Andrew Reid

Last February I made the first EOSHD video quality charts 2014. This was an at-a-glance chart of image quality delivered by every camera I can possibly think. This year I've decided only to include the cameras I've direct experience of shooting with in my own filmmaking projects, with only a few exceptions such as the Sony F35 and Canon C300. I've also removed cameras that have been superseded by very similar ones (such as the GH2 by the G6, sharing the same sensor). Here are the results... Read the full article

A story of the $1999 SLR Magic cinema lens versus a $7999 Cooke S4i Mini. Read the full article

Just tried a 2014 Mac Pro (4 core) with Edit Ready and FCPX. Virtually zero improvement in transcoding speed compared to a 2.3ghz i7 Macbook Pro Retina (Nvidia 750M 2GB). Really surprised at that. Edit Ready took 2.03 to transcode 1 min of 4K 1D C footage on the Mac Pro compared to 2.08 on the Macbook! FCPX transcoding to 4K ProRes (optimised media) wasn't really much either. Same story with the 5K iMac, not much improvement. How can that be?

Ah I see, press X to select entire clip range before dragging. That does it. Getting used to it... it's not bad actually.

When I drag a clip onto the timeline, is there a way to stop accidentally dragging the in / out points over the clip instead? It's infuriating.

​And another result... EditReady was slower on my Hackintosh, 670 GTX 4GB, arguably more powerful hardware than what's in my 'proper' Macs. The GTX 750 and 775 2GB in my Macbook and iMac seem to do a good job.

FCPX vs Premiere is the new PC vs Mac debate isn't it!?

Results for 4GB 1 min 1D C 4K... EditReady - 2m18 (ProRes LT) FCPX - 1m05 (ProRes 422) However the EditReady file is 2.77GB vs 3.6GB for the FCPX one and it looks slightly nicer, even with the lower bitrate (350Mbit/s vs 450Mbit/s) I bought it. I like it.

EditReady is interesting. Faster than all but FCPX it seems. But with the advantage of being able to select the transcoding codec, naturally

With the clip placing tool the magnetic timeline acts like a normal one. Much more sensible now. I'll give it a go. I need to place clips perfectly in sync to an audio track and the magnetic timeline would knock everything out.

​Yeah. No batch convert!

Yes, it works for 4K. Tried it. Sorry Nick I missed your suggestion. It ended up being suggested on Twitter and I tried it from then on. Shame to lose LT but 422 will do me... better than silly old MJPEG anyway!! And 3x faster than Premiere... can't sniff at that. Going to save me HOURS.

I don't use FCPX as my editor, and why should I use it to transcode media when we have Compressor for that? The answer may surprise you... Read the full article

The plan is to use the speedy FCPX transcoding and then import the ProRes into Premiere which is my favoured editing software. PS - It's not just the timeline in FCPX I don't like

By the way your RX10 clip seems much more compressed in the YouTube video than the D5300 clip, what did you do to it? Flush it down the toilet?

Hacked D5200... Is it just the bitrate change or have they progressed much further since I last looked at it?

Yes exFAT is needed for files larger than 4GB. Weird that the NX1 doesn't format it that way in-camera or that it doesn't span to multiple files! Still, 7 and a half mins of 4K per 4GB isn't bad. On the KineMINI in Cinema DNG that is about 4 seconds

So I tried FCPX in the end and glad I did because it transcodes MJPEG 4K at real-time speed (24fps) to ProRes (various flavours) on my iMac and the quality is perfect. Some quite amazing magic sauce going on with this. Resolve is giving me 7fps and FCPX can even edit / playback MJPEG 4K from the 1D C flawlessly on my Macbook Pro Retina 15" whereas Premiere can't (and has the banding). I won't yet be switching NLE but going to explore Compressor as my transcoding app for the 1D C. The FCPX interface has NO batch export for clips, you can only do them one at a time or bunch them all into one clip on a timeline export... pretty stupid!!

​Good choice. I'll leave the art part up to you rather than lecture on that like certain other members like to do...

Could do with going for 30" for 4K. Any good ones?

​Good to see support trickling out yet further. What spec PC do you use?

​Sounds normal to me, early macbook pro 2013 compared to top of the range new iMac is going to be a lot slower isn't it!!

You can definitely tell a large difference on a desk where viewing distances are tiny. I also enjoy the extra real estate for editing and my OS. Going back to 2.5K feels cramped and much softer. The Mac makes it easier on your eyes with the retina scaling options. I don't recommend reading the web on a 27" 4K display at 1:1.

There's also a 5K version of the Dell http://www.amazon.de/Dell-210-ADRZ-Monitor-Reaktionszeit-schwarz/dp/B00R420SU4/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1421949290&sr=8-5&keywords=P2715Q 5120 x 4096 IPS. Is that a typo!?

Damned impressive post. Cheers!