rallyfan

rallyfan

Lives in Wakanda
Works as a Professional
Joined on Feb 5, 2011

Comments

Total: 460, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1257 comments in total)

My only reservation has nothing to do with lens selection, as I don't care at all about shallow DOF.

It has to do with Samsung customer service.

The Canon reps have always been relatively responsive. Also the Oly people.

The camera itself seems absolutely great; finally something that can track moving objects in real life.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 15:26 UTC as 129th comment | 1 reply
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProstheticEmpathy: I see a lot of 'not the target audience' comments, but I don't feel like I've had a clear explanation of who the target audience actually is.

It's simple.

People that like the product and agree with the editorial are the target audience. They are also generally not commenting because they are working professionals and generally an order of magnitude better than anyone else. This is the revolutionary convergence product that they will use to go back to the 1960s via time travel and get both stills and conclusive video of the Kennedy assassination.

People that don't like the product and don't agree with the article should consider the possibility that they are unemployed for good reason, clueless, and a troll. Not only are they not the target audience, but they really aren't good videographers either.

Or something along those lines.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 15:20 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)

Truth be told, I can use a camera that's well built, can capture video and stills, will withstand a reasonable amount of humidity in the atmosphere, has excellent high ISO performance, will integrate into a WiFi network for file transfers, and will operate from a plugged-in power supply.

In fact I could use two. They'd be in fixed installations and operate at temps up to 35C and I'd use them to track moving objects, working with maybe as low as 100 lux.

I get the impression I'm not the target audience here either though. If it's not the tech, it's certainly the price.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 05:49 UTC as 54th comment
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: One simple question to Dpreview. With hindsight at your disposal would you still have produced this opinion piece or would you just have left it at the press release and moved on? Basically, was it worth the effort to produce this article in your opinion?

There's a saying, I believe it's Iberian but I also believe it applies globally: "Where there are two people there will be three opinions" or something to that effect. Very wise.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 05:41 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

tkbslc: Well I didn't agree with this article, but either way 690 comments and counting means it was a win for the author and the site. Lots of traffic for sure.

The article itself is a success and in fact it may serve the site better to post articles like this rather than articles that seem more logical to the more vocal readers. Clicks are clicks and they must translate to funding at some point; otherwise, nobody would care about clicks.

I suspect even the camera will be a success, for the reasons I stated earlier: I don't think sales will go to individuals but rather to multi-unit orders (for fixed installations and/or field work among employees, for example) and Canon is a "safe" buy.

Since Canon is "safe" the camera will sell.

The innovations listed in the article were generally true innovations; however, they've generally been introduced elsewhere previously, in other cameras or devices -- including by... Canon.

Do I hate Canon or any other camera maker? No.

Is the site is independent? No. We're talking about legal relationships among entities. A owns B.

Is the article written in good faith? Yes.

Is the article correct? No.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2015 at 05:37 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: Canon creates another tool for working pros that, once again, sends armchair hobbyists stomping about madly and foaming at the mouth with rage and resentment because the product wasn't designed for them and isn't priced for them either. Boohoo! How dare Canon put pros before trolls! Let's teach Canon a lesson by running out right now and buying all the A7s, A6000s, FZ1000s, and GH4s we can find, then put our Canon lenses on them. I bet that'll show Canon who's boss. :))

Fantastic video, thanks for that! Very cheerful!

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 21:49 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: One simple question to Dpreview. With hindsight at your disposal would you still have produced this opinion piece or would you just have left it at the press release and moved on? Basically, was it worth the effort to produce this article in your opinion?

So the target audience does agree with the article?

Is the target audience commenting?

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 21:45 UTC
In reply to:

Jon H Laake: I bought a leather case for my rx100 mk I from China. It provides all the grip you'll ever need for a dimunitive camera like this. About 10 USD on eBay.

Thanks!

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 20:41 UTC
In reply to:

Jon H Laake: I bought a leather case for my rx100 mk I from China. It provides all the grip you'll ever need for a dimunitive camera like this. About 10 USD on eBay.

Those cases look nice! I was looking at those. Did it arrive quickly?

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 16:40 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

IEBA1: I agree with all the posts that wonder about the point of this article. Given how few "opinion" pieces are on DPreview, why the XC10 gets a positive opinion piece makes the whole web site suspect.

I laughed out loud at: "The XC10 represents an important step on the path to convergence between the still and video imaging worlds, though it’s important to recognize that it’s an early step."

Wha? Can you even find a camera any more that doesn't do both?

Years ago, I hacked a GH2 for fantastic video, stills, and augmented it to use cine servo zoom lenses for capabilities still lenses simply cannot provide. Last year I upgraded to a GH4 and haven't looked back. It is a stellar tool. You can see gobs of my technical videos here:

https://www.youtube.com/user/IEBAcom/videos

The only unique feature is the rotatable grip. Something I had on my first HD camcorder, the JVC GR-HD1. Yes, I'm an early adopter. Thats why it bugs me when I see article like this that are _years_ behind the curve.

