Oh, where to start...
mikeh wrote:He never asks for 4k on the DLSRs so I don't know where you got that from!?
Oh, I have no idea.... he says the 1080p isn't good enough, and then goes on to say that "I expect this kind of technology dick-swinging from Sony, but not from Canon." Plus, "Canon, please stop building fake “4K” video cameras when you can’t even make an SLR that shoots actual 1080p HD."
You have to remember, Canon didn't release this alleged 4K firmware, nor did they release the Magic Lantern firmware. It was done independently, so Canon isn't trying to make "fake 4K toys"
nor did they ever claim to.
wrote:"So stop dicking around with your fake 4K toys and start making cameras we can use. That we want to use."
This is my main problem with the article. People here do enjoy using these cameras. I bought mine because I wanted to use it, not to b!tch at Canon for not making it better. If they'd fix the AGC and allow for monitoring the audio or perhaps increase the frame rate options slightly, that would be all I'd ever ask for. It's certainly better than any video camera I've ever owned. Hell, better than any you've
mikeh wrote:the cheap price of the Canons is no excuse for crappy and inefficient firmware.
No, it's not, but it's unreasonable to expect 4K images by default from a $799
camera. It would be nice, but it's not going to happen from Canon, Sony, or anyone else for under $1K. Hell, Nikon didn't include a mic input on their DSLR... yeah, they're catching up to Canon pretty quick...
And, "They’re still falling way short of HD."
What can he or anyone find that's better for the price of the T2i?
mikeh wrote:It's not a matter of comparing a DSLR to a RED
Oh, no, not at all...."It’s as if Canon brass lifted the internet ban on the engineer’s dungeon just long enough for them to visit to RED’s web site, and then shut it down again after they’d read as far as “4K.”
Does the latter sound unfeasible for “real” video work? Well it shouldn’t — it’s what we do with our RED One cameras now...
Canon, you have none of that stuff, you have no idea how to make it, and you don’t even know that you don’t know this."
Dude, I'm not trying to argue with you- you didn't write the article, heh.
Sure, I'd like some improvements too, but comparing a T2i and its possibility of 4K to the RED camera is like comparing a Volkswagen to a Porsche. No one (at least not reasonably) expects or wants to shoot in a resolution of 4096 x 3112. Why would you want to? The only potential use is to use that footage to make a sharper 1080p one, which is quite usable. The rest of that enormous amount of data will go to waste, because there is no practical reason to shoot a film at that resolution seeing as how the vast majority of cinemas and computer monitors and TVs can't handle it.
I respect that part of his article. It made sense. But the Canon bashing was pointless and should have been left out- that's all I was saying.
We don't disagree on much in this case, as a matter of fact.