Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Let's talk about money: Upgrade prices, value depreciation, promotions for P1  (Read 108725 times)

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

You can use CCD to shoot what you like. I can use CMOS to shoot what you (or any legendary) cannot shoot with CCD. When I shoot pictures that others cannot shoot, I feel superiority as a gearhead. Gear with new technology can make innovations easier, hence it's easier to make your picture uniques and there would be less competition.

Ansel Adams: avoid shooting against the sun.
CCD: avoid backlight long exposure. has to bracket against the sun.
CMOS: can shoot in low light.
CMOS + fast lens: can shoot Milky Way landscape.
modern CMOS + fast lens: can shoot Aurora landscape.
Sony CMOS + fast lens: can shoot Milky Way landscape with moonrise / moonset in backlight condition.

I am not forcing anyone to shoot in a specific way. I just like the feeling of owning gear with dominating performance.
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter


You made a specific statement that "CCD is ONLY good in the studio". i showed an example that disproves this and refered to a famous artist who has even more examples to disprove it.

Your example is poor. No details in the shadow. Proof of low dynamic range.
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

When I shoot pictures that others cannot shoot, I feel superiority as a gearhead.

I feel sorry for you. You're in this for all the wrong reasons.
I shoot for my own pleasure. I don't feel the need to feel superior to anyone or anything.

Also, where are YOUR superior images? Don't show me images made by famous artists. I know where to find them.

Quote
Your example is poor. No details in the shadow. Proof of low dynamic range.

My example is proof enough that "CCD is good only in the studio" is a nonsense statement.
Not all images need the shadows pushed to 100 and highlights pulled down to -100. The greatest skill of them all is to practice restraint.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

I feel sorry for you. You're in this for all the wrong reasons.
I shoot for my own pleasure. I don't feel the need to feel superior to anyone or anything.

Then why do you care to debate in internet forums? For self satisfaction? Not to prove to others that your gear is not bad?

Also, where are YOUR superior images? Don't show me images made by famous artists. I know where to find them.

I don't have superior images. I only have images with good image quality for measurebator purposes. Sadly the CCD images are of very poor image quality in terms of shadow details, and they had to rely on materials shot by Sony CMOS to score.



My example is proof enough that "CCD is good only in the studio" is a nonsense statement.
Not all images need the shadows pushed to 100 and highlights pulled down to -100. The greatest skill of them all is to practice restraint.

You still fail to prove the advantage of CCD in your example. A Sony CMOS can do it better. The only advantage of CCD is studio for portrait, where the 80 MP backs still shine in pixel peeping. In other areas the Sony CMOS can do better. When the next fullframe CMOS back is ready and hopefully exceeds the megapixel count of the 80 MP CCD, there might be no crown place left for CCD.
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

Then why do you care to debate in internet forums?

What can I say? I like giving reality checks to smug as...htrays.

I don't have superior images.

Then why all the whining? If you can't make superior images with your godawesome CMOS gear, maybe you just don't have it in you to make them at all (Before you turn this around, I have never claimed to make superior images, you did).


You still fail to prove the advantage of CCD in your example.

One more time, since you can't comprehend elementary english. I did not post that to show superiority (Again, the only one talking about superiority here is you). I posted it to expose your bullshit argument about CCD cameras being good only in the studio.

Why are you throwing all these strawmen around instead of standing up for that initial statement you made?
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

Then why all the whining? If you can't make superior images with your godawesome CMOS gear, maybe you just don't have it in you to make them at all (Before you turn this around, I have never claimed to make superior images, you did).
I have posted lots of comparison showing you why CMOS gives superiority in image quality. For the same photographer, a Sony CMOS can offer the best image quality, regardless of aesthetics level of the user, except the case of portrait in studio. If image quality is not important for you, then sell your digital backs and go shooting with an iPhone.

One more time, since you can't comprehend elementary english. I did not post that to show superiority (Again, the only one talking about superiority here is you). I posted it to expose your bullshit argument about CCD cameras being good only in the studio.

Why are you throwing all these strawmen around instead of standing up for that initial statement you made?
If this is the case then there is no need to debate.  8)
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

I have posted lots of comparison showing you why CMOS gives superiority in image quality. For the same photographer, a Sony CMOS can offer the best image quality, regardless of aesthetics level of the user, except the case of portrait in studio. If image quality is not important for you, then sell your digital backs and go shooting with an iPhone.

"Superior image quality" to you is zero noise and a plastic wrap look. it means other things to other people. Surely, you're not naive enough to think that 6.2 billion people in the world should conform to your definition, do you? Not, me, not unless your first name is Oxford and last name, Dictionary.

If this is the case then there is no need to debate.  8)

Ok, so you do not understand elementary English. Cool.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

"Superior image quality" to you is zero noise and a plastic wrap look. it means other things to other people. Surely, you're not naive enough to think that 6.2 billion people in the world should conform to your definition, do you? Not, me, not unless your first name is Oxford and last name, Dictionary.

Ok, so you do not understand elementary English. Cool.

