eleison

​ Let me translate: More technology IS better unless less technology is more.. It's like pie.. Have too many different types of pies, you get sick of pies in general and like the basic pies better.. however, when there are very few pies, or pies of the same type, you yearn for different types of pies - exotic pies, etc... People are strange that way. I think Hugh Hefner once said he misses having JUST ONE girlfriend. At the time, he was dating 5 different girls. For the regular average joe, I think dating 5 different girls would be a godsend. I guess it's kinda like the "pasture is always better on the other side" mentality... For the record, I think Hugh is right -- dating five gorgeous women at once would get boring..... yeah, right!!!! sign me up!! hahahahaha... That would never get boring. Cameras and video equipment -- perhaps; but not attractive women. .hahhaha

​ This is also the same reason canon will not release a gh4 competitor this year. It will cannibalize their cinema line. If canon cannibalizes their cinema line, it would basically be Canon admitting they made a mistake when they created the cinema division which was suppose to be their next cash cow. It's a pride issue. Canon is a very prideful company... and they are losing market share not to mention mind share.. The issue with the cinema division is that it is marginally successful enough NOT to be dismantled... but not successful enough to be a cash cow or drive sales at canon. When canon de-emphasize their cinema division, that is when we know they are serious about competing with the gh4 (gh5???) and the a7s (a7s II???) of the worlds...

​I remember a time when the 5d ii was back ordered for months after it's introduction. However, when the newer 5d iii was introduced, you could pretty much buy it the next day... As for the original 7D, it was months before stores were giving discounts.. Now it looks like a lot of places are... Oh well, let's see what canon has at NAB. I doubt they have anything.. it's always "canon will bring something at the END of the year".... just like how people say, "this will be the year the Cubs win the world series"...

​The top used DSLR on flickr is the 5+ year old 7d.... http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2015/01/rankings.jpg http://petapixel.com/2015/01/09/popular-cameras-flickr-2014/

​"You CANNOT make friends with the rock stars. That's what's important. If you're a rock journalist - first, you will never get paid much. But you will get free records from the record company. And they'll buy you drinks, you'll meet girls, they'll try to fly you places for free, offer you drugs... I know. It sounds great. But they are not your friends. These are people who want you to write sanctimonious stories about the genius of the rock stars, and they will ruin rock and roll and strangle everything we love about it." -Lester Bangs from Almost Famous That being said, I like unfiltered reviews. If Eoshd was filtered, it would lose a lot of it's audience. That is one of the reasons Eoshd is popular. Right or wrong... Uninformed or misinformed. The reviews are one man's opinion. It's good to have views that are not filtered through the "system".... If I wanted the official talking points, I could go to the manufacturer's press release (or various other sites which are not as popular but kowtow to the manufacturer). Soooo yes. Keep up the good work. Complain and rip apart. It will ultimately help the manufacturer's build camera's that are more useful in the video field. Besides, revenue can be generated from other sources than the camera makers.

​ Rebels mostly... But, hey, if Canon thinks they can continue to count on the average consumer buying their stuff EVEN THOUGH their products have gotten progressive worse compared to the competition -- so be it. Average consumer buys mostly on brand, and right now canon is throwing away their brand for a quick buck :-)

​Canon is already doing that - "its a dslr and not a video camera". And people are starting to take the hint. That's why canon is not selling as many camera's as they use to. Sony and panasonic on the other hand are saying, "hey, you can take images and video with our cameras. Let me show you". People are listening and they are BUYING.

Between dynamic range and low light performance, Canon is too far behind. They make good dslr camera (1DC, c300, etc, etc..), but on the imaging side, it doesn't look good. Canon imaging sensors are obsolete. Unless they use sony sensors, I don't think it really matters if canon decides to "spray" features. After all, I'm not sure people will pay $3000+ for a dslr that shoot great video, but has bad dynamic range, iso range, etc. "Spraying" works if you have the technology to do segmentation. Otherwise, it's another word for "crippling". Canon will not have a great camera for another 2 year at the minimum. That being said, my next camera will be the new version of the a7s..

​My prediction is "no". These two camera's will be a failure. After all, professional photographers are losing their jobs left and right. Who is going to buy theses camera's? Unemployed professional photographers? Probably not. They don't have the $$$. Maybe, Landscape people? Sure.. How many of them exist in the world? Not that many. The sweet spot for the dslr/video/photo/mirrorless, etc market consists of soccer mom's and enthusiasts that will spend up to $3,000 for the "best camera". The "best camera" must include include great video as defined by the gh4 and the a7s. These two camera's does not fill the majority of their needs. My take on this situation: Occam's razor - Canon management does not know what they are doing... They have the tech. Just look at 1dc. This also dove tails in another saying. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

​Canon is pimping out their most valuable property -- their brand for short term profits. This can only last for so long until the general public stop buying their rebels. The number of prosumer camera's that canon are selling (i.e., NOT REBELS) are down if I am not mistaken. Once their brand is tarnish for the general population, canon will really be in trouble...

​ Unless you want shallow DOF on a native sony zoom :-) However, that's more of an issue if one is taking pictures. F4 seems to be fast enough for video.

I want to move to Sony FE mount also. However, i noticed all their good lenses are slow. There are no zooms with higher aperture F2.8. I think faster lenses are just too big. Sony wants to keep their mirrorless systems small. That's what they are trying to sell to the public - mirrorless systems are smaller. I think once mirrorless systems get even more popular, sony will introduce native faster zoom lenses. However, these lenses will be as big as the lenses we have currently in the dslr field. At the end of the day, people will notice full frame mirrorless isn't substantially smaller than dslrs... I think sony wants to hide that fact for right now..... in conclusion, just an opinion, but I think no native fast zoom lenses for a while. But I'm no expert :-)

​#1 reason (imho) is lenses :-( a lot of people invested in canon lenses. Yes, you can adapt the lenses, but you miss out on stabilization and fast/accurate auto focusing especially for those that want to take pictures in addition to videos. Yeah, it seemed like a lot of the new canon bodies @ CES were things that you can find in cracker jack boxes or toys you can find in McDonalds happy meals. This is 2015... Canon.. Really?? are you SERIOUS?

​Face to face (in real life), people don't "bitch and moan" to a madman. j/k hahahaha.. Things are more civilized. On the internet, nobody really knows "dick from harry" hahahahaha... If someone is slightly "off", people will complain. The internet has basically no filter which is nice. Echo chambers are harder to come by... On the internet, it's easier to get to the truth (I said easier :-) Yes, a used Canon 1dc is probably the best camera under $7,000. How many people actually care? Not as much. Compare the number of users in the gh4/a7s subforums to those in the canon cinema subforums in dvxuser. There's a 2 to 1 difference; not only that but, there are many people in the cinema forums asking questions about the gh4/a7s. The sweet spot for video is $2,500 and lower. That's where most interest will be garnered and where most clicks will be derived from. At that price point, many people can own the camera from soccer moms to hobbyist to film students. At that price point, the the quality of the video is also good enough that pros are also interested. It use to be higher end products would drive sells of lower end products. Win the race on "sunday, sell on monday." Have a "halo product" and the lower products will benefit. The unwashed masses will see X or Y professional use X or Y product and than buy the lesser or more affordable product the next day. I think that was/is canon's marketing strategy. It's not working. Just because canon cinema cameras are better than most products, I'm not going to buy their lesser end products because their premier products are awesome. While Andrew does make a good case for buying a used 1DC, I'm not going to be spending $7,000 on a used camera. That is a bridge too far for me. Those that need the extra quality will spend the money -- and in my humble opinion, they have.... but that is not where the $$$$ or the "clicks" are derived from... Camera's like the gh4 and the a7s.. or hell, the nx1.. those are where the money, interests, clicks, etc.. are being generating in...

You guys are all wrong. The best camera of 2014 is the Arri Alexa Plus... Excellent dynamic range. Great resolution... Most of my favorite movies were filmed with it. It's kinda expensive.. but I'm sure the price will go down in the future.

​Agreed. It's a good sign that people are willing to be open. Within a year and a half, the 1D C was £12,000, now it's current value is around £5,000. Wow... the depreciation hit is almost equal to the cost of a good used car!!! However, I'm pretty sure the previously owner who is no doubt, a film professional, got his £7,000 worth of use from the camera. If I were to have bought the camera new, my wife would be totally pissed especially if most of the time the camera was in the closet (a high likelihood. hahahaahhaha; let's not kid ourselves..) Canon wants to play in the "pro market". Sony, Panasonic, etc play in the "enthusiast/ pro" market -- more customers, more money and more resources to iterate and innovate. I bet within a year, the 1DC will only be worth £2,000... probably lower. But by then, I'm sure Andrew will get his £3,000 worth of use from it. Most enthusiast (like me) will be better served by buying something a lot cheaper. We will probably NOT be getting £3,000 worth of use from the 1DC within a year. A gh4 or a7s is a different story. They are cheap enough that when a year is up, the depreciation cost is in the range where our significant others will not yell at us... at least not too loudly that the neighbors would hear :-) Besides, the depreciation hit will be low enough, that we can probably once again convince ourselves and our wives that we NEED the next great thing from sony, panasonic, blackmagic, etc... the cycle will continue and sooner or later, not only will this great new thing be cheaper than Canon's professional cameras, it will even be better.. a lot better. Hubris before the fall...

There's a reason why the price of canon cinema cameras are falling fast. I think everyone BUT canon knows why :-) In the future, ​I'll consider picking one up if the camera's under $2,000. But by then, Sony or Panasonic will probably have a camera that does 6k RAW with awesome low light, in body stabilization, etc.... for about the same price.... SoooOOoo... After thinking about it some more... perhaps, I wouldn't be picking one up after all.. :-) Canon demands that it products be expensive... more expensive than most people are willing to pay, so instead people buy other cameras that maybe slightly inferior but gives better "value". I'm sure the canon 1dc is a great machine, but for most people the extra features does not warrant the extra $$$ (especially for a used camera). As new cameras appear from other manufacturers, canon prices do not seem to fall fast enough for other enthusiasts to care.. It's only a matter of time before other manufacturers eclipse canon BOTH on quality and price. With every iteration of the gh4 and A7s, they are getting better and better. Can you imagine how awesome a gh5 or a A7s II would be??? These cameras (especially the a7s II) could be a reality within the next 12 months. Want to guess what the resale value of the 1DC will be then? Probably not low enough for me to even care.

I like Canon -- less and less each year. Oh well, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. There are many choices out in the market. I own a canon 7d. I use to feel pride when I shot with canon gear. I don't any more. That being said, the 7d is still a great stills sports camera; at least for the hobbist like me. I wish I had the same pride in canon as I use to. I have more pride in the gh2. Oh well, Canon has to be careful. Piss enough people off and nobody will come back.

People say that content is king. I totally agree. Some people say that the A7s while great, when will someone really use the low light ability of the camera? All, I can say is check out this video. If you think this video is awesome, then the A7s makes sense. The more reading that I do between this camera and the gh4, it looks like the gh4 will be the better camera for most people.

Actually, OK Go exists because of young girls who watch and buy their tracks. The band doesn't care about middle age video camera snobs who yell, "the music video is shaky!!!"... :-)

Music is subjective.. Some of the hottest artist are DJ's (Avicii, deadmaus, Tiesto, skrillex, etc.) and a lot of these artist just use computer software to create their music (fruityloops)... You either survive or you don't. You either get paid or you don't. All musicians who expect to make a good living as musicians now must tour.... The era where a musician did not have to tour is over. Remember, before vinyl records, cd's, etc... Artists were lowly paid artist that travelled from party to party in horse carts being paid by the host. The idea that musicans (good or bad) must be highly paid is a new construct. At the end of the day, who cares???? The music industry either adapts or it dies. As a musician you either adapter or you don't. However, the time that musicans can just rely on royalities from music they created 5-10 years ago OR licensing fees is slowly coming to an end. And in my humble opinion, it's not because of piracy.

Who cares? Do people know how many bands there are out there???? It's like photography. When it was expensive and hard to create photographs, photographers made a good living. Now, with the advent of inexpensive dslr, equipment, etc. It's very hard to make a living off of pictures. Music. You don't need a dedicated sound studio anymore. You don't even need a label. Hell, the main artists are making most of their money from concerts and not really from the music itself. It's about the experience. After all, these very same artist that are complaining that people are "stealing" their music and putting it on youtube... guess what.... these same artist would yell bloody murder if google decided to only allow "indie band music" on their sites. Have you notices how youtube initially was full of indie band music.. but yet the main stream, big label, music people have slowly tried to muscle into that media space? Putting their music on the front page.. trying to marginalized the indie bands? If an artist think that google is complicit and hurting revenue.... He should take everything they have off of youtube.. .all the music.. all the video, etc. I have a feeling that this artist will get lost in obsurity - career ending. Remember, your audience only buys your tickets, merchandise, you itunes track etc. only if they have listened to your song before. Where are you going to put your song? MTV?? they don't play music video's anymore. On the radio? Clear channels owns the playlist and you are most likely not on it. Besides, a lot of people like to listen to music they already saved on their iphones/android devices when driving; and if they haven't heard you before in someone's illegal wedding video, or some place else... you aren't going to be on their device. Face it. There is a lot of music out there right now. A lot of bands.. etc... Music is not as rare as it use to be be.. and it's not as valuable. If people don't like it, then they should take their music off of youtube.. take it off of vimeo.. etc.. Put their music on their own website where the only people who care to listen are their parents and a few friends.

I wonder how he does the slow-mo. I heard that on the T2i, you can get a faster famerate, but it's only at 720p. However, some of his stuff is really sharp for 720p.

    It's not a loss leader.  I stil think they are making good money off of it.  Blackmagic is smaller and more nimble compared to the bigger companies.  After all, I bet Blackmagic doesn't have to pay for the legions of field representitives, and other support staff that Canon and the other manufactors have.  I don't even think Blackmagic has a very big advertising budget as compared to the big guys. They are cutting their margins because they can.....  it's their competitive advantage compared to the big guys and blackmagic is exploiting it to the max.  After all, the hype of the 5d3 RAW will doubtlessly become less pronounced now...

Dslr sales are falling because the main manufactors aren't giving a good reason for people to upgrade.  They are repacking the same tripe for the past few years.  If they want dslr sales to improve, they need to sell their "regular" dslr with the same quality as their cinema line.  They need to innovate -- add more features, etc.  Perhaps make their camera's even smaller, etc...   In the audio/visual field, there are many manufactors who aren't losing sales.  For instance, you have gopro, you have blackmagic, etc.  Granted I agree with a lot of people -- we are at the point where the camera doesn't really matter for the film makers.  Movies and features can be made with almost any camera now.  HOWEVER, people do buy products that are "compelling".  Look at gopro.  How many people are actually going to go wingsuit flying.. OR motorcrossing?  OR swimming with sharks, etc...  However, these same people buy gopros by the boatload -- gopro's are "compelling".. they are the best at what they do at a price point where consumers will buy.   The dslr manufactors better start introducing "compelling" products @ a price point where consumers will buy or else they will be left behind... actually, they are already starting to be left behind.