gethin

Find myself doing a search in windows for mp4 OR ARW OR XML OR MOV OR JPG OR MTS Copy and pasting all the files from the card into a single folder on my HD Did I miss anything? (not sure what the xml files do)

And just exporting a clip now that is taking FOREVER in h.265, (despite the fact I thought the GTX970 had hardware encoding support) And to clarify: I want to export clips that I've worked extensively on to a format I can re-use in projects and get decent playback (as opposed to my computer trying to playback 4+k de-noised graded timelapse sequences in realtime :)) Edit: Ohhh, optical flow was why it was taking ages, dnxhd is taking the same time

Just realised I can now export and use h.265 in my workflow. I've been slowly exporting my graded and tweaked clips but DNxHD has pretty large file sizes. Bearing in mind I might need to do a bit more tweaking later (just a little colour balancing stuff probably) and that the vast majority of clips will end up online, is h.265 up to the task? I'm currently exporting my first test at 50Mbps.

there's not much more to say than: Oh FFS, nikon.

http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/05/panasonic-new-lumix-camera/ Looks like it has no high frame rate hd, which is a relief as I bought the rx100 yesterday!

I agree about the 4K performance and cliff: editing anything 4K on my system becomes a nightmare. Sure files play fine, but as soon as you add a grade or transition you are constantly having to render in order to just to look at the footage play without skipping or stuttering. I'm not convinced (and the comments here seem to support) that any hardware upgrades wouldn't do much to help. I think back to the happy times I spent mucking about with media 100 on the mac and discreet logic effect on pc. Such fine bits of software, why didn't autodesk look to have a broad user base model for its business?

I'm a tragic rumor site reader: http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-panasonic-will-announce-a-new-1-inch-tz100-first-pictures-leaked/ f2.8-5.9. 25-250mm lens. I'd rather have more width than length any day, and the faster the better

thanks folks. Yes I saw the panasonic after posting this - I guess I'll hold off for a couple of days And your comments have made me feel better about dropiin gthe cash on it. I've finally seen it reduced in a sale here in Aus, so unless that panasonic is out at CES i'll have one in my hands next week woot!

Especially when the g7 is 30% cheaper and currently comes with a free 25mm? (And I already have a speedbooster and nikon G adaptor) And when the NX1 is only slightly more expensive. Ho Hum. I've got $1000 ish to spend. I shoot landscape and location stock footage and grabs of people in our area. I guess I'm trying to persuade myself that the rx100 would shoot decent enough footage to use as stock and be small enough for me to take literally everywhere, when even my d5300 becomes a pain in the bum. Is the stabilisation good enough to use it handheld - maybe at higher frame rates?

character - yes . I was thinking about this the last couple of days when I stumbled on some old gh2 footage. it has something that the gh4 does not.

seeing as you can use the graphics card in any new system you decide to get, i'd say this was a no-brainer upgrade

whats the data rate of those files? (I'm not a premiere fan, I remember version #1 and thought it was a mess - and still think it is, but I'm invested in it now). 100Mbit gh4 4k plays fine on my 5 year old windows (8) box in PP, whilst all 6 cores are in use rendering! Can't believe a single 4k file wouldn't play back on mac pro hardware - only if there were drivers not installed, or some other hardware or OS snafu. BTW I think this kind of test would be incredibly useful, I'd love to see more of them. Very curious how other software stacks up on the same hardware in different OSs.

thanks anyone know how ithe low light compares to the rx100 mkiv

I think these guys are going after the dji x5 sort of market (footage of which I've seen so far looks terrible, raw or no)

You mean 1:15? I think thats just technique - he's walking sideways here so using 2 hands its natural that it will shift back and forth as he walks - this is actually where a single handed gimble wins out. One thing this vid shows though is that there is lots of room between the screen and the roll motor: the pilotfly screen is virtually totally obscured with my setup - I have to use separate monitor to see what I'm doing. I'd say it looks like its a slightly beefier pilotfly - with all the caveats that entails: slow setup, really a one lens setup, be prepared for the occasional spasm and constantly re-calibrating. I use mine on real estate shoots; If I had a crew and talent I'd think twice about pulling it out, tldr: I think it'll be like the pilofly: not quite ready for primetime (but I might buy one anyway ).

I currently use nikon d5300, Ok for what I do (usability aside). Anyone out there thats used it and a G7, and can tell me any differences? G7 is dirt cheap in aus at the moment, and I was thinking about it for the option of shooting 4k stock footage (for my own use), that'll stand the test of time better than the nikon's slightly soft 1080. I already have a speedbooster I've seen wildly different reports on its low light ability. Some say max 800 iso, some say 3200... I know I try to keep the nikon below 1600, and that if I try to lift the shadows at all at that iso it falls apart quickly. I had a gh2, I know the nikon handles contrast much better than that did - not sure how the g7 compares to the gh2

Dropped in here to get the goss on the z-camera, couldn't find any posts. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2081787381/e1-camera-4k-uhd-interchangeable-lens-camera Now shipping apparently. I think the image looks quite nice, although nasty sky colour:

I've got the pilotfl h1+ I've had my eye on this because the pilotfly is flaky - at least with my setup (nikon 5300 tokina 11-20). This must use identical electronics to the pilotfly, so the setup will be intense - and explains why in the first russian vid he got crap behaviour out of the box. The main problem with the pilotfly is roll axis drift. I have to calibrate it several times during a shoot. So far this one looks as flaky.

thanks kevin, I wonder if the 18-140 is a viable alternative. Currrently half the price of the 18-200. I've been looking at reviews but they're mixed for both lenses, so cant really get a sense of whether build quality for instance is different between the 2.

are there any big-range zooms (for crop nikon) that are not terrible? I just picked up a cheap nikon 24-85mm (which is pretty gnarly for video use - focus breathing and crappy focus action), and it would be handy to have a similar range in dx. I've been looking at 18-100 through to 18-300 sort of range. But will take anything that isn't terrible

anyone know what the HD output is like in ff and crop? Is it on a par with a7s?

because they started it, and had so much potential. They are huge, and should've been pushing the sensor design envelope. Nikon are small and its true they have missed opportunities, but they never had a lead to squander

yes! My hope for a7s2 is 24mp allowing for 4k apsc mode.

Just been perusing this thread and reminded me that I've got a couple of old bolex lenses in my dry cabinet. A switar 10mm f1.6 and a kern pailard 17-85 f3.5 compact with an SB mount. Checked on eBay and they range from 100 to 700 au dollars. Anyone know if they have any value (or use?)

Another one here if you're brave http://m.ebay.com.au/itm/151663268304?nav=SEARCH