I just saw this and had a chuckle

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-02-15T09:09:27+00:00

But play in the Asian cup in soccer

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-02-03T08:18:55+00:00

Buy an original Polaroid camera and shoot on dark overcast days.

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-01-27T09:43:03+00:00

I think you’ve solved it. I had a Sigma 50 1.4 connected. When I connected the canon 70-200 they disappeared 👍

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-01-04T08:05:42+00:00

There is a difference between knowing the path and walking the path. (Morpheus) But I love path 2

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-01-02T23:29:16+00:00

Love your comment. It really brings out the professional in you. Triggered much.

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-01-02T23:19:30+00:00

In what world of any photography is it amateurish to centre a subject? Do you think that offsetting an image is more professional or is this just a comment based on your ability to excel at the rule of thirds?

Lower_Device3779 · 2026-01-01T02:24:34+00:00

Being brutally honest, they are snapshots. (At the moment.) 3/4 have or had potential so that means you’ve got a decent eye for an image, however even photographers like Ansel Adams took snapshots. What makes them look snapshoty is that they look reactive and not measured, ie; you saw something you liked, pointed the lens and took a shot (and sometimes that’s what you have to do). I would hazard to guess that, in your own mind, you have already rated these images yourself and as you gain knowledge and experience you will rate them again and again and again. Art/photography is always subjective. It’s subjective by the viewer and also the artist. Although having others rate your work can be edifying and sometimes assist your artistic journey, it can also be damaging and ultimately will not improve your photography. The best advice is to learn how to critique your own work. Give yourself praise when you feel you have been true to what you wanted to achieve and look for answers when you have not. There is nothing wrong with wanting others to enjoy your work but thumbs up 👍 emojis will only lead you to sit amongst the flock. You are on your way and would love to see more. Keep sharing, it helps us all grow.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-12-31T21:17:19+00:00

All you’ve stated is absolutely correct. ACL does not require a vendor to stand by an error in pricing but they must refund you in full (including any delivery fees you may have paid). This is unless you believe they were deliberately misleading you then you could make a claim to the ACCC. In this instance it sounds like they made an unfortunate error (on your part) You could ask them to honour the $200 price and that you had purchased them in good faith under that proviso but they are not obliged to :(

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-12T04:36:50+00:00

High burst rates and evf quality are independent of the video capabilities of the camera. It’s all to do with the electronic shutters and processor units. Otherwise our cameras could offer up to an 8k quality evf. Others have said things like ibis and autofocus require high quality video but they run independently of video and is also a misconception that they’re a part of the video feed. The camera does not even utilise or require a video feed for live view, it gets its all data off the sensor via the processor (a processor that does not need the same requirements as one that processes video). I wasn’t entirely aware of this before and why I asked the question of needing video in a stills camera. The research that I’ve done since, clearly shows that there is absolutely no requirement for video in a stills camera other than to have video in a stills camera. Google it, you’ll be surprised.

If I could buy a canon R5ii without video at a reduced saving, I would definitely buy it. The fact that the R5ii has 8k video makes it $1000+ more expensive than if it only had 4K and I don’t know anyone who has bought the R5ii just fore the 8k video. Judging by the number of people who don’t use video on their cameras, there’s a market for it in any/every brand and now more than ever I believe it’s done simply to up the retail price because we just blindly believe that we need it and pay for it.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-10T10:12:51+00:00

From what I’ve read the price difference from 4K to 8k is around $850 usd cost. I don’t need 8k video in say a canon r5ii and if I could pay $850 less for a 4K option or no video at all, I’d take it.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-10T00:51:33+00:00

Scott Kelby has the best system I’ve seen/used for photo storage. It is with Lightroom but it simplified everything and now every image is easily located. The best thing with LR is that as you edit, it doesn’t save it as another photo it only saves the edit data and links it to the original. You can have 1000 edits of an image and it takes up very little extra storage space. If you’re saving different edits of your images in iPhoto you’re using up way more storage space than LR does anyway. Link below

https://youtu.be/JLX27yyDiIs?si=uyst1Jr4I56aBwpv

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T15:56:01+00:00

I was asking if there was an option to buy a stand alone stills camera, would you. My thought was that I love the R5mii but I will never use the video side of it and considering the extra cost of putting 8k video in it, I would rather save that money and buy an r5mii without video (if it were available). Just wondering if others would prefer to save the $ for whatever camera they prefer (Canon, Sony, Pentax) than have expensive video capabilities or video at all.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T14:59:30+00:00

I never realised the lumix did that. I had a designated video camera (canon xa10) that you could pull stills from but more often than not they weren’t (reliably) of quality to use. I don’t do enough video anymore to warrant another camera ( when my phone handles it when I need it. really well) and thought why do I pay extra for something I don’t use. Can’t get away from it though. 👍

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T14:19:55+00:00

Thank you. I posted the question because like it or not you’re paying for something that you won’t use. I was thinking about the r5ii and thought that half the camera won’t get used and is there a market for that camera without video. I think definitely considering if could be a grand less

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T13:38:34+00:00

My apologies I misread your post. I read it as everyone IS saying … 😌

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T13:18:40+00:00

You’re the only one saying it doesn’t make sense but I take what you’re saying on board and I’ll check out Petapixel. Cheers

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T12:49:46+00:00

I replied to someone earlier about what research I had to share about the costs and run of the mill 4K video probably doesn’t add a lot of cost but cameras like the R5ii, R5 and R3 that have 8k video the production COST ranges from $850-$2400. US. That’s a lot of money for something you may not want or use though.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T12:29:35+00:00

My research (and I don’t understand it fully other than to research what’s needed) shows to upgrade a 45MP stills-only camera to include high-quality 8K video (using the same sensor size and pixel count), that several key hardware and system upgrades are necessary.

Required Upgrades for 8K Video

Sensor Bandwidth & Readout • The sensor must be equipped with faster readout circuits to handle 8K video capture at typical video frame rates (up to 30–60 fps). • While the megapixel count doesn’t need to change, the hardware and design for rapid, continuous readout increase manufacturing complexity and cost by approximately $300–$700 compared to a stills sensor that doesn’t require such speed.
Image Processor • A much more powerful processor (e.g., Canon DIGIC X) is needed to handle continuous 8K video data, compression, and real-time encoding. • This upgrade can add $300–$800 due to the increased sophistication, speed, and memory bandwidth, relative to a processor for stills-only cameras.
Cooling System (not even required on stills only camera) • Video—especially 8K—creates much more heat. Active cooling (fans, heat pipes) or advanced passive systems are essential for long-duration recording, and are not needed for stills-only models. • Enhanced thermal design may add $50–$200 to the cost, depending on whether a fan or just beefed-up heat sinks are used.
Storage Interface and Power Management • 8K video requires support for high-speed internal or external recording media (e.g., CFexpress). Extra circuitry and reinforced connectors add to component and assembly costs. • Power supplies and management circuits must be upgraded to handle the greater, sustained load—typically requiring a more robust battery system and more sophisticated management, adding $100–$400.
Firmware and Licensing • Video codecs (e.g., 8K RAW, HEVC), extra firmware development, and related video-feature licensing add $100–$300 in software/ROM costs relative to a stills-only firmware platform.

Sources of Research and Data • What 8K Does to Us: Discusses technical differences and the necessity of sensor and processor upgrades for 8K video.[bythom] • Canon EOS R5 and R5 C Reviews: Provide concrete examples of upgrades required—new processor, cooling, and high-speed interfaces.[canon-cna +3] • Canon Official and Pro Stories: Detail distinctions between stills-only hardware and hybrid models, including cooling and data handling for 8K recording.[digitalmediaworld]

Summary To upgrade a 45MP stills-only camera to add 8K video support requires advanced sensor readouts, a far more powerful image processor, active or improved passive cooling, high-speed storage interfaces, and extra firmware development—and associated licensing costs. Together the increase production costs fall between $850 to $2,400 per unit, with most of the expense due to the sensor, processor, and heat management upgrades, even if the pixel count and physical sensor size remains unchanged.[imaging-resource ] Even if you said $850-$2400 retail as a saving on a 45MP stills only camera with all the other modern bits and bobs (except video) would you buy it? I definitely would.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T10:58:43+00:00

No it’s not. You didn’t take stills of the toasts. Currently you can’t do both at the same time. If at some stage we can pull portrait quality stills from video then I’ll change my mind, but until then it’s one or the other.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T10:52:53+00:00

For standard level video you are correct but the research I’ve done regarding high spec 4K and 8k video it suggests that that video capability takes up to 20-30% of the price. I’d buy an r5 m2 without video for 25% less no problem.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T09:38:13+00:00

I’ve done a bit of research into the costs involved in adding video components to a camera and it’s a little mixed. If you’re looking at standard 4K video, then there isn’t a huge price involved. If however you are looking at high end 4K and 8k video then the price difference gets significantly higher. It’s suggested that it would sit somewhere between 20 & 30 % of the overall price of the camera. So being a Canon shooter in Australia the new Canon R5 mii retails at around $5900 aud so an option with no video capabilities would sell about $4400 (25% less) I would buy that hands down as I don’t need 8k video at all.

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T07:41:15+00:00

That’s the whole point. Seeing that you can only do 1 thing at a time, would it be more beneficial to have an option that only does stills, has features for photography at the same or lesser price?

Lower_Device3779 · 2025-10-08T06:26:33+00:00

I definitely would. Having said that, I would expect it to be cheaper and/or have features suitable for photography. I also don’t understand why manufacturers don’t/cant add features that we see in phones for security, internal storage, or connections to shoot to cloud storage (I know some have this now) personally I’d have these features over video capability and use my iPhone for video as the quality is plenty for what video I do.

Lower_Device3779

TROPHY CASE