jcolwell wrote:
I was talking about what you see when looking at other folks who are out walking around in touristy places, like Siena and Venice.
I agree that it's a lot different at events. Here's four crowd shots from the Clooney event in Venice on 29 September. Phones all over the place. I was planning to do a count, but I haven't had enough time, and I don't have that many fingfers...
Nice shots, Jim!
You could almost composite those two first shots into a pano, couldn't you? That fellow on the far right looks to have a near identical expression to the next with him on the left side of the frame.
I know it's not of paramount interest to many on this forum, but Canon's release of the new C100 Mark II is encouraging, especially at a price point of just over $5K.
At least Canon is moving steadily forward on some fronts.
You could almost composite those two first shots into a pano, couldn't you? That fellow on the far right looks to have a near identical expression to the next with him on the left side of the frame.
Thanks, Jim. The first two images are from the same photo, and so are the last two images (from a different photo).
Gunzorro wrote:
I know it's not of paramount interest to many on this forum, but Canon's release of the new C100 Mark II is encouraging, especially at a price point of just over $5K.
At least Canon is moving steadily forward on some fronts.
Needs better codec options. Never mind that it doesnt even shoot 4K to card like the GH4.
Pretty pathetic. I mean, it does not seem like a horrible camera, should be pretty nice, but when put in the context of the other products and the video product offerings in general from Sony and Panasonic it is a dated product.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I pay a lot of attention to what others are shooting with and if it's not a smartphone, I'd say 99% are using DSLR's (99% of which are Canikon) and the other 1% a mirrorless. For all the hype about mirrorless (and I own one) not many people in Australia are listening. It's yet again the forums which concentrates the anti-DSLR rabid mirrorless fanbois into making a huge amount of noise about how mirroless is the best thing ever and only a moron would lug around a brick.
Despite what many say about how good EVF's are today, many still prefer an OVF, especially myself. The reason DSLR's took away the market from rangefinder bodies was most people wanted to see almost exactly what the sensor saw. Viewing an electronic image is not the same as the live image seen through an OVF.
Anyone remember the Olympus E-10 that had a beam splitter, where you and the sensor both saw the image at the same time through an optical viewfinder? Was great with no mirror-slap noise. Fixed lens was a bummer, but sure did not get any dust on the sensor.
The EVF is the most accurate option. Look at the Cinema world. Most if not all Directors of Photography work with EVFs. IIRC Only the Arri Alexa is available with an optical viewfinder option.
I admit, in scenes with huge dynamic range the optical viewfinder is still awesome and also when photographing people since there is zero lag but with a really good EVF you get instant image preview and one can make adjustments while looking through the EVF which is cool.
Also when working with flash the optical viewfinder is great since light levels are mostly low in those situations but overall a high quality EVF is awesome to work with. Note the words high quality.
molson wrote:
Correct. With the EVF, you get to see the framing, exposure, color temperature, focus, and depth-of-field that the sensor will actually record.
The OVF mostly just lets you know where the camera is aimed, and approximately where the point of focus is.
Bones74 wrote:
I disagree, I hardly ever see anyone with a mirrorless camera (in the UK). Its either a bridge camera or a D/SLR (apart from smart phones), very rarely a mirrorless.
jcolwell wrote:
"I just returned from a two week vacation in Italy; Tuscany and Venice. Canon DSLR were by far the most common cameras, and a lot of people had cameras. The next most common seemed to be super-zoom/bridge cameras, followed by Nikon DSLR. I also saw some Fuji X (X-E1/-E2, X-T1), Sony DSLR (not A7/R/S), and Oly m4/3."
I wasn't saying that mirrorless cameras were more popular than DSLRs in Europe, only that the rate of adoption was higher there (and in Asia), going by sales figures, not personal anecdotes.
I did recently take a trip to Italy and the most popular mirrorless cameras there seemed to be Fujis. They definitely got something right there with the styling and general package.
molson wrote:
Correct. With the EVF, you get to see the framing, exposure, color temperature, focus, and depth-of-field that the sensor will actually record.
None of which I require, and none of which are any more helpful when photographing action shots.
Sneakyracer wrote:
That camera is outdated even before it comes out.
Needs better codec options. Never mind that it doesnt even shoot 4K to card like the GH4.
Pretty pathetic. I mean, it does not seem like a horrible camera, should be pretty nice, but when put in the context of the other products and the video product offerings in general from Sony and Panasonic it is a dated product.
I'm not trying to argue, and am no video expert, but those other cameras you mention have a couple drawbacks if you are invested in Canon system: They don't usually accept (or AF) Canon EF lenses, and don't work with a full line of accessories/add-on's for the Canon. I like the large screen on the C100 as well.
Imagemaster wrote:
None of which I require, and none of which are any more helpful when photographing action shots.
Exactly. Complicated by the fact that I have to constantly watch the battery capacity indicator and carry around 10-20 batteries to get through a days shooting.
Archive 2014 · OMG - 1DsX in NYC...
