----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart McKears"
Newsgroups: uk.rec.video.digital
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 4:49 PM
Subject: canon mv830i mv850i - true widescreen?


On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:33:14 GMT, "Headrush Films UK"

wrote:

We need to change lenses quite often,

I have to ask the question why? I've only used prime lenses rarely and
only on
film - extreme wide angle and extreme close ups.

Mainly using a wide angle in small rooms for doing interviews.but sometimes
a long telephoto for arty stuff.
But I also do some technical stuff that requires the camera to be fixed to a
microscope.
You remove the lens and fit a adapter that allows the camera to be fixed
directly to the scope. You can use the camera lens but the results are
pretty ****ty!


The problem with Sony is the design of their prosumer cameras is too much
like domestic gear. I did weddings on a PD150 and people did not take me
seriously, saying things like "the guy who did our wedding had a
professional camera" they are also a pig to hold steady. for long shots,
the
XL1 and XL2 is bad enough with it's front heavy lens. if only they had
moved
the eye piece forward a few inches then it will balance better.

Use a tripod or monopod or support the camera(or yourself) on a structure.
Seeing a suitable support as well as great shot is one of the things that
marks
out a good camera person of whatever level.

Many Churches and the Cambridge register office don't allow tripods and
often you don't get to pick where you stand :-(
and I would gladly never do another wedding!
Sorry but I must be built differently to you, I find standing for a long
time with my arms out in front of me holding a heavy'ish camera really
difficult. and i'm a 15stone rower with pretty strong arms

I've never done a wedding on film or video, thankfully.


If only Hasselblad or Nikon made video cameras! (joke)

Joke OK but it does raise some points about product awareness and how
names are
more important that reality.

I don't buy camera gear for it's name, as a pro snapper I have what ever
does the job!


Hasselblad. Always liked and thought that my Mamiya RB67 was better.

The RB and RZ is okay as a cheep studio camera but really too slow for
serious work, the focus is truly horrible it's sloppy, good for close-up but
if you are shooting close-up you put on an extention tube! If you are going
to use such a lumbering great camera it's better to use a 5x4. Sorry but
the Mamiyas were my all time worse buy, I really do hate them with a
vengeance. the ones we had were the most unreliable crap we have ever had!
The backs are horrible, and the lenses are like the bottom of beer bottles.
on the other hand the Hasselblads have never been any problem, one is a 1964
500c I don't know how much film it has shot but it's a lot! all the lenses
are pinsharp, they are simple a joy to work with. which is why most
photographers who can afford them use them!
Sorry but in my view the Hasselblad is simple the best camera that has ever
been made!


Nikon. Found my Canon A1 to be better than any Nikon I used.

The Canon A1 was a great camera in it's time, but it you think it stands
anyway near the modern Nikons or Canons you, must be deluding yourself.
both the F5 and EOS 1 are pretty special!

It's horses for courses I have used Olympus OM, Canon, Minolta, and Nikon,
and prefer the Nikon, they just seem to go on working for ever. I now have
a D1, D70 and a D2x on order. the F5 does not get used much nowadays. But
Canon is great and a lot of professional use them, there in not really
anything to choose between them, it's what you like. as a professional
photographer I don't really have to worry too much about the price of gear
so don't have any axe to grind as far as cameras are concerned, The main
thing I want out of a camera is for it to have a good lens and be reliable.