tokyojerry

Thanks for that feedback MaverickTRD. Yeah, I am leaning in that direction for the short-term. With the advent of EM5-III coming soon, and rumored to have at least the equivalent sensor of the current EM1-II, a new processor, not to mention the wide availability of lenses not only from Olympus, but Panasonic, and 3rd parties, I reckon I should stay put with what I have for the interim. If I make any move it might be on the E-M5-III once we know more. Oh, and good point on Canon's version of APS-C sensor size (1.6 vs.1.5) I never even gave that any thought.

Thanks much for your feedback Andrew on this just announced M6-Mark-II. I was about to get rid of my existing (and very humble) Olympus E-M10 Mark-III and 'upgrade' to this M6 Mark-III as my first foray into the Canon world. I thought, double the megapixels, a larger sensor (m4/3 vs APS-C) DPAF vs CDAF only, etc. But now, your insightfulness has created pause to rethink matters. Now, I am thinking to either wait for the upcoming Olympus E-M5 Mark-III and stick with M4/3, or to go full frame and consider A7-III et el, Or perhaps I should venture into the Fuji camp and consider X-T3/X-T30, albeit no IBIS (I think) and also owning no Fuji lenses. I tend to shy away from full frame because of the added weight, size, and expense for lenses, and at this point in life (age) I really like the relative compactness of the current Olympus or this new M6-Mark-II. I like the ergonomics and control layout of the Olympus but the menu system is another story!. But size alone is surely not the only factor. Perhaps the all around compromise might be the Fuji X-T3 / X-T30 but again, no lenses. Alternatively, just wait and see what Olympus produces with the upcoming E-M5-Mark III. It is rumored to minimally have the capable sensor of the current E-M1-MKII but with new processor. Anyway, again, thanks for the heads up info on the shortcomings of the M6 Mark-II 4K specifications not being true 4K. It's definitely food-for-thought. Sheesh! Even my Samsung Galaxy Note 9 gives me 4K @ 60fps! ... decisions, decisions, confusion! (^J^)

I can relate to this situation in Japan. As a U.S. citizen permanent resident of Japan for half my life now, the population is in a decline and increasingly they need to import foreign labor more then ever before. Personally I don't like it as with the influx of foreigners from near and far especially not knowing much at all about Japanese society and culture, I feel there is going to be similar problems with demographics in Japan as there are with middle easterners moving into European countries and the U.S. having it's demographic issues with Central / South American countries. On a more positive note though, fewer people equates to a better quality of life and less impact on resrouces, at least in theory.

If I am not mistaken, I think a dongle is no longer needed to run the paid version of Davinci Resolve Studio.

This is on my acquisition list. I hope Panasonic is watching. This is going to give both Panasonic and Sony a run for their money. I notice however there is very little information related to it's image shooting capabilities. Just like Panasonic's GH5, although the focus is on video it still is very much an image camera. To what extent can we regard the 4K Pocket Cinema Camera as a capable camera with controls, to take images.

Oh, oh, oh....in short, I want one! I will have to talk with Peter at the InterBEE Show in Japan later in the year.

I also have a very similar setup to your own as you described here. I have the LG 31MU97-B, and I also have it connected to a late 2013 Macbook Pro. Using the monitor in conjunction with the Macbook Pro closed lid and externally with BT Keyboard and Magic TrackPad is just so awesome! I also have the iMac 5K Retina as well. I love the LG 4K because for one, it provides 31" of display versus 27" of the iMac. I purchased mine here in Japan for just under ¥120,000 which is a steal in comparison the USD prices which is current stonger versus the JPY. We use 50Hz and 60Hz in Japan, with Tokyo area being 60Hz. How can I confirm what display I am actually achieving? I check system preferences and for 'Resolution' it only provides (1) Default for Display (and the screen fonts get really small) and (2) Scaled. In case (2) the 'More Space' (far right) maintains the same setting as I have in (1) with the tiny screen fonts. I usually keep it set to the second from right option to have the fonts display slightly larger. But in any case, I don't see any where to confirm if I am getting 60Hz or not. In the monitor's menu system, Screen > Picture > Super Resolution+ > Middle. Should that be set to high? low? I am using Thunderbolt / MiniDisplayPort v1.2 out to DisplayPort on the monitor. Should I use MiniDisplayPort to MiniDisplayPort here rather then to the standard DisplayPort? I have such a cable, but when I connect it (mini to mini) the monitor returns a dialog of 'no signal' and then it goes black. On a somewhat sidenote, I've been using my iMac retina as the primary machine, but increasingly am thinking to use the Macbook Pro with this external 31" LG as the primary. The iMac 5K retina is not bad by any means but the biggest thing that concerns me is I am still uses spindle drive even if it is the fusion drive internally. The Macbook Pro, where it might lack in specs (I have core i7 and max'd to 16GB) it makes up for any performance degradation by having the internal PCIe SSD rather then spindle fusion drive. Any thoughts on that idea? Perhaps the most processor / graphics intensive usage I might have might be running Windows 8.1 as a VM (Parallels) or editing in FCP-X. Externally I have SSD over USB3 to make up for only 512GB internally. Apprciate your comments on the above if you have a bit of time.

" I’m very tempted to switch from my iPhone to the CM1, despite liking the Apple operating system far more than Android. " I sure the heck will not. The iPhone is fundamentally a communications device for myself and not a camera. Further, as an operating system, I prefer and trust iOS versus Android in terms of security and range of other issues I won't belabor the matter here. I won't give that up just to try and suddenly make a phone a camera as first priority. The new LX100 can satisfy the lust of 4K and compactness on the go if such features are desired. Besides, it is also designed as a camera, not a camera trying to be a smartphone. Smartphones will continue to evolve with 4K, bigger sensors, etc., with the passage of time. We're still more or less at the threshold of 4K.

Thanks for the heads up on this setting in Handbrake. I use Handbrake in OS-X, but I am unfamiliar with most of these cryptic video specifications and settings except for the most common. I've always accepted the default of 20 as being OK at least if that is what Handbrake's developers have set as a default. I would have been clueless as to whether to go to a higher or lower numeric value and what it does. Your explanation clarifies and clears up some of the fog in at least what is the better (best) setting and which direction to go (higher / lower value). :-) BTW, I just now loaded an ISO image file of a BDrip (7GB+) I took note that Handbrake arbitrarily assigned it a value of RF 37.75. Now that is confusing to me based on what you describe and my comment above. Any thoughts?

Thanks much for that clarification on the AA filter.  Given my limited knowledge on some video concepts, I am not sure of what you mean by your second statement about impact on moire in video mode.... and to throw in the bin to get down to 2MP for 1080p.    Anyway, I will trust your reviews and that the A7r is better for video versus the A7.

  Political issue,  rather then a technical issue.  It is a requirement demanded by the EU  (European Union) from what I understand, for those living in Europe.  I might be wrong, but, that's what I heard/read somewhere.

Personally I disagree with the assessment of A7r is the top (best) choice for video.  For one, it lacks AA (anti aliasing) filter.  For another, it does not have PDAF (phase detection auto focus) only CDAF.  For those only interested in landscapes, portrait photography of the like (and no video) then A7r might be the better choice.  If you want to have any thing to do with video, well then, A7 is not only the better choice, it's cheaper.   RX10, yes, it will be good for video.  I plan to get the RX10 and A7 when they release 11/15.

  Perhaps too late already since you already invested into a Hackintosh.  But I reckon this is one (of many) trials and tribulations one encounters when cutting corners by going the Hackintosh route rather then using equipment that the OS is designed to be used on.  Sooner or later one will run into little irritations and tweaks maintenance.  Brings back memories of the Windows era of plug and pray.   :blink:

I also would plump down for the iMac.  For one, I don't like buying into aging and/or obsoleting technology.  If it were $500 to buy some thing from years ago and  really wanted or needed it that bad for some specific purpose,  maybe.  But, to invest 2 grand for resurrecting dying technology? No way!    As nigelbb points out though, the new iMac with AppleCare for 3 years protection (want it for that big screen) and worry free computing, a quad core i7,  32GB of RAM,  1TB Fusion (a quasi-SSD)   USB3 and thunderbolt for I/O to expand on that 1TB through externals,  having both integrated and discrete graphics....  for.... $2600? And, a 10% discount on that making it $2,340?  That should be a slam done deal!  Personally I am planning to go that route but I am just waiting until the iMac 27" 2012 becomes more readily available and there are some reviews on the product.   Technology has advanced enough that what use to require big beige towers (grey in Apple's case) with noisy and high wattage power supplies is no longer the case.  Similar production tasks can be done with the compact, portable and  AIO computers these days.  Similarly thick, heavy notebooks are giving  way to ultrabooks (PC camp), Macbook Airs, Pros.  My rMBP alone in and of itself connected to an external 27"  can be a workstation in and of itself.  I've easily done FCP, Adobe Premiere Elements work with it.  Simpler tasks are a given.  Talking about the 'heavy weights'.  I don't do 3D gaming, or gaming at all for that matter, but,  I am quite sure it is capable for that stuff too.   I don't like the lockdown on memory and SSD, etc., but, that seems to be the industry trend, PC or Macs, spearheaded by Apple.  That is why you pay the AppleCare protection 'tax' on the device. Then, it's Apple's problem for the next 3 years.  For myself, prior to that expiration, the machine most likely will be sold on auction.  I usually rotate my equipment every 1-2 years to: (1) keep technology current, and (2), to recover a good chunk of my money via auctions.  The amount I don't recover is the 'rental fee' over the time of usage with right of ownership should I so desire. Back to the original point of this article....  building a cheap $900 Hackintosh versus purchasing a MacPro......  along with the price savings (if one can be built that cheaply even)  one inherits the headaches, trials,  tribulations, and the need for technological know how to make a non-Mac machine work like a Mac computer.  Great if you don't mind and are a tinker type.  In the final outcome, you hope every thing 'orchestrates' well together. (like plug 'n pray times gone by for Windows).  But... if you are into heavy 'RAW'  video editting,  and really doing it semi-professionally or professionally for a living, making money at video post in RAW  (going to create Avatar 2?  :-) )  then perhaps you want to go the route of not just one Hackintosh, but perhaps a couple.  But, if doing ordinary video editting work, I already do that on my max'd out 2012 macmini for that matter.   One other issue plays on my mind, perhaps maybe not relative to Hackintoshes..... what is the future of MacPro?  It takes Apple literally years to come out with a new iteration in that lineup.  Why?  Well, maybe  only one new  model once every 4-5 years might be sufficient in spite of technological advancements.  BUT.......  my contention and gut feeling is,  Apple eventually will let that line drop.   There's no money in the MacPro lineup, nor volume of sales.  They screwed around with Final Cut Pro to the dismay of professionals in the industry when going from FCP7 to FCP-X.  The decided to discontinue X-serve.   Also, Apple OS-X Server, for the what-its-worth department, used to cost several $100s as a professional server package has come down to being an add on to OS-X that some one can purchase for.... $49 or so? via the Apple Store.  Apple's nose follows the money.  And, these days,  iPhone and iPad is where the money is... not X-serve,  not server OS,  etc.   To a lesser degree,  their income is also derived from Mac sales.  From a business perspective this is well and good for Apple (iphones and ipad sales).  From the consumer perspective though, expecting Apple will continue to feeling empathy for those desiring a new MacPro every year, I don't think it's going to happen.  Comparatively, there is no money in it.  Similar to the 17" Macbook Pro which is already gone,  I believe/feel Apple is going to axe the MacPro line, as they've already done with X-serve.  Oh,  they may still come out with a new MacPro this year so that Tim Cook remains good on his word from last year.  And, I reckon it will satisfy the MacPro campers for the next couple of years.  But then, that buys Apple  the 'breathing room' to just let that die off if they choose to do so. And, I think they will choose to do so.     So, for myself, it is just one more thought / reason I personally will not go with the Mac Pro, not to mention Apple will charge a premium again for a new MacPro model.  They are a high priced, high margined product company.   For myself, the high end Macbooks,  Ultrabooks, AIOs are becoming sufficiently powerful enough.  The only thing really keeping me tied to all this 'lock in',  'lock down' so to speak, is the operating system,  OS-X.  If Apple mucks around with that excessively.... well.... I will cross that bridge when I come to it. I reckon I got carried away here a bit.  Anyway, I hope there is some comment of value to derive as 'food for thought' in the decision process.  :-)

It real boils down to 2 issues: 1. Objectives: What do you want to accomplish with the machine 2. Budget:  Do you have the budget to buy it?   Again, I prefer to stay with current technology.  I also prefer to stay away from that era of large beige boxes (grey in the case of Apple's MacPro).  I came from a PC environment of days gone by.   If I want to get the most power nowadays,  it will be a max'd out 2012 iMac Pro 27"..... which, ironically is not quite yet even available yet on the market. :-)