Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

5d markii video capability

5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by steveabrink

I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be a lot 
of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full 
frame imager.  I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real uses 
for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And should 
that bother us ...  

This question of the convergence of video and still photography -- and 
apparently this is just the beginning... I could see it for working 
photojournalsits but thats about it.  But, I'd prefer to have 
a 'stills' camera only and therefore less dollars, and an interface 
designed purely for still photography... 
 
SteveB

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by stephenpho@aol.com

The world as we have known is changed forever. You might as well start 
learning Final Cut.


**************
Looking for simple solutions to your real-life 
financial challenges?  Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, 
tips and calculators.
      (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Bruce Watson

steveabrink wrote:
> I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be a lot 
> of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full 
> frame imager.  I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real uses 
> for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And should 
> that bother us ...  
>
> This question of the convergence of video and still photography -- and 
> apparently this is just the beginning... I could see it for working 
> photojournalsits but thats about it.  But, I'd prefer to have 
> a 'stills' camera only and therefore less dollars, and an interface 
> designed purely for still photography... 
>  
> SteveB
>   

I'll second that. I've got no use for video. But if I did, why would I 
want a still camera for it? I would want a camera designed to take 
advantage of what video can do and make it easy to do it. And that's not 
what a full frame 35mm DSLR is about.

I would much prefer that the video capabilities be left out of my still 
camera. But if it's put in, I can always ignore it. Like I ignore all 
the text editing capabilities in Photoshop.

Besides, most of the interest I see coming at this is from one guy who's 
more interested in video than in stills as far as I can tell. I don't 
know why this is, but it sure seems to be true.
--
Bruce Watson

RE: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by E Neilsen

In place of a motor drive, perhaps he is using it to capture the perfect
moment. 

 

Eric Neilsen Photo

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214 827-8301

 

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

SKype ejprinter

 

  _____  
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Watson
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 6:49 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

 

steveabrink wrote:
> I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be a lot 
> of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full 
> frame imager. I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real uses 
> for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And should 
> that bother us ... 
>
> This question of the convergence of video and still photography -- and 
> apparently this is just the beginning... I could see it for working 
> photojournalsits but thats about it. But, I'd prefer to have 
> a 'stills' camera only and therefore less dollars, and an interface 
> designed purely for still photography... 
> 
> SteveB
> 

I'll second that. I've got no use for video. But if I did, why would I 
want a still camera for it? I would want a camera designed to take 
advantage of what video can do and make it easy to do it. And that's not 
what a full frame 35mm DSLR is about.

I would much prefer that the video capabilities be left out of my still 
camera. But if it's put in, I can always ignore it. Like I ignore all 
the text editing capabilities in Photoshop.

Besides, most of the interest I see coming at this is from one guy who's 
more interested in video than in stills as far as I can tell. I don't 
know why this is, but it sure seems to be true.
--
Bruce Watson

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by CDTobie@aol.com

> steveabrink wrote:
> > I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be a lot
> > of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full
> > frame imager.  I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real uses
> > for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And should
> > that bother us ...
> 
Its a great, high rez, wide dynamic range camera, with excellent low light 
capabilities. So if you don't have need of video, don't let the video features 
scare you off. But I can point out any number of ways this changes photography: 
wedding/event photography and wedding/event videography no longer require 
seperate people with seperate equipment. Wildlife photographers will no longer 
have to wistfully point out that yes, this is their best ever super-telephoto 
shot of the elusive whatever, but that they will always regret not having 
dragged along a hundred pounds worth of video equipment so that they could have 
gotten TV-quality motion footage of it as well, as that actually pays better. They 
can just change modes, and record through the same lens, on the same tripod, 
with the same camera and (big!) memory card.

For fine art photogs its a bit less obvious. Carlo Roberti, founder of 
Tuscany Photographic Workshops,   explained his latest passion to me this summer at 
TPW: he carries a small audio recorder with him, and captures sounds that 
relate to his images. Then, instead of just running an iTunes soundtrack to his 
slideshows, he has related sounds which are more contextual and more 
interesting.

Lets take that a step further: while I was shooting the convent that TPW is 
housed in, framed under the branches of a large oak tree in the center of a 
wheat field below, there were a pair of doves cooing in the summer heat. Then the 
belltowers at the convent and at the village church across the valley both 
started chiming at noon; an amazing and inspirational stereo sound experience. 
Then, as I approached the tree for a closer shot, the two doves burst out of 
the branches, and flew away with that classic whistling sound of dove wings. 
Just capturing audio of some of that would have given me some interesting sounds 
to work with, but some of them would not have been clearly relevant to the 
still shots (yes, there is a belltower in the distance, but is that really the 
source of those amazing bells? Yes, there is a tree in the hot sun, but I can't 
actually see any doves in it... sound added to stills is artificial, thus 
suspect, that with motion footage is automatic, so basically assumed to be 
authentic, even when it is not) If I had shot the long shots as a still in a few 
configurations, changed   modes and shot video with stereo audio of the doves 
cooing, while zooming to the tree, and again with the bells pealing, while 
panning/zooming to the belltower, and across the valley to the hill town beyond with 
its church tower, and take a shot while moving in towards the tree while still 
rolling, I could have flushed the doves, and shot them rocketing out of the 
tree and across the field (it was clear enough that was going to happen if I 
got too close), then once they were gone, I could have changed modes again, and 
shot my close-framed stills. 


This adds a number of things the mix which a still photographer is not used 
to juggling, but if I had juggled it effectively, I would then have generated a 
fantastic range of high rez stills for art prints (B&W or color or both, 
whatever worked for those images), plus motion shots with sound capture (which I 
could use with either the video or the stills, or ideally both), and instead of 
a couple of slides with an iTunes soundtrack, or with a site-audio 
soundtrack, I could put together a pretty compelling still & motion & audio montage, 
which would capture the time, the place, the experience in a way that I could not 
capture it with the 5D Mark 1 I was carrying at the time...

Yes, processing and editing such work is more timeconsuming than Lightrooming 
a couple of stills, but its a much richer result. What to do with such a 
result? If the art gallery is your only venue, than a few movies running on 
digital frames amoungst your art prints will give potential customers a much richer 
experience, and can powerfully influence their emotions and degree of 
attachment; which is exactly whats required to change a browser into a buyer (and be 
prepared for the customer who wants to purchase the video-and-frame, instead of 
the wall art, or would like to purchase a combination of the two). 

Or, this can add to the avenues through which you sell/exhibit work, offering 
lots of new opportunities to reach the people who don't go to galleries, or 
who can't afford fine art prints. Sell to advertisers looking for unique 
footage, sell to musicians looking for backdrop footage or music video inserts, sell 
to quality stock photo houses that like to have video as well as still images 
available, sell to markets previously only available to video producers, not 
art photographers...

There, does that explain a bit of what this camera, and its descendents, may 
have to offer to the fine art photographer? Its a whole new world at your 
fingertips...

C. David Tobie
WW Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor
CDTobie@...
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Bruce Watson

The camera does have "motor drive" mode at something over 3 shots per 
second at full resolution (RAW mode) IIRC. If I'm wrong about that I'm 
sure someone will correct me! ;-) If that's not good enough to capture 
the "perfect moment," perhaps one should work more on one's timing. ;-)))

What you are suggesting is using a 21MP camera to capture a 2MP still 
(1920 x 1080), but at a rate of 30 frames per second. This to me is a 
poor use of this camera; a 2MP sensor would be much cheaper to produce 
than this 21MP sensor for example.

To get the video capability they had to do a fair amount of work to the 
hardware as well. They had to get it to move the data this fast inside 
the camera for example. It took a fair amount of software work as well. 
None of this is a value add for me, but it drives the price of the 
camera up as if it were. In the end then it makes the camera a lesser 
value to me ([value = needed functions / price] in my definition).

I didn't buy a 5D because it was missing some things I really wanted 
(automated sensor cleaning being one of the biggies). I may not buy a 
5D2 either, because it costs too much for what it is. It's too early to 
tell because we don't know the real street price yet. For the record, 
I'm still primarily using 5x4 film so perhaps my opinion carries little 
weight.

I'm just really glad I'm not working in marketing. It's tough to know 
where to draw the line, and the stakes are fairly high in the DSLR market.
--
Bruce Watson



E Neilsen wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> In place of a motor drive, perhaps he is using it to capture the perfect
> moment. 
>
>  
>
> Eric Neilsen Photo
>
> 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
>
> Dallas, TX 75226
>
> 214 827-8301
>
>  
>
> http://ericneilsenphotography.com
>
> SKype ejprinter
>
>  
>
>   _____  
>
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
> Watson
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 6:49 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability
>
>  
>
> steveabrink wrote:
>   
>> I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be a lot 
>> of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full 
>> frame imager. I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real uses 
>> for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And should 
>> that bother us ... 
>>
>> This question of the convergence of video and still photography -- and 
>> apparently this is just the beginning... I could see it for working 
>> photojournalsits but thats about it. But, I'd prefer to have 
>> a 'stills' camera only and therefore less dollars, and an interface 
>> designed purely for still photography... 
>>
>> SteveB
>>
>>     
>
> I'll second that. I've got no use for video. But if I did, why would I 
> want a still camera for it? I would want a camera designed to take 
> advantage of what video can do and make it easy to do it. And that's not 
> what a full frame 35mm DSLR is about.
>
> I would much prefer that the video capabilities be left out of my still 
> camera. But if it's put in, I can always ignore it. Like I ignore all 
> the text editing capabilities in Photoshop.
>
> Besides, most of the interest I see coming at this is from one guy who's 
> more interested in video than in stills as far as I can tell. I don't 
> know why this is, but it sure seems to be true.
> --
> Bruce Watson
>
>  
>
>
>

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Eric Neilsen Photography

Bruce, It was an attempted comment that some photographers would rather push their finger down on the trigger and pray they capture something instead of studying the subject and know when to push the shutter to capture; luck vs. insight. I know there are times that a good motor drive is just what you need, but  for many, it is over used. 

 
I am not suggesting that is a good thing. 

Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
214-827-8301
http://www.ericneilsenphotography.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Bruce Watson

Eric Neilsen Photography wrote:
> Bruce, It was an attempted comment that some photographers would rather push their finger down on the trigger and pray they capture something instead of studying the subject and know when to push the shutter to capture; luck vs. insight. I know there are times that a good motor drive is just what you need, but  for many, it is over used. 
>
>  
> I am not suggesting that is a good thing. 
>
> Eric Neilsen Photography
> 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
> Dallas, TX 75226
> 214-827-8301
> http://www.ericneilsenphotography.com
>   

Am I taking this too seriously? Darn, I've never done *that* before! 
;-))) Sorry 'bout that. It's sad when I miss that there's violent 
agreement taking place. Sigh...
--
Bruce Watson

Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by the_des_bois

I feel the same way. Was waiting for the 5DII to move from APS-C to
full frame... but now I'm waiting for maybe... a 5DII without the
movie mode... a 7D?

Maybe I'll wait all my life... ;o)

Denis


> 
> To get the video capability they had to do a fair amount of work to the 
> hardware as well. They had to get it to move the data this fast inside 
> the camera for example. It took a fair amount of software work as well. 
> None of this is a value add for me, but it drives the price of the 
> camera up as if it were. In the end then it makes the camera a lesser 
> value to me ([value = needed functions / price] in my definition).
> 
> I didn't buy a 5D because it was missing some things I really wanted 
> (automated sensor cleaning being one of the biggies). I may not buy a 
> 5D2 either, because it costs too much for what it is. It's too early to 
> tell because we don't know the real street price yet. For the record, 
> I'm still primarily using 5x4 film so perhaps my opinion carries little 
> weight.
> 
> I'm just really glad I'm not working in marketing. It's tough to know 
> where to draw the line, and the stakes are fairly high in the DSLR
market.
> --
> Bruce Watson
> 
> 
> 
> E Neilsen wrote:
> > In place of a motor drive, perhaps he is using it to capture the
perfect
> > moment. 
> >
> >  
> >
> > Eric Neilsen Photo
> >
> > 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
> >
> > Dallas, TX 75226
> >
> > 214 827-8301
> >
> >  
> >
> > http://ericneilsenphotography.com
> >
> > SKype ejprinter
> >
> >  
> >
> >   _____  
> >
> > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Bruce
> > Watson
> > Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 6:49 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability
> >
> >  
> >
> > steveabrink wrote:
> >   
> >> I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be
a lot 
> >> of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full 
> >> frame imager. I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real
uses 
> >> for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And
should 
> >> that bother us ... 
> >>
> >> This question of the convergence of video and still photography
-- and 
> >> apparently this is just the beginning... I could see it for working 
> >> photojournalsits but thats about it. But, I'd prefer to have 
> >> a 'stills' camera only and therefore less dollars, and an interface 
> >> designed purely for still photography... 
> >>
> >> SteveB
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > I'll second that. I've got no use for video. But if I did, why
would I 
> > want a still camera for it? I would want a camera designed to take 
> > advantage of what video can do and make it easy to do it. And
that's not 
> > what a full frame 35mm DSLR is about.
> >
> > I would much prefer that the video capabilities be left out of my
still 
> > camera. But if it's put in, I can always ignore it. Like I ignore all 
> > the text editing capabilities in Photoshop.
> >
> > Besides, most of the interest I see coming at this is from one guy
who's 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > more interested in video than in stills as far as I can tell. I don't 
> > know why this is, but it sure seems to be true.
> > --
> > Bruce Watson
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by sinar001

Very interesting how still photographers can get sucked into "dissing"
what's been added to the camera as a "bonus" not an added cost.

What's really going to be distressing for all the still photogs will
be how long it takes before they can get one. There will be a lot of
video guys lining up to buy the camera! It offers them a cheap
"second" camera with very unusual video capabilities--shallow depth of
field, and excellent high ISO qualities not matched by any pro video
gear at this time. 

Another interesting thing, while Nikon introduced the HD capability
two weeks earlier, their offering seems to be a second rate product
(video quality wise) compared to Canon's. And both are "testing the
water" when it comes to this combined function in a dslr. Everything
will evolve in the next generation products. 

Another thing that will be evolving will be the elimination of the
optical dslr. I would be surprised if the "mirror box" would not be
eliminated within 5-years. Then we could have much quieter cameras.

John Nollendorfs




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "the_des_bois"
<thedesbois@...> wrote:
>
> I feel the same way. Was waiting for the 5DII to move from APS-C to
> full frame... but now I'm waiting for maybe... a 5DII without the
> movie mode... a 7D?
> 
> Maybe I'll wait all my life... ;o)
> 
> Denis
> 
> 
> > 
> > To get the video capability they had to do a fair amount of work
to the 
> > hardware as well. They had to get it to move the data this fast
inside 
> > the camera for example. It took a fair amount of software work as
well. 
> > None of this is a value add for me, but it drives the price of the 
> > camera up as if it were. In the end then it makes the camera a lesser 
> > value to me ([value = needed functions / price] in my definition).
> > 
> > I didn't buy a 5D because it was missing some things I really wanted 
> > (automated sensor cleaning being one of the biggies). I may not buy a 
> > 5D2 either, because it costs too much for what it is. It's too
early to 
> > tell because we don't know the real street price yet. For the record, 
> > I'm still primarily using 5x4 film so perhaps my opinion carries
little 
> > weight.
> > 
> > I'm just really glad I'm not working in marketing. It's tough to know 
> > where to draw the line, and the stakes are fairly high in the DSLR
> market.
> > --
> > Bruce Watson
SNIP

Re: [Digital BW] Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Bob Frost

>Another thing that will be evolving will be the elimination of the
>optical dslr. I would be surprised if the "mirror box" would not be
>eliminated within 5-years. Then we could have much quieter cameras.

A year or so ago, I asked Nikon's VicePresident of Imaging Division when we 
would be getting mirrorless 'dslrs'. His reply was "sooner than you think".

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "sinar001" <jnolly@...>

Re: [Digital BW] Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Bruce Watson

sinar001 wrote:
> Very interesting how still photographers can get sucked into "dissing"
> what's been added to the camera as a "bonus" not an added cost.
>   
What makes you think I've been "sucked into 'dissing?'" In fact I just 
know what I want and I have no interest in video. Why would you assume 
otherwise? And why would you assume that there's no added cost? You 
think Canon does this work for free? Gives the higher speed hardware 
away for nothing? You must be joking. Oh, wait -- I've already made that 
mistake once today. *Are* you joking?
> What's really going to be distressing for all the still photogs will
> be how long it takes before they can get one. There will be a lot of
> video guys lining up to buy the camera! It offers them a cheap
> "second" camera with very unusual video capabilities--shallow depth of
> field, and excellent high ISO qualities not matched by any pro video
> gear at this time. 
>   
That's almost certainly true.
> Another interesting thing, while Nikon introduced the HD capability
> two weeks earlier, their offering seems to be a second rate product
> (video quality wise) compared to Canon's. And both are "testing the
> water" when it comes to this combined function in a dslr. Everything
> will evolve in the next generation products. 
>
> Another thing that will be evolving will be the elimination of the
> optical dslr. I would be surprised if the "mirror box" would not be
> eliminated within 5-years. Then we could have much quieter cameras.
>
> John Nollendorfs
>
>   
Now getting rid of the pentaprism and the mirror is a feature I would 
certainly pay for, as long as it translates into a smaller and lighter 
box. There's no reason why the view finder can't be fed directly from 
the sensor giving us a 100% view. And... taking out the mirror would 
give us a faster "motor drive" mode! There ya go -- full circle.
--
Bruce Watson

Re: [Digital BW] Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Dana H. Myers

sinar001 wrote:
> 
> 
> Very interesting how still photographers can get sucked into "dissing"
> what's been added to the camera as a "bonus" not an added cost.

I, too, was marveling at this.  Of course, DSLR makers are under
pressure to make the cameras capture *still* images at higher
speed - the increased performance of the camera results from
this.

The objections seems more religious than technical from
what I can tell.

DAna

Re: [Digital BW] Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Dana H. Myers

Bruce Watson wrote:
> 
> 
> sinar001 wrote:
>  > Very interesting how still photographers can get sucked into "dissing"
>  > what's been added to the camera as a "bonus" not an added cost.
>  >
> What makes you think I've been "sucked into 'dissing?'" In fact I just
> know what I want and I have no interest in video. Why would you assume
> otherwise? And why would you assume that there's no added cost? You
> think Canon does this work for free? Gives the higher speed hardware
> away for nothing? You must be joking. Oh, wait -- I've already made that
> mistake once today. *Are* you joking?

What I expect is Canon is leveraging the work they've done
to improve still capture to provide an additional feature.
My suspicion is that this feature comes at little additional
*cost* but may increase the *price* of the camera - thus
enhancing Canon's margin.

If you ignore the video capture capability of the 5D MkII,
how does it compare as a still camera?

Dana

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-02 by Dana H. Myers

Bruce Watson wrote:
> 
> 
> The camera does have "motor drive" mode at something over 3 shots per
> second at full resolution (RAW mode) IIRC. If I'm wrong about that I'm
> sure someone will correct me! ;-) If that's not good enough to capture
> the "perfect moment," perhaps one should work more on one's timing. ;-)))
> 
> What you are suggesting is using a 21MP camera to capture a 2MP still
> (1920 x 1080), but at a rate of 30 frames per second. This to me is a
> poor use of this camera; a 2MP sensor would be much cheaper to produce
> than this 21MP sensor for example.

Certainly, if the goal was to build a video camera, the 5D MkII
is obscene overkill.

> To get the video capability they had to do a fair amount of work to the
> hardware as well. They had to get it to move the data this fast inside
> the camera for example. It took a fair amount of software work as well.

What makes you think they didn't have to do those things in
order to build a 21MP camera that sustains 3.9 frames/sec?
Let's just do some really rough estimation; 21MP * 3.9 frames/sec
= ~82MP/sec.  2MP * 30 frames/sec = ~ 60MP sec.

Doesn't sound like Canon had to much (at least in terms of raw
bit twiddling) to enable high-res video capture.  Sure, there's
some software NRE.

> None of this is a value add for me, but it drives the price of the
> camera up as if it were. In the end then it makes the camera a lesser
> value to me ([value = needed functions / price] in my definition).

I doubt Canon drove the *cost* of the camera up appreciably in
adding video, but they have increased the *value* of the package
in general, so they may charge more for it.

Alternatively, all of the high-end DSLRs may soon feature video
capture anyway - so omitting it would be a disadvantage in the market.

> I didn't buy a 5D because it was missing some things I really wanted
> (automated sensor cleaning being one of the biggies). I may not buy a
> 5D2 either, because it costs too much for what it is. It's too early to
> tell because we don't know the real street price yet.

Agreed.

Dana

RE: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-03 by Gary Weaver

I have used my low res video just to get the "moment". It's works.

gar

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
Show quoted textHide quoted text
On 10/2/2008 at 8:22 AM E Neilsen wrote:

>In place of a motor drive, perhaps he is using it to capture the perfect
>moment. 
>
> 
>
>Eric Neilsen Photo
>
>4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
>
>Dallas, TX 75226
>
>214 827-8301
>
> 
>
>http://ericneilsenphotography.com
>
>SKype ejprinter
>
> 
>
>  _____  
>
>From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
>Watson
>Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 6:49 AM
>To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability
>
> 
>
>steveabrink wrote:
>> I know this is not related to B&W printing but there seems to be a lot 
>> of interest in the new Canon 5dMKii with an affordadable 21MP full 
>> frame imager. I'm certainly interested, but does anyone see real uses 
>> for the HD video imaging capability for us fine art types? And should 
>> that bother us ... 
>>
>> This question of the convergence of video and still photography -- and 
>> apparently this is just the beginning... I could see it for working 
>> photojournalsits but thats about it. But, I'd prefer to have 
>> a 'stills' camera only and therefore less dollars, and an interface 
>> designed purely for still photography... 
>> 
>> SteveB
>> 
>
>I'll second that. I've got no use for video. But if I did, why would I 
>want a still camera for it? I would want a camera designed to take 
>advantage of what video can do and make it easy to do it. And that's not 
>what a full frame 35mm DSLR is about.
>
>I would much prefer that the video capabilities be left out of my still 
>camera. But if it's put in, I can always ignore it. Like I ignore all 
>the text editing capabilities in Photoshop.
>
>Besides, most of the interest I see coming at this is from one guy who's 
>more interested in video than in stills as far as I can tell. I don't 
>know why this is, but it sure seems to be true.
>--
>Bruce Watson
>
> 
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
>they are often being updated.
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
>unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
>page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
>them short.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
>Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
>membership without notice.
>- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
>printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
>the membership.
>- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
>guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner
>and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files
>section:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
>BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
>YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND
>�MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO
>YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
>EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF
>PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE 
>�OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN
>ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE
>OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii)
>UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii)
>STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
>YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
>PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-03 by steveabrink

In the end we'll have to live with these new features and pay for 
them -- even if we don't want them.  The market will be flooded with 
these devices in probably a year or so. Its good ol' marketing 
designed to increase profits, period.  Some things never change.  
And, as they get more still photographers into video they can also 
produce and sell more video widgets (like tripod heads etc), software 
etc., so ultimately it will produce new revenue streams... My Mamiya, 
Leica, and Holga are looking pretty good <gr>.  
SteveB 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Dana H. Myers" 
<dana.myers@...> wrote:
>
> Bruce Watson wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > The camera does have "motor drive" mode at something over 3 shots 
per
> > second at full resolution (RAW mode) IIRC. If I'm wrong about 
that I'm
> > sure someone will correct me! ;-) If that's not good enough to 
capture
> > the "perfect moment," perhaps one should work more on one's 
timing. ;-)))
> > 
> > What you are suggesting is using a 21MP camera to capture a 2MP 
still
> > (1920 x 1080), but at a rate of 30 frames per second. This to me 
is a
> > poor use of this camera; a 2MP sensor would be much cheaper to 
produce
> > than this 21MP sensor for example.
> 
> Certainly, if the goal was to build a video camera, the 5D MkII
> is obscene overkill.
> 
> > To get the video capability they had to do a fair amount of work 
to the
> > hardware as well. They had to get it to move the data this fast 
inside
> > the camera for example. It took a fair amount of software work as 
well.
> 
> What makes you think they didn't have to do those things in
> order to build a 21MP camera that sustains 3.9 frames/sec?
> Let's just do some really rough estimation; 21MP * 3.9 frames/sec
> = ~82MP/sec.  2MP * 30 frames/sec = ~ 60MP sec.
> 
> Doesn't sound like Canon had to much (at least in terms of raw
> bit twiddling) to enable high-res video capture.  Sure, there's
> some software NRE.
> 
> > None of this is a value add for me, but it drives the price of the
> > camera up as if it were. In the end then it makes the camera a 
lesser
> > value to me ([value = needed functions / price] in my definition).
> 
> I doubt Canon drove the *cost* of the camera up appreciably in
> adding video, but they have increased the *value* of the package
> in general, so they may charge more for it.
> 
> Alternatively, all of the high-end DSLRs may soon feature video
> capture anyway - so omitting it would be a disadvantage in the 
market.
> 
> > I didn't buy a 5D because it was missing some things I really 
wanted
> > (automated sensor cleaning being one of the biggies). I may not 
buy a
> > 5D2 either, because it costs too much for what it is. It's too 
early to
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > tell because we don't know the real street price yet.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Dana
>

Re: [Digital BW] 5d markii video capability

2008-10-03 by Ernst Dinkla

Dana H. Myers wrote:

> Alternatively, all of the high-end DSLRs may soon feature video
> capture anyway - so omitting it would be a disadvantage in the market.

In high end there's competition around the corner from 
companies like Red with its Scarlet.
Casio already delivered the EX-F1, announced the EXILIM 
EX-FH20, both in another market segment.

The Panasonic G1 with its EVF is another step to speed this 
process up. Next step is to abandon that DSLR shape and find 
ergonomic + compact shapes to pack the hybrid functions. The 
Panasonic EVF is the best EVF I have ever looked through 
(including the Minolta A2) but it isn't an optical finder. 
It has other qualities though.

The Fuji 3D concept camera on the Photokina was in a way 
more interesting in its use of a 3D LCD screen at the back 
of the camera than in its output to prints that didn't have 
that quality. I give it more chance in the market if it will 
become a 3D camcorder with output to a 3D LCD screen on the 
wall. Stereo has always been a niche market but in that 
shape it could be everyone's tool.

Replace film with a sensor and all conventions are at stake. 
The engineers will count the bit rate and translate that to 
whatever form of image capture, the marketing men will pack 
as many features possible within the market segment price. 
It will take some time before new conventions replace the 
old ones, the consumers are often more conservative than the 
people delivering the goods. In the market the follies fall 
through.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

Re: 5d markii video capability

2008-10-03 by Barrett Benton

I have an Olympus C-8080 (an 8MP high-end "prosumer" digicam from 
several years back), which possesses a lot of the stuff bandied about 
as "ideal" for future pro dSLRs: EVF (which on this camera is actually 
quite decent, but not a direct sub for an optical VF, "outside-the-box" 
form factor (which I like a *lot*), and, yes, the dreaded video 
function (which I generally ignore, but works nicely enough, similar to 
my little Casio EX-850). Video functionality has been part-and-parcel 
for consumer digicams almost from the get-go, but since dSLRs have 
always been the El Serioso machines of the market, the inclusion of 
video capture–albeit high-def–seems like a cheap gimmick, though that 
might seem a slap in the face of the engineers who managed to build 
this "extra" into the cameras.

My creative Main Axe these days is a pair of Konica Hexar RF 
rangefinders and lots of film, and that's not likely to change 
radically anytime soon, so all this stuff is mostly academic to me. 
Video stuff generally pores me to tears, but it never got (much) in the 
way of my shooting with digital cameras. I think video is largely a 
distraction (I haven't watched TV on a regular basis for over 20 
years), but it's obviously a marketing "feature" even for high-end 
dSLRs.


- Barrett

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.