Ideal MF system for Location/Portable Advertising

[TMARK]

Not to belabor the point but is this a reflection of the new professional "photo" studio?  A UK shop that specializes in photorenders.  Prices are cheap.

http://www.protograph.co.uk/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209405\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Th worm has turned.

[ericisaac]

I'm an avid mac user but this thing just works. I actually ordered one for my H20 after talking to PhaseOne about it but I got a good deal on the P20 so I went for it because I don't have problems with the screen.

The OQO is gorgeous and I know photographers using it. Actually I know a well known photographer that keeps using the H20/OQO instead of the P20 just because of the screen.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209392\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

wow, if it works, I will give it a try and see. It would be absolutely awesome if digital could be just that simple, but I think, from my perspective and what I have dealt with on set, it never is.

One thing is for sure, art directors are never happy and you can give one art director a cool little toy like that and she'll love it and another will hate it. It has actually happened to me. I was on a long job in California and we used the Epson P-3000 because we saw a photographer use it on location in miami (granted you couldn't shoot to it, but you could download cards to it). From there he put it into what appeared to be a small fedex box to cutout the light. So for the rest of the trip the photographer would not shut up about this device. So a few weeks later on another job I picked one up.

For two weeks the art director really, really loved it. We switched jobs in between and got it out for the next art director. She had an issue with claustrophobia and could not peak her eyes into the box without freaking out. Swear to god! The P-3000 was canned and I lost about 400 bucks, less the rental on it for the first 2 weeks.

[James R Russell]

wow, if it works, I will give it a try and see. It would be absolutely awesome if digital could be just that simple, but I think, from my perspective and what I have dealt with on set, it never is.

One thing is for sure, art directors are never happy and you can give one art director a cool little toy like that and she'll love it and another will hate it. It has actually happened to me. I was on a long job in California and we used the Epson P-3000 because we saw a photographer use it on location in miami (granted you couldn't shoot to it, but you could download cards to it). From there he put it into what appeared to be a small fedex box to cutout the light. So for the rest of the trip the photographer would not shut up about this device. So a few weeks later on another job I picked one up.

For two weeks the art director really, really loved it. We switched jobs in between and got it out for the next art director. She had an issue with claustrophobia and could not peak her eyes into the box without freaking out. Swear to god! The P-3000 was canned and I lost about 400 bucks, less the rental on it for the first 2 weeks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209413\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

People look at what you give them.  

Not saying we don't want to make the client happy but claustrophia over a fedex box?

That's pretty funny., but I've had clients not like a 30" screen, so to each his own.

It's really not worth worrying about.

Then again you could have sprang for another $400 bucks bought a lee bellows and gaff taped it to the epson gizmo.

I do and it works well, even for the space challanged.

I shot editorial in Tokyo with it for two days and nobody complained, actually they loved it.  

Of course the Epson thing eats batteries like a Toyota Prius and doesn't know what a medium format file looks like.

JR


Edit: Your a tech and from your blog you seem like a good one.  Still your going to see this different than the photographer.

You know, this is a strange business and more than any business I know spends a great deal of time thinking about what a client wants.

I've had projects where the catering seemed to be more important than the shoot, so I take all of these "requests" with a grain of salt.

I do know that at the end of the day, everyone forgets about the catering, the camera, the preview device and the AD just wants to make sure they have their shot and their client approves it.

What I want to be positive of is that I have the shot and regardless of where this thread goes, a good lcd would sure help.

[James R Russell]

Time for you to get out of the office and see the sun :-)

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209372\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Your right and I do.

Actually the last few weeks have been the first time in a few years where I've had a break and though none of us really get down time, I've put off a lot of personal stuff like promotions, even billing (ouch) and enjoyed myself.

90% of what I've written lately has been by the pool.

That's almost unheard of for me because my partner and I have a motto about this business.

"if your comfortable then your not moving forward."



JR

[ericisaac]

Eric,

Please tell me that that Windows thing won't work. I don't want to be tempted. And tell me that this screen representation is stripped in, and in the real world, (just like those fake Leaf ads in PDN), that the screen wouldn't be nearly this vibrant and clean. Have you ever seen one of these things working?

gwhitf,

Well that screen wouldn't be vibrant and clear outside. It probably looks like that when the room is dark. So for your next indoor shoot in very dim lighting, it will probably be perfect, if you can get it to tether with whatever mf system you are using that actually tethers usb. It will probably be slow though with its limited amount of RAM. Also it has only 3 hours of battery life, so I hope your close to an outlet. 60GB's of Hard drive, but how much to all the programs and os take up? Is that enough to shoot with in your situation? And backup while your shooting? How do you do that if you are tethered while you are shooting? Do you trust this device not to fail with your job stuck on it. Seems a little risky to me.

And I apologize to the person who told me to "grow up" in response to my comment about windows. I am sorry but windows is a bit icky and it's not like I didn't grow up using it either.

As far as your other question, I saw your post in that other thread, and I went to your blog, and wow you seem level headed, unlike me. I also saw the snapshot of the Italian marble digi cart at Milk; wow, that is some fancy wheelbarrow, literally with (glossy) rocks strapped to it.

Ah yes, I love Milk very much. Its a great place to shoot, the people are always very nice, but I think they miss the boat on some things. An Italian Marble digi cart may sound cool, but I think the point should be to make money, not spend it. That said, I think they have a pretty awesome setup.

I don't know how else to explain what I've written -- I think you're either a cart/firewire guy, or you're not. I just think it does something to the energy in the room when you're tethered -- everything just gets kinda heavier and more serious.

I've done the screen-flag thing, but the bellows ones I've bought are too effective -- hell, I have to lunge my head almost inside them to see the whole screen, and then it feels kinda porn. I know that the makeup artists want to "see what it looks like on film", and that's just human nature, but after a while, they kinda zone out, and they're just watching TV, and going, "Oh, wow, that's a good one. She looks pretty in that one".

You are right. It is very difficult to shoot that way and most of the people I know who shoot, including myself, do not like being tethered, but we have a client here and there that insist upon it. So we make due with it and yes, the energy is drawn from the shoot, everyone is huddled around the monitor and even the talent are stretching their necks for a peak. You step away to talk to the client or take a phone call and the next thing you know the talent is off set, under the hood, flipping through images. It isn't good.

In terms of a good screen flags, check out this: http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/RM1900/ prop the tripod up at eye level and you can see everything. Too much light, drop the vinyl dark cloth over your head.

And more than anything, it's about a hesitation to get into bed too much with a Tech. What if that Tech is booked, when a client moves a shoot two days, say, a week before the job? What if you send me some Trainee Guy, instead of the Head Guy, because the Head Guy is booked? What if my small job won't afford you, once I've gotten used to working with a Tech? What if my five day out of town job won't allow for a Tech, with his flight and hotels? There's just this thing that I don't even want to go near a Tech. I admit, it's just me. I'm Old School, and I just want to shoot a frame, look down at my Killer LCD, and go "Damn that looks good, let's shoot it", just like I used to do with a 665 Polaroid in my hand. And then I want to hand the card off to an assistant and have him download it. Clean and simple and easy.

The issue of being married to a tech is an issue that I deal with constantly and its an issue that has reared its ugly head once again this week when I was told that I would have to make a decision about my loyalty to a photographer. A photographer that will hold you for 22 days but only confirm you for 4. On one hand its a bit flattering that someone is dependent on me. On the other hand, its a bit scary. I'm not much for commitment these days. Being freelance was a pretty big deal to me once I finally got around to going that way. It was hard but now that I am there, I cannot go back. So I like the idea of working with many different people with a few regular guys, those being the ones that I am most attracted to working with - I like their personality and the work that they do. And I am also starting to shoot a little here and there, which is the most important thing to me.  I think it is important to mix it up a bit as long as you keep it consistent.

Case in Point: It seems like next week is a busy week. I had 3 different photographers call for me and I can only do one of the jobs so the first one that confirmed I took the other two I turned down but I found them both great techs that I know will do the job well. The most recent post on my site addresses the issue of creating a bigger network of people to help me to facilitate this more efficiently.

So I think for you, if you find yourself in the need of a tech (which seems like you are competent enough to not need one all the time) you should find yourself one that can devote enough time to help you develop a workflow that you can then keep consistent and then ask him for suggestions on replacements in his/her absence. You should stick mainly with guys that know your kind of workflow really well. The hardest part of this is probably trusting that your guy is going to provide you with a good referral.

