caterpillar

Lives in Philippines Quezon City, Philippines
Joined on Sep 16, 2002
About me:

Equipment: Sony a7 iii, Sony a5100, a5100, Lumix gx7, 20D. Panasonic fz-1000
Lenses -
for Sony: Tamron 28-75 f2.8 RXD, Sony FE 28 f2.0, Sony FE 24-240.

Sony 16-50 f3.5-5.6 OSS, 55-210 f4.6.3 OSS, 18-105 f4 PZ OSS, 50 f1.8 OSS.

For Panasonic: Lumix 12-35 f2.8 I, 12-60 f3.5-60 OIS, Oly 45 f1.8, PL 15mm f1.7, PL 24 f1.4, Olympus 14-150, 45-150.

For Canon: ef 85 f1.8 usm, ef-s 10-22 f3.5-4.5, ef 70-200 f2.8L IS, efs 18-135 STM, 50mm f1.8 STM, he Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 Di.
Plan to get an a6400, sony 70-350 OSS.

Love sports/action, portraits, candid, street, photography. Love doing weddings and happy events.

Comments

Total: 309, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

caterpillar: People use the expression, "elephant in the room." But what if instead you don't find the animal you expect in the room? That is what I have to ask myself as Olympus seems to be left out of the party.

So, what will Olympus do now? Ignore this alliance and continue what they were doing? Is this even sustainable? Would doing nothing be tantamount to suicide?

Or, can they join in this alliance (if the 3 let's them)? But I think the big question for Olympus is - will they have the resources, patience, and endurance to go for a 35FF camera in conjunction with MFT? This is a substancial commitment and big bucks are involved that will be let out the next 1.5-2 decades.

@Dr_jon - The margins on crop sensor depends on which market you are addressing. If you are playing in the low end as the M series are, your margins are small. Assuming a company makes 20% per unit sold, 20% of U$500 is U$100. But 20% of U$2,000 is U$800! So, you have to sell 8x more to get to 1 And I doubt if Canon is even raking in 20% margins on the low end. It's more like 10% on avg for those U$450-650 models. Is this any wonder that after the release of the A7-3 all suddenly went 35FF MILC?

Building a new system is expensive and will take a long time. The investment needed is huge and it goes on for decades. Without prior R&D too, one can't simply dip into serious MILC and just be 1 generation behind. The Z and R cameras shows this lack of R&D. And the "experience" on the N1 and M series does not help because these cameras are there only for show. They don't have mid and advanced DSLR performance.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2018 at 23:51 UTC

Three things:

- This just shows the room in the 35FF MILC is promising and there is profit to be made there, even for niche players. There are now 5 who have entered in this space the past 9 months! Sigma will likely have their own 35FF MILC too. Those who harp about market share better re-think that position because I doubt if any 1 company, even if it has 90% will sell 1M or even 800,000 units in a year. But the profits are way bigger here.

2 - Anybody who still thinks MILCs are a fad, retract now.

3 - Perhaps it is also time to put some ssd storage in cameras. A 64gb or even 32gb can be standard, especially if one is just going to offer 1 card slot.

Though others will find faults with this camera, this is welcome news and I congratulate Zeiss for their own efforts! The more to the party, the better!

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2018 at 01:19 UTC as 253rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

caterpillar: People use the expression, "elephant in the room." But what if instead you don't find the animal you expect in the room? That is what I have to ask myself as Olympus seems to be left out of the party.

So, what will Olympus do now? Ignore this alliance and continue what they were doing? Is this even sustainable? Would doing nothing be tantamount to suicide?

Or, can they join in this alliance (if the 3 let's them)? But I think the big question for Olympus is - will they have the resources, patience, and endurance to go for a 35FF camera in conjunction with MFT? This is a substancial commitment and big bucks are involved that will be let out the next 1.5-2 decades.

@Dr_Jon - It's not the percentage that matters at this time. You can have 99% market share and not make money. Or that market is collapsing. It is shrinking as the smartphones eat the low end, and the 35FF is compressing it from the high end. Not much can be done now at the low end, and it would be foolish to keep fighting on that segment as it's not camera makers who will eat your lunch there.

The margins in the low end is so low that maybe you need to sell 20-30 cameras there to match the profit from a single A7-3 sale.

