The dumbest is that their "auto" modes aren't as good as phones. I bought a Fuji X-T20 and am really disappointed with it; it is definitely capable of much better results than my phone as long as you have the time to switch all the knobs, which is way more annoying than I thought it would be and often not possible depending on your subject.
I have no desire to do any post-processing and didn't realize that most of the amazing photos I saw in camera reviews were the result of professional-level post-processing.
While GPS chips might seem like an obvious addition, it might negatively affect other camera functions like battery life.
That has massive import/export implications, changes how you can ship them, all sorts of nonsense. As always, when a group of hundreds of smart engineers are doing something superficially inexplicable, it's actually either: a) complicated, and a good idea, or b) complicated, because of the government.
c) to improve profit margins at customer UX expense.
I could only imagine if Apple took all of their camera expertise from the iPhone and all of their existing Chip expertise and all of their Operating Systems expertise to create a Semi-Pro Mirrorless camera. Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful l…
It would only make sense from a financial perspective if the market they were entering (think: auto) is bigger than the one they could be endangering (mobile).
Also, would they then be making camera sensors? Or would they just figure Sony (whose profits they'd be stepping on) would just take it? Do they have a 2nd source for this critical component?
Sounds like an iPhone with a bigger camera chip. I don’t think Apple will venture into dedicated camera equipment. The iPhone camera is one of the big selling points and keeps people upgrading. Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. A dedicated device also goes against the unification that Apple seems to pursue.
> Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. I never understood that reasoning. As an individual, I can't simultaneously develop 10 different products, but a large company sitting on billions in cash could develop 1000 niche products simultaneously. In fact, some large companies (Procter & Gamble, 3M, General Electric) have thousands or tens of thousands of products. To use your Apple e…
This isn't Apple's MO. They are big on secrets, big on integration, big on higher ASP but fewer products (though that's changing with increased Apple's market cap).
Apple continues to be unique and continues to be questioned as to the viability of their uniqueness.
While this article focuses on DSLR type cameras, one that I find odd is the lack of phase detection autofocus on compact/superzoom cameras that use 1/2.3" (7.66mm x 6.17mm) sensors when we've had it in our phones for 3-4 years? The only compacts/superzooms with fast/accurate contrast-detect AF are Panasonic's cameras that use their secret-herbs-and-spices Depth from Defocus AF.
And what about the lack of IBIS (In-Body Image-Stabilisation) in cameras like the D850? Many mirrorless cameras (and Pentax DSLRs...) allow you to use unstabilised old glass like Minolta lenses with excellent results thanks to IBIS. I understand Nikon has a wealth of stabilised lenses but it'd be nice to have a bulletproof camera feature-wise. Plus you could pair lens barrel stabilisation with IBIS as Panasonic does with the GH5 and G85 to create silky smooth gimbal-like footage or crisp slow shutter photos while hand-held.
I'm sure these things will come in time but they seem like they should have been here already. Everyone is playing musical chairs with features.
I don't want android on my camera. I just want it to be able to send all data that it's curating to my android device (which has an actually useful screen size and powerful enough cpu/gpu to do real editing) in a browsable fashion where I can see what's on the camera, and pick what to transfer. Kind of like, say... FTP over bluetooth/wifi? (or sFTP, of course). And of course, a full input mapping for all "buttons" on…
Bluetooth might not be great. The max transfer rate is something like 24 Mbit/s (3 MB/s), and say a single RAW file is 20 MB, then you'd be looking at about 7 seconds of transfer time for each photo. With high quality jpegs ~5MB it would be closer to 2 seconds per picture. I think you'd need some kind of direct cabled connection for good perf for professional photographers. Not to mention getting all the camera and a…
I wouldn't mind using a cable if it was fast and went somewhere useful on my phone. e.g. not get stuck in a shitty Canon app. My Canon 6D "has" WiFi but it's so slow and terrible to use it may as well not be there.
GPS based on solely on satellite signals tends to require several to tens of minutes before it can provide an accurate location. Cell phone geolocation tends to much much faster because it utilizes terrestrial radio signals from cell towers and wifi networks and who knows what else...a database of such signals is part of the what else.
My old point-and-shoot camera with a built-in GPS receiver can go from completely powered off (battery out) to an accurate GPS fix in under 4 minutes as long as it has an unobstructed view of the sky. So your time estimate is way too high in most cases. Cell phones are even faster because they pick up an initial approximate location from the cell phone tower and also automatically download GPS satellite ephemeris dat…
To me, four minutes seems to fall in the range of "several to tens of minutes."
I disagree with this article in a lot of ways; the tripod mount is about the closest thing to mattering to a field/wedding/studio photographer. - IR Remote; Works in the studio (or in the field) because your lighting is to the sides or front (if it's behind the camera, you have shadow) - USB/Wifi version. The typical pro is taking 300-3000 clicks before uploading to lightroom for post; between this there are many oth…
> you'll find the best sports cameras either compensate with ram or have faster card writes
Don't most DSLRs do this? I know my low end Sony Alpha will buffer about 7-10 frames from a burst before getting constrained by card write speeds.
The only thing wrong with the 1/4-20 mount is that there's only one. Camera manufacturers should add a second one half an inch to the side so that plates can be mounted with two points of attachment, which would eliminate concerns with twisting and loosening. Wanting to force the weight and cost of Arca Swiss on everyone is just selfish. In fact most of these complaints are just examples of wanting everyone else to s…
Unless you're taking serious action shots on a violently shaking platform, even a hand tight 1/4-20 isn't going to shake or blow loose. Is loosening a theoretical or actual problem?
Depending on what you're mounting the camera on, it can be a real problem. A moderately-heavy lens attached to a tripod head turned 90 degrees for a portrait can definitely put enough torque on the screw to loosen it. This is most likely just going to be an annoyance, though, because the camera will droop but won't actually come loose. On the other hand, if you're using a "rapid" bottom-mounted camera strap, the possibility of the screw backing out and dumping your camera on the ground is very real.
"I definitly have had issues with the tripod socket mount coming loose during carry. It is rare, and usually only after a very long time of not adjusting it but I came within a wisker of dumping my F5 one time and the D300 has seen it loosen up a couple times."
I could only imagine if Apple took all of their camera expertise from the iPhone and all of their existing Chip expertise and all of their Operating Systems expertise to create a Semi-Pro Mirrorless camera. Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful l…
The profit potential isn’t there. Apple probably makes more money selling dongles than they’d ever make with a camera. Also, the Mac Pro fiasco makes me doubtful that Apple wants to be in any pro markets anymore.
How many years in a row are people going to make this proclamation? First it was not making screens anymore, then it was Final Cut Pro X, then it was iOS and the iPad, then it was the Mac Pro. Never mind that the Mac Pro is a great machine, and they've already announced the iMac Pro and hinted at a newer Mac Pro that is more in line with people's expectations. At this point, no matter what they do, people will say, "they don't care about the Pro market anymore." It's ridiculous.