Damphousse

13 hours ago, gt3rs said:

But there is no excuse for no LOG and no Zebra and Peeking.

 

This... particularly the bold part.  I defend Canon on a lot of stuff but lack of Zebras and Peeking is indefensible.  They are real aholes when it comes to that.  You literally ask people to spend thousands on a camera and it can't do a simple task my $500 BMPCC can do?

On 8/12/2016 at 0:34 AM, kaylee said:

a p p l e has a great return policy which their salespeople promote

"Youve got two weeks to make sure you love it, if you dont no worries just bring it back"

whether that mac pro was used for "professional" "paid" work or not, believe me, literally no one at the company cares.... i assure you lol 

Yup.  A friend got screwed on a surprise macbook update.  Told them to return it and buy the new macbook for like $50 more.

On 8/1/2016 at 1:11 PM, DBounce said:

 I am certain the GoPro has seen much more use in real productions than the BMPCC, so what's your point?

You said "iPhone".  Now you are moving the goal posts.  The BMPCC, an iphone, and a Gopro are all very different tools used for very different purposes.  A BMPCC and a GoPro have very defined use cases on a professional movie set.  I have never seen a use case for an iphone on a movie set where it excels or even equals a BMPCC or a GoPro.  I've seen it used as a gimmick but in every scenario I've seen there was a better and at times cheaper option.  So, no, a BMPCC is not an iphone.

6 hours ago, DaveAltizer said:

I wasn't 100% satisfied because within that 30 day window the price of the camera went down $3000. That's reason enough according to them to be able to return it.

That's legit.  I just price match rather than return.  I've done that with B&H.  I don't know how Adorama is about price matching.

It's BS for a retailer to expect you to take a $3000/month depreciation.

18 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Brace yourself for....                     disappointment.

Yeah.  With no C badge you can kiss log goodbye.  Lord knows what other crippling will go on.

On 7/31/2016 at 0:07 PM, DBounce said:

The pocket is not 4k, and the battery last 30 minutes. It's not a workhorse by any means. And while I'm sure there are examples of serious commercial work being shot on one,  the same can be said of the iphone also. 

Wow.  You win the prize for biggest iphone distortion.  The BMPCC was used on the new X-files series and not as a gimmick.  I get it.  You don't like it.  But let's not lie about it.  The color out of the camera is amazing and it is a sub $1,000 raw shooter.  I of course picked it up for less than $500 new.

I like this forum.  From the owner on down everyone is trying to give heartfelt honest advice.  Sometimes we are wrong.  Sometimes we are biased but we are all trying.

That is why I was really disappointed with how "the controversy" was handled.  The lynch mob mentality was disappointing and embarrassing.  For people to set upon one of our own in such a fashion was really uncivilized.  There are ways of sorting these things out without flushing your decency and humanity down the toilet.  As I said before in "that thread" I can absolutely understand the victims' being emotional and coming on a bit strong.  Totally understandable under the circumstance.  What I do not understand is third parties who had nothing to do with "the incident" piling in and spreading rumor and vitriol.  Really it was one of the most unprofessional things I've seen on the internet in a long time.  The Nuremberg trials that involved actual real life accused Nazis were handled in a calmer more dignified manner.

I hope the aggrieved parties are properly compensated.  I will say one positive thing that has come from all this is I have a new found respect for the admittedly deeply flawed US criminal justice system.  After this forum pulled back the curtain just a little bit and gave me a peek at the alternative I realize as terrible as what goes on in our courts they are far better than the alternative.

PS I didn't read most of "that thread."  I couldn't take any more of the juvenile mob behavior and I left.

24 minutes ago, IshootbeforeItalk said:

The advantage, Prof Capasso said, is that these "metalenses" avoid shortfalls - called aberrations - that are inherent in traditional glass optics.

"The quality of our images is actually better than with a state-of-the-art objective lens. I think it is no exaggeration to say that this is potentially revolutionary."

Sounds amazing.

 

Yeah.  Just can't tell if this is for real or just another overly optimistic puff piece.  The article says the lenses can be manufactured on chip fabs just like memory chips and that the technology scales up easily.  It makes it sound like it is pretty much ready for mass production.  I wonder when we will see this tech hit the market.  I wonder how much better cell phone pictures and videos will look with these lenses.  Allegedly they work well with big apertures as well.  Imagine a cell phone camera with a perfect F/0.95 lens.

Quote

Just 2mm across and far thinner than a human hair, the tiny device can magnify nanoscale objects and gives a sharper focus than top-end microscope lenses.

It is the latest example of the power of metamaterials, whose novel properties emerge from their structure.

Shapes on the surface of this lens are smaller than the wavelength of light involved: a thousandth of a millimetre.

"In my opinion, this technology will be game-changing," said Federico Capasso of Harvard University, the senior author of a report on the new lens which appears in the journal Science.

The lens is quite unlike the curved disks of glass familiar from cameras and binoculars. Instead, it is made of a thin layer of transparent quartz coated in millions of tiny pillars, each just tens of nanometres across and hundreds high.

Quote

The advantage, Prof Capasso said, is that these "metalenses" avoid shortfalls - called aberrations - that are inherent in traditional glass optics.

"The quality of our images is actually better than with a state-of-the-art objective lens. I think it is no exaggeration to say that this is potentially revolutionary."

Quote

"But our lenses, being planar, can be fabricated in the same foundries that make computer chips. So all of a sudden the factories that make integrated circuits can make our lenses."

And with ease. Electronics manufacturers making microprocessors and memory chips routinely craft components far smaller than the pillars in the flat lenses. Yet a memory chip containing billions of components may cost just a few pounds.

Quote

The prototypes lenses are 2mm across, but only because of the limitations of the Harvard manufacturing equipment. In principle, the method could scale to any size, Prof Capasso said.

"Once you have the foundry - you want a 12-inch lens? Feel free, you can make a 12-inch lens. There's no limit."

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36438686

So, real or BS?

Can't wait to see the faces of all the Hollywood directors who sobbed, "B-b-but 4k is too sharp!"  They'll lose their minds if someone hands them one of these lenses.

So if this is for real will that end the lens fights on EOSHD?

On 7/21/2016 at 1:42 PM, tugela said:

I suspect there are going to be better lenses for all cameras in a few years anyway, as lenses become more integrated as complementary electronic components in a holistic imaging system. In many ways, most lenses around today are still holdouts from the past. It will be the sort of transition that the avionics industry went through, when wireless flight became adopted.

With or without the bit rate hacks? I imagine that blacks are among the first to go when compression is applied, so higher bit rates should preserve them better.

I have no problem with the NX1.  I just caution people about the other parts of the system.  I'm on a budget.  I don't have the money to rebuy all my lenses every 4-5 years.  I actually held off on buying even Canon APS-C EFS lenses because I always "knew" I was going to move up to full frame.  When video appeared on the scene and Canon made the 17-55mm 2.8 EFS I finally bought the lens because I could see using it for a long time and it holding its value.

To be honest if I was a pro and the NX1 was making me money I would be more inclined to use it.  But for a hobbyist's camera setup I need stuff to hold its value for a long time and have excellent resale value.  I'm just very price sensitive.  I can't buy a $500 lens and take a $300 hit on it.

On 7/21/2016 at 1:42 PM, tugela said:

I suspect there are going to be better lenses for all cameras in a few years anyway, as lenses become more integrated as complementary electronic components in a holistic imaging system. In many ways, most lenses around today are still holdouts from the past. It will be the sort of transition that the avionics industry went through, when wireless flight became adopted.

The only time I the history of the camera industry I can think of where there was a seismic shift in the lens value was with the rise of digital.  And that was mainly a Canon issue since their FD lenses didn't work with their DSLRs.  Of course now with mirrorless cameras and adapters those FD lenses are having a second life.

For the non test chart crowd a high quality Canon prime or L lens will serve them well for many years to come.  Well there could be a game changer a few years out but I'm not going to trade my L glass for Samsung glass because of it.  I'll start a thread.  I'm actually surprised no one has posted about it...  Or maybe I just missed it.

On 7/20/2016 at 9:01 AM, timmyturntable said:

I don't worry too much about it being a "dead" system, as my budget only allows for a purchase like this every 4-5 years anyways.

I keep my $800+ lenses for a lot longer than 4-5 years.  A good lens is a lifetime purchase.  My canon L lenses work on my canon film cameras, my canon DSLR, and my BMPCC.  IS works even on the BMPCC with speedbooster.

The Samsung lenses will be paperweights in a few years.  Total false economy.

24 minutes ago, Timotheus said:

Hi all, OP here. Thanks for the support. Healthy scepticism also always welcome, I know that would be my approach as well.

This thread is not intended to just burn the seller down, I am not a hateful person and believe revenge is a dish best left unserved. Justice and taking responsibility are a different matter though. I am truly, truly baffled by what happened. Can't get my head around the fact anyone would do this for this amount of money. Whether it's junior (ab)using his shared account or if they're both in the know; both bizarre.

Exactly because (Senior) Ebrahim's contributions have been so valuable for the forum I was hesitant to put this out, but this couldn't stand. Hopefully this gets sorted out.

You did the right thing.  You and IshootbeforeItalk have first hand knowledge and we all appreciate you posting what you know.  My objection was to the lynch mob that had no first hand knowledge posting extreme things.  I can understand someone who is a victim being upset and even going a little overboard but to have people on this forum who have not lost a penny behave that way is unacceptable particularly at this stage in the process.

8 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

I suggest to leave this topic as a warning for potential Western Union buyers, close it for futher comments and delete the aggressive statements.

 

I agree.  No Western Union ever.

Also realize documentation and tracking is key.  I recently sold several low cost items on ebay.  They were so low cost that I went with skimpy packaging and no tracking numbers because nothing I've ever sent has been "lost in the mail".  Well low and behold out of the four packages sent out one of them allegedly never got to it's destination nor was it returned to the clearly printed return address.  Hhhhmmm... why does that only happen when it is an ebay sale and I use no tracking?

As far as online transactions go I like Craigslist.  Meet in person in broad daylight in a busy public place.

1 hour ago, Marco Tecno said:

Dead perhaps, but still better than most 'living' cameras and, for sure, better than anything else at its pricepoint.

You continue to ignore the fact investing in the lenses is a dead end with a very finite useful life.  If there is no upgrade path for the body the lenses become paperweights.

11 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

I say it sounds about right. I did a side by side with the D750 and the BMCC 2.5K Raw and the Nikon isn't to far of.
But I dont think this has jack to do with the topic, total low ball to take the opportunity just because some guy didn't agree on some random spec of a camera.

Yeah.  Wow.  You don't like some comment about a spec in a stupid camera review so you bring it up at a criminal trial?  I can see why we have a criminal justice system and due process.  If you allow a mob to mete out justice every ahole with an axe to grind comes out of the woodwork.

I appreciate Timotheus bringing this to our attention and as the aggrieved party I certainly give his posts a lot of latitude.  But the lynch mob of third party people who have suffered no harm real or merely alleged need to chill.  Ebrahim posts on here quite frequently.  If he all of a sudden disappears and makes no attempt to contact Andrew then we can take our speculation to the next level.

When I joined I found Ebrahim on this forum already.  He has contributed a lot.  You would think after years of contributions when something like this is alleged there would be some kind of grace period given for someone to give an explanation.  If you all are so willing to casually throw Ebrahim under the bus what will you do if someone makes an allegation against me?  It's been less than 8 hours and a disturbing number of people on the forum have savaged the guy.

42 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

He picked the money up with his real ID at Western Union, making another account doesn't make it untrue.

 

Were you there?  No one has ever made a fake id in a stable western first world country like Egypt?

26 minutes ago, photographer-at-large said:

Elder Ebrahim was active recently at Reduser forum:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?136609-lenses-for-red-raven&p=1643250&viewfull=1#post1643250

 

That was four days ago.  He may not even know about the controversy.

53 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

At least give him a chance to give his side of the story

The guy with the facebook post only has 9 posts and the OP 35 posts, yet it is all being taken as gospel (i'm not accusing either of you of lying, but it can happen).... I'm in no way taking sides here, If he did do it ... He deserves plenty of abuse, but think rationally first. It is not too hard to imagine that there are scammers out there who actively seek out these sort of "For Sale" sub forums and hack the account of the person in their country with the highest post number.

It is also not unfeasable to imagine that someone could get pissed at an online user for something and set up a couple of account to destroy his reputation around the internet. (Again, not accusing the OP here, just playing devil's advocate).

Yeah, this thread is disgusting.  I understand the OP's feelings but for other forum members to pile on without any kind of investigation is terrible.

On 7/7/2016 at 2:54 PM, Marco Tecno said:

It was not a dead system until few months ago. He speaks as if there has been nothing like xt2 before. There has been for more than 1 year (before being, perhaps, a dead system).

I warned you well before it was officially a dead system.  I balked at the price of the lenses and people argued with me.  Now it is a dead system.  Please don't say you weren't warned.

2 minutes ago, Marco Tecno said:

Well, since he is excited by xt2, and nx1 is better in almost every way, and has been out since nov 2014, my question was legit.

 

And...calling lenses a weak point of nx, makes think you never tried them. Same for ergonomics...nx1 is miles better than any fuji there.

NX1 is a dead system.  No point spending thousands on a bunch of lenses that will never have an upgraded body.  4k is still way too new to lock yourself in to one budget body for the foreseeable future.

Now if you can adapt some FD lenses you already own it can make sense, but of course no OIS.

Some heat from Hollywood is a good thing.  It gets rid of the casual downloader.  Honestly with things like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc it kind of eliminates the need to illicitly download.  I remember back in the day you could download prerelease DVDs.  That was bad.  You could watch every movie before it even came out.  I think now where you generally have to wait at least until the DVD/Bluray release for good quality is much better.  And now you can get HD downloadable content for a reasonable price even before the DVD hits the shelves.

I would like even more options personally.  What irks me about Netflix, Amazaon, and Hulu is you never know what is on what.  If I want to watch a movie I have to search all three and hope one of them has it.  That's BS.  I wish there was some kind of central repository where everything was rentable or available for purchase at a reasonable price.

1 hour ago, Kristoferman said:

I find that the vast majority of people who pirate movies would never see the film otherwise. It's the reason I laugh when studios used to trumpet about how much money they "lost" to piracy, when in reality the actual amount lost would be a small fraction of it.

Yeah the court cases are amazing exaggerations.  I've known people who have downloaded different things that they never even ended up watching.  Just to repeat.  Even when they got it for free they didn't watch it.  For the industries lawyers to book those as sales is fraud.  If I counted up how many people connected to a swarm on bit torrent and used that number to show projected sales for an IPO the SEC would have me in handcuffs for securities fraud.

Econ 101 tells you when price goes up demand goes down... particularly on a luxury like movies.  This isn't bread and water.

On 7/1/2016 at 9:13 AM, DBounce said:

It's a business, they all do this... Apple, Ford... everyone. Bodies are not investments in hardware, they are investments in your talent. If you want a healthy return on that investment you need to produce paying work.

Pretty much common sense.  If you are a hobbyist or a no talent hack that can't make enough to keep the lights on you really shouldn't be buying $16,000 cameras.  On this very forum I wrote multiple posts balking at paying $1,000 for a BMPCC.  When the price dropped to $500 I swooped in and have had no complaints.  I'm a hobbyist though.

On 6/12/2016 at 7:05 AM, ricardo_sousa11 said:

I have actually stoped taking pictures all together, and only pull video frames.

Full collection - http://imgur.com/a/KeilF

These are all videoframes, I think they work great, on some cases better, others worse, but can they replace taking a snap? Of course they can, would this be possible without 4k? No it wouldnt.

That is precisely the type of photograph that it wouldn't make sense to use a video camera to take.  There is no movement.  Landscape photography is all about a slow methodical process.  I've never heard anyone say they needed 24 fps to do landscape photography.  I remember not that long ago Arizona Highways used to only really accept large format film images.  Landscape photography is pretty competitive.

1 hour ago, tomekk said:

I think this question doesn't make sense. 4K is resolution. There is much more to photography than resolution. In this sense, it obviously can't. On the highest level, photography is all about pushing boundaries in every aspect. On your average joe level, 4k still grabs are easily good enough, though. So it depends on a lot of factors ;). 

Actually if you are shooting sports or modeling taking 24 fps or more is "pushing boundaries".  You can pick up a lot of subtleties that would otherwise be missed.  Of course you have to trade off with resolution.  And the average Joe doesn't have time to sift through a mountain of images.  4k stills capture definitely has its place but landscape photography and a few snaps for Joe Blow aren't those scenarios.

6 hours ago, jasonmillard81 said:

My questions is this:  If the FS5 and FS7 and other cameras shoot 4k with images that subjectively are better than the GH/A7/NX series does it make sense to stop investing in the MFT system I currently have and save up for a bit more expensive video body that records 4K?

My thoughts were as follows:  Why spend money on a DSLR that is primarily for photo with video add-ons and shortcomings, when you can spend a bit more and get a cinema quality video camera that allows for 4K frame grabs.  I then thought about, well what if I want to not take video primarily but photo at a family party etc.  I could have people pose, record video, focus on my subjects, and have them pose from 1-3 seconds.  The upside of this seems to be if someone does something funny/noteworthy outside of the standard photo pose I could go back into the 4K video and get a frame grab that typically would have been missed with a DSLR?

 

As someone mentioned no one wants to build up an FS7 just to take a couple of snaps.  This is the exact opposite of what is going on in the consumer world.  People are so lazy they won't even put down their cell phones to take advantage of all a DSLR has to offer.  They are not going to lug around an FS7.

Also the cameras you mentioned aren't DSLRs.  DSLRs have mirrors so you aren't looking at a little TV screen you are looking at real life in real time even when the power is off.  You can't get that in a video camera or a mirrorless camera.

I use raw files extensively.  When you get into difficult lighting situations they are invaluable.

I also take advantage of resolution.  8 megapixels in 4k is a huge step backwards.  People crop, reframe and blow up prints.

Also I like full frame.  Full frame for family photography is invaluable.  In tight spaces like most modern homes you can get a nice wide angle image without a lot of distortion and aberrations with a full frame camera.

I could actually see a commercial person with a studio and controlled lighting using a 4k camera to take pictures.  I mean if they have a specific end use and a very controlled situation and time why not, if it fits their needs.  But as someone with no budget to speak of, no studio, and no desire to fiddle with a video camera when all I want to do is take a few quick snaps a DSLR is still king for me.

Also who is going to wade through all those stills frame by frame?  The DSLR workflow is already overwhelming compared to film.  Now continuous shooting at 24 fps or higher?!

Thanks for the thread.  I dismissed this camera years ago when I saw the price.  I just laughed and moved on.  I appreciate people like you reminding us we can get some pretty amazing crumbs that fall of the professionals' tables.

I guess the one thing we often lose sight of is those damn expensive Canon cameras will all eventually float down to the level where enthusiasts who keep an eye out can pick up solid cameras at heavy discounts.

On 6/9/2016 at 7:30 AM, Andrew Reid said:

I think in the 90's there wasn't the urge to control our own images quite so much or the suspicion over how the material would be used.

The internet changed all that and it does make it more difficult to capture a slice of life, documentary style, undetected.

Yeah.  I think it is a perfectly rational reaction.  I don't like to be filmed or photographed or recorded unless it is just a generic public seen like a square full of people.

With the way the internet is forever and people misuse images it is prudent to be a bit cautious.

16 hours ago, Davey said:

Turns out that people hate being filmed - by arseholes.

Yup.  I have noticed a certain phenomenon when I've been out shooting with a film camera that some people purposely wander into your shot because they think you are a professional and they are going to be famous or something.

It's interesting what the internet age has done.  Some people react by wanting more privacy and wanting more control over their image and others want more fame and more distribution of their image.

22 hours ago, OliKMIA said:

However I'm getting more and more annoyed by their super strict religious policy which make them close many weeks per year due to Jewish holidays.

The closings are irritating but it's a heavily Jewish store in NYC.  Fairly normal for the camera biz in that city.  I find it irritating the way I find it irritating when Christians close on Sundays... or close early.  But that is hardly a reason to stop shopping somewhere.  It's a hazard of living in a diverse semi-tolerant country.

First of all Amazon is an abysmal alternative.  B&H and Adorama focus on photography and videography.  You can actually get someone on the phone who has some clue about those specific industries/hobbies.  I still buy medium format film.  I buy from multiple outlets to do my best to keep them healthy and focused on selling film at reasonable prices.

It is beyond insanity to quit shopping at a specialty store like B&H over something like a schedule... which they go out of their way to post.  You seriously want Amazon of all places to be our only alternative?  Man, I'll wait two weeks if I can get 220 rolls of film at a reasonable price.  Think about what you are saying.

On May 1, 2016 at 1:03 AM, The Chris said:

Sony now includes its medical division in Imaging, Canon, Olympus and others do not. From the report:

"In addition, the medical business, previously included in All Other, is now included in the IP&S segment as a result of a change in the Corporate Executive Officer in charge of the medical business. "

Those numbers don't look all that great next to Canon. But the SAR guy obviously doesn't bother to read the report, he just goes for clickbait. 

Yeah, great clickbait...  Terrible stock and market analysis.

Strange he made the quote from Sony a picture vs searchable text.  Sony acknowledges sales were actually down on a constant currency basis and the overall market is shrinking.

Talk about a blogger and an internet forum poster burying the headline.  Canikon and now Sony have all acknowledged what we who live in reality have known for years. The gogo days of the 90s are long gone.  There simply is no reason for the average consumer to go out and by a DSLR or whatever every 2-3 years.  The cameras have gotten good enough.  And no I don't know anyone who owns a 4k TV let alone has the horse power to edit 4k movies.