Or a venomous and rapidly spreading insect that will destroy us all.. 😀

I don't know about the manufacturing, but they definitely jointly designed it.

Holy fuck that's the same company?!

Seems to me like they would still be the best for shipping.

Also competitive price wise, right? ...........right?

Have you gotten your hands in an index controller?

Except those that make inventions.

I’m ready to try VR… in 5 more years lol. I’m still not buying until we have some much better tach and games. Played a few. Not worth my money seeing what friends have so far. That being said. I wouldn’t complain if I somehow got a free one hahaha. Time to start making those gaming vids and be a YouTube star who gets free gaming swag lol

Then you feel sorry for everyone

I feel sorry for people with zero imagination who have no option but to copy from creative people. Sad, pathetic and embarrassing.

This is correct except for the transformer part. Loads of appliances use a transformer while consuming huge amount of electricity (IE Microwave and Gaming PC). Its just used to move the total voltage up and down and has no effect on the total power draw as the amperage drawn will change proportionally to the voltage. (10V@1A == 1V@10A)

They did ones other than the vive?!

Meta Quest competitor...? Ew

You want to compete, you gotta be as cheap

>Why would you ever buy new entry level when there is a robust used market and you can get an older prosumer level instead.

Buying used camera gear isn't really a beginner's game. It's very easy to get scammed, overpay, or buy something with problems that won't be found until later.

The quest pro headset looks so friggin cool tech wise and spec wise.

But it's tied to Facebook, so fuck that. Even if I had the money for it.

I want a good headset 400$ range for VR Racing but it seams like at this price range there are only standalone headsets with very low resolution

>What's a good, cheap fullframe camera for strictly photography?

'Do you actually need full-frame?' is the first question.

>Thank you, yeah this is really cool tech!!! I really hope they bring this to general market as well, so many things could benefit from this! Tha k you for the explanation!

It'll definitely make it into mainstream consumer cameras one day, there are just limitations that need to be overcome first.

>Canon needs to make a iso independent chip.. ever tried lightening the shadow areas in a canon digital file? It goes to crap very fast.. Recently switched to Sony for this reason, that and in body stabilization and very customizable buttons.. Nikon uses Sony chips for a good reason.

I lighten the shadows in files from my R5 all the time—they are very malleable and look great! The R5 also has IBIS, and fun-fact: Canon IBIS performs better than Sony's.

>I have been paid for my photography for almost 10 years now. I just ditched my full frame for a crop Fuji. There are very few instances where someone is going to notice the difference between full frame and crop.

By the same logic you could probably ditch your crop Fuji setup and replace it with M4/3—there are likewise few instances where someone is going to notice the difference between APS-C and M4/3...

>I think it is more a ding on the non L rf lenses. They are pretty slow for the price and some of which use plastic elements. The 85mm f2.0 rather than a 1.8 for example on the slow side and the 50mm 1.8 that definitely uses plastic elements.

The RF 85/2 lost 1/3 stop to its EF predecessor while the RF 35/1.8 gained 1/3; it's a minor difference and f/2 is definitely not slow. But yes, the variable zooms are slower at their longer ends.

Canon have been using plastic in some of their optical designs for many years now; it's nothing new or bad, and hasn't just been used in lower end models, either.

>The real issue is that canon went after both Samyang and Viltrox for making cheaper and better 85mm and 35mm rf autofocus lenses. So basically you either have to adapt older ef Lenes many of which are 20+ years old and not really made for modern sensors and AF or pay the L premium or settle for sharp but slower rf non L glass that is kinda over priced.

Yes there are some 20+ y.o. EF designs, there are also plenty of newer designs too. But I'm yet to adapt an EF lens onto RF that hasn't AF'd at least as well—if not better—on the mirrorless body than on Canon's DSLRs. As for sensors, Canon's most-demanding FF sensor is still the 50MP one in the 5DSr; in APS-C it's the 33MP one in the R7, essentially the same as that in the 90D's, so it's not like the mirrorless sensors are any more demanding than those in the DSLR lineup.

Your summary of lens options neglects to mention that 3rd party EF lenses can also be used, something that frequently gets overlooked by people complaining about a lack of options on RF. If 3rd party optics and pricing are so compelling, people can simply adapt it.

Finally, the non-L RF lens pricing is actually fairly competitive when you start comparing it to other brands and the launch prices of comparable EF models.

Flowcus sounds like a super modern toilet.

They have had some decent products, but none of them geared toward consumers.

They actually did give it new wings and engines: the 747-8i