301–310 of 384 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume some $300 range cameras has sensor that same (or less) size to $600 smartphones.
They are almost entirely pointless in my opinion I'm not sure why they even sell low end cameras anymore. The only potential benefit I see is the software allows a lot more manual control but it also doesn't have as good automatic improvements that phone software has.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, the biggest questions are: Can I leave the camera powered on, always? and Can I handle it effectively with gloves on in the snow? Those two questions drive as much of my camera choice as do technical concerns.
I have a Nikon dSLR that seizes up electrically if left with 70-300 VR attached for weeks. Fixes itself if left with a fresh battery and an 18-55. I wonder how often that will happen with other brands like Alpha.
Sad to see them go - photography's such a great hobby and having competition in the space is healthy. There's a few brands out there still, but there is a noticable stigma in the professional community around equipment that isn't Canon. If you're not using L-glass, it feels like you get the same kind of judgement that Android users experience when they show up with green texts in iMessage. As a matter of principle, I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In bigger semiconductor business we have three main fabs. Intel, TSMC, Global Foundries. Intel is closed to outside customers, so again we have a duopoly there. It's not very very different in the bigger picture if you ask me. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Intel offers custom work https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/foundry/overview.htm... You forgot Samsung as one of the big fabs.
It occurred to me that Kingston probably has its own fab too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sony's image sensor fab business is a bit different. First of all, there's two companies: Semiconductor and Imaging. Sony opens some of their technologies to other customers by transferring Imaging unit's patents to Semi and allows them for re-licensing. So, not everyone is using the same sensor even if they are coming out from the same fab. Second, there's customer tailored sensor business. Sony can provide a custom…
Totally agreed, but if that one fab company falls over, much of the imaging industry has a problem. That's the monoculture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not go all Sony ? You can share the lenses between your apsc and your full frame.
The problem you still run into with Sony (especially if you're on a budget) is that if you go Nikon or Canon there's decades of used lenses you can pop right on your body and go to town (to at least some level). This impacts both what choices you have, as well as what you can expect to pay for a given set/quality of glass. To Wit: A Canon 10-18 is ONE THIRD the cost of the Sony E-mount 10-18. Yes, the Sony has a cons…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> combined with average consumer going to the cell phone instead of a traditional camera Sadly all you describe could be pulled up 5 years from now when it's Canon that is leaving the came a market, or Nikon....
I think you missed what I was saying - Olympus could no longer afford or had the willingness invest the R&D required to compete with what Nikon and Canon are going to release over the next 5 years. Nikon has the best mount/technology base going forward. Canon has the most money. Canon/Nikon will survive. I see Sony, Pentax, Panasonic leaving the camera market.
It's tough because the irony that you don't make a ton of money in the imaging industry selling cameras. Like Pentax now is the part Hoya didn't want (however happy or not they were with what they got in retrospect). It looks like Olympus also just wants to focus on science and medical optics.
That's why I sort of worry about Nikon. They do semiconductor/flat panel stuff, but they are way less diversified than Canon/Sony. Either their camera business has to be successful or they have to expand the other segment/s.
I don't think it has to do with how deficiency in products or technologies, but if the high-end camera market changes, Nikon is probably the most sensitive of the big players.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are almost entirely pointless in my opinion I'm not sure why they even sell low end cameras anymore. The only potential benefit I see is the software allows a lot more manual control but it also doesn't have as good automatic improvements that phone software has.
The battery typically lasts for weeks. This is something we cannot say at all for phones...
For video recording I found this sony one could only manage an hour on a full charge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally agreed, but if that one fab company falls over, much of the imaging industry has a problem. That's the monoculture.
It is even more tenuous than that. If just one of a company's fabs goes down much of the imaging industry will have problems. A few years ago when the earthquake affected Sony's Kumamoto sensor fab it caused some serious issues for some camera vendors. Nikon for example had announced their DL 1" sensor compact line to compete with Sony's 1" sensor cameras and reportedly due to the earthquake they delayed and eventual…