I don't pretend to be up on the latest mirrorless cameras. Are the models listed all of similar specs/$. Are we comparing apples to apples?
rsellas wrote:
Very true I find myself almost never using DSLA, and I am an old newspaper photographer. It’s sad.
You've inadvertently hit on a fact that I have been musing about. So much photography revolves around journalism. Remember when newspaper cameramen used the monster Speed Graphic style...it was the iconic newspaper symbol for photojournalism. I had a 3/14x41/4 that I just sold on eBay for a good buck. (Hated to let it go as it was my last connection to a more exciting time in photography for me). Then things morphed to 35mm cameras....a lot easier to schlep around.
Now, if you really think about the lousy resolution in newspaper images (I'm not talking about high-end magazines with their spectacular photos) you simply cannot tell the difference between a photo taken with a cell, or a digital camera of any quality. DSLRs (or MILCs) just are not needed for that type of work.
Architect1776 wrote:
Is one necessary?
1 series are flagship.
3 series are next down
5 series are pro level but not as rugged (Nikon D850/Z8 Equivalent)
6 series are consumer level
All above are FF.
7 series are near pro level APSC.
8 Series is new to the R and is FF.
10 and 50 are middle APSC similar to the double digit EF camera series.
And the new 100 is a beginner APSC similar to the Rebel series.
I question "All above are FF". My T4i is also known as a 650D. If that puts it into the "6 Series" — which I suspect, as it is certainly considered a consumer level camera — then I note that it is an APS-C....crop frame.
BebuLamar wrote:
May be it's the R1 as Canon has dropped the price the R3 by $500 to $5500.
While we're on this subject — can anyone straighten me out on the numbering sequence for Canon R Series cameras? Maybe I've been asleep at the switch, but I see no logic in the numbers vis a vis the cameras with respect to features, FF vs crop, $, resolution, etc.
Absolutely. Children seem to comprise a separate category when discussing this topic.
What happens in Paris, stays in Paris.
I had to research this topic once for an organization I belong to that has a Newsletter that is periodically mailed to members. They're always looking for "newsy" articles for PR. The best I could come up with was that if a person is in a public space — street, sports event, meeting of a group that is open to the public, etc. — then they have no expectation of privacy, period.
However, any image derived from said occasion is free to be published as long as no commercial promotion or paid remuneration is involved.
That didn't stop someone from suing someone in NY State in a circumstance that met these criteria and the last I heard was that it was in litigation, so I don't know the outcome. Frankly, the way that laws seem to be ignored these days I don't trust any past precedent to be a safe guiding principle for present day situations. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion are under attack in so many subtle ways that I no longer think our Constitution is working the way it should.
Morry wrote:
This past year I bought a new Samsung 75" TV. No it did not include a operating manual. When I called them about this I was told that I could download it. No they did not have a printed one for sale at a price. To download it would take 74 pages. Hmmmm! This is my 5th new Samsung TV I have bought in the past 12 years and all the previous TV's came with a operating manual. Maybe I will choose a different brand TV next time I buy!
Good luck with that! I have recently purchased a Toaster Oven and an InstaPot. Also, my son, who maintains my Galaxy on his Plan, just upgraded me to the new Galaxy 14. Not one of them came with anything more than a minimal "Quick Start". Maybe you don't want to print out seventy-some pages of a Manual, but you can download to your Download folder and access when you need.
User ID wrote:
Sincerest condolences. I saw some itty bitty little coffins on Amazon. With free shipping too !
I wonder......do dead pixels have to be buried 6' down? Coffin or no?
OK, I admit to living under a rock (according to my wife) but who in @#$%^&*()_ is Cosina?
fetzler wrote:
It is time for folks to get in touch with physics. The smallest optical resolution is about 1 micron or the wavelength of light. 1 micron is certainly a limit for the size of a camera pixel. The quality of lenses will make this at least a bit worse especially a lens that is abraded by being stuffed in to a pocket.
Pixels are photon counters. Larger pixels count more photons than smaller pixels. Image noise is determined by the number of photons counted. Fewer photons means more noise.
High pixel resolution with low noise requires a large sensor. It is unlikely that one will put a medium or large format sensor in a cell phone.
Cell phone users take photos like Instamatic camera users of the past. Such users need small prints or photos for internet distribution. My $80 android phone can do this. No, it is not a great camera but it can take Instamatic quality photos (indeed, even a bit better)
It is also time to recognize that cell phones can be expensive and unnecessary toys. They are not very good computers, phones, or cameras. Yes an Android phone that cost me $80 and a plan for $6.75/month is sometimes
useful. The money used for an expensive phone can be put toward a decent personal computer and a decent camera.
In my life I have used all sorts of cameras. Film- half frame 35mm to 16" x20". Digital 1" to FF. Each format has it's uses. I have a very nice 1/2 frame 35mm print made with ISO 6 film hanging on the wall. A landscape photo or portrait taken with an 8" x 10" camera can be marvel. I have several prints than are now more than 100 years old that are better than most modern prints.
It is time for folks to get in touch with physics.... (
show quote)
Small corrections, if I may. Light, and I think you mean "visible" light, has wavelengths from 400 to 700 nanometers or in my earlier days as a spectroscopist, millimicrons. That is 1/1000th of the micron you cite. Also, an unscientific observation: what is often called "half-frame" 35mm I believe is a misnomer. The image dimension is what movie film boasts which is technically called "single frame". The 35mm we know is 24x36mm or a 2:3 ratio....the long dimension being along the length of the film strip. Single frame, on the other hand, is 16x22mm and the long dimension is across the width of the strip as that is how movie projectors work. The rest of your post is right on.
I will chime in with my usual caveat: the danger to us "advanced amateurs" is not that cell phone technology will overwhelm us but rather that the loss of millions of housewives who record the family's milestone events will not be buying the "entry level" $800 DSLR's (or mirrorless equivalent) which revenue stream supports the R&D for the manufacturers for our beloved real cameras. Consequently the price tag for our toys will escalate even faster...or the improvements will not be as fast to come on the market.
Ollieboy wrote:
Golf and bowling are 2 other activities that do not favor lefties.
True, but in golf...even though you can buy left-handed clubs...the courses themselves are designed with right handed golfers in mind. On some holes, that works to the leftie's advantage but not always.
Yes, the Photo Center at my local Costco did take up a lot of real estate so I can see the desire to allocate that (very expensive) space to higher profit items. It was nice to order prints and have them shipped to some other place in the country for $0. One thing no one has mentioned was their Ink Refill service. In the early days they refilled my Canon cartridges and reset the chip (or whatever) but even before they went totally out of the business they no longer could refill my cartridges.
I have not yet tried Snapfish and I did go through the process of "transferring" my Costco membership to them but I'll bet that at some point in the future, that perk will disappear. Such is life at the retail level these days.
CHG_CANON wrote:
Raw isn't just a file format, it's a way of life. Capturing in RAW and editing the results moves the photographer from a entry-level understanding of focal lengths and camera brands into a higher form of existence, giving a deep meaning to every shutter release and mouse click. I edit, therefore I am.
Descartes, in the flesh! Photography appears to be just another way to say "philosophy". 😎