I bought an XT-3 specifically to capture the excitement of paint drying. Apparently though it seems paint does not have enough contrast for the camera to focus properly.
Hi, I watch Ted Forbes (The Art of Photography) for his history and artistic heritage vids; Thomas Heaton for his landscapes and others ,etc etc. But this channel has it all. You cover techniques; gear reviews; artistic and historic aspects; crystal-ball gazing; camera workings for so many models; editing ... ad infinitum. I am not saying you are perfect nor ever make mistakes - such is impossible. But I do know, from watching for quite some time, that you are uber reliable, informative, good-humoured, educative and trustworthy to a very high standard. I have learnt much - and continue to learn from what I consider to be the best all-round photographers' channel available. And, in case anyone thinks that means you are jacks of all trades but masters of none, I urge comparison with any other channel. I am so grateful this channel exists and I value it very highly. (This comment was not sponsored by anyone but I am always open to a few quid / dollars / yen / cakes / beer. :) ). Seriously, who has a better all-round channel? 1.2 million subscribers could be wrong but I believe they are not.
I wholeheartedly agree. Good on ya Tony & Chelsea - keep up the good work. And you get people talking about stuff, sometimes good stuff, in the comments that can be at times equally informative & entertaining.
hey guys.. as a former White House News Photographer for CBS NEWS. was the pool guy most often on the weekend. but you were talking Silence.. well. I was there during film and digital days.. or years. Now.. the press office would yell out.. "LIGHTS" instantly the two lights they had up were turned off. this was the sign ... no more photos or video to be shot. Anyone seen still shooting or any still photographer making a shutter sound would have their White House ID card pulled.. no questions. no nothing. You were out instantly. The main White House ID is the highest in Wash. DC have this and you are admitted everywhere. the gold standard of You Have Arrived. I did for 12 yrs.. But yeah.. I learned to carry my small range finder 35mm LEICA.. totally silent.. always.. I kept two with me. for colour and B&W.
Just a note: Mirrorless cameras using silent mode are silent. My Olympus EM5 MkII is so silent on silent mode that I can shoot continuously and nobody knows I pressed the button. Also, all full frame 4k overheat. That's why companies like Sharp are going 8k on m4/3.
Great list. I'll add that camera manufacturers seem to also frequently tell fibs about: battery life (# shots); ISO (fudging the values to make their images seem cleaner at the same reported ISO vs. competitors); wifi user experience (it sucks in real life); weather sealing (no standardized testing, how well it works varies a lot from camera to camera); accuracy of the live histogram (it's based on the processed JPEG incl. picture profile not the actual RAW sensor data).
For sealing there is the Ingress Protection rating, unfortunately cameras can't really be tested for it because a camera body with no lens has a giant hole and not every lens is well sealed either.
TechnoBabble publishing the IP rating for common lens/body combos would be a good start, but manufacturers don’t even do that. Instead the marketing materials invariably show a symbolic splash of water hitting the camera with no detail on how well protected it actually is.
My general experience is that I get way more shots on a battery charge than what the manufacturer says, and I tend to hold down the shutter half way a lot (without actually shooting).
Welcome to the world of marketing... It happens in all industries, even highly regulated ones, Remember the emission claims for diesel by Audi/VW? They even put a program in the ECU to trick the test. Lying/misleading is part of corporate business these days. It sells product. They calculate the risk, and even if caught, the fine/consequence is usually worth the risk. So they do it. There is laws surrounding mis-leading marketing, but it is hard to claim that it doesn’t do it, if technically it can, so most people don’t challenge it and companies keep doing it! I wouldn’t be surprised if companies challenge you on this, as stating that they comments are lies!
It happens in all industries? Are you suggesting that pharmaceutical companies might not be completely truthful that vaccines are totally safe and there is no possibilty of negative side effects?
OK normally I don't point out errors you make but you said its rare that a photographer would be in a situation that they could take advantage of the full FPS when shooting sports. As a former sports photographer here are a few really regular scenarios that I used my max FPS. 1. Shooting baseball and having the camera locked on second base catching a stolen base. 2. Mounting your camera above a backboard when shooing basketball to catch those cool overhead shots. 3. Shooting locked on to a goalie for either hockey or soccer, especially during shootouts or penalty shots because even though they move left or right they often stay on a flat plane. 4. Shooting the tipoff in Basketball. 5. Shooting a serve in tennis. 6. Gymnastics shooting the rings. I think you get the point, any situation were the athletic action is stationary you can use those high frame rates and the quickest and easiest way to switch modes is to just toggle the focusing switch to manual on your lens for that shot and get your true as advertised FPS. Just a critique not a criticism and I love your channel. Congrats on the One Million subs. Best, Larry
K. Garcia Productions Tony did say if you’re shooting a stationary subject or if you’re shooting something in the studio then you can use burst with no AF-C. But the point he’s trying to make is for most people when they look at this camera with 30fps, they’re gonna be thinking about bringing it to shoot a soccer game or something, when people are running back and forth, and they’re not getting the expected results. The things you listed are all valid, but if you are pro enough to rig your camera to shoot tip-off in basketball, you would know to research your camera before you buy it, but the average consumer won’t.
Most YT photographers shoot portrait and landscape 99% off the time. They base thier advise on that. I was at an indoor event on time and a photographer asked me for help, his photos were blurry. OMG I said you are on ISO 100. Crank that to 2000, or set it to ISO A, I said. NO they explain they had seen YT videos and were sure ISO 100 "provided the best quality photo".
I love photography but I’m currently just using my phone, due to other financial obligations. One day I’ll love to own a proper setup and you guys help keep that passion going. Thanks for the impartial content
This comment is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace, your number 1 go to for a website ..... Man, it's got to be a ton of money. I assume they pay per referral as commission.
Maybe it's annoying, but keep in mind these two have bills to pay just like the rest of us. They get to spend time producing this excellent "free" content (vs working a job) because of the backend money received by companies like Squarespace. And yes, they are getting paid everytime the coupon code is used. However, you get to choose who you'd like to support. Them or as @rotvonrat says "any shop". I choose them. Annoying, but understandable.
I must say, I watched your video about "5 Lies Camera Companies Tell You" with great amusement. Having been in advertising for 45 years (I just retired), I was a first-hand witness to all the lies advertising agencies will tell prospective buyers in a desperate attempt to boost client sales. Whenever I watch TV with friends and commercials are shown, I often say, "That's a lie...that's a lie...that's a lie...and here's why they're all lies." From drastically retouching a local politician's photo to look younger and more appealing to voters, to creating out and out lies (oftentimes outrageous lies) in order to sell a product or service, ad agencies will gladly, even enthusiastically, lie because if they can push sales just a little further, they could earn a big bonus from the client. Those "5 lies" are, in most probability, more like 50 lies...you just never realized where they were lying and/or had no way to put it to the test like you could with your "5 lies." The thing that always amused me the most was when camera ads boasted about megapixel counts (this is one point you missed altogether). You may have noticed an asterisk and teeny-tiny type at the bottom of the ad mentioning "effective megapixels." A 24 megapixel sensor might in actuality only have 20 (or less) "effective" megapixels. In other words, megapixels that can actually be used to record a photo. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that every digital camera you ever bought had much fewer "effective" megapixels than you thought you were getting.
I just want to point out a feature of quiet mode that isn't about how much noise the shutter/mirror makes. It's about how much vibration it causes. I was trying to shoot shots of the full moon at 300mm focal length on a crop sensor camera. This lens did not have image stabilization or VR. I could not get a tack sharp picture of the moon. Out of frustration I accidentally switched the dial to quiet mode and took a shot. It was sharp. I tried again. Sharp. I tried continuous quiet mode. All images were sharp. I went back to regular shutter speed. Not sharp. It seems that the mirror flip action combined with shutter speed causes enough of a slight vibration to throw off sharpness at far-reaching focal lengths. In regards to 4K, you might get the resolution size of 4K, but you aren't going to get the added benefit of HDR, HDR 10 or Dolby Vision. Those have to be separately color graded and programed as an added overlay on the 4K video.
I suggest you (as in everybody) just don't confuse megapixel with the level of detail. The megapixel advertised are true but this only means the resolution your image has, not the level of detail you can get out of it. The resolution of an image can enable higher amounts of detail, given high quality glass (as tony said), but the actual image is still the exact same amoutn of pixel in width and height no matter how bad your lens or level of detail is. Those "actual" megapixel you can get with a certain camera/lens combination only indicates how much you could scale down you image before you notice it. Just zoom in on any image you took and decide whether it is getting pixelated or soft first. If its soft, your lens is the limiting factor, if its pixelated, the sensor is.
Yes, but then they lie about “SuperRes” or whatever you call it. Pentax still says that their “PixelShift” resolution is still 24MPx/36MPx, while others will multiply their resolutions by four. The thing is, they are usually only half right. The image does have four times the pixels, but not unique pixels, in that there is a 50% overlap of neighbouring pixels. (Pentax has no overlap, since they shift a full pixel, and not a half pixel, and their final image is made up of four 24MPx/36MPx images, but the pixels align, leaving a 24MPx/36MPx image with increased details, due to lack of Bayer Transform Approximations. So, yes, they do speak half-truth -i.e., lies- about megapixels, (except Pentax).
I have 2 pretzels if you want to buy them. Also, my Canon has a silent mode. very simple to use, you switch the lever from ON to OFF! Canon is so far ahead of the game!
I don't think you picked on the GoPro enough... The amazing videos they post on their website are COMPLETELY DECEPTIVE. They shoot in flat mode and in post processing sharpen and color grade for the final result. They also frequently use a gimbal for stabilization and almost always shoot in immaculate lighting conditions. An interesting vlog subject would be to critique "sample" photos and videos provided by various marketing departments and to explain why average Joe's don't get this in real life.
Hi Tony & Chelsea. Really educational camera video. I had no idea (but should have guessed) all the mis-information claimed by camera companies. And how about computer companies claiming 8 hours of battery operation, when in fact it's more like 4-5 hours. I read their tests were done, surprise surprise, under optimal conditions with the internet turned off, screen lighting turned down to the minimum setting, etc. And right, we live in a "We're #1" world. We're #1 in customer service. It's actually, "We're #1 in sales"(because of our misleading marketing campaigns). Whenever a company says "We're #1," I always think of what Chelsea said: "Shouldn't a third party decide this and NOT the manufacturer?" If we really want to know the quality and specs of a camera or any other product, then we should watch shows like yours, RU-vid reviews, Consumer Reports, and so on. Thank you guys for giving us a heads-up on camera company "lies." I bookmarked you!
OK, Chelsea now you did it! I'm one of your most loyal listeners and I'm 75 AND a grandmother! 🤨😤😖 Little old ladies are mentally all right - usually...
I graduated from Ringling School Barton design a little bit ago and you guys are very helpful in starting a business and helping with the fine details and the insights into a different cameras lenses and the capacities of each and your phone, poor viewpoints thank you and continue your work
My Fujifilm cameras DO have a silent mode. Set the camera to silent and set the shutter to electronic, and the camera is totally silent. In fact, recently I had forgotten that my camera was set for silence and when I tried to take a picture I thought the camera was broken. When I realized my mistake, I checked my memory card and found that while I was fooling around trying to figure out why the camera was broken, I had actually shot five pictures.
She's absolutely hilarious. I remember when that arrogant guest was on, the one who doesn't ever crop (because professional photographers don't crop). Chelsea made some funny comment and he said, "I wouldn't say that". Chelsea casually came back with, "I just did". I couldn't stop laughing.
5 лет назад
Happy New Year you guys. I'm very happy to follow you into 2019. I still get a kick out of your videos and podcast. Chelsea's lead into Square Space is always so cute and adorable. As an amateur photographer, you guys remain my goto for learning more about my photography. Looking forward to more education from you both. Oh, thanks for what you do!
I didn't hear the silent mode at all :) On a side note, that new Spiderman multiverse movie looks very jerky, like it was filmed in 15 fps on the Fuji ;)
My Samsung NX1 does 4K video without cropping any of the sensor. It's fantastic that I get that from a camera that was made in 2014. I love the camera so much. I just got it but it's already the best camera I have ever owned. It uses the H.265 video codec and it doesn't overheat ever. That means that my files are have the size and hold 4 times as much detail as other cameras using the H.264 video codec. It is just an awesome camera and even the autofocus system is just as good as modern cameras. I highly recommend the Samsung NX1 camera.
Very true and very well done! Camera manufacturers are taking the consumers for a ride because consumers are easily falling pray to these gimmicks and they know the consumer mentality. People should take them to court.
I have a question about the Fufjifilm X-T4. I'm not interested in using a camera for video capability. Is it just the video feature that makes the camera overheat? I'm thinking that I might be able to get a good value when the camera doesn't sell well. Have you tried it for stills? What do you think about it in general? Thank you.
Chelsea you were on fire in this video. You are so funny, I couldn't stop laughing. A great video guys. Those sneaky manufacturers, I would not trust any of them.
NEED more of this PLEASE, with most photography, paying money for a camera is really big deal with them, after work hard month by month for the money. Thanks for sharing ab the half of truth.
How about “you’ve got to get a 4K TV to watch football.” Sports channels realize the best output from most cable boxes is “1080i” so they transmit football game coverage at “720p” because interlaced video does not render fast motion as well as progressive video. The best performance your expensive TV can deliver is from the over-the-air signal, but only when the station actually transmits in 1080p (which is not all the time).
In America, I do not think any TV station transmits in 1080p… yet. The problem is bandwidth allocation per OTA channel. There are tradeoffs in every area. My local Fox channel transmits 720p, as they are big on local sports. All other channels transmit at 1080i. Current American FCC regulations are such that their is a technical limit preventing 1080p, but the FCC is working on it, and hopefully, will one day have OTA UHD (with improved compression algorithms, to lower bandwidth). Currently, the only way of getting true FHD at 1080p is from a computer or Blu-ray Disc. Currently, the only way to get UHD is from a computing device (such as Chromecast, AppleTV, Roku, computer, etc.). Even cable/satellite do not offer UHD as yet.
Ok great video very interesting but now you messed my head up. So which camera does actually take really good photos and which one can actually shoot 4k? or should someone buy a video camera for video and some other one for photography? Also whats with 60fps? how can we get this fps? GoPro hero 7? Nikon Z6? Panasonic S1? Please give us some suggestions
The problem with advertising cameras is just the opposite: they have to advertise something incredibly complicated involving a lot of electronics and physics to people who will not understand those things and make those things appealing to them
@@JoeLopez I was mostly referring to the video. I have a 5D Mark IV and silent mode is very marginally quieter than normal mode. I don't doubt that some cameras have true silent shooting though.
The real question is that most Photographers who do not practice Sports, Racing or Wild Nature will never ever be concerned about shooting speed per second and number of Megapixels !
Silent mode discussion. Did you turn up the sound when you illustrated the silent mode? or was everything the same except for changing the camera to silent mode? With my Olympus EM1 Mark II, Silent Mode is definitely much quieter although you can still hear the sound if you put the camera right up to your ear.
So, an advertized 24MP sensor is actually using 4 times 6MP photosites with 2 for green, 1 for red and 1 for blue (Bayer filter)? Is there some computing that is made by the camera to extrapolate the value of the missing pixel (the one between 2 reds, 2 blues and 4 greens) to give us a file with 24 actual MP, each having an RGB value of X bits with half of them being extrapolated? I think this would deserve a video in itself. I mean to explain how a camera sensor works actually.
The important part here is to realize that for details the colors do not matter that much. You basically have a 24MP grayscale picture showing fine details, with 6MP color data. (of which the intensity is already mostly captured in the grayscale picture) So a sensor with 24MP sensor for red green and blue will have more detail. But not the difference you would expect between 6MP and 24MP. I haven't seen good comparisons though. I would be interesting to the difference. I think it would probably look like a 24MP vs 18MP.
Yes. It is called the Bayer Transform Approximation, and there are several ways of doing it, with different results, varying from picture content. A sensor with a colour filter array (CFA) such as the Bayer CFA or the X-Trans CFA does NOT capture all the intensity data, either. The CFA transform approximation has to estimate both the intensity, and the colour. For instance, on green grass, the blue and red pixels reads nothing. In a red rose, the blue and green pixels read nothing. On a blue,… er,… um,… ah! …blue towel, the red and green pixels read nothing. Therefore, to capture the details in the towel, the rose, or the grass, even in B&W, requires a CFA transform approximation. To be clear, your raw file does NOT have a CFA transform approximation applied, and in a real raw processor, one can see what it looks like without a TA applied, or what different algorithms for the TA might look like.
@@KarimHosein actually on green grass the blue and red pixels do record something at a lower intensity, as the pixels are sensitive to a fairly wide bandwith that overlap quite a bit. Just like with human eyes. But it becomes quite complex to explain in just text
@@marcdevries9027 , true. I was not being literal when I said, “nothing”, but, as you pointed out, it is not a real record of the actual intensity level, but a lower intensity, and a transform approximation will still have to be applied. That is why the Leica M has so much better resolution of detail; it does not do a BTA, since it does not have a CFA. In fact, it does not have a OLPF either, as neither one is needed for B&W imaging. There is a company which will happily transform ones camera into a B&W camera, by first removing the OLPF and CFA, then replacing it with a flat optical film of equivalent thickness, (for getting precise focusing from the PDAF system). One then skips the Demosaicing process in the develop module, and, viola! High detail B&W! That cannot be done otherwise, due to the BTA.
@@KarimHosein That's really interesting. I found the company you are talking about from another post you made about it on quora.com three years back: maxmax.com Their 30D before and after comparison is really impressive. But that's a VERY old 8MP camera, so it's the best case scenario. Nowadays with sensors having so much more megapixels, the lenses are more of a limiting factor in the detail level and the detail level lost because of the bayer filter is a lot lower. When I look at the Nikon D800 B&W samples the difference is really small. The "after" picture seems to have some post-processing on it. (or has different lighting) But there isn't any actual extra detail in that short compared to the before shot. The same for the "Fujimonochrome". You can see a tiny bit of extra detail, but it's splitting hairs at 100% crop. The difference is far smaller than I expected. And considering the high price for converting a camera to monochrome I really wonder which people will think it worth the money. Still really interesting to see a company is doing this.
I was a mechanic/optic engineer P.E. with Bell & Howell in the early 1960’s doing NASA projects. We also make inexpensive camera’s like Super 8 movie cameras. My favorite was the “Foton 35 mm.” It was the first motor drive 35mm camera. It was a spring mechanical motor drive. It also had a iris shudder so it was so silent that it was court room Qualified. Lastly, we tested ALL lens we made. From the 10” in diameter lens for the U-2 and SR-70 for HYCON cameras to the Super 8 movie camera. All the lens could resolve more lines than any of the films that they could ever use.
Lower end P&S cameras are pretty much all diffraction limited, so the effective resolution is rarely close to the sensor's physical pixels. Back in the early digital audio days, we used to look at the actual signal-to-noise ratio to rate an audio chip in terms of actual bits vs. marketing bits of resolution. So today, you have cameras with 8 real megapixels and an additional 12 marketing megapixels. I'm sure that applies to many kit lenses, too.
Chelsea At 24:40 "yeah, this is showing off a different feature... like how to share pictures you took with the different camera" ......so funny I spit out my coke....lol...outstanding!!
very nice talk, thanks for sharing your knowledge ............now i would ask you guys, what camera would you suggest for a sharp clear photos ?? i need a camera for sharp pictures, i don't care that crap with 4k or 3D or things like that...........just crystal clear pictures , is there any camera that takes nice pictures ???
Which Lightroom model should I buy guys, I heard there was a combo photo shop Lightroom package and also folks having trouble with a few editions of L/R
I do only black and white. Would it be better to change my camera's settings to monochrome? My thinking is that the Beyer filter would be disabled and I would then get a true 24 megapixels as each pixel would be recording luminosity and not be filtering out certain frequencies (colors). Is this true? The problem is that I recently tried this only to find that the RAW images are *still* coming in in color! Why is that?
The Bayer filter is a physical filter on top of the image sensor's pixels and is not disabled by any settings. All the monochrome settings do is simply desaturate the JPG image or RAW preview. They do nothing to the RAW files.
You should have mentioned that Sony and other mirrorless manufacturers didnt lie about silent mode/silentshutter. All you hear is the Aperture closing down, if you arent Shooting wide open
Yea I totally agree. He should’ve mentioned that. However, it’s not like Sony’s silent shooting is perfect. Sony didn’t tell us that the a9 silent shooting doesn’t work when syncing with flash. That’s what kept most wedding photographers from buying one. But yes, he should’ve said something about Sony’s silent shooting.
@@changleon7441 well. They Said it. Not the first thing to mention, and honestly the Situations where flash and silent become useful are rare, but it is what it says it is, whereas canons silent mode is down right missleading. They could have called it whispermode or dampened mode but decided to go with a lie
i noticed some lenses have a "louder" one, which still is barely audible, than others, also , depends on mode. in some modes and situations, your lens will be stopped down already, then there is no Sound at all. Ithe aperture of my 85 1.2, Closing down all the way from 1.2 to f16 is noticable, a Little bit , the Sigma 60 2.8 stopping down to f5.6, barely @@MrPhilbautista
2.5 fps is too low for the Zs. They do have some issues, but I have had it in hands for fast movement of a few people now. We averaged around 60-70% super sharp, with another 10% being okay'ish. I have seen similar results from others. I know you guys are pros, but your experience is so different from what Inhave experienced, i am wondering if you might just benefit from more time with them. I honestly fucked up a lot of pics on day one, two three. After a month, most problems disappeared by understanding the cam. Granted, other cams came faster, but really, your experience is so different from that of others. You should probably lobby the companies for more time or better counseling with best practices. I know i needed that and the time... Maybe that changes the experience?
I thought the Megapixel part of the conversation was hysterical! After spending a lifetime in the photo industry I remembered my years as a photo processor were we would tell young photographers who would bring in their shots that where out of focus! On these occasions we would tell them that the next time they brought in their film to ask whoever was processing it to add “SHARPENOL”to the developer! 😂😂😂
PhotoDude TechFreak not sure I follow the point of your reply? I know how to read a 24 hour clock, it was the fact I’m used to 24 hour not 12, and Tony’s watch said 02:04 which to me is 2am, hence the dedication comment.
According to Nikon manuals on silent mode: "The mirror stays up while the shutter-release button is pressed all the way down. The mirror is lowered (more quietly than in single-frame mode) only when the shutter-release button returns to the halfway position, allowing you to control the timing of the click made by the mirror." So it's not silent as in "no sound", but in that you can control when the mirror is lowered again, which can be more discrete than the up & down in short succession that occurs in regular shooting mode.
I don't see that as a lie. It is a 600mm equivalent focal length and is f/4 in terms of exposure. Where do they make any claims about DOF? If anyone thinks a 300mm lens can give the same shallow DOF as a 600mm lens at the same aperture and subject distance then they need to go back to photography school.
@@cooloox But that's where it's misleading. In case you weren't watching, this is just like the "full frame and can shoot in 4K." Olympus and Panasonic keep harping on how you get double the focal length but stay silent on the effect on depth of field. And for your information, most people who buy cameras haven't gone to photography school, which is why camera manufacturers are so eager to use deceptive ads and claims.
@@cooloox It will also result in significantly worse IQ, both in terms of noise and resolution. That's why it's deceptive. If they compared it to a 400 5.6 with a 1.4x TC or a 150-600, fine, do it. But that's not the case. Exposure settings are irrelevant when comparing different formats.
As a working photographer and a teacher of photography and well have a RU-vid channel soon when I get the time, exposure is the same despite the formate, e.g. a 50mm f1.8 lens, well produces the same size image, the only difference is, that with different formats the image is croped so the field of view is different, not the exposure, and it's the same with DOF, e.g. on m4/3 a 25mm lens well look like a 50mm on ff but you can't compair the DFO cos your compairing a 50mm lens to a 25mm lens of course the 50mm is going to have a shallower DFO, and as for image quality, this is where things get tricky, I had other photographers working with me at a big wedding , we shoot with all different formats m4/3 APSC and FF, and at the end of the day we could not tell what images where shoot on what formate. In my experience over the years working as a wedding photographer, some cameras meter differently and some lenses have different T values, but the only thing that changes with different formats, is the field if view not the exposure, and the DOF is different cos your use different focal length to compensate for the crop factor, and wider angle lenses give you a greater DOF.
Loved it ! I'm guessing ..all these marketing gimiks originating from the heads of the marketing teams that they spend millions on rather than the technical team who actually makes the cameras.
is marketing and also development teams, you will never sell last years camera with the same features again if you don't put something "new" many times are features that the camera already have and a new firmware releases and maybe on the day they put it was the "best" but when you release it is not tottally true, for example the osmo pocket released for the "testers" was 120fps but on the specs released in the site for preorders was just 60fps and after the testers get a lot of criticism about the "lie" on the reviews osmo released a firmware update to get the 120fps on all the models and the idea behing that as some say was to sell in the next year the osmo pocket II with 120fps the same gadget with maybe different color exterior.
Nooby FPS question: isn't there a lot of blur in most fast moving video? I'm probably not understanding the difference between video cameras for film, and what DSL Reflexive lenses do. If the DSLR is recording action video, would it not be fine without autofocus?
This might be a dumb question... but how does your audio sound so good when I can't see any 'podcasting' microphones right near you? How does the audio sound so crisp?
It is nice having it, but I wish reviewers would separately review and rate them. Finding decent RU-vid reviews of mirrorless cameras for stills is painful. It is barely an afterthought in most reviews. Nothing wrong with video reviews but maybe somebody is interested in the M50 because it is cheap and has a reasonably decent sensor for the price with the option for EF mount...
@@GeneWaddle did they even do an M50 review? For that matter, how about comparisons to similar cameras from the same manufacturer. I was already committed to getting a Canon and a comparison of the M50 vs the 80D or 6Dii would have been useful. For that matter, a 6Dii review looking at other $1k cameras and not $2500 cameras would have been useful. Of course, most reviews predated the heavy discounting...
@@RichFreeman Did you buy an M50, or are you looking at getting one? The IQ is slightly better than the 80D, both in terms of sharpness and noise. The AF is excellent once you get used to it and figure out the best methods for the right shooting situation. It's so customisable you can get fast access to most of the main settings from the buttons and can use the Q menu to always go to a particular setting (it remembers the last setting you changed). The eye AF needs the subject fairly close, but then it works very well. Face detection usually nails the eyes anyway (I have no idea why). It's an amazing little camera for the price. I have one for street photography and it never misses a beat.
I recently bought a Nikon D5600 (24 mp) with 2 kit lenses. I have since added a Tokina 12-24mm ultra wide zoom. It's the earlier version that won't auto focus with the D5600. That said, its intended use is for landscapes with the lens set from 12mm-18mm at infinity. Only one outing with it so far but already it's great! Now for the kit lenses. How could Nikon get this so wrong? (I know, profit!) The 18-55mm lens has VR but the 70-300mm does not? The 70-300mm also has ED glass while the 18-55mm does not. Head scratcher! It should be the other way around with all of that. Now I'm sorry I didn't buy the body alone with the Tokina ultra wide and a Tamron 18-270mm walk around lens. I still might go for the later Tamron with the Peizo motor. For the past 6 years I've been shooting with a Coolpix L830 (16mp) bridge camera. It has always delivered great pictures but in the last couple of years I have taken some unexpectedly stunning and startling images! Because of its point & shoot limitations I decided it was time to get my first DSLR. (I used to shoot Konica T-3's and FT1-Motor 35mm cameras). Getting more familiar with Nikon's abbreviations while shopping for the DSLR I soon realized why I've gotten jaw dropping images with a point & shoot. It sports ED glass and built in VR! I haven't really shot enough with the D5600 yet for a total comparison but so far nothing I've shot with it comes close to what I've done with the L850 when it comes to tack sharp focus. I have to admit the D5600's metering is infinitely better. I shot the courthouse in our town square at night with the D5600 and the numerals in the backlit clock were visible and distinct. The L850 could not see them. All you saw in the steeple was a white circle. Still, I foresee certain situations where I will break out the L850 over the D5600 and still come out with pretty pictures.
they also lie about their Mpx, by claiming twice as many as in the final image. Yes, 4Mpx, plus 4Mpx, plus 4Mpx does equal 12Mpx, but they are stacked on top of each other, such that the final image only has 4Mpx.
For the "World's faster auto-focus", there's normally a specific small print. If you read it on Sony's website for the A6400, it states "Based on Sony research, measured using CIPA-compliant guidelines, and internal measurement method with an E 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OSS lens mounted, Pre-AF off and viewfinder in use".
This isn't solely related to cameras, but in general a lot of electronics like to push the idea of: * "Water resistant", or "Water proof to 5 feet in under 1 second", or something similarly deceptive. Basically a trick to say "You can get this wet, and it _might_ not die." For reference, look at most "water proof" items, then look at a decent quality scuba watch. The difference is noticeable. * Drop tests where it shows the product leaving someones hand, and a jump cut to it falling to the ground. It will include a line about it "survives accidental falls up to 1 foot", or something similar, to imply it's highly durable. In both shots, the product technically only dropped the listed foot, but the video makes it _seem_ like it dropped from 5 feet or more. Some companies reword this to "from a great height", or similar. If you see an uncut video of them throwing it off a roof, ladder, etc. assume that they did multiple takes and went with the take where the item actually survived. They don't need to disclose if it's only 1 out of 100. * "Helps protect against..." implies that it _does_ prevent X, whether it be fog, snow, viruses, cracks, or whatever, but may actually do absolutely nothing. The idea is that the device _might_ have the *potential* to do something, but that it is not a guaranteed. Even if the tag line is immediately followed by "Manufacturer guaranteed!" It's a separate sentence, so it's ambiguous enough to mean the manufacturer guarantees that the product is the product, but *does not* guarantee that their _claim_ about the product or it's _suitability_ for applications X, Y, or Z. * "Made in America." The parts were molded, tested, and partially assembled somewhere else. The final screws may have been twisted into place on American soil. By prisoners in a privately run prison. Very few, if factories make products in America from start to finish. Most that do still get their raw materials from elsewhere. From what I understand, this tag line can also sometimes just be in reference to where product _research and design_ took place. Example: K-3 visa engineers may have drawn up a blueprint on American soil, then had it created elsewhere; I believe there has been increased regulation against that specific type of deception, though.
Lie #1: Nikon Z6 & Z7 are weatherproof. Oh yes, they're weathersealed for sunshine! Ask Nikon or read the notes in the manual! The information in the operating instructions must be strictly observed: Temperature 0 to 40°C/32 to 104°F, maximum 85% humidity (no condensation)! Rain means 100% humidity and condensation! The warranty expires when used in rain or even in high humidity. Fine water droplets penetrate. Easiest by the microphone on top! The camera does not turn off immediately. It corrodes and dies slowly. Try to get a new one. LOL
People who did real test concluded. "Nikon Z7's weather sealing is at the top of the class among full-frame mirrorless cameras we've tested to date... it handled heavy rain for a total of 105 minutes etc."
Great video you two. Love the chemistry between you. You requested a complaint. Mine, as of late, is seeing the EOS-R being touted by RU-vidrs (obviously paid or sponsored by Canon) as a replacement for cameras like the 5D MIV or other systems. For me, two very clear reasons why not. One, they moved the AF button in the back (in favor of the slider) to a place where I can't even reach it without loosening my grip on the camera. Maybe a child's hand. Because I use the slider (dumb) more than I need to focus? Come on. I'm not going back to focus racking (press and hold) just to stay with Canon. As your lens + megapixel discussion pointed out... Canon's glass is great, but where are you going to see the difference? Me, I'm shooting for smartphone screens and 8x10 prints. Two, no dual card slot. What in the world and in what world? Not wedding, not portrait, not still, not sports, not video, maybe studio without a client present... Anyone being paid to shoot is likely out. The R has some nice features, but it's like Chelsea's pretzel analogy, basically unfinished. Marketing hype. I feel sorry for the folks that replace their tried and true with the R thinking, "it the next revolution". Thanks again. Great channel!
Megapixels is a number that only states the amount of pixels and thus the resolution of the pictures (actual files) your camera will produce. What color these pixels (on your sensor) record or if they actually make your pictures sharp has nothing to do with that...it’s still the same number of pixels... So with sensorshift (or is it pixelshift ?) the sensor doesn’t increase in megapixels, but the final picture could. Perceivable megapixels is just an indicator of the quality of a lens you put in front of a sensor... The fact that people don’t know or understand this, is not the manufacturer fault. Consumers want to know the megapixel count, so it’s probably emphasized because of it... (My first digital camera ever, didn’t record audio, with the videos...so when I went to buy a new camera, I asked if this one did. The answer:”I don’t know, but it does have Megapixel !”). High FPS without continues auto focus could be used to get sharp hand held pictures with slow shutter speeds. And fast auto focus with still subjects could also come in handy for candid shots. Most people who see me take a shot, start moving at that moment...so if auto focus is quick enough to focus BEFORE the subject starts moving, could in a handful of cases in a couple of years come in handy. The problem, I think, is that most consumers nowadays believe they know what they are talking about and manufacturers tell them exactly what they want to hear. As long as you don’t ask for more...because then they buy something else (from a different manufacturer, that does give them what they want...). I would suggest that the bigger problem is the consumers ignorance and unwillingness to educate themselves. So yes...it’s most definitely misleading advertisement. But they need to, to sell their products...
So, I just started making my Square Space website, bought my domain, etc., and I'm not finding this quite as easy to do as you make it seem (for a complete novice), though I recognize I still have it pretty easy. I think You two should set-up a demonstrational Square Space account, and walk your viewers through the process. I think That would be a great video, and I trust Square Space would approve!
