Please Canon, release a FF D-SLR for less than $2000!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by The Lone Gunman, Feb 23, 2007.

  1. The Lone Gunman

    Scott W Guest

    A really bad solution IMO, first off you are looking at around 5
    minutes a scan, you are also limited to shooting at ISO 100 if you
    want anything even close to a sharp looking image. Been there, done
    that and don't ever want to go back.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Feb 26, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. 12ms? Most LCDs, or at least the good ones, are at 8ms, the XBR is at 6ms,
    plasmas run between 6 and 4 ms.[/QUOTE]

    Ok I should have stated 12ms is the slowest acceptable response time.
     
    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Feb 27, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    Except a lot of film and a film scanner doesn't deliver the resolution that
    a 20/30D does, not to mention a 5D.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  4. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    message
    Ok I should have stated 12ms is the slowest acceptable response time.[/QUOTE]

    Well, you could have said that, but my answer would have been the same,
    since I could see the difference between the 8ms LCDs and the 4ms Samsung
    plasma. I'm guessing that, since the 8ms wasn't acceptable to me, the 12ms
    would be even more so.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  5. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    That's why I spent the extra $$ and got a 5 year extended warranty. I've
    been told by several parties that 4 to 5 years is the maximum life of a
    plasma screen.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  6. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    Yeah, I had heard that. The Samsung is around 170 deg, also. The Sony was
    one that competed thoroughly with the plasmas, but they are more pricey.
    The LCDs that were in the price range were not as good as the Samsung, in
    fact, the only plasma that was as good was the Pioneer Elite, which was
    about $1000 more.
    BTW, I didn't mean to imply that you said that they were terrible, I was
    just referring to your comment about the possibility, or desirability, of
    plasma technology improving.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  7. Any decent 6x7 camera and a Nikon 8000 or 9000 will edge outresolve the 5D.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 27, 2007
  8. The Lone Gunman

    Scott W Guest

    Well if you have a "cultivated viewpoint" then surely you know that
    scanned 35mm film is not all that good, which is what was being
    proposed after all.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Feb 27, 2007
  9. Film has nothing to do with it. The scanner produces that fallacy & all
    that matters is the end product. Quite certainly for most tastes and
    applications digital "cameras" produce a good enough result and there is
    the issue of wok flow - etc. Then there are those of us that shoot MF &
    LF (also) which have rather cultivated viewpoints on what makes film
    many times the better option.
     
    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Feb 27, 2007
  10. I think the OP was referring to the fact that plasma screens are made of
    two panes of glass, which means you will see A LOT of reflection in them
    unless you position the screen and your viewing position(s) precisely or
    have a light-controlled room (in which case you might as well get a
    projector and a screen and go from 42"/50" to 110"). LCD screens are
    pretty much glare-free.
     
    Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute, Feb 27, 2007
  11. Correct- I could have, but I didn't. So do you think the feed was
    identical?
     
    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Feb 27, 2007
  12. I sure wouldn't say that and I am glad I didn't ;)

    I've seen some pretty good scans from 35mm slides,...YMMV.

    Then again if you had read my addition perhaps you wouldn't have
    jumped all over a rather redundant argument.
     
    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Feb 27, 2007
  13. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    Uh-huh, but at what cost, both monetarily and utilitarily? Don't forget, we
    were talking about a fast WA zoom (not available for a 6x7) and a very fast
    WA fixed focal length, the equivalent of would be very expensive for a 6x7.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  14. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    message
    Since I was responding to a suggestion to use film and a scanner to emulate
    the results from a 35mm sized digital camera and wide angle lenses, what you
    say isn't applicable to the discussion.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  15. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    message
    I've seen some good scans from 35mm, too, but none have equaled what is
    available, even at ISO 100, from the 5D and 1Ds mkII. The only caveat to
    that statement is that I've never seen drum scanned 35mm, only MF and LF.
    And those, of course, were superior to 35mm sized digital, not to mention
    scanned 35mm film.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  16. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    message
    I know the feed was identical, the sets were showing the same thing at the
    same time, in the same stores.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  17. The Lone Gunman

    Skip Guest

    That is true, but I don't think that's what Rita was referring to.
     
    Skip, Feb 27, 2007
  18. Extreme. I haven't shot one frame of film since the 5D arrived.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 27, 2007
  19. I've looked at lot at TV sets and computer monitors.

    Even 4 ms is bad for sports TV.

    I find the trailing on LCD computer monitors disconcerting at 4 ms.

    1 ms would be quite OK.

    When I bought an HDTV, which was years ago, DLP had not
    become affordable, so I bought an LCD rear projector. It is
    acceptable, in the 3 ms range.

    Remember that these things are asymmetric in time response:
    you don't see trails of white objects on a black background,
    but do for black objects on a white background.

    Doug McDonald
     
    Doug McDonald, Feb 27, 2007
  20. The Lone Gunman

    J. Clarke Guest

    When the time between frames is 16ms or more, I fail to see how a 4ms
    response time in the display changes anything.
    What "trailing"?
    Sounds to me like you're seeing artifacts that are the result of the
    nature of television and blaming the monitor.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 27, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.