If you think high SNR is "plastic look" and you prefer "film grain" then why not pump the ISO on your CCD back to get "superior image quality"?  ::)
Logged

Chris Livsey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 807

Pass the popcorn this one will run and run, and to what end?
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

If you think high SNR is "plastic look" and you prefer "film grain" then why not pump the ISO on your CCD back to get "superior image quality"?  ::)

You sing a hilarious Song.  ;)
I do what I want with my camera to get the images I want. So far, I am very happy with the results I get. Why are you insisting that people like me are "Using it wrong"?

Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

Pass the popcorn this one will run and run, and to what end?


You can save it. I'm bored of this already.
Trolls like this one are a dime a dozen here. At least the more enjoyable ones consume classy wine and drunk post hilarious posts.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram

Surely, you're not naive enough to think that 6.2 billion people in the world should conform to your definition, do you? Not, me, not unless your first name is Oxford and last name, Dictionary.

Synn,
 
 You have really improved your game!
 Are you lubricating your wit with french red? I find it does help, the Mouton Rotschild is particularly inspirational, but maybe wasted on LL trolls :)

Edmund
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 12:22:28 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

the real truth is how phase can sell all  ccd sensor stock.....
when full frame cmos arrive nobody will buy a ccd back , be aware...
agree with you but the new back is a very very small improvement from the iq2 series and when the next iq4 will be released the market will drop for second hand.
like allways in all economy business.
best.

Yes. It looks like a bargain to upgrade the IQ180 to the IQ380 at this stage, but when the IQ4 fullframe CMOS is announced, the IQ380 will depreciate significantly, asking for another $15K-$20K to upgrade from IQ3 to IQ4. Actually it might be much cheaper to upgrade directly from IQ1 to IQ4, when compared against the total money spent for IQ1->IQ3 + IQ3->IQ4.
Logged

ciccio

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 106

+10000
ccd is past
cmos is future
phase one try to survive their businnes model....
not sure about the last move...
best.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram

I had CCD (Phase, Leica) and Cmos (Canon, Nikon), and some of the CMOS had strong texture loss, while the CCD tended to be very good with skin. As an ex-ICC member I do understand what a CFA is, please spare me the lecture.

Whether this means that ALL Cmos are inferior in some way is improbable, but some people may ascribe creative virtues to their backs and we should not mock them: it makes them angry, possibly depriving their children or lovers of  an evening's affection, and also they might for all we know be more sensitive to image auras than the rest of us, ie. they might be right.

Given a choice, I would still prefer to use a random Phase or Hassy with CCD for portraits, and would certainly reach for a Cmos product whenever high ISO is desired. I don't think I would differentiate between the two for landscape.

Edmund
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 12:52:07 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

I had CCD (Phase, Leica) and Cmos (Canon, Nikon), and some of the CMOS had strong texture loss, while the CCD tended to be very good with skin. As an ex-ICC member I do understand what a CFA is, please spare me the lecture.
I would be curious to see a comparison. Would you care to upload RAW files and briefly illustrate your post-processing steps for a side by side comparison? i.e. same model, same time, same location, same light source, same parameters etc. I have never ever seen a CCD/Canon lover who cared to upload any RAW files as evidence for the superior skin tone claim.
I don't think I would differentiate between the two for landscape.
In the long exposure territory you could certainly differentiate between the two when you do pixel peeping for shadow details. Even the Nikon D5300 can destroy the IQ280.
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

You sing a hilarious Song.  ;)
I do what I want with my camera to get the images I want. So far, I am very happy with the results I get. Why are you insisting that people like me are "Using it wrong"?



I'm just trying to follow your logic :) If you cannot make superior images with a certain gear then you have no right to "make whining".

Let's just take a look:

https://500px.com/photo/88251401/shelter-from-the-calm-by-sandeep-murali


Take a look into the picture, at webpage sized resolution for the mighty CCD - oh well, this is not low SNR, this is film grain :D So romantic!  :o ::)


Then scroll to your nice example:


I am totally overwhelmed by how recognized your images are  ;D You are certainly more qualified to justify gear choice  8) :D
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

And your point is?

You may bust a nut on zero noise, Voidy. I pay more attention to things like composition and feel. And I add noise to my Nikon shots.And I couldn't care less what numbers show up next to my images. I post them for SEO, next to my real name.


Btw, I like how you cut off your name in your pictures to protect your anonymity on the web. Took me 10 seconds to find it. I am not scared to attach my name to my opinions. What's holding you back, Song boy?
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 03:22:05 pm by synn »
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

And your point is?

You may bust a nut on zero noise, Voidy. I pay more attention to things like composition and feel. And I add noise to my Nikon shots.And I couldn't care less what numbers show up next to my images. I post them for SEO, next to my real name.


Btw, I like how you cut off your name in your pictures to protect your anonymity on the web. Took me 10 seconds to find it. I am not scared to attach my name to my opinions. What's holding you back, Song boy?

Then why do you shoot at base ISO with your Nikon? Cranking up ISO settings would be easier - saving you time adding noise in post-processing :)

Yeah sure composition and feel is more important. Why not shoot with an iPhone? You are obviously very qualified to teach us what is good composition and feel  :D
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 03:27:35 pm by voidshatter »
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

Why not shoot with an iPhone?

Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13   Go Up