|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
11-22-2021, 10:08 AM
|
| |
When 4k cameras started showing up on set I asked several DPs about it. The short answer was that it was never meant to be a consumer spec, it was to allow DPs to re-frame, track, stabilize, etc., in post and allow for 2K delivery to theaters without losing image quality. The irony is that more than a few of these DPs I asked thought that 4k and 8k output on consumer monitors (aka, televisions) is not very cinematic, "It doesn't look very good." Also, talent doesn't really like 4k or 8k either.
Shoot in 4k-8k only if you're rushed on set and anticipate the need to rework your operating in post but don't deliver in 4K or 8K. Deliver in 1080p or even 720p if you want to reach the widest audience, particularly viewers in regions where infrastructure is not the best.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
06-08-2019, 01:44 PM
|
| |
The Brownie didn't bring an end to quality photography equipment. The Instamatic didn't bring and end to the SLR. Someone above mentioned the smartphone camera as the P&S of this era and I agree. SLR cameras were always a niche item, even the K1000 in its day, until around the late 80s when plastic fantastic fully auto SLR cameras became genuine consumer items to be disposed of upon release of the next piece of plastic.
I guess there are a lot of folks alive today who don't realize that there was a time when owning an SLR was a big deal; not something for the great unwashed. There was a time when owning an SLR was a sign of status not particularly related to wealth; it was I think mostly a symbol of one's skill and dedication to something that required the acquisition of a certain level of knowledge in order to participate. Back then, many people who could afford to buy an SLR could never learned how to properly use it.
Any camera company that's gotten too big to get small again and return to it's original core business is indeed going to be a casualty. I think the golden age of digital (and for that matter film) cameras is right now as a result of the smartphone. Quality "obsolete" digital cameras are a dime a dozen right now due to smartphone dominance. The great thing about getting a used digital today is the lemons are gone or being sold as "parts" cameras.
As time marches on, camera companies are going to return to their core business or fail. They are going to have to produce quality cameras for discerning enthusiasts and professionals; two groups that will never disappear from the camera market.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-31-2019, 08:52 PM
|
| |
No IR remote was a deal breaker on release and remains so.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
06-09-2019, 12:44 AM
|
| |
How about something to suit your needs that provides benefits like these:
- No subscription fees.
- No market force influences.
- No data breaches.
- No down time for "routine maintenance" (unless you decide).
- No loss of access due to internet service or electrical outages.
- No need for upgrading or interface "improvements".
- Simple.
- Reliable.
- Proven technology.
Wait for it...
A fire and waterproof safe designed for data storage hardware.
You can even set up an NAS station inside it; when in use the safe is open and hard drives connected. When backups are complete, the NAS station is disconnected, the safe is closed, and locked.
Don't be seduced by technology. There are simpler ways, proven reliable over time, to accomplish many of the things people are lured into using "latest technology" for.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
06-23-2019, 09:11 PM
|
| |
I sure am; love that show.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
06-23-2019, 06:58 PM
|
| |
- Lumix TS2
- Olympus Tough 8000
- Canon A95
I purchased the TS2 because of a TS1 I owned awhile back and sorely missed. I originally bought it as a rainproof pocket camera for use during a 45 day train trip around the U.S.during the late fall and early winter of 2009. This time around I wanted a "proper" camera for hiking that was pocketable and tough enough to withstand the elements and some abuse. I couldn't find a used TS1 in good condition so I got a TS2 instead.
The Oly was the camera that got beat out by the TS1 back in the aforementioned day. Unlike the TS1 it's crushproof to 220 lbs. As much as I wanted to keep the Oly it's IQ wasn't as good as the TS1 so I returned it. If I could have afforded both at the time I would have kept the Oly as well. I liked it's form factor better than the TS1 and, now, the TS2. Although not as sharp when compared to the TS1 or TS2, the Oly's color saturation is a bit more accurate and, overall, images are good enough to preserve the kind moments for which it was designed to capture. The Oly takes pictures in places where other cameras shouldn't go (including the TS2) and, for snapshots, they look just fine.
The A95 was a camera I had become a bit nostalgic for and my original one was long kaput but I still have all the accessories including an underwater housing. It was cheap to get used so I did. I now suspect, however, that most of these are so old that they will all have problems of one sort or another. One other thing that it had going for it beyond being cheap as chips was a full manual control setting. However, since it doesn't work on any setting due to a bad sensor, I wasted $25. I least I cured myself of any nostalgia for it.
It was interesting for me to make some comparisons and I appreciate folks who indulged me and offered their opinions. The A95 is getting binned but I will still keep an eye out for a good CCD pocket camera from back in the day that can be had cheap. As for the other two, unlike 10 years ago, I can afford to keep both so I will.
Those last two landscape pictures I posted have been edited in GIMP with only one step each. I adjusted the exposure of one and applied unsharp mask to the other. I consider both usable for intended purposes but the TS2 is the better image overall. |
|
Forum: General Talk
06-22-2019, 07:41 PM
|
| |
Living, breathing, broadcast TV history. If you know of Sven... you know what I mean.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
06-18-2019, 09:59 PM
|
| |
This is actually the, "Best Camera Review Ever".
Thanks for taking the time out to thoroughly insure that so many people can avail themselves of the opportunity to be ROTFLMAO by the end of it all.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-19-2019, 09:53 PM
|
| |
A new batch with incremental improvements might sell well. The r&d is well paid for so if the tooling is still "there" the price could come down as well. Something as simple as adding an electronic viewfinder, could differentiate and revitalize the system. Even without major changes it's still a unique camera system.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
06-10-2019, 07:09 PM
|
| |
Had to look up "Veet". Yikes! It might be getting grayer and grayer every month but it's all still there.
---------- Post added 06-10-19 at 19:26 ----------
That sucks. You wife, however, is awesome.
---------- Post added 06-10-19 at 19:26 ----------
I got mine on sale for $250.00 and it's turned out to be good money well spent. If I remember correctly, it didn't sell well and was discontinued after about a year. Thing is, the MX-1 was reviewed relatively well. I think it failed because it was a "photographer's camera" marketed during a time when compact cameras were trying to be everything to all people. It's video performance didn't stand up to other choices in the "compact camera" marketplace of the time and video was a hot feature at the time. I think it also hit the MP sweet spot for the 1/1.7" sized sensor. Finally, I think the MX-1 shares a sensor with the Q7 so it's sort of an adjunct of my Q System; no small thing in my world.
Over the past couple of days, thinking I might have to replace it, I did a little research. DPREVIEW has a wonderful comparison widget and I spent a lot of time availing myself of it to determine what might be a suitable replacement. My conclusion is that there isn't one.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-30-2019, 06:50 PM
|
| |
Was the conversion a pricey proposition?
---------- Post added 05-30-19 at 18:59 ----------
I just saw the "click to view photo" link.
Makes me want to buy an older body just for the sake of converting it.
---------- Post added 05-30-19 at 19:00 ----------
I really like those monochrome ones.
---------- Post added 05-30-19 at 19:01 ----------
My favs are 2 & 6. Nice.
---------- Post added 05-30-19 at 19:03 ----------
Those are all older "film" lenses, yes? Lovely, no matter what lenses.
---------- Post added 05-30-19 at 19:08 ----------
There's a lot going on there for this to look so balanced. How do you get ISO 5000?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-29-2019, 01:49 PM
|
| |
I intentionally constrained the the date range to encompass the transition from CCD to CMOS and to limit the rise in MP count.
I'm wondering how these older DSLRs are holding up today. I'm especially curious about how their IQ stands up.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-29-2019, 03:52 PM
|
| |
Nice. Interesting to see an image output by an APS-C sensor from 2013 with 24MP. At the height of the MP marketing wars it seemed that many sensors suffered from having too many pixels.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-27-2019, 09:39 PM
|
| |
I came to accept the Q cameras as a "system" after I realized a Q was never going to be "pocketable" beyond the 07 lens. I can take the entire Q system, two bodies and eight lenses, with me and it fits in this with room to spare for a random K-mount lens. As a result I will take it places where I would not take a larger camera and all it's lenses. On a light day my APSC requires at least this. My entire APSC system requires this and I'm still not not taking everything I own in the system. To be fair, when referring to my APSC system, "entire" would include several flash units, wireless triggers, gels, lighting stands, umbrellas, sand bags, etc.
I think of the Q system a bit like my Leatherman Wave kit (the entire kit). I'm not going to take my toolbox with me wherever I go but that Leatherman kit has proven more than capable of fixing more things on the spot than anyone realized at the time. It's way more than just better than nothing; it's a genuine micro toolkit and if it can't get you out of a small jam, you ain't in a "small" jam.
The Q System was dismissed early on by many reviewers but they didn't have the entire system at their disposal at it's initial release. The word "fun" was bandied about by a few critics but that was considered faint praise by most folks when they saw the price. I felt the same way but stuck it out until I had acquired the entire system including, and by no means an insignificant "add-on", the Adapter Q. It wasn't until I acquired the entire system and had everything it offers at my disposal that I "got it".
---------- Post added 05-27-19 at 21:43 ----------
Copy and thanks.
The micro 4/3 thing was huge; it was like the critic's darling for awhile. What happened?
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
05-23-2019, 03:26 PM
|
| |
This last one certainly illustrates where older p&s digicams fall down. I did a slight crop and a little dodging and burning but that was it. There's only so much that can be done before it loses that "thing" that made me pull over and get out of my car in below freezing temps, still wearing shorts from my trip to the beach earlier in the day. In the end it certainly conveys the moment, however, it does fail to illustrate it as best as possible
In all fairness this was a one of those times when no photo could have done the moment justice and it ends up being strictly about illustration, no matter. A more modern ruggedized p&s camera would certainly have provided a better illustration of the moment if for no other reason than the ability to shoot RAW. This is a thirty dollar beater, though, something I won't feel bad about if it takes a fall down the mountainside.
A little ways down the road I ran into an injured PCT hiker. His mates had gone ahead to set up camp and he was to meet them. It wasn't far but it was already below freezing and the temperature was continuing to fall as the sun disappeared; night was looming large in the east. His injury didn't appear to be anything serious enough to insist he let me take him down to an Urgent Care so I put his pack on the roof rack and drove him the couple remaining miles to his camp. After dropping him off I thought about the kind of p&s camera I would take with me on a once in a lifetime trip through such rugged terrain. I decided I would do what I did ten years ago and find the best rugged p&s camera I could find.
For everyday camping and hiking though, the Oly is a beater that's a keeper....
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
05-22-2019, 10:42 PM
|
| |
Spent some time at the DMV in Dana Point and picked the Oly as "camera of the day". I got home and reviewed the pix I took; they all look fine. Many did look better with about a stop underexposed but IIRC most P&S digicams from around 2010 needed to be stopped down as a rule in order to not blow out the highlights. Nothing new, just gotta follow some old rules; kinda like remembering how different film stocks need to be treated.
The first one is as it came out of the camera and I think it's fine but with a slight crop I was reminded of old postcards I saw as a kid so I spent about 15 minutes in GIMP to make the colors more closely resemble what I remember.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
05-21-2019, 09:03 PM
|
| |
Back in the day these would have cost almost $1000.00 altogether. Today, they're less than $100 for all three and they still capture pleasing images. I sort of previously owned, or almost owned, the lot of them at one time or another.
My first modern digital camera was a Canon A85 but it developed some problems and Canon replaced it with an A95. For several years that A95 went with me everywhere. I even went so far as to acquire all the accessories: all the lens converters, filters, even a waterproof housing. It was the perfect "camera system" for traveling on my motorbike all around California when I first moved here. Looking back on that compact little kit it was a bit like prototyping a Q system. Lithium batteries were becoming all the rage at work and I was given a mess of partially used ones to re-use and recycle. I used them in the A95. Bad Idea. I know better with this one.
I had the first iteration of the Lumix and thoroughly enjoyed it during a 45 day, 16,000+ mile, Amtrak Rail Pass trip. It went into storage for a bit and when I unpacked it, it no longer worked. I didn't have the presence of mind at the time to just check the battery connections, so I binned it. Not one of my smarter moves. The bright side I guess is that this 2nd gen iteration is considered to be a bit better and the price this time around assuages any remorse over losing my old one.
The Tough 8000 was the one that got away. Returned actually. When I was shopping for a p&s for my Rail Pass trip the Lumix was just the better choice and owning both would have been a very expensive proposition. I liked everything about the Olympus but it was the 720p video of the Lumix that ended up being the deciding factor. I never forgot how great the Oly felt in hand, compact and seemingly indestructible, it was a... wait for it... tough decision to make the right choice for my trip.
