Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 04 Aug 2017 (Friday) 15:51
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Deleting YouTube subscriptions after latest equipment reviews

 
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,416 posts
Gallery: 211 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 4070
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chula Vista, CA
     
Aug 05, 2017 17:25 |  #16

Personally, I don't shoot video, but when cell phones are shooting in 4k. . . . . . . .


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,826 posts
Likes: 2065
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Aug 05, 2017 18:34 |  #17

Wilt wrote in post #18420118 (external link)
I have a hard time believing the statement in blue, when the average home does not own 4K screens because the programming in 4D is limited, certainly broadcast TV hardly stresses 720k and certainly not 1920x1080!

What professionals need (4K video) for shooting professional quality video might be 4K, but unless one is routinely professionally created that programming they are not likely shooting it to play on their 4K TV at home (yet), because the average house is not throwing away the 720k digital tuner TV or the 1920x1080 TV (either of which probably cost $700-1200 to buy within the past 10 years) simply because you can buy a 4K TV...

4K might not have deep penetration today but just looking at any big box store fining a non-4k tv is hard. They are all siting in the back room or tucked away in some corner. If your looking down the road 5 years when the 6DII replacement comes out 4k or 8k will have much greater penetration.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,365 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2391
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Wilt.
     
Aug 05, 2017 18:39 |  #18

gjl711 wrote in post #18420176 (external link)
4K might not have deep penetration today but just looking at any big box store fining a non-4k tv is hard. They are all siting in the back room or tucked away in some corner. If your looking down the road 5 years when the 6DII replacement comes out 4k or 8k will have much greater penetration.

I would like to think that 5 years down the road there is a lot more programming available for high res needing 4K TV. But then the skeptic in me thinks back to all of those 3-D TVs and 3-D glassess that were in stores a few years ago, too! And the fact that all the 1920x1080 TVs in homes have not improved broadcast TV quality past the 720k spec.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,416 posts
Gallery: 211 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 4070
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chula Vista, CA
     
Aug 05, 2017 18:45 |  #19

Wilt wrote in post #18420178 (external link)
I would like to think that 5 years down the road there is a lot more programming available for high res needing 4K TV. But then the skeptic in me thinks back to all of those 3-D TVs and 3-D glassess that were in stores a few years ago, too! And the fact that all the 1920x1080 TVs in homes have not improved broadcast TV quality past the 720k spec.

Who still watches broadcast TV?-?;-)a Netflix is now available in 4k! :p:-P BTW, large 4k TVs tend to have up-scaling, which works pretty well. When it comes to a camera feature like 4k though, it's sort of like the 0-60 times in car magazines.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elitejp
Goldmember
1,702 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 186
Joined Mar 2008
     
Aug 05, 2017 19:26 |  #20

I brought a usb with photos taken from the dslr to best buy store and plugged it in to a 4k tv and a 1080p tv. That easily settled it for me that 4k was the better choice.

You know i really dont get what the op is complaining about. I mean the camera is just now getting into the hands of photogs so anything before that can only be based off of specs. It sounds to me that you just want to hear everyone praise the camera, but i would look for a more rounded review. I want to know the pros and cons along with how it compares to similar bodies from the competition.


6D; canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 24-70mm VC, Canon 135L Canon 70-200L is ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
battletone
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 1 year ago by battletone.
     
Aug 05, 2017 20:58 |  #21

Wilt wrote in post #18420178 (external link)
I would like to think that 5 years down the road there is a lot more programming available for high res needing 4K TV. But then the skeptic in me thinks back to all of those 3-D TVs and 3-D glassess that were in stores a few years ago, too! And the fact that all the 1920x1080 TVs in homes have not improved broadcast TV quality past the 720k spec.

But resolution isn't a gimmick...and broadcast is dead. It's either Netflix or YouTube or I find something else to do.
My next TV will have 4K, I don't feel a need to go buy it, but it doesn't mean I don't want it.
(And I don't shoot video on a DSLR and don't even care, but there is no reason to not offer it)


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,826 posts
Likes: 2065
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Aug 05, 2017 21:17 |  #22

What broadcast tv chooses to do doesn't really come into play in the dslr market. I would think that most of the material displayed would be taken by the owners of the camera. That's why I think that 4k is a big miss. If the camera update cycle was 18 months then it wouldn't be such a big deal but 5 years is a long time.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,628 posts
Likes: 497
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Post edited over 1 year ago by davesrose. (2 edits in all)
     
Aug 06, 2017 00:45 |  #23

There's some misinformation about broadcast HD resolutions going on here. For quite some time, digital HD channels have had the chance to either broadcast in 720P/60 or 1080i/60. Some on demand content is 1080P. It's up to the TV to either scale and/or pull-down to a native resolution and frame rate. I have one plasma HDTV that's older and isn't full 1080 resolution: yet 1080i looks significantly better because it's processors have good de-scalers and resampling algoritms. The general consensus for resolutions is that sports centered channels are 720P (to maintain 60fps in North America), and movie channels are 1080i (which in NA equates to 30fps).

At some point, there will be better 4K/ultraHD standards for TV(unless Google fiber makes it everywhere quickly). As with HD and blu-ray having the highest bandwidth, ultraHD discs offer the best specs. QuadHD resolution, 10bit color space, Dolby Atmos or DTS X. UltraHD has already had better market penetration then blu-ray 3D. Hollywood has been scanning and restoring films at least 4K for awhile, and all current production intermediates are at least 4K.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mathmans
Senior Member
273 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2014
     
Aug 06, 2017 01:59 as a reply to  @ davesrose's post |  #24

I just want the best for my money. I'm not here to support companies and buy whatever they put out.
Let's look for example at the new Nikon D7500. It has the same new sensor as D500, BUT it still has the same old D300 focusing system, no dual card slots and no connector to attach the grip. They obviously don't want to cut the price. They want more profit by cutting out the features.
The thing that bothers me the most is still the same old focusing system with only 15 cross type points squashed in the middle of the viewfinder. I will pass this half finished product.


My photos:
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/149610703@N05/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drmaxx
Goldmember
1,115 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 351
Joined Jul 2010
     
Aug 06, 2017 02:00 |  #25

inwardphoto wrote in post #18419365 (external link)
What do you look for in a hardware reviewer? What draws you to a YouTube or Vimeo channel?

Not sure, if an answer to the OPs question is still relevant or if the thread already drifted towards the relevance of 4K movies. But here it goes:
I think it is important to distiguish between opinions, facts and specs. The good reviewers show me based on examples or evidence why they like or hate something. This helps me to make up my own mind, if it is relevant for me or not. And don't expect facts from youtube videos; only opinions. For facts check one of the 'boring' technical reviews.


Donate if you love POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,628 posts
Likes: 497
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Post edited over 1 year ago by davesrose.
     
Aug 06, 2017 09:52 |  #26

As for the OP....that's why I don't follow much youtube channels. Many posters are trying to get hits with rhetorical headlines and opinionated content. All to obtain more likes or comments in disagreement (and other rebuttal replies). Flame wars over the opinions is only a good thing: any press is good press. When a new camera makes it to market, I don't immediately go to youtube: since most posts are from people who haven't tried using the camera. I'll look for reviews on the internet, since I can quickly see specs and summaries (vs having to waste my time with youtuber banter).


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,567 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5616
Joined Sep 2007
     
Aug 06, 2017 10:04 |  #27

you dont need hands on experience to KNOW that a 200hp minivan will be slow.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,010 views & 3 likes for this thread
Deleting YouTube subscriptions after latest equipment reviews
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is macremedia
837 guests, 259 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.