Yes, exactly: the market muscle to sell institutions a high priced but under-featured camera that can't match the GH4. Thinking about that statement, I believe you're correct. They do have that power and they will probably succeed.

I don't think the camera has to have different features. I think companies will buy this in sets of 2 or more rather than individuals.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 20:36 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I understand the argument that someone shooting ENG could want 4:2:2 and extremely high bit rates to satisfy a broadcast station requirement. However, what are they doing now if that requirement exists today? Have you ever had ENG footage rejected because it wasn’t 4:2:2? No cameras in this price range shoot 4K 4:2:2 internally right now. So does that mean that 4K is not used at all for ENG shooting?

In reality I am not sure that ENG shooters are even ready for 4K. It would be nearly impossible to transfer native 4K files with these high bit rates from the field. They would certainly have to transcode it down to heavily compressed 1080p at the very least. Then the benefit of high bit rate 4K would be lost.

Also the viewfinder is essential for outdoor field work like this. With the large viewfinder in place this camera is not small anymore. In addition the viewfinder appears to be attached to the LCD screen. That really does not look to be very durable at all.

No. In fairness the pivoting body and pivoting LCD accomplish two different things. Consider this: instead of looking at the former as a pivoting body, flip roles and look at is as a pivoting grip. Then the ergonomics become apparent. So the pivoting body is useful. The pivoting LCD is also useful.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 20:31 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)

It could very well be that few people will buy a single copy of this device, but many organisations will buy 10 or 20 copies. I think Canon may be to video equipment what IBM used to be to computer equipment: Nobody ever got fired buying IBM, the saying went, and so maybe today nobody ever got fired buying Canon. They're "safe" for the guy signing the purchase order.

Whether the product is innovative may not actually matter as much as the label. Canon may use the tech seen here, in an evolved form, in future cams or camcorders or whatever -- including suppositories... What matters is they may be filling a line item on any number of purchase orders etc.

Meanwhile, DPR killed several birds with one stone by running several pieces on the device: the anticipated responses to the claims here generated site traffic; Canonisti arrived to defend the indefensible, somebody at Amazon might be happily counting clicks, and in the final analysis, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 20:25 UTC as 70th comment | 12 replies
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike99999: Canon informercial from a site sponsored by Canon. No surprises here...

This camera is a RX10-clone disguised to look like something better. The RX-10 has a target audience, but for 4K use I don't see why anyone would choose this Canon over the flexibility of a GH4.

I think it'd be more fair to Canon to recognize that people do like the 5DII video capabilities though. Pricing, size, etc. come into play but realistically Canon have made significant steps, just as Panasonic have.

The question is, will the XC10 be viewed as a significant step?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 07:40 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

jukeboxjohnnie: Yes but photography is mainly a stills hobby I couldn't care less about video I've never used it on my camera since digital started

Aha! OK!

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 07:38 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

ozturert: I don't need this camera but I can see how useful this can be for some.
Ups, sorry! I should have said "this is an extremely expensive and nonsense camera. my FZ1000 is much better and cheap!" :)

You're generally correct; your FZ is better and cheap.

There may be a user base for this, and there may be ways in which this is better than the FZ. However, no amount of optimism or stretching will make this the ground-breaking revelation that Canon or the media apparently want it to be.

It seems to be a decent camcorder with the capabilities of a P&S stills digicam, or vice-versa. I don't think it's capable of cold fusion and sincerely doubt it will even come close to curing cancer.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 07:33 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

jukeboxjohnnie: Yes but photography is mainly a stills hobby I couldn't care less about video I've never used it on my camera since digital started

Cool story bro.

Why are you reading about a camcorder?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 07:28 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)

If the XC10 were a big deal, would it need press pieces explaining that it's a big deal?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 07:28 UTC as 146th comment | 1 reply
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

bluevellet: lol

more people claim to have had this camera than those who claim to own it or just want to own it.

That is funny.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 05:24 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Why would I buy this when the Panasonic FZ1000 is only a fraction of the cost? Someone please enlighten me regarding this outrageous price tag :)

Wait, if we can only speculate about the build quality of the Canon, we're using its weight as some sort of indication that it's more resilient than the FZ? So if it weighed another 2 kg, would it then be even better?...

People are using mobile phones and their videos are run on CNN.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 05:11 UTC
On article Opinion: Why the Canon XC10 is a big deal (811 comments in total)

Could this find a market as an entry-level pro webcam? The browser interface is actually a good choice IMO. Sound could be an issue with no XLRs but I suppose unbalanced lines could work.

Thoughts?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 05:03 UTC as 160th comment | 2 replies
Total: 460, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »