Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Do we still want better cameras?  (Read 8832 times)
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2870


« Reply #40 on: September 19, 2010, 04:01:13 AM »
ReplyReply

What do you mean by sharpness spot? I haven't heard that term before. As to the wish list are there any cameras on the market that has all these features?
Logged

kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 786


WWW
« Reply #41 on: September 19, 2010, 04:47:55 AM »
ReplyReply

What do you mean by sharpness spot? I haven't heard that term before. As to the wish list are there any cameras on the market that has all these features?

sorry I am dutch- No i meant the sharpness Dot in the viewfinder that says the subject is in focus...- it is not precise.
and no - but it is a wishlist.
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Lost
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71



WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 19, 2010, 03:30:46 PM »
ReplyReply

"Better" is entirely subjective.

I still have my old Minolta X300/X700 and lenses from the 1980's. These were cheap enough to buy as a student, were portable and had some nice sharp lenses (still going strong thanks to some micro 4/3 adapters). They didn't do face detection or any kind of AF, but they had a clever focusing screen that worked well.

Fast forward to today's SLRs and I am a bit non-plussed. Full-frame digital sensors are fantastic, but why are the cameras so huge and expensive compared to their full-frame film predecessors? I would love to find a good FF DSLR that just captured RAW photographs quickly and easily, without the myriad of settings that may or may not change my RAW output (and which behaviour is never clear from the manuals!).

Actually, quite a lot of modern cameras would be "better" if their manuals would accurately and clearly describe what the camera settings actually do...
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #43 on: September 19, 2010, 03:43:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I would love to find a good FF DSLR that just captured RAW photographs quickly and easily, without the myriad of settings that may or may not change my RAW output (and which behaviour is never clear from the manuals!).

AFAIK the only in-camera settings which impact RAW data are resolution and compression (if available). If you're using the manufacturer's RAW converter it gets fuzzy, though, as there are documented and undocumented tweaks applied to the RAW in the converter.
Logged

Lost
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71



WWW
« Reply #44 on: September 20, 2010, 02:13:09 AM »
ReplyReply

AFAIK the only in-camera settings which impact RAW data are resolution and compression (if available).

I am not sure that is so true now. Examples include highlight-tone compression and various flavours of noise reduction that are applied to the RAW data. Usually it is unclear whether the setting affects the RAW data or not.

Another example is the AE setting on some cameras. Panasonic loves to inject the word 'intelligent' in to its documentation but the best that I could take away from the manual was that "intelligent exposure" was just somehow magically better than other modes. It might be simply modifying the JPEG tone-curve in camera, or it might be deliberately underexposing one stop with automatic compensation in ACR. I can not tell from the documentation what actually is happening and as a result I avoid the mode entirely.

So a simple table listing the settings and their effect on JPEG and RAW output would make several of my cameras better for me  Smiley
Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2870


« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2010, 02:55:42 AM »
ReplyReply

A simple answer is to buy a book that is pertinent to your camera. I think that all the major cameras produced in recent years has had books written about them . At least three written about the Nikon D300. As to the bulk and size of cameras, you have a point. Video capabilities built in. Nikon are re-introducing scene modes in the D7000. Dual card slots. Are they useful? D lighting in Nikon cameras along with a retouching menu. They obviously are selling points that don't appeal to advanced amateurs and Professionals. I am afraid you will have to bite the bullet and get on with it. Sad
« Last Edit: September 20, 2010, 02:57:16 AM by stamper » Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8340



WWW
« Reply #46 on: September 20, 2010, 03:06:39 AM »
ReplyReply

A simple answer is to buy a book that is pertinent to your camera. I think that all the major cameras produced in recent years has had books written about them .

Indeed. Among those the ebooks of Thom Hogan stand out IMHO.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Lost
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71



WWW
« Reply #47 on: September 20, 2010, 06:29:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks! I'll try to take a look at these, although I can't help thinking that my existing cameras would be "better" if they came with a manual that usefully described what things do Smiley
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #48 on: September 21, 2010, 03:37:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree wholeheartedly that less would be more.

I have set my own D200 and D700 as close to what constituted a fully manual film camera as I can; the only beneficial additions (for me) are the bits where you can add copyright stuff etc. Perhaps the best advance I have found is the Matrix Metering mode on the two Nikons: pretty well perfect.

Maybe that's one of the big attractions about the Leica marque's top guns, which some see as failings: minimalist tools that don't get in your way.

Which at once does battle with my first sentence: why should less, even when it's more, cost more too? Maths always defeated me and I now start to worry about logic.

Rob C
Logged

MichaelWorley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67


« Reply #49 on: September 25, 2010, 05:07:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I want a camera that tells me which way to point it and when, and when to push the shutter release. And maybe how many times. And how good I am.

Better speakers a waste. I can't hear below 100 or above 5,000 Hz. Essentially AM radio. The other ear is even worse.

Mike
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8340



WWW
« Reply #50 on: September 25, 2010, 08:38:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Better speakers a waste. I can't hear below 100 or above 5,000 Hz. Essentially AM radio. The other ear is even worse.

This isn't a lot cause, audiophile will tell you that this is precisely the most enjoyable range of frequencies and the one where high end gear will bring the most value.

I believe that you need something like this: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/theroom/1.html

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Lost
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71



WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 26, 2010, 01:17:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I want a camera that tells me which way to point it and when, and when to push the shutter release. And maybe how many times. And how good I am.

Sony already make something even better than this (you do not even need to press the shutter button):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGk_-E44zAk

With WiFi auto-upload from the Camera to Flickr or Facebook, it will let you know how "good" you are too. Even better still, companies like Google unleash robots to trawl over your online photographs, looking at them and collecting them (and allowing others to use them without permission). Flickr will automatically calculate how interesting your photographs are.

So all you really need to do is find the on/off switch...
« Last Edit: September 26, 2010, 01:19:26 AM by Lost » Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #52 on: September 26, 2010, 03:04:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Sony already make something even better than this (you do not even need to press the shutter button):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGk_-E44zAk

With WiFi auto-upload from the Camera to Flickr or Facebook, it will let you know how "good" you are too. Even better still, companies like Google unleash robots to trawl over your online photographs, looking at them and collecting them (and allowing others to use them without permission). Flickr will automatically calculate how interesting your photographs are.

So all you really need to do is find the on/off switch...

Combine that with Casio's photographic point-of-interest programmed on a GPS, and one of these babies, you don't even have to leave home.
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad