Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: what about Samsung?  (Read 4912 times)
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2013, 03:53:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred,

When it comes to equipment I buy, I spend very little time thinking about what others use, probably way too much time about what I need/want to use.

I'm not going to argue about the use of Nikon and Canon as viable professional cameras. They are and have been for a long, long time  and we obviously know where you stand on that thought.

I and others have shot a billion images with dslrs in every type of situation.

In fact I just bought a 1dx, so it has it's place.

That doesn't mean that formats other an 35mm aren't considered and for high profile work Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf are used with great regularity.  To a lesser volume, Leica and Pentax.

In fact that doesn't even mean that medium format is used less, just lately their is a lot of noise about the new Nikon.  Internet noise doesn't always equate to real world use.

In regards to branding, I don't think the public has a lot of in depth knowledge about any segment of the professional photography industry.  They may know Lady Ga Ga but most well heeled amateurs are probably more impressed by the cameras used for Sports Illustrated.

I'm sure you get these questions, I do almost every time I fly.   What magazines do you shoot for?  Nobody in the public would believe me if I told them shooting a series lifestyle advertising for Chase pays about 1000 times more than shooting the cover of Elle.

Next question.   What cameras do you use?  Say Nikon, Canon they go uh huh, If you answer Hasselblad they go ooh, and ah if you say Leica some will say yes, some just don't know, though most industry people say Leica is running at full capacity.

If I say Contax/Phase or RED I have to explain, though if the person asking is a photo geek, then thet're very interested.

I'll admit I'm biased.  I'm brand agnostic as I own most of the brands mentioned (other than Samsung), but I love professional equipment.   Big lenses, big lights, big stands, big trucks.  I like large production.

I'll also admit I think cameras like the Nikon d800 and canon 5d2 are amazing devices for the money, though they do very little to inspire me.  To me their like Toyota Camrys.  They work, do their job well, but don't give me the same felling when I work.

I like equipment that is unique and not sold on every corner.  I like things I feel I should treat as precious.

But back to the original theme of this thread.  Samsung I hear makes good electronic equipment.  I even looked at their latest phone, though I just thought it was a less than robust  I-phone.

Taking that brand to a professional arena seems like a leap.

IMO

BC

P.S.  The reason I bought a 1dx rather than a d800 was I like Canon's colors better, it tethers amazingly well with ethernet, the iso is a gazillion for some interesting low light work  and I'll use it mostly for fast lifestyle, on figure fashion, 15fps cut frame video and cinemagraphs.

Also the lcd stays on when tethering, but the main reason was I already own 30 something mpx cameras that I find special on set and in post,  so adding another 30 mpx camera won't change much for  me.

« Last Edit: January 09, 2013, 03:55:02 AM by bcooter » Logged
Emilmedia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 09, 2013, 05:29:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Bcooter, have you seen their tvs? They are probably the brand that feels most high quality. And the phones i quite like too. Yeah apple was first on the ball but man they are slacking in some areas (not design tho). I think it would be refreshing. Like the 5D ii or RED. They do have the money to do pretty much anything they want.
Logged

hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1678


« Reply #22 on: January 09, 2013, 05:36:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Bcooter, have you seen their tvs? They are probably the brand that feels most high quality.
I recently bought a tv and neither LG nor Samsung were on my list. Design, annoying apps, websurfing and tablet integration seems to be their thing, while actual image quality is left as an exercise for Panasonic, Sony and other Japanese manufacturers (+ Philips).

I base my judgement on informal viewing in stores, at friends places and reputable review sites, thus my opinion may be disputed.

-h
Logged
Emilmedia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 09, 2013, 06:42:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Personally i prefer the Plasma image quality from Panasonic, same reason why i want to move to medium format. LED is sharp and contrasy as hell and i dont like it. Don't feel natural. Medium format has this feel to the images that has nothing to do with resolution or sharpness.

However, when it comes to crispness, dynamic range design of the TVs Samsung is in the lead. Thats also why they are market leaders with BIG margin.
Logged

hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1678


« Reply #24 on: January 09, 2013, 07:05:02 AM »
ReplyReply

However, when it comes to crispness, dynamic range design of the TVs Samsung is in the lead. Thats also why they are market leaders with BIG margin.
We will just have to disagree, I think they are marketleaders because they are cheap, thin and filled with useless apps. That may be what the mass-market wants, but I could care less about those things. In fact, I would pay more to get rid of some of the crap that is put into current televisions.

By "LED", I assume that you mean LCD tvs with LED backlighting.

-h
Logged
Emilmedia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



WWW
« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2013, 07:34:55 AM »
ReplyReply

That is whats called LED today so yes. Samsung charge about 6000 bucks for their highest level tv when it comes out. I dont know its that cheap? Of course they have low price models too... its like saying nikon is cheap cause they have point and shoots for 50 bucks.
Logged

hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1678


« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2013, 12:44:04 PM »
ReplyReply

That is whats called LED today so yes. Samsung charge about 6000 bucks for their highest level tv when it comes out. I dont know its that cheap? Of course they have low price models too... its like saying nikon is cheap cause they have point and shoots for 50 bucks.
no. it is like claiming that market share cannot be taken as an indicator of absolute quality.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2013, 08:17:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I think it's a misconception that 35mm DSLR are mainly associated with sports photography.

Validation in the broad market does come to a certain from what is shot with what equipment.

Fashion from what I see is being more and more shot with 35mm DSLR, even in studio.
Even at the highest and "trendiest" levels.

Just look at http://inezandvinoodh.com/. They shoot for Vogue and Harpers Bazaar, Louis Vitton, Dior, Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent

They shoot 35mm DSLR.

Both Canon and Nikon make both high speed cameras designed predominantly for sports and higher MP cameras for
other purposes.



Fred,

When it comes to equipment I buy, I spend very little time thinking about what others use, probably way too much time about what I need/want to use.

I'm not going to argue about the use of Nikon and Canon as viable professional cameras. They are and have been for a long, long time  and we obviously know where you stand on that thought.

I and others have shot a billion images with dslrs in every type of situation.

In fact I just bought a 1dx, so it has it's place.

That doesn't mean that formats other an 35mm aren't considered and for high profile work Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf are used with great regularity.  To a lesser volume, Leica and Pentax.

In fact that doesn't even mean that medium format is used less, just lately their is a lot of noise about the new Nikon.  Internet noise doesn't always equate to real world use.

In regards to branding, I don't think the public has a lot of in depth knowledge about any segment of the professional photography industry.  They may know Lady Ga Ga but most well heeled amateurs are probably more impressed by the cameras used for Sports Illustrated.

I'm sure you get these questions, I do almost every time I fly.   What magazines do you shoot for?  Nobody in the public would believe me if I told them shooting a series lifestyle advertising for Chase pays about 1000 times more than shooting the cover of Elle.

Next question.   What cameras do you use?  Say Nikon, Canon they go uh huh, If you answer Hasselblad they go ooh, and ah if you say Leica some will say yes, some just don't know, though most industry people say Leica is running at full capacity.

If I say Contax/Phase or RED I have to explain, though if the person asking is a photo geek, then thet're very interested.

I'll admit I'm biased.  I'm brand agnostic as I own most of the brands mentioned (other than Samsung), but I love professional equipment.   Big lenses, big lights, big stands, big trucks.  I like large production.

I'll also admit I think cameras like the Nikon d800 and canon 5d2 are amazing devices for the money, though they do very little to inspire me.  To me their like Toyota Camrys.  They work, do their job well, but don't give me the same felling when I work.

I like equipment that is unique and not sold on every corner.  I like things I feel I should treat as precious.

But back to the original theme of this thread.  Samsung I hear makes good electronic equipment.  I even looked at their latest phone, though I just thought it was a less than robust  I-phone.

Taking that brand to a professional arena seems like a leap.

IMO

BC

P.S.  The reason I bought a 1dx rather than a d800 was I like Canon's colors better, it tethers amazingly well with ethernet, the iso is a gazillion for some interesting low light work  and I'll use it mostly for fast lifestyle, on figure fashion, 15fps cut frame video and cinemagraphs.

Also the lcd stays on when tethering, but the main reason was I already own 30 something mpx cameras that I find special on set and in post,  so adding another 30 mpx camera won't change much for  me.



My post was not about your camera choices. My point was about how what work is shot with a cameras system effects
how it is perceived in the general market and how it can effect the brand as far as using a new camera system as a prestige flagship
to promote the overall brand.

My point is that the most prestigious and glamorous work in the eye of the general public is Fashion and Fashion with celebrities.

While you point out that a commercial lifestyle shoot for Chase pays more than a cover of Elle, shooting the cover of Elle will raise the day rate of the photographer
significantly.
 
Also if I recall correctly Annie Leibovitz had or has a very lucrative contract with Vanity Fair. If I recall correctly it is/was $ 2,000,000.

Fashion has huge allure and because photography is such a large part of fashion it gets a lot of exposure through it.

Just look at the hits a backstage fashion shoot gets:

http://youtu.be/O-JSfo0kuaA 215,320 hits.

My point was that if a camera manufacturer like Samsung is considering a flagship camera for brand prestige
they will be looking also at what type of exposure it will get in the general and social media.

Also lets not forget the Hermes Leica Wink

Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #28 on: January 09, 2013, 08:34:45 PM »
ReplyReply


........
 
Validity in photography is and probably always will be from what imagery is shot with what camera.

For dslrs it's normally sports. A bunch of white lenses at the Olympics, or the super bowl moves people towards Canon, Black Lenses to Nikon.

........

In regards to branding, I don't think the public has a lot of in depth knowledge about any segment of the professional photography industry.  They may know Lady Ga Ga but most well heeled amateurs are probably more impressed by the cameras used for Sports Illustrated.

........



Regarding Sports Illustrated the photos that seem to count the most are the swimsuit edition photos...that are Fashion photos.

The Swimsuite edition is a bigger buisness than the magazine that started it.

From The Buisness insider:
Quote
And while many giddily await the special glossy's arrival on newsstands for its endless stream of bikini-clad models posing on sun-drenched landscapes, for Time Inc., the publication's parent company, the Swimsuit Issue means something more: a multi-million business that's bigger than the sports magazine that spawned it.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/sports-illustrated-swimsuit-issue-history-2012-2?op=1#ixzz2HXGlzqLH

[/quote
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2013, 12:26:03 AM »
ReplyReply

If Sports Illustrate swimsuit edition is fashion, then Maxim is haute couture.

But maybe your right . . . maybe readers buy the magazine to view the swimsuits.

In regards to payout.  Gross billing that includes production costs vs. net are different numbers.

IMO

BC
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2013, 05:46:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the link, Fred.

It's been a while since I looked at them and nice to renew the relationship!

What it does prove however, is that great fashion pics are ever dependent on great models and great clothes, quite apart from photographers. I think these fashion superstars don't know how lucky they are to get to work with the clothes that they do.

Rob C
Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2013, 02:09:45 PM »
ReplyReply

If Sports Illustrate swimsuit edition is fashion, then Maxim is haute couture.
BC

Huh??...

Two totally different things.... Sports illustrated swimsuit edition
is Fashion photography and has nothing to do with sports photography; Maxim has nothing to do with Haute Couture.

From Vogue:



Sports Illustrated



Both top models, sand on lovely skin, a skimpy swimsuite and a good photographer bringing out sensuality and skin that does not look like it came from some
lab at Adobe or Capture One.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2013, 08:24:43 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2013, 02:36:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Semantics aside, this guy has been making exciting pictures for many years, combining sex appeal, fashion, style, hedonism and sybaritism; often, with a Pentax 67. I think he comes, originally, from Venice, Italy.

http://www.marinoparisotto.com

It used to Marino Parisotto Vay, but for some reason the Vay was dropped from the website name.

Rob C
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7405


WWW
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2013, 10:51:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I know that the Pentax 67 was very popular in Fashion in the nineties, I don't know why. I have one, it is built like a tank, but nothing really exiting. The interesting thing with the P67 is that it has low sync speed (1/30s) lacks AF. I wouldn't say the lenses I have are really excellent (Fisheye, 45, 90, 165 and 300) but those lenses are probably not top of crop. Hard to say from scans, though.

