Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10 »
 41 
 on: Today at 05:27:01 PM 
Started by Theodoros - Last post by Theodoros

Up!

 42 
 on: Today at 05:23:38 PM 
Started by Deardorff - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Perhaps my memory betrays me and please forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I do seem to remember you defending the Nikon wide T/S performance, in fact singing your own example's praises on several occasions in the not too distant past.

I continue to think that my copy of the 24mm is good when tilted, I have never claimed that it was great when shifted.

But I fail to see how that this is relevant to the discussion.

There is clearly a widespread view that Canon wide T/S are vastly superior, view I agree with overall since more people seem to use these lenses shifted (or to measure their performance when shifted), and I am saying that Nikon must be aware of this and will most probably fix it soon. I don't believe they consider my own little opinion about the tilted performance of my copy as over weighting the opinion of internet. I beleve that their lens release plan is overall rationally decided based on the overall feedback they are getting and based on a factual comparison of relative performance.

This common sense and I am frankly unsure what you are arguing with. Wink

Cheers,
Bernard

 43 
 on: Today at 05:17:24 PM 
Started by Deardorff - Last post by KLaban
Nowadays the Nikon wide T/S are probably the last example of lens category where the current level of performance isn't satisfactory for real world applications (not speaking about pixel peeping).

Perhaps my memory betrays me and please forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I do seem to remember you defending the Nikon wide T/S performance, in fact singing your own example's praises on several occasions in the not too distant past.

 44 
 on: Today at 05:11:34 PM 
Started by BobDavid - Last post by Diego Pigozzo
A casting agent from Hollywood picked it up to star in the TV show: "Maniacal Mailboxes Go Postal." I think the show is in rather poor taste.

Let me tell you: I really like both the creativity you put both in your photography and in your story-telling (and jokes Cheesy).

 45 
 on: Today at 05:06:57 PM 
Started by Harlem22 - Last post by Diego Pigozzo
Truly cute shots.
I personally prefer the second and third (but probably it's because on my monitor the first one looks a little overexposed).

BTW: the title is spot on  Grin

 46 
 on: Today at 05:02:12 PM 
Started by Alpenhause - Last post by Guillaumeperret
Be Careful with Alpenhause. I bought him a camera one year ago and he never send me anything. So he stole me 600 USD.
a lawsuit is pending against the person.

Guillaume Perret

 47 
 on: Today at 05:02:08 PM 
Started by Diego Pigozzo - Last post by Diego Pigozzo
I don't think it's a "cheap shot" as you put it, at all. I think you've used very good judgement in the post processing...
Anthony

I have to say that I find your comment quite interesting.
Due to my professional background I've never thought about post-processing as an "artistic choice", but reading your comment I think you have a good point, a point I have to think more about.

So, the end point is: your comment made my mind a little richer (and my ego a little happier, together with the other's comments Cheesy)



 48 
 on: Today at 05:01:41 PM 
Started by Alpenhause - Last post by Guillaumeperret
Be Careful with Alpenhause. I bought him a camera one year ago and he never send me anything. So he stole me 600 USD.
a lawsuit is pending against the person.

Guillaume Perret

 49 
 on: Today at 05:00:49 PM 
Started by Deardorff - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Insider information or just something you feel in your waters?

Simple logic. I don't remember a single occurence these past 10 years where a lens released by Canon/Nikon hasn't been overall superior to the existing version of the other guy's lens.

Nowadays the Nikon wide T/S are probably the last example of lens category where the current level of performance isn't satisfactory for real world applications (not speaking about pixel peeping). There is no way Nikon could not be totally aware of this. Remember, they see themselves as a higher end brand than Canon targeting a higher level of "performance". I am not commenting on whether they are succeeding overal, but it seems clear they have the technical capability to succeed on a given lens if they consider it important.

Cheers,
Bernard

 50 
 on: Today at 04:56:20 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by bcooter
Sony seems to have hit the 4K sweet spot with the $10K FS7, which is probably the most flexible acceptably priced product presently on the market. We will see if they make some sort of scaled down version which is cheaper.


This little Canon will make a decent high end pov camera.  Sort of a better gopro.   It's ok for drones also, though misses a few marks in no wireless zoom controller, but if your main A cams are Canon this will grade close to your principle footage.

To save time in post is worth the price of admission,  if you like the canon "look" which in my experience has a lot of color bleed, but that's just a personal view.

Though now that the gh4 is selling for half price at $1,299 it probably is a better solution for pov and drones with faster lenses.


Edmund,

I think one out of three of your posts mention price.  

I don't know how to explain this but in motion or still equipment every time you go up 20% in quality you "usually" go up about 100% in costs (usually more) and another 100% in effort.

I'm amazed Sony came out with the fs7 at it's price point.  In fact I think they should have marketed the F5, maybe included the prorezz board and stuck with that camera for a while, but I'm not a camera maker or marketer.

I do know if you took the Sony name off the F5 and put on Arri, nobody would notice, it's that robust and well designed.

The pro world seems to know the F5 because you rarely see them come up used and when they do it's rarely at a discount.

But back to price.   There is no free lunch.

Anyone can take a gh4, with a single lav and a medium sized fluid head and shoot some decent footage.  

All you need is a hand full of nd filters or a fader, though to make the camera professionally useable and produce 422, you need a decent recorder like odessey, a good cage like wooden camera.

Then that yagh interface for better sound shielding, a boat load of arms, a adapter for a power source, a bunch of goldline batteries, velcro and adapters.

At this stage you'll be into about 7 grand or more plus lenses, so there you go, you have your "cheap" FS7 for about a 0 dollar savings because you can buy an FS7 for 7 grand if you look around.

But price is relative.  5 or so years or so ago, I bought a 5d2,  I  tried to make a dslr a motion picture camera which it never was meant to be, spent about 5 grand and never used it because I bought two RED 1's and never looked back.

The R1's then were expensive (relatively speaking) but I've used them for 5 years and they've helped turn our studio a very good profit and continue to do so today and are not obsolete.

In fact if I put them in a case and never touched them again, they've earned there keep.

Every camera has a place, including this little Canon and the users that know how to get the best out of it will rave positively, the ones that don't, won't.

In my experience, the best way to go about pro level construction is to go pro (not the "gopro", but go professional).  Pro equipment is solid, heavy, meant to run under almost any conditions, is rarely innovative, but always useable and "lasts".



IMO

BC


Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10 »