|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
02-05-2019, 02:41 AM
|
| |
I've realized everything online is mostly indirectly aimed at creating demand for products (" content marketing") and most of it aimed at consumers. There's also a lot of lies about cameras. So, I'll gradually pull out of all of this and keep using what I already own or sell it and buy something else that makes sense to me (without buying into all the marketing lies that we see online). 9 camera models out of 10 out there are designed with the goal to sell stuff to customers instead of being designed for photography. And even with the best camera out there the reviewers completely miss to present the most important capabilities of the model because these guys doing camera reviews are not even educated photographers.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-27-2019, 05:48 AM
|
| |
Image quality of micro 43 used to be good enough not to get into full frame (Pentax K1 was way too expensive and image quality wasn't better than micro43).
But now, I'm afraid that the image quality of 1" sensor is gonna have to be good enough to avoid getting into micro 43 :-)
---------- Post added 27-01-19 at 13:49 ----------
Compact camera will do.
The reason why camera prices are increasing isn't related to the equipment, it's related to falling volumes that require significant price increases to pay back R&D, regardless of sensor size and lens speed. The EOS R is the low end product, Canon are going to release a "professional" model even more expensive than the EOS R.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-27-2019, 12:50 AM
|
| |
Yes, you get the point. Those brands keep address market segment left by others. Size of camera body does matter especially once a lens is mounted on it: I already received an accreditation for press photo based on the size of my camera gear. The general public as no clue about sensor size, Olympus could even fit a 1 inch sensor in that E-MX1, it would still look like a pro camera (without actually being a pro camera).
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-26-2019, 04:24 AM
|
| |
I get your point: it's important for the marketer to put himself in the position of customers to understand competing product alternatives. To me it looks like the kind of camera models are the outcome of companies juggling with the situation they are in: budget long term and short term, type of shareholders that defines how much risk they are allowed to take.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-25-2019, 11:12 PM
|
| |
Yes. My impression is that cameras are getting more and more consumer electronic devices aimed at hobby photographers, and it is now evidenced by dp review that advertising can make or break a camera (given that it is not a bad camera). We've seen the Pentax K-1 being lowly appreciated due to it's lacking AF tracking performance, while it is not aimed at sport photography. And we see the X-M1 very well promoted by dp review, while in fact it is an expensive camera for the sensor size provided, in spite of innovative AF tracking claims. For me, this E-MX1 is the evidence that advertising money can seriously change the way a camera product is perceived by the community of customers, unfortunately.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-25-2019, 03:56 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the link. Looking at a number of photographs, he is using a 45mm f1.2 prime lens allowing 1/800 at ISO 800, image quality is good, subject in focus most of the time. But as soon as he shoots with a zoom, even f2.8 wide open at ISO 4000, images suffer. Should be fine for web publishing and illustration photographs beside text. Again a matter of enlargement ratio between the sensor size and displayed size.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-25-2019, 06:14 AM
|
| |
I've seen a number of tourists using micro 4/3 cameras when sight seeing. I have never seen a single pro using a 4/3 for sports, it's much more rare than even Pentax. And I've been a workshops, even met some other Pentax user guys but zero micro 4/3. So I guess fast AF+frame/s u4/3 would cover a new demand out of the existing 4/3 user base, but will never bring in new customer already using better systems.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-25-2019, 04:16 AM
|
| |
The experience that I have with full frame on shooting sports indoors such as ice skating, hockey, ballet, gym, martial sports, is that ISO setting is minimum 1600, most of the time 3200 and 6400, downsized FF images give about 12 good megapixels, and I'm guessing pretty close in the same conditions images from the E-MX1 will be good enough for posting on the web and A4 prints.
Actually, my current understanding of camera formats is that apsc is good enough for everything that goes into the web, paper magazines, and books. Full frame low res. is good for sport photography for web, magazines. And medium format is good for commercial printing. These are mainstream usages that fit together in the real world. Micro 4/3 works well at low ISO but using it for high shutter speed / high ISO shooting will be too much of a stretch especially given the price that Oly are asking for.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
01-25-2019, 01:41 AM
|
| |
The E-MX1 is a bold evidence that DP Review are totally biased in their reviews. The E-MX1 is as expensive as a full frame system. Performance wise, 60 frames per seconds is ridiculously useless as you'll get to throw away so many redundant frames. The E-MX1 is a camera that is aimed at amateurs who like to think of themselves as being professionals , but who are actually not professional at all. No professional would buy an E-MX1 system, there are simply too many better systems options. That said, the E-MX1 shows what efforts can be put into camera design itself. I would like to see such camera design effort from other brands , with using a larger sensor.
The problem of shooting sports is it requires fast shutter speeds; fast shutter speeds means higher ISO or faster lenses. So a camera system that has a great AF tracking system and small sensor is in the wrong corner of the camera system design triangle. Cameras such as 1Dx are in the correct corner of camera design tradeoffs: high AF tracking, lower count of bigger pixels and faster glass , is the right design mix for shooting sports; the E-MX1 is not.
|
