Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by mike_tee_vee

  1. It's funny how the Japanese imaging leaders (Canon and Nikon) are using the American auto industry (i.e. Ford, GM) as the basis for their business models.  They are trying to sell the most products to the largest target audience while taking the least amount of risk.  If you follow EOSHD.com, the you are likely an outlier on Canon and Nikon's mass target audience list. 


    I paint Nikon with the same brush, as they're also out of touch.  A D300 successor is nowhere on the horizon, the D800 and D600 QC issues are your fault (not theirs), and the virtues of the V1 and D5200 were unintentional.

  2. gh3 got smashed right down.  funny thing is, I bet little to no real passion was put into the video mode on the nikon.  I imagine it was pure fluke, and a lack of software crippling.  whereas the gh3 had video given priority by its r+d guys it would seem.  I'm now looking at nikon with a lot more interest.


    Agreed on the pure fluke.  I believe Andrew said it best when a new leader has stumbled ass backwards into pole position!

  3. Please read up on my Speed Booster stuff sir. Already explained it all. It gives you 1 stop extra brightness so F4 becomes F2.8 in terms of exposure, and F1.4 becomes F1.0. The wide angle 24mm is the Samyang 24mm F1.4 on the Speed Booster. The SLR Magic lenses are T0.95 and used as-is, they are not Canon mount so don't fit the Speed Booster adapter. The 24-105mm costs around $800, price varies on country. In Europe it is about 600 euros used. Good lens.


    Andrew, how is the focus ring on the 24-105?  Is there enough travel between macro and infinity to achieve accurate manual focus?  I know Bloom said the 17-55 is too tight.

  4. There are no ethical implications to what a business choses to charge for its products. We live in a capitalist society where price action is governed by supply and demand. Canon's goal is to maximize profits. Demand will ultimately dictate price. As much as it sucks, Canon are under no moral obligation to provide cameras at a reasonable price for low budget filmmakers. Take a look at Apple. Margins on most of their products are significantly higher than the competition, yet the demand for them is through the roof.
  5. [quote name='Zach' timestamp='1348089321' post='18625']
    I am very underwhelmed by the GH3 footage so far. The colors just look strange to me

    It reminds me of the softness with the Mark III. However, the Mark III appears to have superior tonality.
  6. [quote name='sfrancis928' timestamp='1344534105' post='15216']
    I'm not so sure about that. For one thing, all of Sony's E-Mount lenses are APS-C only.

    I was watching a presentation on the NEX camera line and when asked about a full frame NEX the Sony official said there were currently no plans to make one, and he thought it was unlikely, mainly because the main point of those cameras is the compact design, and a huge full frame sensor would not really make sense.

    It's a shame, but we're probably stuck dealing with the Alpha Mount for full frame cameras from Sony.

    Why mess around with the Alpha Mount? Sticking with it is extremely limiting, and just another example of Sony's insistance on proprietary products. It's a legacy mount. Traditional DSLRs are at a saturation point, while the mirrorless market share is growing. I can easily see Sony placing the Alpha mount on the backburner much like Olympus and Panasonic have with the original Four Thirds mount.

    In terms of workflow, many of the lenses used on the FS100 will not be usable on an A99.

  7. Mike the GH2 does have Auto ISO in video mode, you just need to set your Creative Movie Mode shooting setting to P,S or A not M. I mean in the menus not on the dial - that should be set to movie mode.

    Regarding Auto ISO, say you want 1/50 sec and F1.8 to be constant, but want Auto ISO to vary based on changes in lighting while shooting. I didn't think it was possible to achieve this with the GH2, correct?
  8. [quote name='sfrancis928' timestamp='1342297378' post='13864']
    If you want to conform 60p to 24p should you keep your shutter speed close to 48? Or should you still set it to around 120?

    I'm also curious as to what shutter speed to use.

    Also, if you're essentially throwing out frames to conform 60p to 24p, how well does this intercut with native 24p?
  9. [quote author=emgesp link=topic=783.msg5666#msg5666 date=1338029679]
    [quote author=christianhubbard link=topic=783.msg5662#msg5662 date=1338007994]
    you're comparing it to an 85mm, and you should be comparing it to a 150mm.

    No, because a 75mm lens is not built the same as a 150mm lens. It only has the same FOV as a 150mm lens on a Full Frame.  A fast 75mm lens is much cheaper to make than a fast 150mm lens.

    Exactly.  Similarly the hood (not included) and lens cap should cost about the same as the ones for the Nikon 85mm 1.8, NOT a 150mm 1.8.  I hope no one is defending the $100 cost of the hood simply because we should be comparing it to a 150mm lens hood.
  • Create New...