Canon may sell 1.5-1.8-M cameras in 1 year, and Sony maybe 400,000 A7-3's. But Sony will be reaping more profits from that. Is it any wonder that Panasonic and now Zeis has thrown their hat in 35FF MILC?

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2018 at 01:02 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: People use the expression, "elephant in the room." But what if instead you don't find the animal you expect in the room? That is what I have to ask myself as Olympus seems to be left out of the party.

So, what will Olympus do now? Ignore this alliance and continue what they were doing? Is this even sustainable? Would doing nothing be tantamount to suicide?

Or, can they join in this alliance (if the 3 let's them)? But I think the big question for Olympus is - will they have the resources, patience, and endurance to go for a 35FF camera in conjunction with MFT? This is a substancial commitment and big bucks are involved that will be let out the next 1.5-2 decades.

@Greg OH - how can there be an elephant in the room if we can't see it? If it is going to be in the room in 3-5 years from now, that is not an elephant in the room now! In 3-5 years, Sony will have a mark 4 or 5. Global shutter will likely be implemented even in aps-c mode. All the other criticism on Sony will have been addressed. By the time Canikon gets to be an A7-3, the A7-5 will be so far away doing 4k-60p, maybe even 8k-24p in some models even on crop mode!

I doubt even if they have an elephant by that time because they don't have the tech to do those things. And their R&D seems to be going elsewhere. And if you think that the tech required is just casual, think again because it took Sony 5 years to get to where the A7-3 is. It's not a single tech they have to catch up.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2018 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: People use the expression, "elephant in the room." But what if instead you don't find the animal you expect in the room? That is what I have to ask myself as Olympus seems to be left out of the party.

So, what will Olympus do now? Ignore this alliance and continue what they were doing? Is this even sustainable? Would doing nothing be tantamount to suicide?

Or, can they join in this alliance (if the 3 let's them)? But I think the big question for Olympus is - will they have the resources, patience, and endurance to go for a 35FF camera in conjunction with MFT? This is a substancial commitment and big bucks are involved that will be let out the next 1.5-2 decades.

@AlexisH - Both Olympus and Panasonic are the std bearers of MFT. If one of the 2 proponents is building a 35FF MILC, what is Olympus fall back if MFT market share folds? Will it just keel over and die? Is that your position? Remember - you are invested in MFT, then you too will find your lenses have no future bodies to hope for, much the same way 4/3 cameras and lenses are now orphans.

Your "retarded" FF products are the ones making the money. You can insult it all you want, but you seem to be ignoring the reality before you - Panasonic, Canon, and Nikon are going "retarded" FF.

The proper question is not what is missing in 35FF that MFT has.
The proper question is - What MFT can never do vs 35FF:
- wide dynamic range
- high iso performance in low light
- ability to go 42mp & higher in the future
- The ability to shoot aps-c or super 35 video
- a responsive AF-C in photo and video good enough even for action shots
- get the 35FF "look"

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2018 at 12:59 UTC
In reply to:

RED i: Panic attack statements now that Panasonic/Leica/Sigma consortium is about to hit the market.

@Olymore, et al - People keep harping the market share. But you folks check two things:
1 - Look at the current FS of Canon the past 2 quarters. Market share due to selling M cameras is up, but profits are down vs the same period last Fiscal year.

2 - If everyone is doing just fine with their market share, why the sudden desire to come up with a 35FF MILC? 3 companies, suddenly decided to build a 35FF MILC almost all at the same time? Are these 3 companies talking to each other? Why so sudden?
IF all is dandy as it is, why suddenly build a new mount and lens lineup? Isn't all peachy as it is? If all is well, then it should just be business as usual.

But it isn't. When the A7-3 came out, that was/is a game changer. Because, let's face it, the A7-3 is eating everybody's lunch. Market share mean squat when you are now not making money.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2018 at 03:48 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: People use the expression, "elephant in the room." But what if instead you don't find the animal you expect in the room? That is what I have to ask myself as Olympus seems to be left out of the party.

So, what will Olympus do now? Ignore this alliance and continue what they were doing? Is this even sustainable? Would doing nothing be tantamount to suicide?

Or, can they join in this alliance (if the 3 let's them)? But I think the big question for Olympus is - will they have the resources, patience, and endurance to go for a 35FF camera in conjunction with MFT? This is a substancial commitment and big bucks are involved that will be let out the next 1.5-2 decades.