The techs that I've hired always want to "process in the background" while I'm shooting. That scares the hell out of me. I let them run JPGs, just so they feel like they're doing something, but in the end, I always want to live with a job for a day or so, and then, even with the Canon, I always rebatch the RAWs into JPGs later. I never use the embedded JPG. There's just so much going on inside your head, when you're shooting, you have no effing idea how you really want the color to be dialed in, right there on the spot, in the heat of the moment. I find that I always want to cool it off, or warm it up, or push it out another third stop, but only after living with it a day.

You sound like a great guy, and I wish you the best. Good luck with your business.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209303\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

First, I have a big rule about teching - NEVER DO ANYTHING WHILE THE PHOTOGRAPHER IS SHOOTING. DON'T EVEN MOVE THE MOUSE. No backup drive is connected, no programs that are not pertinent to the operation of capture are open, etc. I process in the background in between shots. JPG's only. Most likely tiff's aren't ready to be processed until the photographer has signed off on color and exposure. Processing while shooting is mostly a waste. I process jpgs because the quality is lower and if we need to give the AD something after the shoot, jpg's are usually what he needs most for layouts. Besides, in most situations, TIFF's won't be ready by the end of the day. And I am also opposed to the JPG's generated by the canon. Usually they are just confusing and create a mess of the capture folder. I usually throw them out and create new ones anyway.

Second, allow me to back peddle a bit because I realize now that my post to you was sounding a bit like a sales pitch and I want you to know that it absolutely wasn't. That being said, I pride myself on doing a good job so I find it irritating to hear when others out there are creating a bad image for people like me - a tech, although I hate to be considered only that. It seems that in this business our roles are a bit too black and white. "She is a photographer", "He is an assistant". Mainly I wanted to offer advice because it seems like digital has become just another thing you have to think about and coming from my perspective, as a tech and as a photographer, I want to focus on what I am shooting and having the right people for digital can help you get back to that.

Cheers

[pss]

You go first. Go ahead and pay full retail, work out the kinks, get it tweaked out, and then report back here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

no kinks at all...just a macbook with a cintique on top....no keyboard but has bluetooth and GPS....but seriously...works perfectly.....

[ericisaac]

Edit: Your a tech and from your blog you seem like a good one.  Still your going to see this different than the photographer.

You know, this is a strange business and more than any business I know spends a great deal of time thinking about what a client wants.

I've had projects where the catering seemed to be more important than the shoot, so I take all of these "requests" with a grain of salt.

I do know that at the end of the day, everyone forgets about the catering, the camera, the preview device and the AD just wants to make sure they have their shot and their client approves it.

What I want to be positive of is that I have the shot and regardless of where this thread goes, a good lcd would sure help.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

One of the projects I work on about 4 times a year, a big catalog job, is all about keeping our art director happy. We have a separate producer who just handles the insane requests from the AD. And then there are all the insane requests on the digital end - "fix my ipod", find me a battery for this camera (in a third world country), etc. So I know all too well about client needs to the most extreme.

Just out of curiosity though, why does it have to be an LCD? If the polaroid was good enough back in the film day's why can't a quick (but good) print work as well?

[James R Russell]

Just out of curiosity though, why does it have to be an LCD? If the polaroid was good enough back in the film day's why can't a quick (but good) print work as well?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209425\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

To begin with we're not in the film days anymore.   Expectations are different, usually higher.

Early on with digital I did the portable printer thing I think it was called the Selphy.  Had spare batteeries, it all fit in a cool kit and at first clients liked it, kind of like a polaroid, but then it became somewhat of a gimmick and nobody could really do anything with a small print anyway, so people stopped asking, we stopped printing and I carried it around for a few more years until last year I just threw it away.

Then again, if somebody wants/needs an image now, it's very easy to send it to their Iphone and they can carry it around as long as they want.  Everyone I work with has an Iphone anyway.

I also have my own way for deliveriables and this really isn't the place to discuss it, but I've gone from about 90 grand a year in consumables down to less than 1/10th of that and increased my volume, so clients are use to electronic as long as it's done in a cohesive, effecient manner.

Delivering everything online is easy for the client.

I'm not saying my way is the best, it's just best for me and my clients, though I change and modify for the job.  We've run multiple monitors, multiple tech stations as requested, but really that's always overkill and the dog and pony show gets to be more important than the photograph.

Actually, if a client really does want a polaroid it's easier to just shoot a few frames and process it rather than go through all the forms of electronic printing, though I don't think I've mounted a polaroid back in 3 years.

Now in regards to retail, I've shot it with about everything in every system and for the AD that wants to edit on set, the very most effecient way is to shoot to cards on the Canon and let them work with the tech using photomechanic.

I have one AD that absolutely demands to leave the studio 10 minutes after the shoot with all his final selects and this is the only way we have found to make that happen.

The previews are instant, comparing is easy, flagging and renaming a no brainer and they can do it almost as fast as I shoot.

Once again, every project is different and has diffeerent expectations.  A large ad job is going to be a different workflow than an editorial or a retail gig.

JR

[gwhitf]

no kinks at all...just a macbook with a cintique on top....no keyboard but has bluetooth and GPS....but seriously...works perfectly.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209423\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think one thing that will influence the quality of something like this is the size of the embedded TIFF that comes out of each camera. Somewhere, years ago, I remember seeing a chart somewhere from Phase, that listed the pixel dimension of each back's model embedded TIFF. I'm talking about the teeny little Preview, not the large file that gets written to the CF card. For some reason, what struck me was that the P21+, (the back I was using at that time), had the largest embedded TIFF of all the models. I do not know why. Another vote for why the P21+ is a great back.

But it would seem that, the quality of the image that came out of the digital back would influence how well it displayed on that tablet thingie. Almost as if the TIF was more important than the device.

I remember spending a lot of (wasted) time at Best Buy once, buying a battery operated DVD player that would hook up to the VideoOut port of the Canon 1ds2. I'm talking about some little $299 cheesey device that some soccer mom would hand her kid, in the back of a Dodge mini van, on a long trip. Once I got it working with the 1ds2, it showed a really halfass quality image, at best. Embarrassing to show an Art Director, actually. We used it on about one hour of one job, then threw it in the trash. It was 640x480 of Total Mush. If you jiggled the connection of that little miniphono plug, the screen would go black; great precision design by Canon on that one.

What I think is, whatever guy (or company) could figure out a way to simply hand an AD something at the start of a shoot, and say, "Hey, here's your Tablet. Everything that I shoot will pop up on this tablet, within one second of me shooting it." Whoever solves that could be a rich man.

Eric, in terms of printing out a "polaroid" on an Epson printer, that's WAY too slow. Personally, I work very fast, and I'm not going to stand around, wait on a print, hand it to the AD, and then have them say, "Oh, wow, that was SO five minutes ago". I want them to see something, (and be able to make changes), within a couple seconds. I appreciate your input; it's interesting to hear things from your perspective.

[James R Russell]

I think one thing that will influence the quality of something like this is the size of the embedded TIFF that comes out of each camera. Somewhere, years ago, I remember seeing a chart somewhere from Phase, that listed the pixel dimension of each back's model embedded TIFF.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209430\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is what we need.



The problem is medium format previews are too small, so they're going to send raws and that requires processing and on some software requires updated video cards, so for medium format I guess this isn't going to happen, or if it does it will be bog slow.

Still, I wonder how much it would it cost just to call these people up and write a simple software that allowed you to view a preview, save the prevew and give it to your clients on a jump drive.

In fact I'm really surprised the camera makers aren't all over these type of accessories.

Once again look at the Red.  They have their lcds, mounts, hardware and it looks good . . . it looks professional.

Their battery charger looks like something that fits in that SR 71 spy plane.

There is a premium price for the Red gizmos, but that also comes with the fact you know it's supported by the maker of the camera, so in theory it should work.

JR

[gwhitf]

Here's what I want. No silly external device, just a huge LCD, at least 4 inches square. If it was a vertical shot, you'd have black on the sides, if it was a horizontal shot, you'd have black at top and bottom. Or, the option to shoot square, and display it full frame on the LCD. Or 4x5, without those stupid focusing screens. (And no Digital Tech needed). And the LCD quality should be as good as Nikon D3. I'd pay twenty grand for that camera, right now, even if it was still only 22MP.

[Snook]

This is what we need.



The problem is medium format previews are too small, so they're going to send raws and that requires processing and on some software requires updated video cards, so for medium format I guess this isn't going to happen, or if it does it will be bog slow.

Still, I wonder how much it would it cost just to call these people up and write a simple software that allowed you to view a preview, save the prevew and give it to your clients on a jump drive.

In fact I'm really surprised the camera makers aren't all over these type of accessories.

Once again look at the Red.  They have their lcds, mounts, hardware and it looks good . . . it looks professional.

Their battery charger looks like something that fits in that SR 71 spy plane.

