Do you enjoy always being so abrasive and personally insulting?If you want to interject yourself and make it all about you, (...
Upvote
0
Do you enjoy always being so abrasive and personally insulting?If you want to interject yourself and make it all about you, (...
I thought you appreciated staying on a subject. Guess not. If you are always this delicate, it might be time to disconnect from the internet.Do you enjoy always being so abrasive and personally insulting?
If you thought that was bad, you need to get out more!Do you enjoy always being so abrasive and personally insulting?
Well, if super high-tech systems like air traffic control and high-grade military weaponry still need floppy disks, it makes perfect sense that fancy cameras would be limited to DOS 8.3 filename conventions. Lol.Another add I would include is one across all cameras. Have more than 4 digits for file numbering. This causes me issues on most of my shoots.
it's scary right? Let me tell you about mainframes running software from the 70's currently active in most major banks...Well, if super high-tech systems like air traffic control and high-grade military weaponry still need floppy disks, it makes perfect sense that fancy cameras would be limited to DOS 8.3 filename conventions. Lol.
That’s not “scary”, that is “proven technology”it's scary right? Let me tell you about mainframes running software from the 70's currently active in most major banks...
"... gather 'round, children..."![]()
I realize the comment was meant humorously but the real question would be what file system to put on memory cards. The file system for a hardware device that needs to be supported out of the box on Windows, macOS and Linux would have to be formatted in either exFAT or FAT32 since those two Microsoft file formats are the only ones supported natively on all three operating system families.Well, if super high-tech systems like air traffic control and high-grade military weaponry still need floppy disks, it makes perfect sense that fancy cameras would be limited to DOS 8.3 filename conventions. Lol.
Another add I would include is one across all cameras. Have more than 4 digits for file numbering. This causes me issues on most of my shoots.
Yes, I routinely shoot 14k+ images at an all-day track and field event and have shot more than 10k at an all-day motorsports event.You shoot more than 9,999 frames in a single shoot? (Cameras skip 0000, so there are not 10,000 possible combinations with 4 digit numbers.)
That's a beautiful suggestion. Love it. Especially when some bodies have a LCD-based mode selector, displaying names would be sooooo easy to implement...R5 MK III (MK3) requested/hoped-for new features:
"C4, C5"!
This is an EASY bonus feature! How hard is it to add additional Custom settings? How hard is it to get away from the historical "only 3" Custom Settings? TIMES HAVE CHANGED! No more flip-phones! No more 4800 baud dial-up squeaky modems! So, no more "just 3 Custom settings"! Settings are now SO complex with so many variables and things to set, that having only 3 custom settings is FRUSTRATING, LIMITING and ANTIQUATED. How long has it been 30 years? We need AT LEAST 5 now!
AND: NAMES!!! Let the user NAME them!!!! 4 letters (not 3) as that 4 allows so many complete or near-complete WORDS: "BIRD", "PORT", "NITE", "STAR", "LAND", "MOON", "SPRT", "RACE", etc., etc.
This isn't a request to develop new, cutting edge technology that will require millions of $$ in R&D. Canon keeps adding features and specs and options... yet we're still stuck with just 3 custom settings!
Just add at least two more Custom Settings: "C4" and "C5" and let us name them!
Thank you for the correction, I generally didnt know that. Just going by the fact it is 2/3s slower.Absolutely right. The RF 100-500mm has the same size front element (entrance pupil) as the EF 100-400mm. So, it lets in exactly the same amount of light. You get the same number of photons per duck with both, with one at 500mm f/7.1 and the other at 400mm f/5.6. So, even though you are using 2/3rds stop more iso at f/7.1, the larger size of the duck means you have the same signal to noise in the image.
Glad to be of help.Thank you for the correction, I generally didnt know that. Just going by the fact it is 2/3s slower.
Yes, I routinely shoot 14k+ images at an all-day track and field event and have shot more than 10k at an all-day motorsports event.
Even without shooting through the full 4 digit roll in a day, it seems a low effort QoL upgrade to allow 5 digit file name.
It's not a big problem but personnally, when traveling, I have to use a renamer software regularly to change the file name to include the day of shooting and avoid duplicate number between the start and end of the trip. There are workarounds but it would be nice to not having to think of that
That's a beautiful suggestion. Love it. Especially when some bodies have a LCD-based mode selector, displaying names would be sooooo easy to implement...
Also allow for different file naming schemes or folders depending on the custom mode so two people can shoot with the same body and we can clearly attribute the photos afterwards. Tried it on the R5II and the naming scheme seems to be a global setting.
It's not AI-based, though, so it probably gets dismissed....![]()
serious question... how do you review such a high number of stills?Yes, I routinely shoot 14k+ images at an all-day track and field event and have shot more than 10k at an all-day motorsports event.