Why do you buy fast lenses/cameras?

Started 3 months ago | Polls thread
mamallama
mamallama Forum Pro • Posts: 56,080
Re: Why do you buy fast lenses/cameras?

sportyaccordy wrote:

mamallama wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

mamallama wrote:

Michael Fryd wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

AOC wrote:

We're already seeing ways to get convincingly good shallow DOF effects without needing large, heavy, and altogether encumbering fast glass.

No we're not. Not if you look at photos at sizes any bigger than a 3x5 print or web resolutions

And the organizations driving computational photography seem to have no interest in applying it to standalone cameras

I think the issue is that those who choose to use bigger cameras are likely not as interested in computational photography as those that shoot with smartphones.

Noise reduction will be a real challenge. Computational photography will be able to provide a clean and noise free low light image, however, the computed details may not match those that were present in real life.

Computational photography is just in its infancy and only widely applied now to very small size cameras. Computational photography research and development is forging ahead at rapid speed and the road ahead is vast. Who know what can be achieved when applied to regular sized cameras. Billions$ in R&D will tell.

Let's wait for the achievements to actually happen before giving credit for them.

I give computational photography a lot of credit for doing so much with so little. We will see what the next leap using larger hardware will bring.

Too much credit IMO. Yes, we will see. Let's wait for that leap to actually happen before celebrating it.

As I keep saying I celebrate and give credit to what has already happened and not what may come.

You and others are so eager to see smartphones kill standalone cameras you have declared victory in a war that's barely begun.

You may be at war, I am not. I just see the trend of what’s happening. Smartphone companies are forging ahead pouring tons of money and resources into computational photography while regular camera companies are dragging their feet and seemingly ignoring the elephant in the room.

What you want to happen isn't necessarily what is or will be.

I want to happen what is already happening. I think technology is progressing at a good pace. I don't care which companies push the ball forward but I have already indicated which I see as laggards. And market trends show it.

And even with all the money in the world, physics are physics. As long as smartphones have to combine exposures and/or synthesize data, there will always be a gap.

I never expected that laws of physics will be broken. I do expect that computational photography will eventually come to regular cameras which will open new frontiers.

As for camera companies ignoring the elephant in the room, I'd love to hear your plan on how an industry that sold 120 million units at its peak could combat an industry consistently selling a billion units a year. You're basically saying Canon, Nikon and Sony should have outsmarted Apple, Google and Samsung. I am all ears on how you suggest they could have made that happen.

Not necessarily but to not let Apple, Google and Samsung outsmart them. Those companies seem not to have embraced enough software as fast as they should. I hear the Leica is just now restructuring and turning their focus by hiring what they term a team of photography software experts.

 mamallama's gear list:mamallama's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tko
tko
AOC
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow