is image quality and detail. As Philip Bloom said, "Autofocus will never work because the camera doesn't know where I want to focus."

Accurate AF is a godsend if you're shooting documentary work, particularly in fast moving situations. It's not about focus pulls from foreground to background, but quickly and accurately acquiring focus when the scene changes, or the subject moves. I use the GH3 and am looking forward to the improvements of the GH4.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 06:26 UTC
In reply to:

Gollan: When I received my D7100 kit through the mail from Future Shop Canada, I was surprised to see that it was shipped in it's original box; FutureShop just put an address label on it! Canada Post has had intermittent problems over the years with theft, but overall I consider them trustworthy, reasonably fast and a good value. It is interesting that someone at a specific point in the vast postal system somehow has the ability to detect and steal high-value packages. At least this is rare enough that it made the national news here in Canada.

I'm surprised at what what must either have been slackness or naivete on the part of Future Shop Canada in that instance. Shipping a camera, or any other expensive and easily salable piece of equipment in its original box, is just asking for trouble. Glad you got your package okay.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2014 at 08:51 UTC
In reply to:

JackM: Kind of ironic that they chose an image with almost nothing in focus.

The train track is actually curved? Heck, I thought it was lens/sensor distortion!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 01:57 UTC
In reply to:

krikman: I know the secret.

SONY got access to ultimate bending machine (Heil Futurama!).
Their engineers begun with a sensor. But tomorrow SONY can bend anything with NEW ULTIMATE BENDING MACHINE. Curved cars, curved planes, curved pets an finally a curved human. The curved future is coming. Be curved or die.

We're doomed!

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEEED!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 01:56 UTC
In reply to:

PicOne: What isn't said above, is that seemingly you can now ONLY GET LR IF YOU SUBSCRIBE to the $9.99/mo plan. The option to purchase standalone LR is seemingly gone from Adobe's site if you click the How To Buy link

https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/how-to/lightroom-mobile.html

I knew it! Those slimy ... words that I cannot write lest they be auto-denied by the forum software.

The problem is that Lightroom is my favourite raw processor, and I've spent many hours developing presets and workflows with it. So if I want to upgrade, I either have to do this blasted subscription horsehockey, or switch entirely to another program. I might just vote with my feet when the time comes.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:32 UTC

I'm still on LR 4, and I've been waiting to see if LR 6 is still a standalone buy-once program, and this announcement does not bode well for that possibility. In more cynical turns of mind, I wonder if Adobe is doing this to scare people into buying LR 5 right now, before it potentially becomes subscription only.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 09:41 UTC as 26th comment | 3 replies
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rotodpreview: I think Sony (Zeiss) has finally crossed the threshold into unequivocal par or superiority over Panasonic (Leica). Sony for me next time.

How (in the world) do you (illogically) claim that the news of this Panasonic (with 4K video, longer zoom and lower price) supports superiority of Sony (with a more expensive and lesser specced camera)?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 01:35 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neodp: Hey it was very astute of the author to recognize the "new FZ50". I'm still waiting. LOL.

To bad this isn't competitive. Accept compared to 8 year old cameras. It rules there.

Of course it isn't competitive. Everyone else has 1" sensor superzooms that offer superlative image quality and 4K video, don't they. Been doing it for years.

What would be competitive in today's superzoom market is a 45mp full frame camera with 18 stops of dynamic range and in-cam 8K video and a 24-600mm f1.4 constant lens, all the size of a Canon Rebel. Still waiting for that one.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2014 at 10:08 UTC

"While you are reading this article ... a camera reviewer waits."

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2014 at 01:10 UTC as 119th comment
Total: 116, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »