Topic: That convergence thing again... (Read 9858 times)

Craig Arnold · « **on:** September 22, 2008, 04:16:15 am »

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/

Michael called it right again...

One aspect of all this interests me though; most photographers do their own post-production, it's regarded as an integral part of photography taking the (digital)neg to the final product. Though we don't all do the final print ourselves.

But video or film is different, short on-the-spot PJ is one thing, but moving pictures need editors, scriptwriters, and directors, not to mention actors, set designers, etc. Those jobs are things that take years to learn and have very steep learning curves that most aspirants never make it past.

The situation we are moving towards is where the technical and financial barriers to entry are essentially removed, but (apart from a handful of naturals) the skill barrier is not going away. How many youtube videos do you see and think "If only the production values were higher it would be broadcast/cinema quality"?

So now with a couple of 5DMkIIs, some lenses, a Mac Pro, and Final Cut - maybe $15,000 worth of equipment you can have everything you need to make a movie. But the skills and talent to make a movie people want to watch don't come so easy.

AdrianL · « **Reply #1 on:** September 22, 2008, 08:38:02 am »

Quote

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/

Michael called it right again...

One aspect of all this interests me though; most photographers do their own post-production, it's regarded as an integral part of photography taking the (digital)neg to the final product. Though we don't all do the final print ourselves.

But video or film is different, short on-the-spot PJ is one thing, but moving pictures need editors, scriptwriters, and directors, not to mention actors, set designers, etc. Those jobs are things that take years to learn and have very steep learning curves that most aspirants never make it past.

The situation we are moving towards is where the technical and financial barriers to entry are essentially removed, but (apart from a handful of naturals) the skill barrier is not going away. How many youtube videos do you see and think "If only the production values were higher it would be broadcast/cinema quality"?

So now with a couple of 5DMkIIs, some lenses, a Mac Pro, and Final Cut - maybe $15,000 worth of equipment you can have everything you need to make a movie. But the skills and talent to make a movie people want to watch don't come so easy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223194\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Tim Gray · « **Reply #2 on:** September 22, 2008, 09:07:49 am »

Vincent's blog post, while very enthusiastic, contained an important qualifier.

His comments about "best" were in the context of low light videography

Tklimek · « **Reply #3 on:** September 22, 2008, 07:43:49 pm »

Wow....all I can say is that I was quite impressed with the capabilities as presented in the very brief clip that Michael created.

Wow....

Todd in Chicago.....

Quote

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/

Michael called it right again...

One aspect of all this interests me though; most photographers do their own post-production, it's regarded as an integral part of photography taking the (digital)neg to the final product. Though we don't all do the final print ourselves.

But video or film is different, short on-the-spot PJ is one thing, but moving pictures need editors, scriptwriters, and directors, not to mention actors, set designers, etc. Those jobs are things that take years to learn and have very steep learning curves that most aspirants never make it past.

The situation we are moving towards is where the technical and financial barriers to entry are essentially removed, but (apart from a handful of naturals) the skill barrier is not going away. How many youtube videos do you see and think "If only the production values were higher it would be broadcast/cinema quality"?

So now with a couple of 5DMkIIs, some lenses, a Mac Pro, and Final Cut - maybe $15,000 worth of equipment you can have everything you need to make a movie. But the skills and talent to make a movie people want to watch don't come so easy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223194\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

barryfitzgerald · « **Reply #4 on:** September 23, 2008, 08:18:01 am »

Not sure what the big deal is! Ok if you are "really interested" in video, then sure. It looks great.

But whilst I like to plonk about with video, I have no real ambitions to make serious production movies. And most of us here are still photographers.

We heard all this before, when video cameras came out, nobody will take still shots anymore. Yeah that was right wasn't it!!!

So yeah, video driven person, big deal. Photographers, hmmmm not as much.

Mabye I missed something??? lol

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #5 on:** September 23, 2008, 08:41:44 am »

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?ac...&articleID=2086

michael · « **Reply #6 on:** September 23, 2008, 08:48:40 am »

Quote

Not sure what the big deal is! Ok if you are "really interested" in video, then sure. It looks great.

But whilst I like to plonk about with video, I have no real ambitions to make serious production movies. And most of us here are still photographers.

We heard all this before, when video cameras came out, nobody will take still shots anymore. Yeah that was right wasn't it!!!

So yeah, video driven person, big deal. Photographers, hmmmm not as much.

Mabye I missed something??? lol
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Barry,

Maybe what you missed is that other people might have different interests and needs than you.

Michael

giles · « **Reply #7 on:** September 23, 2008, 10:21:00 am »

Quote

Not sure what the big deal is! Ok if you are "really interested" in video, then sure. It looks great.

A work (IT) colleague commented that he'd like a camera that could take quality stills and video; he would like to carry one camera that could do both jobs for recording his kids' activities.

With the ability to share snippets of video easily on the web (look at youtube's popularity!) I suspect a lot of people will be tempted to experiment if/when they have cameras that can record decent quality video. (Hey, even I'm tempted, and that's not something I've ever been at all interested in before.)

Plus I'm sure the convergence will happen the other way too: lots of people buy video cameras; I am sure a percentage of them would like to be able to take reasonably high resolution still photographs with the same equipment.

The combocams are coming; of course you can ignore features you don't like. (I have no idea what the "scene modes" do on any of my cameras that have them; I don't care enough even to read those pages of the manuals to find out what the obscure icons are supposed to stand for.)

Cheers,

Giles

barryfitzgerald · « **Reply #8 on:** September 23, 2008, 12:37:09 pm »

With reference to Michael, of course I can appreciate others have interests that I may not. But surely we all share the one interest, and that is photography.

I have read much about this, and no doubt the appeal is there to many, but this isnt a budget priced SLR, it's a FF one. Surely the consumer appeal is more based on models such as the D90 and below.

The point I am really making here, reading the article on this site, is that from a design point, its a still camera, and some areas are not really suited that well to video.(ergo/audio capabilities etc) If this is a signal Canon are going for the high end video market, and this is the ist shot, fair enough.

Nor do I say, let's not have it.

One thing I would like to say though, is I would be deeply worried if some see this as the future of photography, with higher res video being used as a replacement for taking still shots. Might seem a boon to some, but I have to say..not good.

Digiteyesed · « **Reply #9 on:** September 23, 2008, 01:24:54 pm »

Thing is, I could care less about video. I'm strictly a still photographer and convergence is annoying the hell out of me. So the new 5D has video. Great. Marvelous.

NOW WHERE THE @#$% IS THE MLU BUTTON?

Oh, right, it's called Live View. Except that I don't use Live View. I like looking through the damn viewfinder, freak that I am.

Anyhow, as soon as the 5D was announced I cruised over here looking for a review of it as I find that Michael's "real world" reviews pertain to me a helluvalot more than the tripe Askey posts over at DPreview. So here I am. And what do I find? Michael limited his review to the one part of the camera that I could care less about.

ARGH!

Yes, I'm bitchy today. And, yes, I realize there are people whose interests differ from mine, but they're not important since they're not me. The world revolves around ME. (And my missing MLU button.)

I need more coffee.

Sean M.
www.neutralhillsstills.ca

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #10 on:** September 23, 2008, 01:37:17 pm »

Quote

Thing is, I could care less about video. I'm strictly a still photographer and convergence is annoying the hell out of me. So the new 5D has video. Great. Marvelous.

NOW WHERE THE @#$% IS THE MLU BUTTON?

Oh, right, it's called Live View. Except that I don't use Live View. I like looking through the damn viewfinder, freak that I am.

You'll find the view through the viewfinder to be identically black when using either live view or mirror lock up.

Digiteyesed · « **Reply #11 on:** September 23, 2008, 01:45:48 pm »

Quote

You'll find the view through the viewfinder to be identically black when using either live view or mirror lock up.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223664\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

...except that having MLU would not deplete my battery charge as quickly as the LCD display would be turned off. I only use the display for chimping my histogram.

Does the mkII still come with a print button?

Best,

Sean M.
www.neutralhillsstills.ca

michael · « **Reply #12 on:** September 23, 2008, 02:10:52 pm »

Sean,

I focused on the video capabilities of the 5D MII because I only had the camera for two days, and Canon had no raw software to give me. Shooting JPGs would have told me little.

Other than image quality, there's not much to say about the 5D MKII, is there? It's just a rehash of the new features that Canon has added to their other recent DSLRs.

Therefore it's the video capability that I focused on.

As soon as a production 5D MKII is available and I have raw software that works with it, I'll do a more comprehensive review of it as a stills camera.

Michael

Tklimek · « **Reply #13 on:** September 23, 2008, 03:30:03 pm »

And well, I for one am completely floored by the Vincent Lafloret video. And for what Michael was able to do in a day and half is pretty impressive.

I am not a video person but DO have a small Canon HV10 which takes 1080i video. And I could agree; perhaps for true professionals that make *real* money from photography, they may not want to pay for something they are not interested in using. But there are WAY many people out there that own Nikon D3's or D700's (I have the D700) and whatever the equivalent in Canon-land is that have photography as an interest or hobby and now the ability to take snippets of high quality video while you are out taking your pix is pretty darned cool.

Hmmm....I wonder what "Scarlet" will bring to the table? ;-)

Michael really REALLY called this one with the whole convergence issue...it's not coming.....it's here. Like it or not....ready or not.....now it will really get interesting.

Cheers.....

Todd in Chicago

Quote

Sean,

I focused on the video capabilities of the 5D MII because I only had the camera for two days, and Canon had no raw software to give me. Shooting JPGs would have told me little.

Other than image quality, there's not much to say about the 5D MKII, is there? It's just a rehash of the new features that Canon has added to their other recent DSLRs.

Therefore it's the video capability that I focused on.

As soon as a production 5D MKII is available and I have raw software that works with it, I'll do a more comprehensive review of it as a stills camera.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223670\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Digiteyesed · « **Reply #14 on:** September 23, 2008, 03:55:56 pm »

Michael,

Please pardon my irritation. I'm having a lousy week at work (I clean up after Bill Gates for a living) and the volume of work means that I get no time in with my beloved cameras.

I'm just getting tired of marketing jackasses cramming extra features into the products I buy rather than simply improving the original functionality I'm looking for.

For example, it's great that my Razr cell phone takes pictures and movies and that I can play solitaire on it. It would be even better if the calls were clearer and my calls dropped less since making calls was actually what I bought the darned thing for.

So, woo-hoo. Canon put video in the Mk II. I really would like the MLU button instead since it's a feature I use extensively. If I'm going to have LiveView crammed down my throat then at least make it useful by sticking an articulating display on the camera so I don't have to carry the small mirror I use to kludge my way around that problem.

I dunno. I'll probably buy one anyhow.

Anyhow, my thanks to you for this wonderful site that you invest so much of your time into. I'm truly grateful for it even when I sound like I'm not.

Best,

Sean M.
www.neutralhillsstills.ca

dalethorn · « **Reply #15 on:** September 23, 2008, 04:16:46 pm »

I still get a significant number of misses because the "mode" dial is in the wrong place. This convergence will work a lot better when there are two shutter buttons - for video and stills. The ergonomics are absolutely vital for seamless use when switching back and forth with the same camera.

maxgruzen · « **Reply #16 on:** September 23, 2008, 04:59:05 pm »

I for one am very disappointed in the 5d II. Lots of gizmo's to jack up sales but very little of what I really need

1. A bright big viewfinder like the new Sony.
2. The ability to manual focus with my 85 1.2 clearly and accurately.
3. The ability to Auto focus my 85 1.2 clearly and accurately without having to use the center point
only. Almost everything I shoot with that lens has to be cropped because I have to put that centerpoint on the subject. Focus and recompose is not an option.
4. The ability to accurately see what 1.2 is doing in my viewfinder, rather then only f 2.8

If I could have just these 4 things I would be a happy camper. I don't need 21 mp and I certainly don't need video.

Seth Honeyman · « **Reply #17 on:** September 24, 2008, 09:40:34 am »

I can think of many times when video capability would have been handy. For example, an extemporaneous speech at a 50th anniversary, a guide's talk at a national park, a baby's first attempts at walking or talking. Many of us (amateurs) are interested in preserving memories as well as making art. Having the extra capacity at no additional cost in either weight or money is, to my mind, outstanding.

Regards - Seth

gerk · « **Reply #18 on:** September 25, 2008, 11:33:55 pm »

On the video front the mkII is very interesting to me being into both photography and video. The capability of shooting 1080p through my L glass is very interesting indeed! I'll hold any other judgement until there's a real pre-production version that Michael can get his hands on and do real testing with.

Craig Arnold · « **Reply #19 on:** September 26, 2008, 03:14:10 am »

I showed my wife the Laforet video last night.

Her immediate reaction (she's a film editor) : "Nice quality, but it looks very digital to me - too clean, but I guess you could alter it in post".

So I suppose when I have saved up enough money for the 5DII or plunked down the credit card we shall have to look into some software to render the frames with a film look. :-) Something like DXO Film pack but as a Final Cut Pro plug-in. I'm sure such things exist already - can anyone recommend anything?

The revolutionary thing about this camera is that this kind of quality is now available at a price point that was unimaginable 5 years ago.

Author Topic: That convergence thing again... (Read 9858 times)

DarkPenguin

DarkPenguin

dalethorn