That was then and this is now and now I got all three back (in a roundabout one way or another sorta way). These aren't going to replace any of my other cameras but none of my other cameras are old-school, pocketable, Instamatic-like, point and shoots (my phone is not a camera). This weekend I'm headed to the mountains to do some hiking and play with them a bit.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-15-2019, 07:23 PM
|
| |
Honestly, the hurricane was more than a bit anti-climactic when taken in context. In St. Augustine the rain was steady but only occasionally sideways; when it did get bit heavy, doorways and my foul weather jacket kept me relatively dry.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-13-2019, 11:19 PM
|
| |
I agree with the sentiment expressed earlier that people who want one really want one. I'll add, however, that once you have one you never want to get rid of it.
I was lucky to be able to get the entire system with both Q and Q7 bodies during the sweet spot of pricing. There is something truly unique about the system that simply works in spite of the limitations, a Zen-like synchronicity to it; it becomes perfect at just the right time it needs to be so. The lenses are perfectly suited to the camera and you'll find yourself using the so-called "toy" lenses more often than you think. There is "just something about it" that is, dare I say, "inspiring", and that is exactly what good equipment does in any creative field
How inspiring? During a hurricane in Saint Augustine I was inspired to take a walk though the historic section at midnight with nothing more than the Q and Mount Shield Lens (07).
They're not art but the Q got me out when everyone was was inside hunkering down...
FWIW, these are all straight out of the camera with no processing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-13-2019, 10:03 AM
|
| |
Perhaps the last differentiating factor for people who care is lens quality. My 4 year old Droid 2 has a Sony 1/2.4 21 Mp sensor and the Q has an unbranded 1/2.3 12.4 Mp sensor. Put those two sensors in identical proper camera bodies with identical fixed lenses and the Sony sensor could very well win the contest.
The Q isn't a fixed lens camera, though, and the non-toy Q series lenses can't be compared to the tiny lenses on any smartphone. It seems to me that the lens quality more than makes up for the smaller number of Mps. I feel like a 21Mp image captured using a tiny lens can't be enlarged much bigger than a 12.4Mp image captured using the higher quality Q lenses.
I use the original Q as an example because anything that applies to it also applies to the Q7 and it's larger sensor.
As for the system's much speculated upon "death", considering the price any of the Q series still fetch on the used market it's no surprise that Ricoh won't commit to the end of the line. There is still money to be made and right now people other than Ricoh are currently making it on the used market. Are other "discontinued" compact mirrorless camera systems holding their value as well as the Q system?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
05-03-2017, 12:29 PM
|
| |
Fast and accurate focus isn't just about sports. On the contrary, I believe it is part and parcel of the 35mm SLR legacy. HCB certainly didn't have the advantage of auto focus so he had to work within the constraints of his era's technology and the techniques of the day. Our era of technology and techniques of the today include fast, accurate, auto focus. Unless you're a Pentax owner and that makes no sense to me.
I'm certainly no HCB but "The Decisive Moment" was one of the reasons I took up photography in my teens, well before auto focus, digital or otherwise. Whether it's the light, someone's reaction to "the moment" , or the that first crack as the bat contacts the ball and breaks, a camera needs to be ready and I don't feel that Pentax's auto focus capabilities are ready for "the moment". They may never be. Hopefully when the time comes that I can afford and upgrade it will be within the Pentax brand but after years of waiting for the auto focus to meet modern standards
My kit certainly works for me a good bit of the time but it limits what I can do, many moments have fleeted with the only evidence being a shot of "the moment missed".
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
07-29-2016, 01:05 AM
|
| |
A lot of unsettling delays culminated in taking the car instead of the bike. A bit disappointed but I made up for it by bringing my APSC kit as well.
The Q kit, however, is allowing me to take a complete "system" on longer hikes that would have turned what's supposed to be fun into a chore with a similar APSC or FF kit. The new lens is working out great, also. Pix soon.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
07-15-2016, 03:15 PM
|
| |
in the Netflix series, "Stranger Things", episode 2.
Just sayin'.
|
