Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't they just make it taste bad, for safety's sake?
In some countries that is allowed, but in others it has to actually be poisonous.
Well, I hope it is both then.
Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
121–130 of 665 posts
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#122And this is probably because Canon corporate won't justify a budget for developing this software unless they expect separate revenue for it, even though it's clearly just value-add to the (already very expensive) hardware.
This is because this behavior is simply not illegal, and companies can get away with it.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sonys are some of the better cameras for software, but that's a low bar. I love my Nikons for picture taking though.
Nikon has been killing it lately. Z8, Z9, Z6iii, lots of cool lenses! If you're in the market for a full frame body and "the holy trinity" (16-35, 24-70, 70-200 F/2.8), you can't go wrong with any of the major 3. They're all very competitive. (but I would go with the Sony because I like their designs the most, Nikon would be my 2nd choice) Nikon users are missing out on a 16-35 2.8 though, but I'm sure Nikon is worki…
I've only ever used Nikon starting with a D40 ~20 years ago. I regularly still use my D7100, but primarily use my Z5. The only time I'm ever envious of another camera system is when connection options like this come up. But then I go out and take pictures and I'm reminded why I'm probably Nikon for life :)
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#124Is there a reason OP can't get themselves a $50 USB capture card and a $20 HDMI cable, and use OBS to capture the feed from the HDMI-out in the camera? Most decent capture cards also expose themselves as cameras to almost all applications. This is my setup, and it works perfectly. Nikon D7500 as a webcam. More professional setups use Atomos monitors with built-in NVMe drives mounted directly to the camera. I generall…
> Is there a reason OP can't get themselves a $50 USB capture card and a $20 HDMI cable, and use OBS to capture the feed?
This is how I've used my Sony camera since COVID. It works great.
I wasn't sure at first if OP was trying to do something nonstandard, because you get video to your computer with a video cable. Plus a way for your computer to capture that, which for me is CamLink.
Honestly, I'm surprised there's a relevant manufacturer app at all. Not surprised that it costs money.
This is a bit like not having power in your home to charge your camera with and asking the manufacturer for a generator. They may have a solution, but the price will be bad.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I love the EU but it certainly has its idiosyncrasies. This issue does not appear weird. There is some legally technical difference between a video camera and a still photo camera. Probably different tariffs or something. Not weird at all and it is not uncommon anywhere in the world for different classes och products to be classified differently, infallibly because of industry lobbyism to reduce their costs or to r…
So American and Asian consumers can pay the same price for the same device that can do more, but to protect me, the European, my device must do less? It is I the customer who will pay the tariffs (they are always paid by the importer) - the manufacturer gets the same amount per unit.
Tariffs aren't to protect you. They are to protect domestic industry.
https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/eu-to-hit-some-di...
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#126I firmly believe this is the branch digital cameras are dying on, and at this point, probably must die on. If these opened up, at least to the level iPhone did in 2007, they'd have an ecosystem as people still used them. As-is, for most purposes, my Android phone is a better camera than my full frame interchangeable lens camera.
I agree with your comment.
But as phone cameras are reaching limits due to the physical amount of light that they can capture, “computational photography” ML models are essentially making up details that aren’t there.
So your Android photos may have the look you want, but be worse for many purposes.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of when lawyers successfully argued that X-Men are not human, so that their action figures would be classified as "toys" rather than "dolls" and thus charged a lower tariff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_Biz%2C_Inc._v._United_Stat...
Sounds insane. But what is more surprising to me - is why dolls were taxed differently than other toys. At first glance, it looks like stupid rules force to play silly games.
Some trade war from the XIX century or something? Or maybe because dolls were historically thought for girls?
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#128I also discovered that I couldn't use my Canon SLR to record more than 30 minutes of video continuously. The problem however wasn't Canon, but that I lived in a region (EU) that would have imposed a customs tariff on cameras that could do that, but by keeping it under that, the camera would be classed as a 'stills' camera and so was therefore exempt. Admittedly this is different from the case in the article - but it…
Silly restrictions aside, I feel that most use cases don't have takes longer than 30min anyway (I mean, on cameras that you actually start and stop recording manually) But yeah technology evolves and the taxes remain. (Though don't complain too much or they will just pick the higher taxes for the newer cameras)
Camera manufacturers can just enable the functionality as an easter-egg.
So they just publish some activation code on some consumer forum somewhere and from then on it's the consumer's responsibility.
I think they did the same thing with DVD region restrictions.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I love the EU but it certainly has its idiosyncrasies. This issue does not appear weird. There is some legally technical difference between a video camera and a still photo camera. Probably different tariffs or something. Not weird at all and it is not uncommon anywhere in the world for different classes och products to be classified differently, infallibly because of industry lobbyism to reduce their costs or to r…
So American and Asian consumers can pay the same price for the same device that can do more, but to protect me, the European, my device must do less? It is I the customer who will pay the tariffs (they are always paid by the importer) - the manufacturer gets the same amount per unit.
> but to protect me, the European, my device must do less?
No, I think it's to protect the European producer of devices that can do more from being out-competed by imports.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#130So, uh, has anybody noticed that the headline is false? You can use your Canon camera as a webcam without having to pay for it. It even says so in the last image in the article! You plug it in via USB and you get a webcam. It's just that you can't use any feature other than reading the video feed. But you can get other software for that. I guess "You can't use Canon's webcam software to adjust your video feed, or rem…
This is misleading. You don't get a proper video feed, you get 720p at 30 fps out of a camera that shoots 4K at 60 fps. On top of that, no white balance, no color correction, no etc. My laptop's built in webcam does better than that.