BigOne: Questions from an amateur.
1. 755 MP x 300fps = 226,500 MP = FIVE GIGABYTES PER SECOND. How the hell do you record this? Is there even a memory device capable of writing at such speed?
2. For a regular consumer focusing may be a problem. For professional cameramen... have you ever seen an errorneously out-of-focus shot in any movie? Is it really such a huge advantage for them?
3. Philosophical. When you shoot a picture or a film scene, there is certain finality in the "Cut!" command. You shot it, it's final. It gives the image certain character. You can easily recognize Godard or von Trier by seeing a simple pan. But with all those post-production abilities where you can change anything, won't they make movies plasticky and characterless?
4. Even more philosophical. It's not the technology that made cinema the art we love and cherish. It's WHAT they shoot not HOW. And with the crap that goes on screens these days, I doubt this technology will make it any better.
2. I see erroneosly focused shots (ears instead of eyes) in rather a lot of movies...
My jaw just dropped. After a really long time there is something unusual, completely distinct and something I have to extensively think about to get an idea how it works. Really exciting!!!
vladimir vanek: Thinking of google's hobby to collect everything I wonder what the word "collection" stands for in the name of the app/service. O:)
I know, just a play on words... No need to be that serious. ;)
Thinking of google's hobby to collect everything I wonder what the word "collection" stands for in the name of the app/service. O:)
vladimir vanek: I know it's marketing, but it would be much easier to understand and more fair to say EITHER "with a 4.5-108mm f3.0-6.9 lens" OR "with a 25-600mm f16.6-38 equivalent lens"...
It's a kind of semi-lie to promote only the "better" figures, that is "equivalent" focal length and real lens speed, which mixed together create unreal expectations among people who are not that technically savvy.
The DOF can be calculated based on sensor size, sensor-to-subject distance and actual focal distance. There's no magic in it. This way you can calculate "equivalent DOF" to FF sensor. Example: If you have FF 50mm f2.8, the DOF comes out the same 2 ft (at 10 ft subject distance) as MFT 25mm f1.4. The 2x factor is no coincidence...
If they talk about equivalent LF why don't they talk about "equivalent" DOF? It's an equally interesting figure.
Note, that "they" only say "XX to XX mm equivalent lens" so a bit of information would be helpful here. Otherwise they can write "f/16.6-f/38 lens" or better "f/16.6-f/38 DOF lens"... At the present state it IS partially misleading.
webrunner5: Man, I am a Big Olympus lover, but what the heck are they doing with Video in their cameras. Well, pretty much NOTHING!!
I'm an Olympus fan as well. So I bought an OM-D which is superb. And I bought a SONY waterproof handycam with high bitrate and 60 fps to shoot....VIDEO. And since then, I don't need to cry that my CAMERA has poor video or that my camcorder has poor still image quality. ;)
tkbslc: 4K "Video"
Yes, they should probably say 4K serial shooting or 4K timelapse. :) There should be some regulation that you can call a sequence of images being a "video" only if it has at least 24 fps... Otherwise some prosumer cameras can be claimed to have 20k 9 fps "video"...
I know it's marketing, but it would be much easier to understand and more fair to say EITHER "with a 4.5-108mm f3.0-6.9 lens" OR "with a 25-600mm f16.6-38 equivalent lens"...
vladimir vanek: Kind of steep pricing, I'd say...
Photomonkey, thank you for your post - that may justify the reason for the higher price tag. Graybalance - I didn't mean an exact product, just a thought that a few LEDs can cost so much. But as Photomonkey pointed out, the price may be justified by the fact that they're some special kind of LEDs designed for consistency...
Kind of steep pricing, I'd say...
why not just make an efficient solar power bank that could be fastened anywhere (backpack, garments, helmet, etc) and hooked up to a gopro or other cams? this makes me think of it as a refinery attached to a car.
Now all car makers are gonna sue each other for the shape of the car that resembles the other brand... ha ha ha!
I think Canon should be happy to sell ANY ILC. :)
vladimir vanek: Absolutely fantastic (except for the price in my case)! 35mm is all you need 90% of the time. And combined with 42mpix, you can extract some nice crops if need be. But a 35mm lens will teach you a lot about photography, people and a lot about yourself. Currently, I carry around an OM-D E-M10 with a fixed 17mm/1.8 lens and I simply don't need any other lens. Just try it! It's fun, it's art, it's a challenge, it's really worth it.
I understand your point. And I can agree with it. However, I can live with a bit narrower FOV and find a view, that would fit within the frame. That's what I mean with "learning". There is always something interesting in the 35mm FOV (as well).(And you can always stitch a pano if it's the only only way to go.)
Wow that looks BIG. I mean B-I-G. No, I mean BBB-III-GGG! More like a compact medium format than portable FF.
Try it all with a 35 and you'll learn a lot. ;) (I admit, that is not the way for every situation and shooting style, but I think that for the majority of people it's viable to stick to 35mm.)
Absolutely fantastic (except for the price in my case)! 35mm is all you need 90% of the time. And combined with 42mpix, you can extract some nice crops if need be. But a 35mm lens will teach you a lot about photography, people and a lot about yourself. Currently, I carry around an OM-D E-M10 with a fixed 17mm/1.8 lens and I simply don't need any other lens. Just try it! It's fun, it's art, it's a challenge, it's really worth it.
Reading news about EOS M, I always feel like swimming in a pool of honey.
noflashplease: The industry needs more competition among sensor suppliers, especially in the full frame segment. If full frame format sensors could become "commoditized," digital photography would be transformed, and all for the better.
But do not forget about FF disadvantages as well, such as: 1) shallow depth of field (which causes some serious limitations for macro, for example), 2) large and heavy lenses, 3) more expensive to produce (applies to sensors and lenses alike). Bigger isn't always "better".