CANON 7D USED ONLINE MOVIE
CANON 7D USED ONLINE FULL
CANON 7D USED ONLINE SOFTWARE
CANON 7D USED ONLINE FREE

CANON 7D USED ONLINE FULL

If, however, the leaked EOS R7 specs of a 32.5MP APS-C sensor, up to 30fps burst, 4K/60p video and IBIS end up being true, I might seriously consider getting the new RF-mount camera instead of a full frame because I think the price tag would suit my budget. Since then, I’ve really been drooling over the EOS R5 but have resisted the purchase because of it’s high price. However, the question then becomes, how good is good enough? Even if the video is not as good as what you can get from a good DSLR, could it be good enough for a feature film? Maybe it can.The Canon EOS 7D Mark II was my primary camera for years until I went full frame with the EOS 6D Mark II. I think that problem is solvable in the medium to long term. That assumes you can overcome the lens size issue, maybe with something like folded optics or other tricks. That’s why it’s going to be very very difficult, if possible at all, to get really high quality video from a smartphone in anything short of full daylight. To get a better image/video without sacrificing either resolution or speed, you just flat need a bigger sensor. This is not a problem that can be surmounted by further miniaturization, because you can’t shrink the photons hitting the sensor. 4″ sensor typical in a point and shoot, there is quite a lot of noise when shooting indoors. I’m sure you’re aware of it, but just to point out, the smaller the sensor, the grainier the image you get (at least in anything other than bright sunlight). However, the sensor size will always be a problem. But are you to claim that one example (that in this case might come into the “Well done but boring – there’s quite a few over the years I could put in this category) negates me saying that a reasonable percentage of “hollywood” film output released in cinemas shows no better production value entertaining or not? Reply View in chronology

Which is pretty much exactly what I said.

CANON 7D USED ONLINE MOVIE

The President’s Speech is a movie that can put me to sleep. I’ve seen some compelling amateur content that had it had more budget would have been easily of “quality prodution” enough to be shown in a cinema for example and it’s undeniable there’s a market for “entertaining trash”.Īs for “what is good”, it is all relative.

CANON 7D USED ONLINE FREE

It’s already free to make films, the change is that cheap good equipment allows the quality of the good ones among them to rise above the rest to truly rival the “studio produced” content. It’s not like much of that isn’t already there in Youtube or similar. Which exactly goes to my point about snobbishness – or elitism if you prefer. I might not like the signal above the noise, but I can tell the difference between what is and what is not. However, it is a very high quality movie, great dialog, amazing filmography, great sets, great costumes, etc. Much more noise, not much more signal.Īs for “what is good”, it is all relative. The end result? Lots of video shot, little of it useful.

CANON 7D USED ONLINE SOFTWARE

Doubly so if you pirated the editing software and borrowed the camera from Dad. That means you need limited skills, no understanding of framing, shooting style, writing, plot development, or any of that stuff, because well, it’s “FREE!”. When you remove the risk, everyone can make a movie. The ones trying to make movies are much more dedicated to the idea, and are willing to take risks (financial and other) to get there. When you have a higher bar to entry, not everyone tries to make a movie. Also “good” is my opinion, not necessarily anyone elses.) Reply View in chronology

(Disclaimer: There are probably more than 6 “good” films in the last 2 years but I don’t spend my life watching films – 6 represents maybe 10%-ish of films watched that were made in that time though lets face it some you know are trash without having to watch them. I wouldn’t like to try and predict the effect, but I’d consider it equally likely that status quo is maintained and hold a hope that more competition for people’s attention might even force the mean-point of “worth-watchingness” a little higher. Saying “more film makers means more trash” seems a little snobbish to me. I don’t think I could point to more than 1/2 a dozen films in cinemas in the last couple of years that I’d move outside that category, though to be fair some would come into the “entertaining junk” sub-category. That pre-supposes that those (or a large percentage on those) made now are not junk and “junk” is a personal opinion. Hmmmm *checks latest cinema film list* I’m not totally convinced that more film makers will affect the relative percentage of “junk” (rather than the absolute number of rubbish films). You end up with more movies (massive leap in techdirt style innovation and creativity) but in reality you just end up with more junk.

Canon 7d used online