Leaderboard

Neither of those are good choices due to massive throttling of their GPUs. Get a portable gaming laptop. Reddit is a good non-biased source to use to find the right one.

It is not that it is Just Raw so much, it is that most cameras that Do shot Raw do it in a 10-16 bit environment. No the typical 8bit, 10 bit in low Codecs that are common to them., like they do in say the 5D. So there is in reality usually a 1 to 1 1/2 stop boost using Raw efficiently. That means editing it right also. You can screw it up as easy as you an help it if you are clueless LoL. The main advantage to Raw is that in reality you can't under, or overexpose the output unless you REALLY screw up. So you have all the DR you can possibly get out off the sensor, bypassing a lot of the added processing in that Raw file. So you get what you see thing more than what the camera Normally wants you to see with it's onboard processing engine.

According to the video description, Andy Lee made that video.

There can be big differences between what people actually want, what they think they want, what they will tell you they want, and what they will actually pay for. In start-up businesses there's a trick. You hold a focus group, and then listen to people talk on and on and on about what they think (which you write down diligently and then throw away later on) and when people are leaving you either offer them free samples, or you tell people you have some stock for sale and would they like to buy some now? That final part is the real test. There's a story in startup land about a company getting into the MP3 player market, had a focus group with all sorts of different colours and patterns and people were very supportive of all the colours, but when the company offered a free player as a 'thank-you' every single person took black.

Mine is a late 2015 and had an intermittent keyboard fault a few weeks ago. Credit to it though, it recognised that intermittent problems are really frustrating so it has now made itself permanent. I'm not sure if its dust thats caused it as it has not exactly led an easy life and routinely has overnight stays in boxes of rice after getting rained on on jobs. I'm pretty sure its a detached ribbon and will be an easy fix but the reports of £700 for a repair means that the repair won't be happening at an official Apple outlet.

I think this might become even more of a discussion point in the next couple of months as the Pocket 4K starts to be delivered and people are looking to edit RAW in Resolve. My MacBook Pro is probably due an upgrade but I actually think I might go the route of getting an external GPU as it looks like its going to be cheaper and more effective for Resolve than upgrading the computer. After seeing some of the performance increases on offer in Resolve with external GPU and them now being officially supported in macOS 10.13.4, I think it might be time to take the plunge.

Indeed. I guess I was trying to say, it’s not really what I agree with or want, but I can seperate my personal views about what is pragmatic and practical and understand why a company makes these kinds of choices. Because they also need to be viable as a business as well. What I want from a camera is not what most of the users of this forum want and is likely to result in a camera that would fail commercially. So who cares what I want ! I’m not against choice, but I’ve also had the SAME conversations with the people that can make this stuff happen. I’m just paraphrasing the answers to the questions I’ve already asked long ago from those that do the making. I have to say it’s really disheartening to see people shooting off about trying to work around and defeat IP. Even if you’re philosophically OK with trying to do that, you know that if Sony’s lawyers come knocking I’m pretty sure you’d feel different. Not to mention the fact that they are an important vendor for someone making a camera. The make a lot of components from the sensor down.... Would you REALLY want to jeapordise a new product that you’ve invested millions on R&D into only to have the company that potentially make your sensor yank it because you’re trying to circumvent their IP on a lens mount ? And then seeing engineering challenges claimed that are easy and cheap without any true understanding of what they’re claiming is possible. I’ve been a part of these conversations already. I’ve already asked most of the same questions that then get asked here. The same things get kicked around by R&D and product managers. They already have done the numbers on most of these things and I think BMD have shown more than anyone, if they can make something, they will, they have zero fear of market segmentation or protectionism of product class. But it does have to be profitable and enough people that will want it. JB

you're from new zealand? that's awesome. I've been here two months with three weeks to go. I wish i had more time to explore. we have a trip to queenstown scheduled before we go. but i've been cutting and shooting out of park road post in wellington and have been working through nearly every weekend to make deadlines. doesn't leave much time for anything else. still, i love it here. that music is a track I got off Artlist.io. I have a subscription. As for the color rendition, I think Canon's emphasis on great skin tone brings an amazing "living photograph" quality to their imaging. It's fantastic. For me, it was between an EVA1 and C200. Made a list of what I thought "won" in over a dozen categories and it was close. but ultimately I chose the EVA1 for its color fidelity, more detailed image, actual 2K rather than HD, and its finer noise character.

Depends a lot on the person buying it, for me who is using it every day and for paid work, then the extra cost of its life span per use is nothing at all. But if a person is using it much less often, then it could be smarter to get the cheaper F4

Let's not start speculating in delays until after September. There is still plenty of time for BM to deliver on time... Delay conversations are boring especially when the due date hasn't even passed yet.

It will use Bluetooth LE to communicate with my controller so a smartphone app could equally be used. My personal view of that though is that its a bit of an overkill way to do it, especially considering the size and cost of the smartphone even though you might already have it. Using something like a small Bluetooth LE controller (a keyfob sized remote control similar to smartphone shutter release for example) is, to me at least, a better way to control it as the beauty of doing it that way is you don't have to fire up an app on the smartphone so its a bit more instant, not to mention tactile ? There'll be options for both though.

Andy Lee is supposed to be doing a short film using them,unfortunately he is not on these forums much these days. The guy at "Ironglass" could probably put you in contact with him.

There's lots of links between very different types of sounds, including the sound of a train on early Jazz music.. http://www.wbur.org/radioboston/2017/01/19/trains-jazz at about 75% of the way through. Edit: or this example where the album starts with the sound of a train and it is included until almost the 4:00 mark when the music fully takes over. This is an absolutely wonderful album, one of my all-time favourites.

Absolutely to subjectivity. What I was referencing with regards to weight is the Sony is 2,895g, the Canon is 3,850g and the Nikon is "approx 3800g", so the Sony is lighter, but they're all still really heavy with all that glass and metal!

Raw indeed doesn't suddenly boost the DR. The main reason people shoot RAW is for the post workflow.

EMBRACE being middle of nowhere!

This will get you far closer to that as it will track the aperture (and shutter speed if you wanted it to I suppose) and you then set a conservative limit on the auto ISO so it will constantly be doing the offset without large changes in the ISO. You would deliberately set the base exposure to be a stop or two away ISO wise from the limit you'd set for the auto ISO so it had some range above and below to work in. For example, if your base exposure is 1/50th, f4 and ISO640 then you'd set up the ND to add enough to make that exposure at ISO320 instead and set the auto ISO limit to be ISO800. That will take care of a reasonable change in light as the auto ISO can range above and below that point and the ND will track the changes from the aperture point of view to keep that initial base exposure constant as far as the auto ISO can see. It depends on how much swing you expect to have within a single shooting scenario but configuring it like that would take away a lot of manual intervention. It can be done exactly like that now with any ND either fixed or variable but the difference is in the tracking of changing aperture which would otherwise require a manual change in ND level. Otherwise you'd be looking at a Sony FS5 which will work in full auto mode as it has a built in variable electronic ND. No, what I've done here isn't groundbreaking or original so manufacturers are able to do this themselves if they want and, as above, cameras like the FS5 already do. This is more about being able to add that style of functionality to any camera, especially when integrated with my controller, and at a reasonable price. As I say, it depends on how changeable conditions are going to be within the same shooting period but I think its possible to get pretty close with an ND filter that can track aperture changes. Or take the full creative control option and buy an FS5

It's not the easy path. They're not being lazy. But it has to be viable. Sustainable. Digital Bolex made a camera that EVERYONE loved. Everyone loved it's design ideals. The Kodak made CCD, the global shutter, the super 16 format. It was announced before Blackmagic announced their pocket cinema camera, which kind of did similar things. Super 16 sensor and fairly unique look. At about 1/3rd the price. There was a lot of love for the DB camera and it's visuals. But they went out of business. Even though in many ways they made a DEMONSTRABLY better camera in terms of IQ, it had less utility for most users who didn't want to put up with their RAW only model, the way the media had to be offloaded. So even though they made a better camera in many ways, gave us image purists what we asked for, they couldn't make it fly as a business model because WE DIDN"T SUPPORT IT. AJA made a camera that EVERYONE said was a better camera than Ursa. Cion was the camera that would show Blackmagic how it was done. It addressed all the complaints of Ursa, with supposed better ergonomics and a better build from a company that seemingly had a better reputation. It was stillborn. No one liked the pictures from it. Ursa wasn't a great success either, but considering it used the same sensor, it at least delivered a camera that for some made great pictures, had an EVF and could do everything on-board. Ursa was a failure too, but they sure as heck sold a lot more cameras than the AJA Cion. Ursa is very interesting to look at because it had not only an interchangeable mount, but an interchangeable sensor assembly. It TRIED to do what is being discussed here. Something modular, and interchangeable. Read between the lines here. I can't say a lot, but it's a LOT LOT harder to make something like this work than you think it is. I'm sure the engineering problems could be solved, but the COST of doing so at some point means it's not worth the energy expended, especially when sales of the camera overall weren't that great. JB

What I was referring to regarding the stops was measured stepping between values. If you want it to be user variable (there are 256 steps of adjustment) then it can be like that but from a control point of view it makes it easier to use if those steps are divided between stops as tied to the exposure you are setting on the camera using the controller. So if you set your base setting of f4 at 1/50th then when you changed to f2.8 or f5.6 it would automatically turn the ND up and down to maintain the same exposure. I'll give some thought to the interface for a standalone on regarding variable control. Probably a small joystick (like the controllers on a PSVITA) would work best I think. No, the box its in is purely to hold it while I was developing the code to control it. Its actually a cut up cardboard box from a USB power bank with a Cokin flat filter adapter grafted on to get it on to a lens as they were what was within my eye line when I was doing it! The filter itself is as thin as a regular filter. As a standalone unit it will obviously need some electronics to drive it so it will all be contained within a frame but it will be nowhere near as big as what you can see on the, erm, carefully constructed and lovingly sculpted housing its currently in.

Even though in this thread I've often been disagreeing with you (but still greatly enjoying your contributions! I find it interesting your perspective, even if I disagree on the details), I suspect that maybe we're not that far apart. As I too can empathise with manufacturs' thinking to take the easy path out and use EF mount primarily, like for instance Panasonic EVA1 has done. I can't understand their "logic" they'd go through to arrive at the decision to release an EF mount camera, and I can follow how they'd get to that conclusion. This is the "safe" move, to launch yet another EF mount camera. It isn't unreasonable, but I disagree with it. As I just wish they put a bit more thought into this or were a bit bolder, and offered more. And do what Kinefinity, Sony or JVC are doing. (especially Panasonic after all who are a major backer of the MFT standard! Seems bizarre to me that they abandoned MFT with the Panasonic EVA1. But what I've heard is that internal politics was a factor, with the pro division being jealous of the consumer division's success and thinking it is also due to that division "stealing" from them. Thus not wanting to use Panasonic's own mount). On this I agree with you as well. High quality adapters are not cheap to make. However you can have adapters priced at different levels to meet different market needs. For a videographer who is just using EF mount still zooms and pulling his own focus on the fly, then likely a cheap hundred buck adapter will do just perfectly fine for him. For another production which is using a Canon CN-E set of primes with a dedicated 1st AC pulling focus wirelessly, then they'd be happy to spend hundreds on an adapter which gives a much greater level of precision. The market can meet both their needs / price points.

http://www.red.com/tools/crop-factor Ah, Dragon 6K 16:9 is x1.35 crop. Bit bigger than 1.5x indeed, but not massively so? It isn't a dumb idea if it is the best option out there. Like you said, E mount is not an option. (ditto FZ mount) KineMount isn't ideal for LS300's intended users. (as I imagine many of them like the idea of using MFT lenses for run and gun shoots, as the camera is more targeted at videographers than cinematographers) Trying to create a new standard is rife with its own problems, so no sense using a new mount here. Isn't hard to see that if you wanted an intermediary mount on a camera that then when the JVC LS300 was launched that MFT made the most sense, and still does. Guess making cameras with permanent EF mount isn't an ideal solution either.... If they'd had a sub mount underneath then this would have been a much easier fix to be able to offer after the problem was discovered.

That SONY MADE camera was released in 2012. That's not licensing. That's OEM No one has ever made THEIR OWN camera with a native E mount. Like I said. Never going to happen. I have plenty of adaptors for PL mft and a lovely collection of lenses including Contax, Leica R, leica M and of course PL. That's how I know that in the end it's futzing. It's not really good for primetime. See above. See my many blog posts about using vintage lenses. I know the point you think I'm not getting. It's still painful TO DO. Have shorter focus throws, clicked iris, more problems with breathing and zoom tracking. All over it. But i never hear it being talked about as a camera except in this exact context. Not because of the pictures it makes, But because it has a native MFT mount with a larger than MFT sensor behind it. If this is the design ideal, as a proof of concept, it's hardly been stellar. I look at a camera like the Digital Bolex as a camera with similarly noble ideals that had a lot more directed visual impact. It's a fine idea. But why limit it to a native mount that's always smaller than the full sensor resolution that you have to use an adapted lens with. Play along with me and accept that Sony will never licence E mount. You want another lens mount is all. I'm not against what you're pitching, I just think it's dumb to do it with MFT or a mount you'll never see on camera not made by Sony. No. You disparaged manufactures for making cameras in a mount that's incredibly prevalent and means they can stay in business and instead advocate a native mount that would force any user to use another adaptor to get the full sensor resolution out of and realistically few people want. I don't think you get it. Kinifinity made an E mount. But they can't put an E mount lens on there. Because the lens protocol is what's protected. You can't talk to an E mount lens without that. Thus... No native E mount from Kinifinity. It's the only thing that can be done because it's DUMB to use MFT as an intermediary mount. What are you talking about "the cost" of the RED plate ? It sells for 700 bucks. Go check the price of the Titanium one. 99% of people that buy this camera aren't going to want to know about shimming anything. Most people don't even understand how to do it correctly. Gee like Blackmagic did with their first EF mount cameras that were the EXACT FFD for EF mount ? Ask all those Tokina owners how they feel about their lenses not hitting infinity. And that's EACTLY the kind of things that start happening when you start introducing mount adaptors or interchangeable mounts. You mean those ones you were just saying don't have to be expensive ? Which is it then ? Not for 99 bucks. Except with a camera that has a universal mount they're MORE LIKELY to have problems even if they don't use that feature. Right now EF mount's aren't generally shimmable (except for a couple of higher end C seriesd Canon cameras and a few RED's) There's no real mechanism to do it easily (user). You mean those 700 dollar ones you keep saying don't have to be expensive ? You want your cake don't you. You can't argue it's not problem when the ones you keep pointing to prove my point. To do anything as PRECISE as a lens mount needs to be it has to be done with great care and precision with the added complication of the electronic side of things. It's fine if you're used to still lenses that NEVER have accurate witness marks in the first place and usually overshoot infinity JUST BECAUSE the tolerances are far less. It's feasible, but it won't cost 99 bucks for an adaptor. Every mount will cost many hundreds if you want it done well and reliably. To argue otherwise says you're just an armchair engineer. I've had these conversations with people that do this kind of work. It's grossly insulting to say it can be done reliably for the cost of an 50 dollar ebay adaptor. On this forum. But not many others. I'm sure the market will reward them. I think youre confusing things. I hate EF leneses. I hate EF mount. But I can understand why a manufacturer would prefer to make a camera for a lens mount that has . amuch larger installed user base. Now I don't agree with that., But I can empathise with that thinking. It's so hard to make a camera and make money. Ask, Dalsa, Aaton, AJA, Digital Bolex, Ikonoscope, Panavison (two shelved cameras) Only if you accept the cost of that is 700 bucks my friend. I think you said it earlier. It's about degrees of precision. A bit out for you might be acceptable for for other sit most certainly won't be. No no no. You're keep claiming this and using RED as example. You can't have it both ways This getting tiring. Nope. RED is your example. They charge 700 bucks for their CHEAP version. The titanium version is 2000 dollars. More than the cost of the camera we're discussing here. Why do you think they even have those two options ? Why do you think they're charging that much if it can really be done so easily and cheaply like you claim ? JB

Yes. And a privilege to read.

This topic will be the last place I will be looking for information on the pocket 4K at this point, Its got 130 pages of speculation, requests, wishes, complaints. But no actual user feedback or footage. So I am stunned that people are all of sudden complaining that it got a bit off topic, while John's insight is probably the most valuable information you can find in those 130 pages.

I used ProColor V4 on the SONY A7III. A few shots were in ProLog 3 (opening four shots in the car) but from :20 on its all the new profile. Works well for perfect out of camera color. This was shot in a very extreme environment of deep forest shadows and bright harsh sunlight. It has great skin tones though even in those spots. Be sure to protect your highlights at all times! The thumbnail shot (at :54) had bright sun on that back rock wall, I exposed for that, then brought up the shadows a bit in post in that one shot. It was contrasty to the extreme!

More stills from the same short that I posted about earlier. EVA1. Kowa BH 2x anamorphic, Voigtlander 40mm f2 EF mount taking lens. This grade is a first pass I did for the HD proxies my wife will use to cut the film.

People talk about only "8 stops of dynamic range" as if it's unusable. I love following Andrew's and everyone else's analysis of how to maximize various camera's potential, but we sometimes let things get out of perspective. The order of important in my experience is 1. Lighting 2. Focus/stabilization 3. Lens 4. Sensor 5. Ergonomics 6. CODEC. Yes, we can't control the lighting all the time, but we also have to compare cameras in how they do in properly lit scenes; that is, scenes at/under 8 stops of DR. Here's my take on why we must never forget that shooting scene with more than 8 stops of dynamic range is something we really want to avoid. No camera can truly save it. It becomes a calculus of atrocities.

On Windows with many gaming notebooks available with either a GTX 1070 or 1080 that have basically the same perf as the desktop counterpart card an eGPU doesn't make too much sense. If you buy a notebook is for the portability so these new gaming notebooks allow you to edit on the road with no issue at all. I have a ASUS 15'' i7 7700HQ with a GTX 1070 with 8 GB Vram and I can do real-time editing and grading on a 4k timeline is Resolve.