Le Kilt
Lives in
South-West, France
Works as a
Searching for Light
Joined on
Mar 28, 2005
|
Comments
 |  |  |
| Sunrise by Xiaomao from My Best Photo of the Fortnight | Mandarin Drake by TheDispossessed from Ducks Unlimited | As in Days of Old by Birdman50 from Down on the farm |
Like many I will get the R7 as a second body for its extra reach, or pixels per bird. It will replace my 90D.
We've been waiting for a replacement for the 7D MkII that is...8 years old!
Let's hope a R7 Mk II won't be 8 years away.
My 5D Mk IV is to be replaced by an R5 for medium to ultra-wide angle and low light shooting, and the R7 will have a 100-400 or 100-500 glued to it for the distant and wildlife stuff.
As has been said, a one of a kind, which Canon filled with loads of features for the time such as an intervalometer and even Focus bracketing, and a great lens.
I had a lot of fun with mine and still have it in the cupboard, poor thing. I didn't upgrade until the 5D came out and went for that and all the followind 5D series.
I was always disappointed that they never updated it, with updates to the sensor and screen it could have been a continued success.
Not much info about 'getting' the pics and videos.
I presume we must use the application to access them?
Can we download and edit them with any other software?
Can we access them from a PC and download them without a phone?
These and other questions may be answered someday :-)
7R...?
Please Canon, let the next R be a high density crop-sensor 7R :-)
With the new 100-500mm it could be a great bird catcher!
(wih F/11 focusing of course, for use with a 1.4X, please)
DPReview007: This is a fine, affordable FF camera. The issue is the competition: an iPhone will produce higher DR (through software), and it might even do higher quality video in some circumstances. And it won't weigh you down.
Just think about it for a second. If a newly released FF camera can't beat an iPhone in many of the features where it really should, no wonder the market is shrinking, $1,299 or not...
@DPReview007
Oh dear, so you now have to contradict yourself. Good for you!
RichardSwearinger: My goal is to make my friends die of envy, and to that point does this camera give you the ability to process your raw files in camera?
If so, that would make it the ideal travel camera—shoot all day, then at mealtimes, process and upload to the socials.
Lacking in-camera raw processing, how well do the different picture modes work on the jpegs? Are they relatively malleable?
The RP does have in-camera RAW processing. You can adjust a bunch of settings and produce extra JPGs.
So maybe you won't need the Ferrari ;-)
RTFM page 325 :-)
DPReview007: This is a fine, affordable FF camera. The issue is the competition: an iPhone will produce higher DR (through software), and it might even do higher quality video in some circumstances. And it won't weigh you down.
Just think about it for a second. If a newly released FF camera can't beat an iPhone in many of the features where it really should, no wonder the market is shrinking, $1,299 or not...
@DPReview007
RTFM - the RP does do HDR in camera, combining several shots to obtain higher DR, automatically aligning shots if handheld and necessary.
something you CAN do with the RP without a tripod and extra work in post.
This is not an opinion. It's a fact. Try it!
If you're going to use Facebook, don't use any of the apps.
Reactive: I can't see the problem here. All modern phones are designed to use huge amounts of computational photography to generate an artificial image that never hit the sensor. So who's to say the phone's powerful algorithms couldn't have invented exactly the same set of pixels as the SLR's photo? It's not like Samsung are providing fake scientifically measured data, just an impression.
Lazy idiots. I'm sure many of us would produce as good or better examples directly from the phone.
Indeed, Lazy idiots.
confused circle: Why is the ability to take useless shots at 3000mm equivalent seen as a feature? You can also take pictures with the lens cap on, doesn't mean that the output is worth advertising.
The P1000 is unique, and for good reason. Everyone else realizes there's no point in doing it.
@User9070981109 Erm, yeah.
The only point I'm making here is that the P1000 can get you cool pics at 3000mm.
BinHereBe4: 1cm minimum focus distance (at wide-angle)
Isn't that measured from sensor?
If so, how is that possible with foot long lens? :D
They probably mean the 'working distance' at 24mm , i.e. from the front of the lens - which of course varies as you zoom in.
As you say, MFD is measured from the sensor.
Curious to know the MFD at 3000mm!
confused circle: Why is the ability to take useless shots at 3000mm equivalent seen as a feature? You can also take pictures with the lens cap on, doesn't mean that the output is worth advertising.
The P1000 is unique, and for good reason. Everyone else realizes there's no point in doing it.
A lot depends on the camera and lens, you're comparing a bad experience with a $440 Kodak camera with a $1000 Nikon camera that you haven't tried.
Some of the pics from the P1000 are amazing, like the heron's head at 3000mm.
