Simon Shasha

I have seen a handful of reports about what ISIS has done in regards to my people. What I wish to uncover and show is how the more "moderate rebels", as Western media phrases it, have also done the exact same things to us that ISIS have. That is what I was getting at. Though I disagree with some parts of the article, i.e. "U.S.-led Western coalition trying to restore stability with an as-yet-unidentified new regime" (that's a nice way of saying "we're trying to overthrow a government and replace it with a government that is favourable to us"), I am glad to see my people's plight get exposure, regardless.

It's a shame that Western journalism, especially in the USA, has turned to complete and utter s**t. The mainstream media isn't really the "Fourth Estate" anymore, nor does it hold or adhere to the "muck racking" ideals that the Fourth Estate was built upon. Rather, it has mutated into nothing more than a public-relations firm - regurgitating and glamouring-up State Department press-releases and political speeches. I remember when I began my Media Degree at University here in Sydney, the first lecture I attended, the lecturer's opening words were; "The modern mainstream media...is a lie. The Fourth Estate is dead." It's funny how Australia gave the world that wretched bastard, Rupert Murdoch, however, has also given the world Julian Assange and John Pilger - two great inspirations to me personally - and the future of independent media - how the Fourth Estate was originally intended and meant to be. I hope to be travelling back to Syria soon to make a documentary about my village/region (Syria's Christians), and how they suffered at the hands of Western-backed "rebels" - something that is never reported on in the West.

I said the "Western media, governments, and their apologists". I didn't say "Every single U.S. citizen". I have no gripe with U.S. citizens. I praise anyone that stands up to U.S. hegemony, aggression and war-crimes - especially U.S. citizens.

Sony probably could. Regardless, my original statement still stands. I'm not sure how old you are, but I used to use a Canon Scoopic Super 16mm camera 13 years ago. This has an OVF (so no real-time preview of your final shot like an EVF) and we used exposure-meters to nail exposure - perhaps I come from a bygone era, but for me, if we could get it done back then like that, then people these days have no excuse not to be able to get it done now. But to be practical, I recommend forgetting about the touch-focus feature, and getting an LCD view-finder - not only will it cut out reflections, but magnify the LCD for you to help hitting focus. Will also help further with stabilisation when pressed up against your eye. As for the rolling-shutter - I guess that will all come down to how one films. For scenes that have a lot of fast/dynamic/energetic kinetic movements, I recommend shooting in 1080P. I have the A6300, and find the rolling-shutter greatly reduced when shooting 1080P. All in all, if you want the ultimate "run and gun" setup, I think the Panasonic GX85 with the 20mm F1.7, Speed Booster, and a couple of nice, fast prime lenses, would be the way to go. I think it's the better buy.

