Dear Panasonic : An Open Letter

Barry_Green said:
I mentioned the Sony lens in a prior post, but at f/3.8 on the wide and f/6 on the tele, it's not likely to be viewed as a direct replacement for a lot of ENG glass and you might even likely get shallower DOF off a 2/3" camera with a fast lens. There's about a 2.5-stop difference in DOF from 2/3" to S35, so f/6 on the Sony is about the same as f/2.8 on a 2/3" camera, and f/2.8 isn't too hard to find in ENG lenses, so I wonder if you'd really see any benefit over a 2/3" camera for ENG use?
Click to expand...

it's true, it isn't very fast. but it seems like the discussion of why the manufacturers don't put out a complete package is like a game of whack-a-mole. we make the rounds of all the reasons, but when we've addressed them all, we start over again.

suffice to say that i view the new sony lens as a proof of concept, if not a final solution.

the only truly unanswerable explanation that i can see for why the manufactures haven't put out a complete, integrated pro package is... that the manufacturers haven't put out a complete, integrated pro package.
 
"No, you wouldn’t use this lens to replace your trusty traditional Optimo, Fujinon Premiere, Alura, ZEISS or Cooke CXX zooms. This is a whole new ballgame–a different mind-set. Welcome to the era of 35mm motion picture point and shoot, with imagine stabilization, face detection, and lots of cross-over from the consumer/pro-sumer world." - from that link above
 
James0b57 said:
It costs an extra $2k in production cost to put the EVF anywhere but the back of the new cameras. I know, camera manufacturers want to put it in the right place, but it is just so expensive, they would rather give us savings.
Click to expand...
MPB said:
does it cost an extra $2k? that's such a precise figure. :)

i don't get the argument made there, except that consumer solutions are better. because they're cheaper. ok. sell the cheap cameras. make mine the one that costs $2k more, please. i'll spend at least that much on a proper viewer and the machined aluminum to attach it (poorly) to my inexpensive camera.
Click to expand...

Me too. I was being cheeky. It makes no sense to have the EVF at the back of the camera. and there is no 'cost' argument that makes sense either. It's an lcd connected by wires, it could be put anywhere for the same cost.

The human anatomy hasn't changed since the invention of the camera, so it seems odd that they keep getting the designs wrong.

 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Yes it is completely confirmed by Canon.
Click to expand...

Yes. The AF100 remains a screamingly-good-deal.

For owner-operators the puzzle remains a good (parfocal T2.8 or even T3 constant) affordable zoom for any of the big sensor cameras. I'm sure its been said before, but if RED can manage to rehouse someone else's glass into a PL mount cine style zoom for under $7k (or the Digioptic at $4K) an organization with the resources of Panasonic should be able to figure it out.

Off-the-shoulder ergonomics are a missed opportunity to be certain but the alternatives from Canon or Sony aren't any closer (so far).
 
Last edited:
Letzring said:
Off-the-shoulder ergonomics are a missed opportunity to be certain but the alternatives from Canon or Sony aren't any closer (so far).
Click to expand...

mmm, but then again, that is part of their business model. Just they haven't realize 'pro' has become much more low budget. There are guys working 12hrs days making minimum wage, and yet they are buying their own equipment. So they end up having to deal with intentionally tiered garbage. Cameras aren't just separated in price because of cost to produce anymore, tiering has become much more purposeful than ever before.
 
James0b57 said:
mmm, but then again, that is part of their business model. Just they haven't realize 'pro' has become much more low budget. There are guys working 12hrs days making minimum wage, and yet they are buying their own equipment. So they end up having to deal with intentionally tiered garbage. Cameras aren't just separated in price because of cost to produce anymore, tiering has become much more purposeful than ever before.
Click to expand...

I think calling the current crop of cameras "intentionally tiered garbage" is pretty loose talk.
 
"Intentionally tiered" is a mild understatement. I will be Rip Van Winkle by the time one of these manufacturer's finally releases what everyone has been asking for. The processor is not one generation, but TWO behind in Canon's new "flagship" C300, what the heck is that ? I mean I know the story, but come on already. You have a beautiful new sensor and you put a Digic III behind it?
 
The processor is not two, or even one generation behind in Canon's new "Flagship". The latest video processor they have is the Digic DV III. That is not the same as the Digic III, it's a different product. Digic III is for SLRs. Digic DV is for video cameras, and the latest iteration is Digic DV III. That's what the brand-new XF100/105 and XF300/305 have, and that's what the C300 has.

This thing about it being an old processor is just misinformation and should stop being repeated, because it's wrong. The C300 is using the latest video technology that Canon has.
 
Barry_Green said:
The processor is not two, or even one generation behind in Canon's new "Flagship". The latest video processor they have is the Digic DV III. That is not the same as the Digic III, it's a different product. Digic III is for SLRs. Digic DV is for video cameras, and the latest iteration is Digic DV III. That's what the brand-new XF100/105 and XF300/305 have, and that's what the C300 has.

This thing about it being an old processor is just misinformation and should stop being repeated, because it's wrong. The C300 is using the latest video technology that Canon has.
Click to expand...

My bad. I stand corrected.
It is however a processor introduced in 2009 and will be 3 years old in little over a month. It might be the latest technology Canon offers, but I certainly doubt this is the latest video technology that Canon has...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top