tomekk

I think he meant that this is unlikely to happen to the commercial world before we die? Therefore, raw will be with us for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, makes sense in this type of photography. 

2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I put in Photographers and was surprised to see it was only 2% as I can see definitely technology emerging that will make the capture part of the process far more automated. 

Why? In what genre? If someone is just a picture taker and that's his only skill then of course automation could potentially harm him because he relies only on the capture part. Digital is already harming picture takers, anyway. Great capture part is more often than not basic requirement to an award winning photograph nowadays. It's one piece of the puzzle (least important, IMHO). I'd love not to have to worry about AF/DOF/retouching people and just get on with what's important in the photo ;). Automation of the capture part only could wipe off bottom end of "photographers". Admittedly, this could be most people who think they're photographers nowadays? We would need to define who a photographer is in the first place and then run this algorithm ;).  

2 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I'd rather have what I need, with the occasional glitch, than have the feature lacking entirely.

Me too, if I'm not in a situation where I can't have another shot but that's a different camera, different target buyer and different race to get through. The key is to have options so we can choose the best camera for our needs :).

31 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's always a compromise.

The most reliable F1 car does not last for 10 years like your reliable town run-about does it?!

The engine goes pop after 2 or 3 races and the parts have an ultra short lifespan.

They get through a race reliably... That is different.

Yeah, but they increased reliability and kept performance, so it can be upped to get the job done for the task it was built for, right? If you target race, get it reliable enough to get them through a race. Likewise, if you target pros get them reliable to get them through their "race". It's not impossible and Sony A9 is an example (or it's next iteration will be).

BTW. Modern town cars don't last much longer than warranty period ;). It's a design/business choice. Keep cars cheaper so people can "afford" them by using worse parts and make money on parts afterwards as a part of the business.

54 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

It was Ross Brawn at Ferrari who made them reliable by putting good technical structures and procedures in-place, like post-race debrief sessions, parts compliance, better standards at the factory, etc. and Michael Schumacher was just a technically gifted driver, I sometimes think Schumacher gets too much credit for turning around the team when it was actually Brawn and the existing backroom staff. If you are an F1 fan get Total Competition by Ross Brawn and Adam Parr, a very good read!

Doesn't this prove that it's actually possible to up the reliability on an already high performance car ?

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Im not sure what you are asking. You can use what ever lens you like. Put an equal lens on a DSLR and it will focus faster. Its one of the main reasons DSLRs still outsell mirrorless.
It will track better to.

For my needs mirrorless is fine. I don't use a DSLR. I shoot mostly manual focus.
But full time pro photographers needs to cover a wider spectrum of styles.
Not to mention in lower light situations, then my X-Pro2 and the X-T2 I had is hunting all over the place.

Hasn't A9 proved mirrorless can be at least equal or better than current top of the line DSLRs? 

I'm nowhere near saying Sony is there yet. I've just pointed out Sony's sensor in Nikon's body is already ahead of Canon's current tech and Sony is moving in this direction fast. That's what I think Andrew meant in his comment ("5d iv sensor behind Sony as well" - sensor I assume, not the camera as a whole package ). Sony is gaining a share in the market in the meantime but it obviously is going to take time to threaten Canon. That's normal. 

Sony's sensor is in Nikon's cameras and they're reliable and ahead of Canon's tech. Sony's cameras reliability is improving fast and move to their cameras has already started. A few wedding pros have switched recently, high end ones included. In fashion I've seen workshops with pros using Sony cameras too. This is still early stages and sample size is still small so it really doesn't matter that a few people switched but there is a trend and this matters. That's how the change starts. We're yet to see how it pans out but clearly something is happening. Whatever happens it should be good for us (usually;)). 

29 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

On the stills side they are behind with mirrorless, with no real premium or pro model. The M5 is a PowerShot, basically.

The lens range just isn't there for Canon in mirrorless and that takes a lot of time to develop.

They have no presence in medium format either.

Their 50MP sensor is behind Sony's 42MP on noise, 4K video, dynamic range, etc.

5D Mark IV sensor is behind Sony as well.

So yeah, photographers are starting to shuffle in their seats as well.

Yeah, what I meant is that Canon is catching up with the old tech just now. They're well behind new tech advancements like pro mirrorless products which just shows how far behind the curve they are. 

28 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

So in danger of going over the same ground we've been going over since 2010 with Canon, perhaps for sake of expediency we should stop trying to defend them and disagreeing with me when I call them out, and get fully behind the campaign to have them give us better value for our money.

Good point, I'm in. Guys, Canon is behind on the stills side too. Merely catching up with Nikon's old full frame cameras in their newest products. It's a bigger issue, IMHO. They could blow competition out of the water if they wanted. Who else could come up with a completely new eos cinema line in such a short time just after seeing what one of their dslrs had done by accident back in 2008! 

Where are mods?

.
 

As above, stay away from Benq for colour accurate work, you can't calibrate broken monitor ;). Uniformity is much worse than in NEC's budget EA series. Unfortunately, for colour accurate work, monitors are expensive. Not only that, you also need to take care of your working environment. Proper colour accurate lighting, neutral colour walls, optimal light levels... You don't want your environment to affect how you see colours on the monitor, do you? So don't worry about it too much, unless you're going real pro and don't mind spending tons of money on it. 

Nice first impressions review. Just one note. Zeiss 35mm 1.4 is smaller and lighter, but it's specs are much lower as well according to dxomark. No free lunch there. Either, top specs or size, you can't have both with current glass tech ;). https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/35mm-f-1.4-G-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-II-versus-Sigma-35mm-F14-DG-HSM-A-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Sigma-35mm-F14-DG-HSM-A-Sony-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-II__380_1120_1056_1009_1060_1120

5 hours ago, Kubrickian said:

Test many cameras by all means. Don't let the site be a grand rationalization for Gear Acquisition Syndrome though. It's unprofessional. 

I would love to hear why you disagree with Andrew's in-depth reasoning rather than listening to your pointless ad hominem attacks.

On 5/29/2017 at 9:34 PM, Teemu said:

Okay, didn't know this...

Also want to update status on the case of my Lexar card. (Old topic got locked so can't put it there) It will be sended over to Lexar laboratory at UK. Below is straight copy from email they sent me.

Regarding our data recovery process, we will take your card back and attempt recovery for you in our East Kilbride lab in the UK. If this is successful, the recovered data will be sent on DVDs or copied onto your replacement card and sent to you that way.

Should the recovery not be successful in East Kilbride, we will send the card on to our headquarters in Milpitas, California, where it will be dismantled so the NAND can be accessed directly. This process can take up to 12 weeks.

Please note, image recovery service is a courtesy for our Lexar Professional customers and is not part of our warranty. The recovery process does not guarantee the recovery of images as the nature of data loss on flash technology can vary.

The card will be replaced under the warranty but during the recovery process, the original may be destroyed.

So... time will tell what is the conclusion on this case.

That's a good customer service on their part. I wonder if Sandisk is equally good ? Has anyone here had a similar experience with Sandisk?

18 minutes ago, tugela said:

That would require physically accessing the silicon. Very few places would be capable of that, even the FBI would be challenged to do that.

If you want to see the challenge, have a look at this video to see what is actually inside those cards: 

 

You just need skills;) 

15 hours ago, tugela said:

Not if it damages the controller. The data might still be there in memory but it can't be accessed.

Yeah, but then a good recovery company should directly tap into memory or use their own temporary controller to access data. 

1 hour ago, Teemu said:

(...) when it was making some "last markings" when shutting down. It's the only logic way how it got destroyed so badly.

If this happened your data prior to this event would still be there. It's just a sequence of 0s and 1s written to the card. Interrupting writing process, aside from losing latest data being saved can corrupt information on how to interpret those 0s and 1s but it doesn't wipes out all the data that had previously been saved. Proper recovery software/company can dump 0s and 1s from the card and reinterpret them for you. 

Doesn't every camera which shoot raw stills is capable of delivering raw video? It's more or less just  a straight data dump to a media card limited by interface's speed. If so, GH5 is capable of doing it and why not all manufacturers enable it? Canon is not the only one holding back this feature! 

On 2017-5-17 at 5:36 AM, ozmorphasis said:

At least several DP's that I know (and in a couple of cases hugely admire), will choose tungsten instruments when in a controlled environment for any kind of beauty shoot.  They have access to the very best of the best daylight balanced LED, HMI, plasma, and Fluo sources, but will still choose tungsten when it's practical.  It does look better for skin.  

I myself am moving toward all LEDs for practical reasons, especially now that they are getting good results.  But, the best stuff I've shot has always been in natural daylight or tungsten.

I've got solux daylight halogen bulbs used in art galleries all around the world for ultimate quality ( http://www.solux.net/cgi-bin/tlistore/infopages/index.html )but they're such a pain to use! They're perfect reference for testing leds, though

Jcs, have you tried daylight http://www.yujiintl.com/high-cri-led-lighting (CRI 98, not that it matters) ? They match sunlight entering my room very well and under this light colours in prints match what I see on a calibrated Eizo screen too. I believe they sell led strips which would be perfect for creating video panels https://store.yujiintl.com/products/vtc-series-high-cri-led-2835-ribbon-120-led-m-unit-5m-reel-1

7 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I've tried all that but am struggling mightily to find an EQ that works. The tube amp/electrostat combo is quite satisfying for me, though everyone I've demoed it for prefers bass-heavy heaphones, be they Sennheiser, AKG, or Beats. I agree the Koss are bass-light, but less so than lambdas. I have actually noticed the greatest user satisfaction with Beats.

I use Spotify premium on a Mac and there's no software EQ. The third party EQ software I've tried isn't compatible with a USB DAC on the Mac, only the built in sound card. I've taken a look at frequency response plots for various headphones (and yes, tried multiple lambas and know they vary a lot). I know I like like my Koss ESP950 more than I like most Lambdas, but in comparing the frequency response curve to the notoriously dark Omega 2s (007) you can zoom in on the bass (not so much sub-bass, which seems more seal-dependent) region and see an emphasis there that runs counter to Koss's mid-centric frequency response. If I had the money, I would simply get the O2s and a top of the line tube amp (IMO electrostats need some tubiness to thicken them up), but that would run nearly $10,000 and, as I said, I didn't ask for this hobby, just listenable pleasing music. Some days I wish I shared the taste of those who are happy with Beats, but I was cursed with a particular weird preference (thick warm bass, even slightly distorted with even order distortion from a tube amp, and infinitely detailed transparent mids without any treble sibilance).

What EQ do you use? I have had no luck with EQs (as above, they are not compatible with USB DACs, also I notice digital bass distortion immediately if I boost it even 1db). I could switch to Apple Music to get the iTunes EQ or buy a cheap DAC or hardware EQ with bass boost, but I quite love my (relatively high performing) DAC.

I am going to try the AKGs. I've heard so many raves about them. It would be nice to sell all this gear and just have one thing I liked lol, particularly something less expensive than my current multi-thousand-dollar rig.

What Stax do you currently use and like? The Koss are so close to perfect but I suppose they are not quite top of the line, but they do punch above their class imo, just beautiful mids without a hint of sibilance. 

I'm using equalify for windows to EQ in spotify. I've got vintage Lambdas Signature. They're 30 years old and still going strong (changed pads)! They're not perfect and are similar to newer, non L (minus pricetag) lambdas.  

I think, because of physics you will never find all advantages from different types in one pair of headphones. You could, however, find out the most important frequencies in music you listen to and then match amp/dac to compensate for deficiencies in technology. In case of Stax I found warmer amp/dac combo + slight EQ in the lows and just enjoy music now. I assume you've done that already so I guess you can't get better than this except of upgrading to bass heavy Stax. Then again, bass will still be different, more controlled and tight than everywhere else because of technology. Sound decay is much faster in electrostatic headphones. It's not lacking bass per se. Top end models extend to the sub bass very well. They may sound thinner, because bass is cleaner, imho.