Malabito wrote:
Is there really a Raspberry Pi inside? I can't stand these overrated videos..it’s like trying to make a soap opera of a YouTube clip...
The video did its job.
Title brought attention. Content explained with the title in context.
A bit dramatic, yes. But I appreciate the effort put in versus the angry photographer style videos of the past.
Malabito wrote:
Is there really a Raspberry Pi inside? I can't stand these overrated videos..it’s like trying to make a soap opera of a YouTube clip...
RoamingScott wrote:
Watch the video, perhaps.
Here's the thing IMO: this is a text-based forum. Unlike other forums, it's not possible to hover over a thread on the main page and see a preview of the contents. So, I click on a thread and expect I can read the contents of it very quickly and either participate or move one. But it's simply a link to a video that tells me nothing. I need to watch the video, which I actually don't want to do right now. Also, these videos usually ramble along and require many minutes of time to extract a tidbit of information, even if it's running in the background while I do something else. If I really want to know, I might visit the video's YT page and read the transcript instead of sitting through 5, 10, 15, 30 minutes of ums and ahs. And based on that, maybe actually watch the video.
Sure, I could just move to the next thread of interest without need to comment. But @Malabito shared an opinion about which I quite strongly agree and got some pushback as a result.
I'd welcome a one-sentence 'spoiler' in addition to the video link for us grumps who just want the quick answer. But I guess that doing so negates the need to watch the video, which means the content creator won't get their views and likes and followers and in turn YT won't pay them for their hard work.
Is a Raspberry Pi in a camera a good thing, or bad? I mean, my M9 feels like its electronics are from way more than 15 years ago and maybe putting a Pi inside it would actually improve the user experience. Maybe also my M240. I guess the outrage is that it's a $70 processor in a $3-4k camera. But I suspect this isn't unique to the Pixii.
IMO the current generation of mirrorless cameras should be powered by the same processors running current iPhones and Android phones. It would be nice to have some actually useful computational photography happening in-camera in addition to making camera processes faster.
Malabito wrote:
Is there really a Raspberry Pi inside? I can't stand these overrated videos..it’s like trying to make a soap opera of a YouTube clip...
SPOILER ALERT
No. There is a Raspberry competitor with similar advertised specs inside. Which, to my mind, isn't at all surprising. Sure, you can buy the processor. Anyone can. Anyone can buy the sensor. Anyone with enough perseverance and determination can make a camera. These guys did it. Like every other camera on the market, you either appreciate it for what it is or you spend your money elsewhere. That, I think, is ultimately the theme of the video, which is coming from someone in the process of creating his own camera (something he touches on, but I'm guessing details are covered in other or coming videos).
In other news I went to get a coffee and they wanted £6 for it and I said no way Jose, there's only 10p of coffee grains in there and maybe another 5p of water.
rscheffler wrote:
Is a Raspberry Pi in a camera a good thing, or bad? I mean, my M9 feels like its electronics are from way more than 15 years ago and maybe putting a Pi inside it would actually improve the user experience. Maybe also my M240. I guess the outrage is that it's a $70 processor in a $3-4k camera. But I suspect this isn't unique to the Pixii.
+1. The less mechanical components are in a camera, the less expensive it should be in general - but we all know that this is not the case, rather the opposite. A good example is the M EV-1 which has no longer optical rangefinder components and is purely electronics - and it comes with a big surcharge. The majority of cost is making up for less quantity of semi-professional cameras sold on the market anymore plus the brand name. I suspect that the materials cost of a digital MLC sold is just 20% or less of the overall sales price tag. And of course cheaper electronic components are used to further increase profit.
panos.v wrote:
In other news I went to get a coffee and they wanted £6 for it and I said no way Jose, there's only 10p of coffee grains in there and maybe another 5p of water.
I generally agree with the conclusion of the video; the camera world needs more competitive brands trying new things. I do however also agree that it needs to be better for $5000, but that's the journey the company is on.
Glitches, refusing to start up or random magenta photos aren't the most acceptable however and that would make me feel like a guinea pig.
freaklikeme wrote:
Well, they'll write a name on a cup. No guarantee it'll be yours. I'm usually Brian or Greg.
I see you as a Brian, but not a Greg. Unless you're the kinda dood who sets up his pinhole camera for a 2 hour exposure at a local park and then complains when someone walks through your shot.
Desmolicious wrote:
...Unless you're the kinda dood who sets up his pinhole camera for a 2 hour exposure at a local park and then complains when someone walks through your shot.
Especially, since it would be like trying to capture a time-accelerated alien, as in "The Wink of an Eye", Star Trek TOS.