@AlexisH - you should be concerned with what Olympus does. The fact that 3 companies are entering the 35FF means that it is an important market and it could spell the survival of a firm. Do you want Olympus to wither and die? I don't. The reality is - yes, MFT has its advantages, but to survive, maybe it's time to grow a larger sensor.

A true fool ignores the reality happening hoping they go away or is exempted from their effects, like an ostrich who buries his head on the ground. Even if you don't own an Olympus, their existence help keep everyone on their toes. Sony has to step up IBIS because Olympus set the standard for a good IBIS. Sony improved their video because Panasonic upped their game in video. And mind you, Sony does not do MFT. .Even if you don't need or want MFT. Competition is good. Only a fool or someone with a narrow perspective can't see this. .

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2018 at 03:41 UTC
In reply to:

RED i: Panic attack statements now that Panasonic/Leica/Sigma consortium is about to hit the market.

@Edgar_in_Indy - correct! It's as if 99% of the population want, need, and can even afford a U$6000 f0.95 lens! And for something that much without even AF! And people forget how heavy and large these lenses can be. And it's as if these are even available already!

Moreover, what use is a f0.95 or f1.0 when your camera can't even do decent eye-AF in AF-C, or crops heavily in video, can only do 5fps, no IBIS, etc. etc with f4 lenses?! It will take Canikon 3-5 years to level up to the A7-3, and its as if Sony, Fuji, and Panasonic are just going to sit and let Canikon catch up! This is both in lenses and cameras!

In reality, f1.8 is good enough for 97% of the population. F1.4 is plenty just right in terms of size, weight, and cost for those who really want it. And Sony's 12-24 and 16-35 f2.8 zooms has shown that you don't need 55mm throat diam to produce good wide angle glass.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2018 at 23:57 UTC

People use the expression, "elephant in the room." But what if instead you don't find the animal you expect in the room? That is what I have to ask myself as Olympus seems to be left out of the party.

So, what will Olympus do now? Ignore this alliance and continue what they were doing? Is this even sustainable? Would doing nothing be tantamount to suicide?

Or, can they join in this alliance (if the 3 let's them)? But I think the big question for Olympus is - will they have the resources, patience, and endurance to go for a 35FF camera in conjunction with MFT? This is a substancial commitment and big bucks are involved that will be let out the next 1.5-2 decades.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2018 at 15:46 UTC as 14th comment | 28 replies

Panasonic is smart - tthey are targetting the events/wedding pros. Just like Sony did with the A7-3. The lenses first to be out is the give-away. The only thing it lacks is a 16-35 f2.8, but I am sure, they'll have that before the end of 2019. And maybe a 35 f1.8 too.

Meanwhile, Canikon's target is their own user base. They are just out to stop the bleeding. Panny is out to get Canikon and Sony's pro shooters. But mostly, they will get those from Canikon as the A7-3's lead will prevent many from switching. And it's not as if Sony will not release a 4k-60p A7S-3.

IF this camera is as good as the specs, Canikon will have to release a mk-2 by Sept-Oct 2019. The trouble is, can they level up to what Panny, Sony, and Fuji is doing?

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2018 at 15:39 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

caterpillar: The goal of the R is stop the bleeding, hence the need to make it look and feel like a DSLR. It put its money on things that will make a Canon user feel familiar and at home. But lacking the tech means it is crippled in so many areas. Ver 1 is going to be problematic, but it only need to be good enough for the fans. For those who already got the a7-3 or a7r-3, most will not switch back. The high cost is also a barrier of entertaining a 2 system ownership. So, only those still within Canon will consider this. It is also doubtful if many Nikonians will shift.

Canon will succeed in stopping if not slowing down the migration with this one. But the high cost is a serious barrier. The lack of lenses, and many other things heaped upon Sony and others will soon haunt them as many will soon learn. Hopefully, many will realize that making so-so M MILCs is far different from making a MILC that can perform like a true DSLR, or match up to something as good as the A7-3 or now, the XT-3.

@ozturert - That is easy to explain. Their market share came from selling cheap M cameras. I would not boast about that either because the proof is in their FS. Go check it out. Their market share is up due to the M series, but look at their profits, after expenses. it is down. That is not good. Check out Sony's FS, profits are up.

And if market share is a benchmark of health alone, then, as I always point out, why even try to suddenly make a 35FF MILC with a new mount, a lens system you have to build in years and decades? Surely, all Canon need to do is like what they have done before - NOTHING.

But everybody is scrambling. Even Pansonic seems to be ready to jump to it too. or at least go larger sensor. Why? IF marketshare is such a deal breaker in this case, why the rush to create a NEW SYSTEM?

That's not all. It seems Canon is also shifting its R&D expenses to elsewhere. Cameras are high tech products. Without it, you will eventually wither & die, unless you outsource it.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2018 at 01:36 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: The goal of the R is stop the bleeding, hence the need to make it look and feel like a DSLR. It put its money on things that will make a Canon user feel familiar and at home. But lacking the tech means it is crippled in so many areas. Ver 1 is going to be problematic, but it only need to be good enough for the fans. For those who already got the a7-3 or a7r-3, most will not switch back. The high cost is also a barrier of entertaining a 2 system ownership. So, only those still within Canon will consider this. It is also doubtful if many Nikonians will shift.

Canon will succeed in stopping if not slowing down the migration with this one. But the high cost is a serious barrier. The lack of lenses, and many other things heaped upon Sony and others will soon haunt them as many will soon learn. Hopefully, many will realize that making so-so M MILCs is far different from making a MILC that can perform like a true DSLR, or match up to something as good as the A7-3 or now, the XT-3.

@Jyppy - At today is just suddenly the right time? If they were preparing then and just waiting for the right time, these gochas in specs and performance would not have happened. They would have IBIS, they would have AF-C in fast frame rates, not SLR days speeds, etc. And Nikon would not have to outsource many of the tech just to keep up. It may not be for you, but most wedding shooters say otherwise.

IF Sony guys are just living on specs, how do you explain the brisk sales of the A7-3? And how can one justify the weak if not mediocre specs of the R? Is only a good EVF or 4:2:2 your selling point? What about 10fps with AF-C? Or a really functioning eye focus even at video, no 4k-cropping and long battery life? Having 2 card slots is also not a high tech thing to put in a U$2,300 camera? I'm not even putting in DR and high ISO performance!

People seem to be ignoring the more critical functions of a camera. The brisk sales and out of stock status of the A7-3 is the proof of that.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2018 at 01:11 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: The goal of the R is stop the bleeding, hence the need to make it look and feel like a DSLR. It put its money on things that will make a Canon user feel familiar and at home. But lacking the tech means it is crippled in so many areas. Ver 1 is going to be problematic, but it only need to be good enough for the fans. For those who already got the a7-3 or a7r-3, most will not switch back. The high cost is also a barrier of entertaining a 2 system ownership. So, only those still within Canon will consider this. It is also doubtful if many Nikonians will shift.

Canon will succeed in stopping if not slowing down the migration with this one. But the high cost is a serious barrier. The lack of lenses, and many other things heaped upon Sony and others will soon haunt them as many will soon learn. Hopefully, many will realize that making so-so M MILCs is far different from making a MILC that can perform like a true DSLR, or match up to something as good as the A7-3 or now, the XT-3.

@ozturert - those are design decisions and remember the A9 is ver 1. It will havee those annoyances. Not any difference when in 1-2 months, R and Z users will discover their pet peeve.

The small things that OEMs do sometimes can pile up. Like that gray focusing point being gray. And some of them are compromises to lower the cost. People bring up the less clear A7-3 EVF, but then again, people seem to miss that though the R has way better EVF, it costs U$2,300, and it cannot AF-C with eye-focus, has a 1.7x crop in 4k, no 1080p, no dual card slot, no IBIS, 5fps AF-C, etc etc. I don't know about you, but I would not give up those for a bright EVF, dull AF points,

I beg to disagree on market leaders being just followers at first. It's not always the case. Motorola, Polaroid, kodak, IBM, MS, Apple, etc were first and had decades of lead that were only surpassed way later on. Soon Tesla will join this group as well. Leaders fall behind in high tech when they fail to innovate.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2018 at 09:05 UTC
In reply to:

mariuss: I was waiting since Canon 5d Mark II for a Canon camera that it is a good still camera (with good DR) and that is good for video too.
I keep hearing "well, just wait till the next camera comes". Waiting was not a problem for me 10 years ago.
But someday you woke up and you realize you wont live forever and then, waiting ... is a problem.

@Mariuss - I am glad people are starting to wise up. I am a bit lucky, I graduated from course in grad school that taught us how to read tech "tea leaves!" By 2012, I was already suspicious of what Canon was doing, in spite of the success of the 5d2. By 2015-16, my suspicions were confirmed that they will just coast along as long as they can. That's when I got my first MILC, the sony nex-5t, on a closing sale.

I've waited long too. The only saving grace was I was not shooting pro anymore by around 2010, even non-pro till around 2016. Nikon was not an option because the use of 1" for a MILC is laughable. That has no future. I don't even have to analyze that in depth. It was only Sony that was pushing the tech envelop deeper and faster. So, I knew I just had to wait 4-5 years in 2016 for things to gel. But I was wrong. They got it right by Jan 2018. They exceeded expectations in the A7-3 and I was spared 2 years of waiting!

Canon will take 3-5 years for them to match the a7-3.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 23:11 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: The goal of the R is stop the bleeding, hence the need to make it look and feel like a DSLR. It put its money on things that will make a Canon user feel familiar and at home. But lacking the tech means it is crippled in so many areas. Ver 1 is going to be problematic, but it only need to be good enough for the fans. For those who already got the a7-3 or a7r-3, most will not switch back. The high cost is also a barrier of entertaining a 2 system ownership. So, only those still within Canon will consider this. It is also doubtful if many Nikonians will shift.

Canon will succeed in stopping if not slowing down the migration with this one. But the high cost is a serious barrier. The lack of lenses, and many other things heaped upon Sony and others will soon haunt them as many will soon learn. Hopefully, many will realize that making so-so M MILCs is far different from making a MILC that can perform like a true DSLR, or match up to something as good as the A7-3 or now, the XT-3.

@ozturet - we in the MILC world knew that years ago. It has been dismissed by some DSLR die-hards though.

But it isn't just the lowering of cost. If it were so, why didn't Canikon fully embrace MILC 5 years ago? Why not start the transition even if takes 10-15 years? They only acted now because they got sideswiped by the A7-3. Suddenly, this camera is way better than the 5d4 & way cheaper by U$1,300 then.

There's also more to making a truly competitive MILC. What happened to the N1 and the relegated low end M series shows that if you don't do the R&D properly you get mediocre MILCs. Translate that to an A7-3 beater, and you can't match up. Now, the xt-3 have set another high bar for Canikon in the aps-c segment. If the XT-3 is 35FF MILC, it would even outperform Canikon's offerings.

Now the A7-3, A7R-3, A9 and XT-3 is showing that dslr's now can never be on par with high performing MILCs. This is the start of the death of DSLRs. It will be a long slow one.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 23:01 UTC
In reply to:

caterpillar: The goal of the R is stop the bleeding, hence the need to make it look and feel like a DSLR. It put its money on things that will make a Canon user feel familiar and at home. But lacking the tech means it is crippled in so many areas. Ver 1 is going to be problematic, but it only need to be good enough for the fans. For those who already got the a7-3 or a7r-3, most will not switch back. The high cost is also a barrier of entertaining a 2 system ownership. So, only those still within Canon will consider this. It is also doubtful if many Nikonians will shift.

Canon will succeed in stopping if not slowing down the migration with this one. But the high cost is a serious barrier. The lack of lenses, and many other things heaped upon Sony and others will soon haunt them as many will soon learn. Hopefully, many will realize that making so-so M MILCs is far different from making a MILC that can perform like a true DSLR, or match up to something as good as the A7-3 or now, the XT-3.

@Paul Jones - to some even if slaps them in the face, they will never know. The fact that suddenly, after years of silence, both Nikon and Canon just decided to build a truly competitive MILC? After 9 months of theh A7-3 release? And Panasonic is likely to join the fray too?

All Canon and Nikon have to do is nothing if there is no bleeding. Why rush and build a new lens lineup which they have to populate in the coming years? Why the rush? Is there any other reason except, the bleeding is real?

As far as SOFP goes, Canon have have the U$450-650 segment. They'll just keep a token of 1 or 2 models there as place holders. Sony even has the 5 year old a5100 and a6000 fronting that segment vs the newer m100 and m6. Ever wonder why?

It is obvious that Canon is winning the numbers war in the low segment, while Sony is selling few A7-3's and A7-2's but reaping more profits.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 13:27 UTC
In reply to:

Solophotog: I realize, as many have said here, Canon may have been worried about releasing a new body that directly competes against its DSLR line. Still..... I don't get how you put out a camera with a high performance AF system (5,000 points) and sensor, but mediocre FPS in servo mode? If the R had fewer AF points it would make sense. If it had fewer AF points and the sensor from the 6D2 and a lower price point, Canon might have a good teaser entry camera ....and admittedly one that looks like the Nikon Z6.
By the way, no one has mentioned the elephant in the room: Does a new camera system come with a new flash system? How long before it's goodbye EX-RT?

@Solophotog - the answer is simple - the current sensor tech does not have the bandwith or data path to handle all those AF points, and/or thee digic processor is weak and innefficient. It too cannot handle the load. This is the reason for the 4k 1.7x crop, lack of 1080-120p, AF-S only one eye-focus, low framerate, etc.

As for the elephant in the room. There is none. Those flashes will work the same as with dslrs.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 12:33 UTC
In reply to:

Klipsi: I like the EOS R because of my specific needs . I shoot flying vultures and basejumpers. I use my 80D for vultures on the ground because of added crop zoom and ultrafast dual-pixel AF. But catching them in flight I need the use of the eye view finder for better tracking, and this is why I got me a handycam. Now EOS R with 4K at x1.7 crop is great , it turns my 600mm lens into a 1020mm telescope, with image stabilization doubled ( in-camera and in-lens ).
By the way do you know if the great 3-10 crop in video as found on 80D still exists in the EOS R ? Maybe only in 1080p ?
here are some of my vultures and basejumpers vids
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Lo8tp57SMg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z9oxo45IHU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_FAoS31rbk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFR6MLeMdIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImxYsuYkqXk
sure I'm pretty happy with my current tools, 80D, 6D, Sony AX53, but now I want to try the EOS R , hahahaha...

@klipsi - You also get that with the A7-3 though at 1.5x crop optically. But Sony has Clearimage zoom that further gives another 1.5x zoom which is amazingly still sharp for a "digital zoom." The image is hardly compromised. That 600mm effectively becomes 1,350mm FOV. This is in 4k or in 1080p. In photo, you can go as high as 2x on ClearImage zoom.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 12:24 UTC

The goal of the R is stop the bleeding, hence the need to make it look and feel like a DSLR. It put its money on things that will make a Canon user feel familiar and at home. But lacking the tech means it is crippled in so many areas. Ver 1 is going to be problematic, but it only need to be good enough for the fans. For those who already got the a7-3 or a7r-3, most will not switch back. The high cost is also a barrier of entertaining a 2 system ownership. So, only those still within Canon will consider this. It is also doubtful if many Nikonians will shift.

Canon will succeed in stopping if not slowing down the migration with this one. But the high cost is a serious barrier. The lack of lenses, and many other things heaped upon Sony and others will soon haunt them as many will soon learn. Hopefully, many will realize that making so-so M MILCs is far different from making a MILC that can perform like a true DSLR, or match up to something as good as the A7-3 or now, the XT-3.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2018 at 12:02 UTC as 77th comment | 12 replies
On article CIPA: Sizable drop in camera shipments for July (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Ona 4 day trip last month I ran into 3 people still using the original 5D. They forked over $3000 back in the day and they're done. It got me thinking, for the average user who bought a good camera within the last 5 years, other than video, what would they gain by purchasing yet another camera? I still use my D700 sometimes; the results look fine and the popup flash is really handy for triggering the SB-800s.

@Photo_Genius - agree. Same reason here. Maybe some need the 10-bit, 4:2:2, etc, and in the future, these will be the new baseline, but for me, and for most, 8-bit, 4:2:0 or and 4k-30p is enough.

People think of video as separate. Many literally hate it or think it is a useless feature. I sometimes think of video as just a series of photographs strung together. When the A9-2 comes out a 24fps x 24mp, then people will realize that video is such as that. Even 4k is just 24 or 30fps x 8mp still strung together. If you are shooting sports, you can have this framerate if you are just fine with 8mp stills. If you look at it this way, it does open up possibilities for sports/action shooting.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2018 at 22:32 UTC
Total: 309, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »