60d 7D proof

Sam Kanter · August 13th, 2011, 04:42 PM

I know the statement might dissuade you, but I think the statemen tabout "breaking the camera" is there for legal reasons for the developers. If you read the side affects for aspirin, it will say "may cause death". They have to say it, (and I think it could have been said differently) but you should assess the risks with other criteria. I think risks are very minimal, and haven't heard of one bricked camera with thousands of users.

But, understand that I am in no way responsible either! :-)

Sam Kanter · August 13th, 2011, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Wiley

That's right Edward. It is a feature which can be switched off. The actual t3i sensor is (almost?) identical to that used in the t2i, it's just you have the added option of only using part of the sensor when you choose to.

Is this a software feature or hardware? I wonder if ML developers can add this feature to other cameras?

James Donnelly · August 15th, 2011, 04:05 AM

This whole essential thing has been done to death by now, but often people leave out what line of work they are in.

I am a ML addict, but I am not sure I would use it at a wedding. For film makers, I think there is a more persuasive argument. Also, we are talking about hundreds of releases and versions on several camera platforms, and referring to them all as one thing here, which is where generalisations can become worse than useless.

Here is my generalisation: Try it, it almost certainly won't break your camera. You might find that it turns your off-the-shelf space ship into a temperamental millenium falcon, which once you know it's foibles, can be coaxed into amazing things. If you have enough money for a star destroyer, buy that, and spend the extra time you saved on tweaking by plotting to crush the rebels.

Hector Landaeta · August 17th, 2011, 05:56 AM

Star Wars pun apart I believe that ML symbolizes the spirit of the using of a stills camera for video like all of us do. I don't really think it's about being cheap and getting great IQ out of what's generally considered small change in pro video production nowadays. I believe it's about having the possibility to tweak and tinker, even having to go to extra complications, to achieve a superior product.

August 13th, 2011, 04:42 PM	#46
Sam Kanter Major Player Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: New York Posts: 205	Re: 60d 7D proof I know the statement might dissuade you, but I think the statemen tabout "breaking the camera" is there for legal reasons for the developers. If you read the side affects for aspirin, it will say "may cause death". They have to say it, (and I think it could have been said differently) but you should assess the risks with other criteria. I think risks are very minimal, and haven't heard of one bricked camera with thousands of users. But, understand that I am in no way responsible either! :-) Last edited by Sam Kanter; August 13th, 2011 at 07:42 PM.

August 15th, 2011, 04:05 AM	#48
James Donnelly Major Player Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Chelmsford England Posts: 287	Re: 60d 7D proof This whole essential thing has been done to death by now, but often people leave out what line of work they are in. I am a ML addict, but I am not sure I would use it at a wedding. For film makers, I think there is a more persuasive argument. Also, we are talking about hundreds of releases and versions on several camera platforms, and referring to them all as one thing here, which is where generalisations can become worse than useless. Here is my generalisation: Try it, it almost certainly won't break your camera. You might find that it turns your off-the-shelf space ship into a temperamental millenium falcon, which once you know it's foibles, can be coaxed into amazing things. If you have enough money for a star destroyer, buy that, and spend the extra time you saved on tweaking by plotting to crush the rebels.

August 17th, 2011, 05:56 AM	#49
Hector Landaeta New Boot Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 10	Re: 60d 7D proof Star Wars pun apart I believe that ML symbolizes the spirit of the using of a stills camera for video like all of us do. I don't really think it's about being cheap and getting great IQ out of what's generally considered small change in pro video production nowadays. I believe it's about having the possibility to tweak and tinker, even having to go to extra complications, to achieve a superior product.