There is a premium price for the Red gizmos, but that also comes with the fact you know it's supported by the maker of the camera, so in theory it should work.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209437\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think the epson p5000 would work fine if you could shoot tethered to it and it read Phase Tif files...:+]

I use it a alot with my canon shots... the previews are great..
I really do not think it would that hard at all.. just not sure the market is that big??
Snook

[James R Russell]

Here's what I want. No silly external device, just a huge LCD, at least 4 inches square. If it was a vertical shot, you'd have black on the sides, if it was a horizontal shot, you'd have black at top and bottom. Or, the option to shoot square, and display it full frame on the LCD. Or 4x5, without those stupid focusing screens. (And no Digital Tech needed). And the LCD quality should be as good as Nikon D3. I'd pay twenty grand for that camera, right now, even if it was still only 22MP.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209463\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Since we're dreaming, let's make it a touch screen.



How about one that goes wireless to other . . . touchscreens.

JR

[Henry Goh]

business must be slow...

[ericisaac]

It appears that out of all the criteria that you've suggested in the first post of this thread, the LCD is the one that everyone seems to focus on. I imagine that everyone else who has contributed has the same thought as me in that the rest of the criteria seem easily obtainable since, for the most part, we have seen those things already just not all in one solution. What we haven't seen is the LCD.

I don't think we are going to see it either for these reasons.

Cost: A high quality, glare resistant LCD is not cost effective. Even my $4000 46" HD LCD doesn't look good unless the windows are blacked out.

Heat: My cats love to sleep next to the TV, why because it is the warmest spot in the house. That heat generates noise which in turn produces shitty files that the DB manufacturers want to avoid. Phase and Leaf handle heat in different ways. Phase uses a wake up system so that the back isn't constantly on. Leaf uses a fan. A better LCD probably means an entirely separate cooling system for the screen and its processor.

Demand: Introducing a larger, higher quality LCD means redesigning the architecture of the system which is far too costly because outside of here, very few people are complaining about it.  They are just adapting to the way things are, tether, cart, cables and all. Most never look at the LCD. Some put a piece of tape over it because the light bothers them while they are shooting. Some just shoot untethered, swapping cards and looking at a digital polaroid. And some just count on the tech to make sure that everything is consistent when it comes time to edit. If photographers weren't buying the systems, they might consider changing something, but as you'll notice, these systems have been out for years now and not much has changed outside of file size.

[jing q]

you've gotta be kidding me...nearly all point and shoot cameras have a better LCD than a $30k back
you're telling me that the amount of heat generated by an LCD is sooo bad that it would screw up the image?
the companies need to hire someone that specialises in lcds then to fit it into a back
and I'll be really surprised that no one else complains because my god the LCDs are disgusting compared to even the cheapest point and shoot.

[James R Russell]

It appears that out of all the criteria that you've suggested in the first post of this thread, the LCD is the one that everyone seems to focus on. I imagine that everyone else who has contributed has the same thought as me in that the rest of the criteria seem easily obtainable since, for the most part, we have seen those things already just not all in one solution. What we haven't seen is the LCD.

I don't think we are going to see it either for these reasons.

Cost: A high quality, glare resistant LCD is not cost effective. Even my $4000 46" HD LCD doesn't look good unless the windows are blacked out.

Heat: My cats love to sleep next to the TV, why because it is the warmest spot in the house. That heat generates noise which in turn produces shitty files that the DB manufacturers want to avoid. Phase and Leaf handle heat in different ways. Phase uses a wake up system so that the back isn't constantly on. Leaf uses a fan. A better LCD probably means an entirely separate cooling system for the screen and its processor.

Demand: Introducing a larger, higher quality LCD means redesigning the architecture of the system which is far too costly because outside of here, very few people are complaining about it.  They are just adapting to the way things are, tether, cart, cables and all. Most never look at the LCD. Some put a piece of tape over it because the light bothers them while they are shooting. Some just shoot untethered, swapping cards and looking at a digital polaroid. And some just count on the tech to make sure that everything is consistent when it comes time to edit. If photographers weren't buying the systems, they might consider changing something, but as you'll notice, these systems have been out for years now and not much has changed outside of file size.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What gwhitf is refering to is not those days that the budget or the client requests move the project into a 20 person crew.  We all have those days and whether the camera has a 2" lcd or a 10"  lcd probably doesn't matter because everyone is going to be looking into the computer anyway.

He's talking about the realities of those editorial and quick ad jobs where the budget gets tighter or the personal work where you don't really want or need 20 people to shoot a photograph.

That's when all we need is a decent reference.  Obviously medium format has their issues in hitting this, I assume price, or the ability to source the right materials, but I'm sure like everything else in the world it comes down to price.

Though even when you have a 20 person crew there is something flat footed about being tethered and I think it's somewhat funny that a 9 oz. polaroid back has been replaced by the 250lb "cart o' rocks" just for a preview.

Still, from my viewpoint as a photographer I want the options to do what I want and some days that may mean I can throw the image up on 24 seperate displays for the world's biggest dog and pony show, other days that may mean I just want to quietly and discreetly show the image to the AD and the talent.

I'm not alone in this thought and listen to these interviews.  

[a href=\"http://red.cachefly.net/video/crash.m4v]http://red.cachefly.net/video/crash.m4v[/url]

http://www.red.com/interviews

These all come from people that don't work with 20 person crews they work with 200, 300, person crews and they still want to shoot a camera that is not tied down to a tech station.

I find all of this somewhat interesting because I don't think any of us need to spend so much time reviewing an image on a computer.  My partner and stylist has worked side by side with me for years and she will rarely look at the monitor as that only shows you what is done, not what can be done.  She looks on set.  In fact we've wired different forms of devices for her to view and she refuses to look at them, but it's amazing to me she can spot an issue before it gets captured, not after.

Actually, I've changed my worflow in medium format a great deal to work tech free.

An example is when we shot for Phase One in Paris because once we set the session, nobody manned the computer. I had one lcd on the Imac for the clients, another 23", that faced toward me and we just shot the gig.

I only stopped between sets and changes just to quickly review what was done and didn't spend over 3 minutes on each review.

In other words I tired to shoot it like film.

http://www.russellrutherford.com/paris_production/

JR

[yodelyo]

" I will say that the new Hassey backs have THE best screen of all. Looks like the new Canon screens."

wow is that right?

[James R Russell]

" I will say that the new Hassey backs have THE best screen of all. Looks like the new Canon screens."

wow is that right?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=209605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Don't take this as definative, (in other words try it for yourself), but I've done some quick snaps with the Phase, Leaf and Hasselblad and the Blad is the best of the bunch, but it's not over the wall great and just going from memory probably not as detailed as the original 1ds.

The size helps but the detail is pretty much the same as all medium format from what I could tell.

It's OK.

All of them can fool you.  The P30 regular was pretty good in bright sunlight, (actually I liked it in bright sunlight) the P30+ disappears in bright sunlight and blows highlights everywhere, but if your viewing it in subdued light and you shooting with soft light it looks good, but only under those conditions.

The Phase 4 button menu thing still confuses me and I use it all the time and have never gotten it down to an intuitive motion like the Canons, or the Leaf.

The Leaf proably has the best menu of all the backs and when you get the hang of that little wheel works well.

The Phase has the fastest and best focus check, but scrolling it to a certain point is painful.

Bottom line is if we had an lcd as good as the Canon, God forbid the Nikon this disucssion wouldn't exist.

If it went to a wirless device like the Ipod, we would be in heaven and the cart o' rocks probably wouldn't exist.


JR

[gwhitf]

Interesting rumors floating around. Who knows if it's true. Imagine the beauty (and business benefits) of being able to hand a client a Mac Tablet during a shoot, and allowing some kind of WIFI device to send an embedded preview to that machine. I bought (and quickly returned) the junky unusable updated Canon WIFI device for the 1ds3, so that one is off the table, as is the never-introduced Phase WIFI unit. But one day, one of these companies will actually make a unit that works.

Interesting, the last couple of sentences in the post below:

http://tinyurl.com/6b98tb

(snip) "Rumors have suggested that Apple may introduce a 12" or 13" Mac tablet later this year (September or October). Another possibility: rumors of a smaller PDA-like device that is 1.5x larger than the existing iPhone." (end)

Mark my words, these MF companies are going to continue with their excuses and justifications for their sorry LCDs, while someone like Apple or Sony or somebody totally out of the blue (Red), might even leapfrog them overnight. My question: if my iPhone has a camera in it, and a massive, great LCD, how come the images shot with that dont' show noise? You look at the physical design of that P65+, and wow doesn't it feel so very 1998? Shouldn't something like a P65+ have evolved further by now, (not to mention trying to justify the price tag as well?).