Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're simply mistaken.
The marketing material for OP's model: > Use the EOS Utility Webcam Beta Software (Mac and Windows) to turn your Canon camera into a high-quality webcam, or do the same using a clean HDMI output.
Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
361–370 of 665 posts
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they don't. They advertise that the camera can "turn into" a webcam with the right software or through HDMI out.
That’s basically the same though, isn’t it?
It's like me trying to sell you a car that can "turn into" a boat with the right attachments. Notice I didn't say how much the attachments cost.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#363Is 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…
This is hugely dependent on whether the camera supports clean HDMI output - that is, without overlays. My Canon camera for example insists on showing a focus square over HDMI no matter what, and it is impossible to disable.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#364The fact that its a subscription is what really rubs me up the wrong way. Not everything deserves to be a subscription. Why is everything a subscription these days?
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#365That's reminds me when I was in South East Asia a few years back and wanted to do some time lapse or series photography with my Sony Alpha a7ii. A camera that I had paid close to 2k€ for (just body, no glass). It required an app to be installed on the camera that was paid-for. Which in term required the camera to be connected to a WiFi. Imagine discovering this while on a trip in the jungle or the desert or whatever…
As William Shakespeare said, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the MBAs".
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#366I 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…
Funnily enough, I have actually used the 30 minute limit as a "feature" on my Panasonic Lumix G80 (the cousin to the unrestricted G85) as sometimes I would want to set up my camera and leave it recording for 20-30 minutes while I walked away to do things but wouldn't physically be able to return to switch it off. It would save me battery and SD card space because it automatically stops after 30 minutes.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#367Is 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…
Exactly. But why does he need to buy a USB capture card and HDMI cable? He can just hire someone to come and record the videos for him. They'll also do the post processing. Why does he even even record the videos himself? He can just hire actors to do what he wants, probably a lot better. And what's the whole thing with buying a camera? He should just buy a studio and hire a crew to manage all that stuff.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#368Earlier 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...
Hoo boy we have some classics in that category in the UK. My personal fave is when morning TV host Lorraine Kelly successfully argued she wasn’t hosting as herself but acting a character called Lorraine Kelly, with very favourable tax consequences.
Re: Canon wants us to pay for using our own camera as a webcam
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reasons like this is why the Japanese companies are eating sh*t and are VERY interested in pushing for a US-China war just like the western companies. Everything coming out of China is way more customer friendly, usually way cheaper and getting better and better to a point that they are surpassing everything else that exists. If DJI releases a full-frame mirrorless camera with L-mount (which they are going to), Canon…
Regarding products from China being cheaper: remember that Japanese, Korean, and Western companies are the ones mostly innovating and absorbing the R&D costs. Remember how modern OLEDs were made feasible basically by LG and Samsung? Having stolen that IP[0][1][2], without any R&D costs but with dirt cheap manufacturing due to direct and indirect subsidies like relatively almost nonexistent labour protection laws, PRC…
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2015/08/25/tsmc_samsung_espionag...
[2] https://www.reuters.com/legal/samsung-hit-with-303-mln-jury-...
[3] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1314374/south-korea-sams...