You may not get 100% keepers, but the raw of pic 57 shows you can get amazing quality from a 3000mm with that sensor when the conditions and your technique are good. The detail in the eye is surprisingly good. The jpg doesn't do it justice.
I've got soma great pro equipment, but I would love to play with this just for the 3000mm!
Gerhard1042: I saw Mr E-Davies P 1000 Moon shot about 1 Month ago. I have a Canon Powershot SX60 HS and like to take pictures of the Moon. So it was nice to compare. Of course one always has to consider different conditions like clarity of sky etc. It was no surprise to me that I could see more details in Mr E-Davies' shot than in my pictures. 3,000 mm equivalent optical focal length are superior to equivalent 1,365 mm, if the lenses have the same kind of optical quality. So to my opinion the Nikon P 1000 is probably the best camera on the market for pictures of the Moon. Of course people can get better pictures using cameras with a telescope and special processing. But if you just take a camera and take a shot of the Moon you do not get further with anything else. Even the most expensive SLR camera with full format sensor and a professional 1,000mm lens will not beat it.
Agreed, this is a camera for those who love to zoom in!
I'll have to dig out (or take fresh ones) a moon shot with my 80D + 100-400 II + 1.4xTC + 2xTC (1792mm f/16 equiv) and see how they compare.
Of course, the price doesn't compare!
confused circle: Why is the ability to take useless shots at 3000mm equivalent seen as a feature? You can also take pictures with the lens cap on, doesn't mean that the output is worth advertising.
The P1000 is unique, and for good reason. Everyone else realizes there's no point in doing it.
Even if the quality isn't outstanding, if you learn to use it well, 3000mm will get you some very cool pics indeed that you just can't get with a shorter lens. There is mothing else like it at that price.
Of course, if you've never used ver long telephotos, you won't realise the potential of a 3000mm lens, and hey, that's ok.
Elaka Farmor: Good article! Of cause no time lapse in the (Canon) house?!
yes they're finally putting it in all their recent bodies.
There's an option to convert a timelapse into a 4K video in camera.
chriswilliams10: Wonder what owners of the RX100V think of the new RX100VA?? The changes seem like they might have been accomplished by Sony via firmware update... Personally I'd be a little miffed at Sony but maybe the changes were more than Sony could push via firmware...
The VA body is identical to the V.
Do you need an intervalometer? Not available on the VA.
Tungsten Nordstein: I want something very cool-looking. Stealth no-frills design. Matt black, rubber hand-grip.. Small. Well-designed ergonomics. Single hand-operation. A few simple controls. Small prime lenses. I don't want a fake viewfinder – optical or nothing. Titanium alloy body. I want the old Nikon logo. No greens or reds on the body. No LEDs. I want Nikon to go back to the their classic F1 camera era, the S2 model or the compact 28Ti and use that as a starting point for the look and feel.
I can understand prefering optics, but you do lose TTL viewing :-/
Stujomo: Let's be honest while a new mirrorless from Nikon and Canon is exciting, for most it won't make a bit of difference to the pictures they take.
There are far too many looking for the magic bullet, the camera that is going to lift their average photos to something special.
The constant changing of gear does nothing to improve ones photos. If anything it make it harder because instead of mastering the gear one has, it is changed out for something else long before the gear has been learned inside out.
The cycle just continues over and over again and will continue forever.
It's time to wake up people, it's time to think about upgrading the photographer instead of the gear every 6 months.
Those cameras most of you are using today are great, learn to use them properly, learn to create the photos you want.
Learn about lighting and how to control it.
Get a decent tripod and use it when ever you can.
Stay away from gear forums, get out and take pictures.
You don't need another camera.
LOL, it's all too easy to invent a category of idiots doing the wrong thing just to be able to make some sweeping statements about them and give cheap or pointless advice.
:-)
Le Kilt: I can only see three things that are relevant to mirrorless, the rest are what every one wants in any decent camera.
One difference in mirrorless which could be a big advantage in some situations is video using the viewfinder.
Useful, but not dependant on mirrorless.
Tungsten Nordstein: I want something very cool-looking. Stealth no-frills design. Matt black, rubber hand-grip.. Small. Well-designed ergonomics. Single hand-operation. A few simple controls. Small prime lenses. I don't want a fake viewfinder – optical or nothing. Titanium alloy body. I want the old Nikon logo. No greens or reds on the body. No LEDs. I want Nikon to go back to the their classic F1 camera era, the S2 model or the compact 28Ti and use that as a starting point for the look and feel.
So you're happy with a rangefinder type viewfinder as on some of the Leicas?