Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 814151617181920 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 196
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,644
    Default
    That's good. I wish the p4k had a viewfinder. Then I would be happy buying it. All of the emphasis on phone usage says to me that RAW video needs to be here yesterday on all models to make these mirrorless offerings a more viable alternative in the marketplace. I don't think it is wise for the makers to ignore this tidal wave. Not the time to keep features in reserve because at this rate, the camera business is going to be in demise 3-5 years from now anyway.

    A friend was showing me his new Iphone last night. The ability for folks to shoot, edit and post video instantly is just too enticing. Not for me as I did not like the look of the end result, but I am a geek so to speak. We as the content creators need tools that can offer something better than what is in folks pockets or we are toast as well.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,171
    Default
    I haven't shot with the latest iPhone but on my 8 Plus, I have been pretty disappointed with the stills, the video is usable here and there. Both look ok for social media but once you examine the images and video on Retina 5K screen, they look quite lousy, noisy, aliased, almost posterized looking
    unless the light is really bright and even. Almost no DR, the images only look good if the DR is very narrow and controlled, even with "manual" exposure using Filmic Pro and ProCamera for stills. I'm sure the iPhone 10/11 images look incrementally better than my 8 Plus but for now, I am quite
    content with stills from our 80D and footage from our XT-3. Having tried to deploy it for some pro level projects, I am quite soured on iPhone cinematography. It's okay looking but real cameras still have a pretty big edge, although I agree, for the average consumer, Phones are IT.
    P&S are dead and even mirrorless are basically out of contention except for photographers, pro and hobbyist.

    It's funny, just a few years ago I was constantly bombarded from friends and relatives with requests on which DSLR to buy because they wanted to take their photography to the next level.

    Not getting very many of those requests for gear to consider anymore.
    Last edited by puredrifting; 12-05-2019 at 12:39 PM.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,211
    Default
    FWIW, DXO marked iPhone 8+ at 94 and the iPhone 11 Pro Max at 117 (Huawei Mate 30 Pro and Xiaomi Mi CCP Pro Premium lead at 121 ... not accidentally, many contend that it's basically the same smartphone that is designed to bypass various trade sanctions placed against Huawei). There's a Finnish YouTuber, who's also an Olympus "ambassador". He pixel-peeped at iPhone 11 vs. an Olympus MFT camera and found an MFT far superior. Naturally, he missed the bigger point and that is iPhone11 is "good enough" for most consumers already and, those enthusiasts and pros who dp want to pixel-peep, have either moved on to full frame or are in the process of doing so. And that's simply because they won't be left with much choice.

    The big move by the smartphone manufacturers against the photo-video hybrids is discussed in the adjacent thread. The new Qualcomm chips will deliver a superior performance to the current generation of smartphones both in stills and video and will also exceed performance of most hybrid photo-video cameras for a fraction of the cost (albeit not under all circumstances). And that leaves the pro market to fend for itself.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,877
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post
    And that's simply because they won't be left with much choice.
    And that is the scary part, that we won't have choices in the future... I've probably taken WAY more pictures on my iPhones than I have on my DSLR's(removing high-frame rate sports from the equation), simply because it's always with me and I think my iPhone 11Pro is pretty darn good, BUT it still doesn't compare to real still and video cameras. It looks great on its gorgeous little OLED screen, but when you look at it on anything resembling a "big" screen, like a 15" laptop, the images can quickly fall apart, especially anything shot in a "light challenged" environment. LOTS of light, no problem, you can probably fool most people, but when you're not in those ideal conditions... Modern camera phones may be able to punch above their weight, because of "computational photography" tricks, but the teeny-tiny sensors still suck in low-light.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,228
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Bassman2003 View Post
    That's good. I wish the p4k had a viewfinder. Then I would be happy buying it. All of the emphasis on phone usage says to me that RAW video needs to be here yesterday on all models to make these mirrorless offerings a more viable alternative in the marketplace. I don't think it is wise for the makers to ignore this tidal wave. Not the time to keep features in reserve because at this rate, the camera business is going to be in demise 3-5 years from now anyway.

