Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

dslrbodies.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 393 posts

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#21

Post by tqkxzugoaupvwqr »

askafriend wrote: post #7

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…

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.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#22

Post by dflock »

askafriend wrote: post #7

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's a fairly small and rapidly shrinking market - mostly because of camera phones, so this is incredibly unlikely, obviously

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#23

Post by avh02 »

Viper007Bond wrote: post #12
cm2187 wrote: post #9

I'd add to the list geotagging. It is extremely useful to embed in the Exif the coordinates where the picture was taken.

My point and shoot did that like 5-10 years ago. Crazy that DSLRs don't.

When I bought my most recent DSLR, I had to pick between a slighly older model with GPS or the latest model with wifi. They were essentially identical other than that I think, maybe touchscreen?

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#24

Post by jaggederest »

Steve44 wrote: post #14
l33tbro wrote: post #8

My pet-peeve with modern DSLR's is that none of these manufacturers seem to care about motion-cadence with their video offering. There's been amazing leaps with 4k video and now 10 bit image depth with the Panasonic GH5, but the footage looks so damn robotic and souless compared to cinema cameras from Arri and Red. I obviously don't expect a $2000 dslr to match a $50k Alexa in image quality, but surely they must be a…

I think a lot of the problems relate to the experience of the person behind the camera. Often you can see the choppiness when things are moving. That to me looks like they are using a high shutter speed which is inappropriate for cine work. In still photography if you take a picture of a waterfall on a bright day at 1/1000 you'll see every crisp drop, shooting at 1/30th will give a little bit of smoothing motion blur…

> My other bugbear is many cameramen appear to have forgotten what a tripod is. The camera wobbling about can occasionally at to the atmosphere but most of the time it is just annoying and distracting. Again a combination of lack of skill and production values.

With projection and home displays lagging camera technology, I'd be surprised if the opposite didn't happen. You can do a lot of shake reduction with 2x the pixels you intend to keep.

Also I think a lot of the shake these days is added in post, partly to cover for production flaws and partly to add "atmosphere" as you say.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#25

Post by tolien »

Viper007Bond wrote: post #12
cm2187 wrote: post #9

I'd add to the list geotagging. It is extremely useful to embed in the Exif the coordinates where the picture was taken.

My point and shoot did that like 5-10 years ago. Crazy that DSLRs don't.

They do (or at least, my Canon EOS 7D mark 2 does). However, leaving the GPS switched on significantly reduces battery life.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#26

Post by jrimbault »

Steve44 wrote: post #14
l33tbro wrote: post #8

My pet-peeve with modern DSLR's is that none of these manufacturers seem to care about motion-cadence with their video offering. There's been amazing leaps with 4k video and now 10 bit image depth with the Panasonic GH5, but the footage looks so damn robotic and souless compared to cinema cameras from Arri and Red. I obviously don't expect a $2000 dslr to match a $50k Alexa in image quality, but surely they must be a…

I think a lot of the problems relate to the experience of the person behind the camera. Often you can see the choppiness when things are moving. That to me looks like they are using a high shutter speed which is inappropriate for cine work. In still photography if you take a picture of a waterfall on a bright day at 1/1000 you'll see every crisp drop, shooting at 1/30th will give a little bit of smoothing motion blur…

Maybe someone here can answer my question:

During panning shots (horizontal, vertical), in recent films the image is blurry and uncomfortable (for me). Similar panning shots in earlier films seem cripser and more "comfortable".

Is there a technical reason (shutter speed fashion) ? Or is it in my head ?

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#27

Post by mschuster91 »

Tangentially related: I plan on buying a Sony a7s Mk2 this year. Aside from the screwmount and the battery issues, how is this camera affected by the other problems mentioned in the article (vibration, especially)? Is there anyone here who regularly shoots video with this camera?

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#28

Post by leejo »

clra wrote: post #6

Great article. I was hoping that the author would add something about the UIs of these cameras. The bodies of modern DSLRs are jampacked with every kind of knob, control, button, dial, and dongle that you can possibly think of. To a large extent, that's kind of the whole point — these cameras are for professionals and professionals ostensibly need to be able to adjust every aspect of their picture. But in practice, 9…

> Sometimes you don't notice, and there goes your shot.

That's because you're not using the EVF, which you should be. The single most useful feature combination I find on the x100 series cameras is the EVF combined with the exposure compensation dial. This relates to the following annoyance from the article:

> No focus information in viewfinder

Any need for this is negated by a well implemented electronic viewfinder. Fuji are killing it on this aspect. An EVF will give you: exact framing, exposure, white balance, focus, and depth of field. You get none of this in a traditional optical viewfinder. It completely removes the need to "chimp" and you can concentrate on shooting photographs rather than reviewing what you just shot.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#29

Post by mikeytown2 »

l33tbro wrote: post #8

My pet-peeve with modern DSLR's is that none of these manufacturers seem to care about motion-cadence with their video offering. There's been amazing leaps with 4k video and now 10 bit image depth with the Panasonic GH5, but the footage looks so damn robotic and souless compared to cinema cameras from Arri and Red. I obviously don't expect a $2000 dslr to match a $50k Alexa in image quality, but surely they must be a…

Using an ND filter to get a slower shutter speed is the way to go. The more expensive cameras usually have a ND filter built in. Shooting at 24fps is possible on most modern cameras these days.

If you want to have the ability to adjust the amount of blur in post shooting at 120fps+ allows for that workflow but it’s a pain to do.

Or is it something else like a bad video codec?

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#30

Post by pawelk »

agravier wrote: post #5

Tangentially related: I find that being able to run android apps on my camera (not my phone with its tiny lens) is extremely useful. I bought the Samsung galaxy camera 2, but I don't know of any other such product.

From a cursory Google search: Nikon COOLPIX S800c, Panasonic Lumix DMC-CM10. So the big players are investing in Android.

This just shows how different users have different needs. I do not want my camera to be "smart", I want it to measure the amount of light that comes trough the lens, tell me if it's too much or too little, then capture and save the data on some storage. I can take it from there.

My ideal solution would be something like the failed Siliconfilm project which was a digital sensor you'd put into an analog camera 35mm film compartment.

Post reply on HN