Jump to content

unadog

Members
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The overall issue, I think, is that a camera is a whole "ecosystem", basically the basis of your "Brand/Style/Look." Who you are, what you are "selling" to the client or marketplace. Going back to the 1DsII days again, I remember pro's that had been using the 1Ds complaining that it took them 1 year to find the "look" that they wanted with the the 1Ds. Damned if tehy were going to upgrade to a new camera, and have to spend another year just to find what they were looking for in the next camera ... (The 1DsII was the first camera that made me st
  2. [quote name='Pierre_move' timestamp='1345801259' post='16390']And Canon producing a similar camera some day? Well yes of course.. the technology progresses, cpus get more powerfull, [/quote] I am not convinced that Canon has released their video-centric, pro-sumer follow-on to the 5D2 yet. The 5D3 is a really great, all around stills camera, with somewhat improved video (still probably the best all around DSLR video, with the D800 about/almost tied.) The T4i is a pretty nice, entry level stills camera, with about the same quality as the $8,000 1DsII from
  3. [quote name='Shawn_Lights' timestamp='1345779100' post='16362'] Going to have to disagree with you about the inside shots being ugly and the grain looking like digital. [/quote] Well, I come from a fashion photography background. The face was ugly, in both the RAW and the grade. I probably could not get beyond that. The lighting was harsh, deep furrows in the brow, etc. And that is not just a product of the resolution. The grain, well ... not sure what to say. Again, maybe my large format (4x5 or medium format), ISO 100 fashion background. It is hard to seperate
  4. [quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1345762961' post='16345'] You are damned right they have a risk aversion. They probably even have an entire risk assessment department! [/quote] I think this is a product of the economics of a large corporation. I helped start a subsidiary for a Fortune 5 company in 1995 that we grew to 600 employees and a multi-billion dollar business. Then Corporate changed directions and shut that company down (repurposed the employees.) We VP's would have loved to buy the company and run it, we could have make a few million per year
  5. Thanks for sharing. The RAW and resolution are nice. I think it will be a great niche camera to start. I loved the look of the later image (Shot 3), where she is in the "window/porch" toward dusk with the dress. That grades well too. The interior images and the sparkler images are somewhat ugly. That worries me a bit. Sensor video look? Lighting? I will have to reserve judgement on that until I see more. I have to say that I really do not like the grain of these images. It looks very digital and is quite distracting to me. I don't know why so many seem so confu
×
×
  • Create New...