I guess some famous guy started using it and the mass followed. At least the one viewfinder I had is awful. Quit possible the metered prism was better. I took some pride in not using built in meter as I was a spotmeter kind of guy.

I liked the Pentax 67, actually. Well, liked it except the dark hole called viewfinder. On the other hand I made many landscape pictures I am still proud of with that camera.

Now, getting back to the hypothetical Samsung. Let's assume having Schneider lenses designed and built Pentax, as Samsung DSLRs were using Schneider labeled Pentax lenses. So they use a Samsung sensor? Samsung is not exactly famous for it's sensors. Pentax used Samsung but went to Sony for their top models.

Samsung could of course develop a CMOS sensor couple it with a great OLED display, live view and live histogram, HDMI output at 4K. They could put it into a marvellous modular camera. It may even sell, it is hard to know. A product should either match the needs or the "wants" of the targeted customers.

On the other hand, I guess that Samsung produces for a mass market and is not interested in building market recognition in a small sector where they are not present.

Best regards
Erik




Semantics aside, this guy has been making exciting pictures for many years, combining sex appeal, fashion, style, hedonism and sybaritism; often, with a Pentax 67. I think he comes, originally, from Venice, Italy.

http://www.marinoparisotto.com

It used to Marino Parisotto Vay, but for some reason the Vay was dropped from the website name.

Rob C
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2013, 02:55:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I guess some famous guy started using it and the mass followed.

That would be I want to be Sam Haskins syndrome.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7405


WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2013, 03:05:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm not sure... Wasn't Sam Haskins the seventies? I got the impression that P67 was quite popular just before the rise of digital, like late nineties?

Best regards
Erik



That would be I want to be Sam Haskins syndrome.
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2013, 03:13:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not sure... Wasn't Sam Haskins the seventies? I got the impression that P67 was quite popular just before the rise of digital, like late nineties?

Haskins was admired by many for his use of the P67 on the Pentax calendars.

Misguided souls?
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2013, 03:32:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm not sure... Wasn't Sam Haskins the seventies? I got the impression that P67 was quite popular just before the rise of digital, like late nineties?

Best regards
Erik



At least early sixties, Erik. Five Girls made him a world-wide name.

Rob C
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2013, 03:57:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I was fortunate enough to be invited along to a Sam Haskins screening of slides during a trip back to Scotland many years ago.

Amazing work, and the best reason for 6x7 and 6x6 slides after print requirements. A pleasant man, very open to questions from a mainly not-so-bright audience. He and Hans Feurer used to alternate Pentax Calendars for some years – sometimes better than Pirelli, in my view. Another reason to protect local dealerships: mine used to give me the calendar!

I bought a new Pentax 67 ll as a final resort in an attempt to rekindle both my interest in, and the market’s interest in my stock pictures, and to make shots of real estate look super good in holiday brochures. The low synch. wasn’t a problem as I used down to a 1 sec. sometimes for interiors.

Unfortunately, changing format wasn’t an answer: it couldn’t hold back the tide of political correctness nor of do-it-yourself holiday operators with small digis.

In the end, I reverted to Nikon, bitterly regretting the swap away in the first place, especially as it’s meant my rebuying a lot of stuff I’d already had. And I’m still short of much that I know I won’t replace.

But the Pentax: it was very well built, felt great, and my first handling at a photo-show by my old, now extict wholesaler was love at first feel. However, nothing prepared me for the shutter bounce which was simply something one couldn’t circumvent.

I didn’t have one of the Pentax shuttered lenses and maybe that would have been an answer for some, but my lengths were 55mm and 200mm… had that camera worked on the ‘blad or Mamiya principle, a lens in each shutter, it would have been a world-beater. I didn’t find any problem with the prism.

Rob C
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2013, 06:43:34 AM »
ReplyReply

However, nothing prepared me for the shutter bounce which was simply something one couldn’t circumvent.

Amen.

There was a time when my heart's desire was a P67 system, that is until I actually tested it. The vibration had to be seen to be believed.

Since that time my mantra has been try before buy.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2013, 06:46:23 AM by KLaban » Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad