27th November 2004, 11:05 AM
27th November 2004, 12:16 PM
i believe the 1V was not introduce until 2000. You may get your facts wrong.
Originally Posted by F5user
28th November 2004, 11:11 AM
Forgot to mention
For those ardent canon fans out there.. i'm sorry... by right, the 1v was introduced in 1999, released in 2000. yes...
Originally Posted by Belle&Sebastain
I get my cameras 2 yrs in advance due to the nature of my work. ie: F5 in 1995, 1v in 1996-7, etc etc...
It's part of the "testing" process by the major camera companies, who let their cameras undergo field testing prior to releasing them for the commercial market.
And i do believe that press companies still do get their cameras well in advance of any official product release.
ie: SPH had their d1hs 1 yr even before cathay had their first shipment.
28th November 2004, 03:33 PM
buy used top end (D1, D1H, 1D). cheap and good. no worries for ever
28th November 2004, 03:56 PM
Yeah I'm still pissed with the lighting for the toy thingy I posted here, can't get it the way I wanted
Originally Posted by espn
And well, 3 years of shooting i'm still pretty much pissed with majority of my shots, if I did A right, i've got B,C and D wrong, If D's right, A, B and C will be wrong... well you get the idea
Well, but it's getting better, so as espn said hang around and shoot more.
And oh, I don't use Canon or Nikon, but I love my camera. Solely personal preference tho. All cameras are competant tools in the right hands.
28th November 2004, 04:13 PM
Originally Posted by AReality
Tested the 20D at sitex...the shutter noise is terribly loud ..wonder why did canon do that ...?
29th November 2004, 03:00 PM
29th November 2004, 08:15 PM
29th November 2004, 08:24 PM
Sorry, just wanted to add that yes... though there've been "trouble" with some of the equipment upon release to the public, these were mainly restricted to the firmware released to the consumers.
most of the time, those covering with dslrs usually had their firmwares flashed with a version specifically tailored to the needs of the department. And these versions rarely give any trouble at all.
I'm not too sure if nikon / canon cover that within their contracts with sph here, but i do know that the company i'm working for has specific versions of firmware for its 1ds and 2hs tailored to the needs of the venue of coverage.
Sadly these troubling issues consumers face only surfaced with the implimentation of digi coverage.
29th November 2004, 09:31 PM
erm.... so, did anyone tested the D2X couple of yrs ago?
exposure medium: 30% film, 70% sensor
29th November 2004, 09:37 PM
It was out in year 2000 I believe, several of my friends and me were already playing with D2X then, online and on battle .NET, depends on your preferance
30th November 2004, 03:26 PM
So the manufacturers actually have a perfectly working firmware right off the bat, give the perfect, bug-free versions to you guys to test for free, and then subsequently flash inferior, untested buggy versions to the paying consumer? What a way to do business! Interesting to hear about customised firmware for different shooting conditions and venues of coverage, care to share some examples of what these may be?
Originally Posted by F5user
1st December 2004, 01:57 AM
Ok... some good examples are:
back when the d2h was used within the company, the cache was flashed with a ver which only allowed the camera to shoot at 1024x768. The firmware also immediately duplicated the picture so that the card or the remote storage would have 2 images in diff formats, raw and nef (if i remember correctly)so as to cater for the publishing department to plough through the images once uploaded.
If the assignment was a press conference, firmwares were mainly written to "lock" the whitebalance in for that particular event, with the nikon/canon technicians presetting the balance to their utmost best at the workshop prior to deployment.
I guess, this was particularly done to prevent the human interface from fumbling with the gadget, thus hindering workflow, and to "lock in" the settings for the photojournalist so as to allow him to shoot and capture for his rice bowl as accurately as possible.
For the average user outside, you're paying a full and hefty amount for the device and thus, of course the company will try their best to give u what u want, but as with all digital tech... it's never perfect.
6th December 2004, 09:38 AM
Thanks for all your advise. I guess all the DSLR is not that perfect. Well look like that to me at the moment.
Thanks again to all of you.