the point by point "assault" is to disprove every untrue statement you make and show it up for what it really is...rhetoric without substance.
Originally Posted by DonSchap
yes, as i said before you have argued it and failed. becasue you cannot say WHY to keep them seperate. if you said...i think movies in dslr is a useless feature i would never use...then there is no arguement. but your not saying that at all. you want to deprive others of their choices based on your arguements which make no sense at all.
Rooz, if you have a true "SIDE" to present, make it so. In so far as your tear down of my contentions go ... it seems almost arbitrary. I have tried to present a side that says ... keep the two separate
. Like church and state. Video may seem like photography, but it is intrinsically different.
you actually have NO logical arguement. just saying "you should never mix the 2" over and over and over again doesnt make your baseless argument more valid. it just makes it baseless and annoying.
who are you to say what it was and wasnt designed to do ?
Homogenizing (STILL/MOVIE) is nothing more than torturing your DSLR in ways it really was not designed to do.
answer my questions, what video camera gives you dslr like low light performance ? wide angle lens ? dof ? the fact is that dslr's do video better than video cameras do stills. so if you want one thing to hold when doing something, this is the way to go.
There are plenty of alternative ways to do this and do it CORRECTLY,
in fact in alot of conditions, dslr takes better video than video cameras.
there is no drama. you;re inventing it.
without heaping this kind of nonsensical drama into your camera's workload.
no, thats right. it doesnt. which is why i called you up on it.
It has nothing to do with age or experience,
which enables you to do what exactly. this is technology which moves FORWARD. you are talking about looking BACKWARDS.
although having that view certainly allows the argument to be reflective
whats the burden if you dont use it ? stop sidestepping the questions and just answer.
As a purist, I am happy with the SONY Full Frames not having to share this "burden" of obligation on the camera.
so you want to blame the camera capability for the user's poor ability ? again, you are not making a rational argument here.
There is no expectation of a MOVIE with the α850
. When and if it gets used ... I know when I yank out the CF card or Memory Stick ... they are not full of animated, poorly laid out or poorly lit/composed footage
, taking up all my shot space!
i know WHAT your saying, you;re just not providing a rational argument as to WHY. do not tempt people ? lol wtf is up with that ? dont you live in the "land of the free ?" you know where people are enabled to make their ownb choices ? your argument is just laughable.
In essence, what I am saying is: If someone wants footage
... get a "footage-maker." Leave the DSLR alone and do not tempt people to do with it what they should not.
a purist ? what is a purist exactly ? oh yeah thats right...the same purists that objected to AF ? or metering ? or TTL ? or digital ? or photoshop ? the same purists who would scoff at a "SONY" .
Originally Posted by DonSchap
i didnt say anything about SLT. they are one form...sonys form. dslr is what im referring to cos thats what i'll use and there is no comprmise at all to photos. none. zero. zip. zilch. nada.
The argument stands that sleazing your images through a Translucent Mirror
solution would be ... unnecessarily silly
for 100% of your work, just to have a 1% (maybe) chance need for making a MOVIE!
i dont want to take 2 devices. i get to have a choice and so do you. your choice is just dont use the video mode.
I suggest that it would be better to have the new SLT-α77
on hand as not only a "backup", but your movie-maker (if you must) ... it would be a lot cheaper, too
how does it wreck your work ?
Wrecking a 100% of my work ...
how so ? your analogy makes no sense. do you even understand what that saying means ?
for a simplistic movie feature
... borders on cutting your nose off to spite your face.
as above, i'll use my dslr thanks. no comprimise needed...so your attempt to wriggle out of the old argument you were losing and move to a new argument is redundant cos i'm not referring to SLT cameras.
I suggest you reexamine your approach to your photography. Regardless of how you look at it, that mirror is an inherent corruption to the light.
as above. this was about video in dslr. dont confuse the issue just cos you're confused.
I do not know about you, but I did not spend thousands on my well-ground lenses and optically pure filtration just to have some cheap semi-permeable, dust-collecting, fingerprint-harboring mirror corrupt all of them.
Last edited by Rooz; 09-24-2010 at 08:14 PM.
D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75