Hi Kisaha, First let me thank you for the humanity you have shown my fellow Syrians. It is very kind of you, and it is appreciated and remembered, believe me. I am well versed in the suffering of my fellow Orthodox Christians. In the last century alone, 2Million were killed by the Ottomans, 20Million by Nazi Germany in Russia (half of which were civilian), and now many more in Iraq and Syria at the hands of the Gulf and NATO backed proxies. I'm sure if we delve deeply enough into history, we will find that every empire has committed atrocities and war-crimes at one time or another. I would like to note - I do not appreciate Russia's help simply because they are (mainly) an Christian Orthodox nation. Rather, I appreciate their help because they are the only real power that came to our aid when the rest of the Western world and Gulf states sent their Salafi and Wahhabi proxy militias against us under the guise of "democracy". The West has a well-documented track record of creating failed states. In the recent past, much of this took place in Africa during European colonialism. So much devastation did the West reap and sow in Africa that we are still seeing the devastating results of European colonialism till this day. In our current time, the West is still creating failed sates - this is usually done under the guise of "promoting democracy". These failed states are either resource-rich, or are of geo-strategic importance. In the case of my country, Syria, the West, and their dictatorship allies in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, want(ed) to build a pipeline from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, through Turkey and on to Europe, in order to cut-off and destroy Russia's dominance of energy supply to Europe. In other instances, the West will use the excuse of "stabilising" a country that they have purposely "de-stabilised", whether through an engineered colour-revolution or through direct military force, in order to gain a foothold by means of military occupation, new bases, or propping up a government that is favourable to them - what then proceeds is the raping of said country's natural resources. Here in Sydney, I achieved a Degree in Media from Macquarie University, while my brother achieved an Honours Degree in Political Science and Middle East studies, and Masters in Law from Sydney University. If there is one thing I have learnt in all our study and exchanging of knowledge and books, it is that in the realm of realpolitik, one cannot be influenced strictly by ideology alone, or at all. One must be practical, realistic. Factual. Romantic ideologies, for all their utopian and altruistic beauty, do not, unfortunately, interact well with the stark bleakness of reality and complexities of the real world. I wish they did, but they don't. People tend to forget this - the gritty complexities of the "fog of war". If people want to survive a war, I recommend they check their romanticised ideologies at the door. Believe me. War and politics do not work this way. To paraphrase Norman Finkelstein, the regime of Stalin was brutal, it was not exactly a bed of roses, but who didn't want the Red Army to defeat Nazi Germany? Who didn't cheer on the Red Army's advances on the Führerbunker and Reichstag? Getting back on track, people so quickly paint Russia as the villain - as if we were in some Cold War era Hollywood red-scare film. But who is the real villain here? It was Cold War-era Secretary of State, James Baker, who said to the Russians that in exchange for cooperation on Germany, the U.S. would make "iron-clad guarantees" that NATO would not expand “one inch eastward.” And what have we seen? NATO expand eastward. Eastward towards Russia's borders year on year since the end of the Cold War. The U.S. has 800 US bases in a multitude of foreign countries - with 174 U.S. “base sites” in Germany alone. You know how many military bases Russia has world-wide? 10. And Russia is the aggressor? Did Russia destroy Iraq? No, the U.S and the "Coalition of the Willing" did. Did Russia destroy Libya? No, NATO did. Did Russia destroy Syria? No, NATO and the dictators they love selling weapons to in Saudi Arabia and Qatar did. What I find absolutely most nauseating is this idea many in the West have - this idea of Western Exceptionalism. In the media, this can be most simply seen with the use of words like "smart bombs", "high precision bombs". The West tries to humanise their bombs. Make them more appealing and humane, thus to distract away from their truly devastating and horrifying nature. The Western media, governments, and their apologists, would have their audiences believe that their bombs are full of chocolate and roses. They do not talk about the Agent Orange in Vietnam. They do not talk about the White Phosphorus used in Afghanistan and Iraq. Or all the Depleted Uranium they used against Iraqi civilians in Fallujah - which has resulted, not only in countless deaths, but birth defects and mutations which are still being seen till this very day... No, no, the West is exceptional - their bombs are full of rainbows and butterflies. And "democracy"...

I am Syrian. I am Antiochian Orthodox Christian. I come from a place in Syria called Wadi al Nasara (known in English as the "Valley of the Christians"). I come from a village called "Safita" - about two-hours north of Damascus. I currently reside in Sydney Australia. 99% of my family remains in Syria. If you are not Syrian, if you have not lived in Syria, if you don't have all your family and friends in Syria, please do not pretend to know about Syria, or talk on behalf of Syria. I have lost many family and friends in the past few years. All at the hands of the US and NATO's so-called "moderate rebels". The youngest was two-years old - killed, along with her mother, whom was attempting to rock her to sleep, by a "moderate rebel" sniper. Why? Because she was unfortunate enough to be punished and killed for no other reason other than for being born a Syrian Christian. The Western-backed "democracy loving rebels" destroyed our towns. They desecrated and burnt our churches. They beheaded our priests (two from the village next to mine). I am doing my absolute best to control myself as I write this. I keep telling myself to back-track. Delete the post entirely. In all serious, what is it going to change? What is going to happen other than having myself, my background, my history, exposed? It will most likely be in vain - most people have been manipulated by Western media for years. My hope is that perhaps one mind could be changed. If that. Regardless, I am absolutely fed up with this diatribe and propaganda that is purported and spurred on by Western exceptionalism at the behest of US/NATO hegemony. Obama. Clinton. Merkel. Erdogan. All these NATO war-mongers, and their partners in the Gulf, namely Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have armed, trained, and funded these Salafi and Wahhabi proxies militias against us. I blame them personally for this. I blame them for all the family and friends that I have lost. What's worse, Western media would have you believe that was is happening in Syria is all in the name of "democracy" - that it was some "popular uprising" - when anyone that is Syrian, or has lived in Syria, especially during the war, knows that that is complete rubbish. Regardless, the idea that the West wants democracy anywhere is a joke. Only political romantics that do not understand geo-politics, Western hegemony and realpolitik fall for this. The West wants democracy in Syria, huh? Even though they partner, arm and train the two most undermocratic governments and armies on Earth - Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Give me a f**king break. I don't care for Trump. I don't like Trump. I don't have hope for his administration. Personally, I supported Jill Stien. Regardless, anyone that thinks Clinton would have been any better is deluded and ill-educated on her neo-con and neo-liberal history and agenda. You know what - I'll tell you the real "cruel irony" - the one BBC, CNN, and the rest of the faux news wont tell you - that people who support LGBT rights and women's rights, the people that are against crony capitalism and corruption, the people that are against war, are the same people supporting and protesting for Hillary Clinton - a woman funded by Saudi Arabia and Wall St cronies - whom are the absolute antithesis of everything those people stand for - that is the f**king cruel irony. And this whole anti-Russian sentiment has reached ridiculous proportions. You know, I got off the phone with my Dad in Syria the other day. He said to me; "If Russia dies, we all die." If you were a Syrian Christian, or a Syrian that supports secularism, you would know what that means without even needing explanation. Russia is the only reason Syria hasn't fallen to the proxy armies and militias of NATO and Saudi Arabia. If if wasn't for Russia, there wouldn't be a single Syrian Christian/secular Syrian, left alive. People want to keep playing this anti-Russia card, fine. Keep believing the same bulls**t media and governments that sold you the Iraq WMD lie. Or the photo-op phony NGO groups like "White Helmets", et al. Real Syrians know the truth.

Nobody is happy. As per usual. If people can't make a film with the A6500, they couldn't make it with anything.

Thanks, Tim

Thanks, appreciate the kind words Yeah, the form-factor can be cumbersome. I use the Micro for filmmaking, live-event work, and anything that requires 50/60P, and take my Pocket whenever I leave the house and just want to have some fun. I'd say the Pocket is my favourite camera of all time, actually. Sony Australia is providing me with an A6500 soon, however, I can see myself reaching for my Pocket Camera as my "daily driver" for a long time coming. I'll tell you what's good fun - that little Panasonic GX85. I used it the other day with a Panasonic 20mm F1.7 - really great. Definitely a camera that doesn't put hurdles in the way of content. Regarding brand allegiance, I have never understood it, to be honest, and in my defense, and though it may have appeared to some this way, I wasn't attacking Blackmagic - merely trying to gauge why Windows 7 64bit hasn't been included in the requirements list, and why I find that very illogical - and also trying to dispel the myth that the latest Resolve and Camera Ulitity do not work on Windows 7 64bit.

Hi Mercer, Yes, I did.

Wow. Again, I am reminded why I stay off forums most of the time...guess I'll take my leave from here indefinitely, then.

Mate, I am well aware that it states that. I wrote it in my post. But as I also stated, it's somewhat illogical not to support Windows 7 64bit (for the many reasons I stated). I simply want a more detailed clarification from, say, a software engineer at Blackmagic, as to why Windows 7 64bit is not, officially, supported.

Don't use them? Well, I guess it's strange that I created an official video for Blackmagic with a Windows 7 system... I think, for the sake of absolute clarification, we need an official statement from Blackmagic on what operating-system Resolve, and Camera Utility, can run on, and if they're willing, for us self-professed system-building geeks, to explain why it cannot run on Windows 7. For the record, I have the latest Resolve (12.5.3) and Camera Utility (4.0) running perfectly on Windows 7 64bit - despite the "minimum system requirements" stating that one requires "Windows 8.1 Pro 64 bit". Also, as I stated in my previous post, Windows 7 is by far the most widely used Windows OS - beating Windows 10 nearly 2:1, and Windows 8/8.1 by 5:1. Dropping support for Windows 7 64bit is not an intelligent move - and if anything, Blackmagic has intelligence in spades. From my knowledge, the base kernel of Windows 7, 8, and 10, is Windows NT, and should be able to execute, install and understand both Resolve and Camera Utility no problem. When I was building systems and Windows 8 came out, being a closed-source OS, I, and my fellow system builders, couldn't really tear apart the OS and look at the kernel changes, however, after trialing Windows 7 against Windows 8 with a handful of system builds I did, it seemed the only raw, real-world difference I could see were that boot times seemed quicker on 8 (I'm talking a handful of seconds here, 5 to 10 seconds - at most). If I were to guess, I'd say this probably has to do with the low-level system-state - it seems Windows 8 doesn't do a cold-boot like Windows 7 does - it seems to hibernate rather than absolutely clear all cache/RAM/virtual memory. However, I am not as versed in low-level software as I am in hardware, so I may be wrong. Anyway, I hope we get official clarification on Resolve/Camera Utility regarding Windows 7 64bit