    A friend was showing me his new Iphone last night. The ability for folks to shoot, edit and post video instantly is just too enticing. Not for me as I did not like the look of the end result, but I am a geek so to speak. We as the content creators need tools that can offer something better than what is in folks pockets or we are toast as well.
    At the lower end, being more creative should bypass any ability to shoot raw. I shot an event two months ago with an EOS R. It was 11am-2pm in a big venue that was a mix of shaded areas and harsh sun directly overhead. 80% of the shots have blown highlights, most to the point they've gone "nuclear". Of course, it wasn't a problem at all and they were happy with the video. As a small business, you're better off spending on content that will grab attention vs. look nice and be boring. I'm trying to avoid an all-encompassing content is king argument and am mostly referring to smaller projects.

    Like R&G mentions, I think they need to improve on the mixed and low lighting front, otherwise the phones are there. Ideally with low budget content creation you'd get the same rate if using a phone or a mirrorless and you get to choose the appropriate tool.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,211
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Run&Gun View Post
    ... Modern camera phones may be able to punch above their weight, because of "computational photography" tricks, but the teeny-tiny sensors still suck in low-light.
    Technically speaking, the smartphone manufacturers can provide a very low count MPX sensor/camera for the low light performance. They make "lower than regular" but still high enough MPX module because people don't care. I have a friend who is an early morning jog junkie. He runs along the Miami Beach oceanfront and will usually snap a few photos at sunrise. Or before the sunrise with the orange street lights. And those don't have the "filmic" noise. They have the "blue powder" noise and his selfie face has an orange cast on top of that. Do you think he cares?

    PS. And don't start me on a shot composition. "Are you shooting the pier?" - "Yes" - "Why is the empty sky seventy percent of the frame? You want to shoot the pier, shoot the pier".
    Last edited by DLD; 12-05-2019 at 08:25 PM. Reason: too many words


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,211
    Default
    One of the reasons the current RF mount models are being so heavily discounted is because there's an expected high megapixel full frame announcement. CR has it at 75 MPX and, if it's priced around $3,500, then it would make sense to have a 30 MPX EOS R slotting into a "half-the-price" position. Sony's 61 MPX A7R MK IV is selling well at $3,500 - Camera of the Year by the DP Review - and Canon will try to edge it on (some) specs.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,644
    Default
    MPX wars are stupid imho. I think Canon would get more mileage with pros if they made the 5D mirrorless in the 30's and improved the light gathering & DR. This is kind of their big opportunity to get a lot of DSLR users to go mirrorless - with their brand. If I see 75MPX I am just not that interested to be throwing away all of those pixels and filling up hard drives with extra processing time... By all accounts, the need for more pixels has diminished in recent years. Printing is way down and upscaling technology is the best it has ever been. One does not need to feed a photo lab with monster sized files to make wonderful prints.

    Just seems like they are chasing the wrong car. But maybe there are more people who are woo'ed by that than folks who want to keep it real.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,211
    Default
    High MPX count allows for all sorts of crops and aspect ratios. The idea with 75 MPX or thereabouts is to get a medium format performance from full frame for the portraits, landscape, architecture, products, food, etc.

    For video shooters looking for affordable gear, Canon is rumored to come out with C100 MKIII. Its specs are unknown but will probably be on the FS-5 level - 4K with XF-AVC or CRL.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Samuel H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    7,961
    Default
    I think phones could "easily" improve their low-light abilities to m43 levels if customers really cared about it, but they don't.
    Getting rid of the color filters allows more than twice the light to hit the sensor. And combining exposures from two sensors (a color and a b/w one) further helps reduce noise. I think two 1/1.7" sensors, one color and one b/w, could match an m43 with a fast-ish prime in terms of low-light ability.
    This is what the Huawei P20 pro did: it had a triple camera, with a main 40Mpix one and a secondary 20Mpix one that was only b/w and helped a lot in low light, even though it was a smaller sensor with half the area of the primary one.
    I never used that phone, but either technical issues when merging the color and b/w images were bad enough to kill that low light advantage, or Huawei found that users cared more about having an ultrawide option than they did about low light, because the P30 pro killed that secondary b/w sensor and put an ultrawide instead.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 814151617181920 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •