-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
I mean if one's just starting out and has no pre-existing camera system and needs their camera to be new then that's the camera to buy. The Fuji stuff is very good as well, but even I have been using the stuff less these days after adding Sony to my tool set.
I"m sure that they will want to focus on sports for the Olympics and then other markets later.
They supposedly always announce their flagships around the Olympics, though I guess the S branded cameras would be for around when the winter Olympics come around.
like clockwork. Nikon is on 2 year cycle and they want their new gear out before the Olympics.
I do think it's weird that people on Dpreview or wherever get mad about this online... This is a niche camera for a market Nikon knows. It's not like they are making this camera instead of making an APS-C mirrorless system or something. Actually, by all accounts they are working on the latter atm anyway.
Does anyone have experience using Capture One to import Fuji RAWs, convert to TIFFs, and then spit out to Lightroom?
I like Lightroom too much to really want to move away, but I think this would be a cool way to get the better color management of C1 without needing to full fat switch to it.
I like Lightroom too much to really want to move away, but I think this would be a cool way to get the better color management of C1 without needing to full fat switch to it.
you have a D4? a Fuji and a Sony camera system? What the hell are you complaining about camera prices for. :P
I got my D4 used about a year and a half ago for $1500 (traded the D600 in), paid $100 for my X-T2 (traded in my D7100 and a couple of 2.8 lenses and the 18-35) and got the A7R2 and 3 used. I try to spend as little as possible for good shit and still end up financing the good shit at some point.
I can buy stuff and still whine about the prices. Like I have six cameras and minus the X-T3 they're all used. Most manufacturers don't make too much off of me. Now I'm going to go back to my current state of trying to not buy a 135GM.
Last edited:
I can see how it looks and the ease of the work flow tomorrow
Too late, already am doing it lol. It's a pretty simple work flow, and with the vastly better Levels tool in C1 will probably actually save me time in addition to improving RAW quality.
The most annoying part is that using Auto-Import I can't have my C1 exported TIFs go straight into dated subfolders... If you have subfolder in your auto-import folder, it completely ignores everything, and Auto-import doesn't have the same settings that NORMAL import does. BLECH.
Interestingly though, all of my Lightroom adjustments are maintained... So if I adjust the colors and everything, pop it into C1, then export back, all of my adjustments just get applied like I was working with the OG image, which is nifty. I may see how this can help -- I may be re-uploading some of my flickr shots.
I notice an immediate difference in how the noise is handled; C1 does indeed handle Fuji RAW better in that regard. No more worms!
EDIT: Took like 30 seconds to get this:
C1 middleman on the left; I'm seeing improved sharpness, noise, and color... just by exporting it as a TIF.
Last edited:
yea for reals.
has capture one gotten better? when I had a Phase One I found lightroom easier and faster to edit Phase One's files instead using their own editing software.
I've looked at moving to C1.
No lenstagger plugin
No Flickr export
My entire current library gets fucked
I don't like sessions vs a large library
I like LR's interface better
I know how to edit photos much better in Lightroom
Now, maybe, just maybe, having C1 as a middleman will have me using it enough to get comfortable with it, and just deal with the lack of an easy built in way to edit lens metadata for all my manual lenses, but for now, I am more than happy using it as a middleman step to do the actual RAW conversion.
No lenstagger plugin
No Flickr export
My entire current library gets fucked
I don't like sessions vs a large library
I like LR's interface better
I know how to edit photos much better in Lightroom
Now, maybe, just maybe, having C1 as a middleman will have me using it enough to get comfortable with it, and just deal with the lack of an easy built in way to edit lens metadata for all my manual lenses, but for now, I am more than happy using it as a middleman step to do the actual RAW conversion.
Makes sense since it'll be available before the Japan Olympics, which all the manufacturers want. Only one missing is the 1DXII successor so far.
I honestly consider the SIII to be the most niche of the bunch. The videographers constantly fucking whine about it but only about 2% of the people whining for it will actually buy it. I'd really love to see what the breakdown numbers are between the Sony lines, because I have a hunch that the S line sells the least or at the very least way less than the R series.
I own an A7S Mk. I and am still pretty happy with it. The Mk. II brought better color and IBIS, which was great, but I'm still shocked at what the A7S line delivers for the price tier.
Sony already cannibalizes their FS5/FS7 offerings with the A7S Mk. ii. I can't imagine the Mk III would be announced before their next true video camera bodies.
I honestly wasn't expecting Sony to keep all these models given the industry contraction but I guess they know what they're doing. I assume with the APSC cameras there are a lot of parts in common so presumably they have an efficient manufacturing process.
I really think it depends on what it is that you do. For me I'd never touch and A7SII, period, I do a good amount of video, but I could do that easily on the RII or RIII. I can't do the photography work I do on the A7SII though, that thing is not an event photography camera and I honestly think in this day and age at the price tag the SIII would come out at it needs to be capable of doing both. I just find the SII to be very niche, as in it excels at low light video, everything else the A7RII does way better than it at. It really is just a video camera that could take a picture if need be, but it doesn't excel at photography, it's not what I would call a true hybrid camera. If I need 4K60 I have an X-T3.
This is why all of their bodies are 98% the same between models. The A7SIII would honestly have to be what Panasonic did with the S1H to be efficient with the heat management and shut up the whiny videographers. Edit: Also please don't take the "whiny videographer" thing as an insult. I'm on way too many photography forum/FB groups. They are whiny as fuck on there.
Personally, I've shot a bunch of things on my A7S Mk. I and exploited the cleanliness of the low-light capabilities. Here's a goofy comedy short I did on one a few years ago:
The thing to remember when looking at this footage is that we lit it with 2-3 $5 colored light bulbs, giving us the worst CRI imaginable. Low wattage, too. The "blue" light looked blue on set, but registered more like green on camera. What's worse is that we also had green light sources, too, and we wanted a contrast between the blue and green light colors. Normally I'd just adjust my color temp to compensate and cool the green and tint it magenta in camera, but we were using multiple light sources and going for blue, green, orange, and white sources, so we had to go with a normal, true-to-life temp in camera to keep all the colored light sources accurate.
In post, I used some channel mixing to get the green to look more blue without ruining the skin tones and such. Considering the amount of light we were working with, the quality of those lights, and the fact we were shooting finite details like lights catching in smoke... If we had shot this on any other camera, the picture would have fallen apart pretty quickly. The A7S's picture, even internally recorded, held up super well with the channel mixing.
Last edited:
For short movies and such I can see the S series making sense, I don't mostly documentation, photojournalism B-Roll event work. I have only wanted the cleaner high iso for like one event at a graduation. The highest I'd spend for an SII is like $800 but other than that it just seems like a regression feature wise from my other two Sony cameras. The video looks like a pain to color correct for.
After this video, we went out and dropped some money on a bunch of decent bi-temp light panels. It made our style a lot easier to produce going forward.
Light panels are a lot easier to work with. When I first started doing headshots I was using a bunch of lights in my offices studio and god damn it made white balancing a bitch. One was magenta toned and the other was like a tungsten source and leaned orange, was impossible to white balance around. After making the change to strobes it got a lot easier to actually get the colors more accurate.
With my job being the way it currently is I'm at the point where I can say that I'm done with my DSLR's. I have to send stuff to my office on the field and my D4 and D810 do not have that ability. I need whatever manufacturer I use to have a seamless phone transfer app for that and even Fuji's breaks my fucking balls randomly with that. I do too much video, my Nikon's live view isn't the best with garbage video AF. Can I use a DSLR still? Yes, at times I wish I still could, but I can't so I ended up adapting and got into mirrorless super hardcore. This is coming from basically what is a press journalist, but not a dinosaur press journalist. If your camera system can't do good video, have good AF and a burst rate that can be used for run and gun photojournalism, you can't get your jpegs from your camera to your phone and then email them off to your social media team quickly then pack up your camera company and leave the business or just straight up cater to soccer moms because nobody that knows what the fuck they're doing and using their camera gear to pay their bills and put food in their mouth will want anything to do with you.
Well I don't think you really need to worry about that. Technically nothing you list is incompatible with having a mirror and prism, but the only two large companies still making SLRs are clearly on their way out of that business. Even if their long term exit plan isn't exactly clear.
Nothing "new" has that problem. I can't take my D4 or D810 to anything these days because I can't get an image off of one to my phone and I can't even give my social media department anything unless I bring over a card reader for my D4's XQD card or something for a compact flash card. Like this type of stuff can get very annoying. I don't think the D4 can do 1080 24P so that's useless on the video front.
If the 5DIV is anything to go buy they're probably still using their shit tier motion jpeg codec. The video off the camera looks good, but that god damn thing is a fucking data catastrophe. I hate importing the video off that camera, same with the C100 and it's AVCHD codec because it's all in an AVCHD file and you have to to go in to that and then export the individual clips from Premiere. When you just want to go home after getting back from a shoot at 7pm, you DO NOT want to deal with this shit.
JadedWriter
JadedPhotographer
seriously though these are things Thom Hogan has been harping on for damn near a decade.
Even my A6000 was doing NFC transfers, years back, which was wonderful.
I'm also a big fan of my ThinkPad's built in SD card slot for similar reasons: I can't stand adapters and dongles.
If a veteran as storied as Thom Hogan has been saying the same things then I'm obviously right in my observations. I'm also surprised that it has taken the manufacturers this long to put this stuff into motion because good god this stuff should've been built into the older flagships a long ass time ago. I love every camera I have bought for the most part, but god damn the older DSLR's are not future proof at all.
I really wish the D4 and D810 could do NFC or something that would transfer the pics seamlessly in the modern age, but they really don't and if there's a wifi adapter then they're expensive as shit and I don't feel like buying them only to find out that whatever app there is for that doesn't really work. Sometimes you kind of need future tech in your body and not just a body capable of taking a good pic.
have you never read his modular camera?
he's said for years someone should come out with a modular camera that can easily interchange sensors, lenses, and be able to communicate over wifi or something like that.
No I really haven't I don't check in on Hogan too much unless I need a lot of different opinions on something before I purchase it. In a way he's right, but at the same time I could see a modular camera being pretty damn expensive. they'd have to manufacture certain things according to individual taste.
LMAO
can we change our names or did you have to pm a mod?
Anyone make use of Adobe Portfolio? I made my own portfolio/website last week after being aware of this feature.
Yes you can change your name, it's just got to be approved by a mod.
I don't have an interest in like 90% of the cameras on his channel but nevertheless I watch every Kai Wong vid that comes out.
I really don't think Kai has ever convinced me to buy anything. It's just another opinion then I compared that to another opinion and I might laugh at some of his jokes.
Kai's videos are entertainment and I watch them for that. For deep dives in cameras showing every nook and cranny I would go to Gordon Laing or Maarten Heilbron. Also when I just need to relax sometimes I put on a maarten heilbron video in the background, dude's voice is better than taking an ambien.
I was just about to say that Maarten puts my ass to sleep. I don't mind the former Camerastore guys on DPReview, since they're a good middle ground and always have been. Kai's well, he's faux witty and I don't always care about poop jokes. I guess I just go back and forth on this shit.