And you're merely cherry-picking from my post. Read my whole post. I was stressing that speed and performance has more to do with hardware, and drivers written for said hardware, than with the OS. Even if I were to compare Windows 7 64bit to Windows 10 64bit, there is essentially no difference - they are both based on the hybrid Windows NT kernel (albeit with the added ability of addressing the x86-64 instruction set). I have been building very high-performance PC's, for myself and many others, for two decades now - from my experience, I find Windows 7 64bit to be far more stable and less taxing on memory. Further, your understanding of the "industry" is incorrect - Windows 7 is, and will remain for some time, the most popular version of Windows in the world. The "industry" you mention isn't stupid - they are not going to drop support for the world's most popular and used OS, believe me. In fact, Windows 7 was so popular, and remains popular, that Microsoft had to forcibly end OEM distribution recently because people were still asking for it over Windows 10. Regardless, Windows 7 64bit will be supported until 2020 with updates and service packs. - whether you want to believe me or not, I don't mind, but at their core, Windows 7 and 10 are essentially the same thing - they are both based on Windows NT and employ the hybrid NT kernel - minus a few GUI changes and features (such as Cortana), which digital artists don't really need at all. Ultimately, when it comes to NLE's, and thanks to stream processing, graphics drivers from Nvidia and AMD/ATI, and the higher-bandwidth RAM they employ, are far more important than what OS they are running on.

I used the example of Windows 7 64bit vs Windows 10 32bit to highlight the fact that being "new" doesn't necessarily denote "better". I am not sure where you are getting your information from - I'm running Windows 7 64Bit, and have DaVinci Resolve 12.5.3 running perfectly.

Wrong. USB 3.0, or any other piece of hardware, has nothing to do with the OS, but rather its own unique driver from its original manufacturer. With regards to USB 3.0, it has to do with the motherboard and the motherboard's drivers. If you install the drivers for your motherboard correctly, USB 3.0/3.1 works perfectly fine on Windows 7. The reason many people use Windows 7, like myself, is due to its stability, simple GUI, and extensive service packs/updates. Personally, I use Windows 7 64Bit as it can address up to, theoretically, 256TB of RAM (I have 64GB installed). In contrast, 32Bit operating systems can only address up to 4GB of RAM. Hence, a system running Windows 7 64Bit, with, say, only 8GB RAM installed, would trounce a system running Windows 10 32Bit with 4GB installed regarding memory management and overall efficiency. Also, you are wrong again regarding video performance. Video performance has nothing to do with the OS either. It has do with how many CUDA Cores/Stream Processors your GPU has, the size, speed and bandwidth of its on-board RAM (i.e. 128bit, 192bit, 256bit, 384bit, 512bit), your GPU driver set, and whether or not your NLE supports CUDA/Stream Processing. Windows 7 64Bit can handle any NLE. And it will for a long time. There is no need to upgrade to Windows 10, nor do I recommend it personally if your main concern is stability and memory management.

I owned an RX100 IV for a while - the resolution of the Mark V's 1000FPS looks a lot better than the 1000FPS I was getting from the IV.

According to this video ...the rolling-shutter on the RX100 V has become virtually non-existent due to "faster processing" - hopefully this means the same for the A6500...

How could the extra DRAM and new LSI not have helped the rolling-shutter at all?

Of course it's a successor. It was most likely developed side by side with the A6300 - with the A6300 playing the role of a stop-gap-measure until they got the cooling and 5-Axis stabilisation right. It's also most likely a response to the X-T2. The constant releasing of new bodies from Sony is really ridiculous. Sony needs to release lenses for APS-C - especially given the A6000 is their most successful camera to date. If they would release a 16mm 1.4, 24mm F1.4, 35mm F1.4, and 60mm F1.4, something akin to Fuji's fast XF line, to go along with their APS-C cameras, instead of a new body, I can guarantee that myself, as well as many other Sony APS-C shooters, would appreciate it. Hell, make them all F2 with weather sealing and faster AF motors. Just give us some professional lens options that don't carry the price and weight of FF lenses. If they don't, than hopefully Sigma will. I recently purchased the Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC DN for my A6300. Insane performance - especially for the price.

I bought and kept the A6300, and I'll be the first to admit that it paid itself off quickly. Regardless, you fail to realise that the A6300 has only been on the market barely eight months - and even then, much of those eight months were spent in back-order due to the Kumamoto earthquake. There is no consistency in this new model's release date whatsoever. For Sony to release a superior successor so soon is somewhat arbitrary and irrational.

Just bought an A6300. This is bullshit from Sony if true. A6300 has barely been on the market for 8-months. Guess it'll be priced around X-T2 pricing.

Was there a firmware update with a higher-bitrate 10bit for this camera, or is it still stuck at 50Mb?

I wonder if the speed that the lens racks focus can be controlled...

GH5 looks like a winner. Amazing features. I hope the 10bit is at a high bitrate. Low bitrate 10bit is rubbish. Shame it can't do 4K 60FPS in 10bit. Hopefully the high-frame-rate 1080P is in 10bit. I wonder if they'll opt for H265 in the end? Time will tell.