Brett Stark

Thanks. 24p 24m it is...although now i want to try some 60p too. thx

OK, so xxM is the bit rate and who cares what the letters after it mean i guess!   so, is the answer simply shoot 24p 24M and deal with it later - including what media to write video to (if any) and what to do about PAL/NTSC?   i only have imovie (so far).   thx

Hello All -    this is a really basic question, so if there is a good/easy resource - can you please just send me the link and I will go and read etc?   I have a new sony rx100 II. Yay!   From user guide: When you create AVCHD discs from movies recorded in [60p 28M(PS)]/[50p 28M(PS)], [60i 24M(FX)]/[50i 24M(FX)] or [24p 24M(FX)]/[25p 24M(FX)], it will take time as the image quality must be converted. To save [60p 28M(PS)]/[50p 28M(PS)], [60i 24M(FX)]/[50i 24M(FX)] or [24p 24M(FX)]/[25p 24M(FX)]movies without converting the image quality, use Blu-ray discs.      In the record setting on the menu of the camera: 60i 24M(FX) 60i 17M(FH) 60p 28M(PS) 24p 24M(FX) 24p 17M(FH)   I understand (i think!) the basics of interlaced vs progressive...   Background - at the moment, i am mainly shooting wierd little clips i see and family stuff - not yet into serious film/video making..   So, some questions: - what do the above acronyms/nomenclature mean?   - when would i shoot interlaced vs progressive?   - when would I use the above settings over the other for any reason? Is there a setting I would just leave it on 95% of the time? Does the answer depend I guess on what media I want to put the video onto in the future? If it just stays on the computer and I stream/watch via say apple TV I guess that bit doesn't matter.    - at some point, I'll be back in Australia where PAL is used. Does this sway the answer at all?   Or is it simply - shoot in 24p (one of them above - what is 24m vs 17m?) - and worry about it later??:)   Thanks for any help/answers.   Brett  

can you recommend a few good sites thx?

Hi - Sorry for the noobie questions...   I see the guides on this site. I am a little unsure of them because I am interested in learning the real basics and not so attached to the camera itself...I actually just bought a rx100 to start out and will add something next yr.   So, can anyone recommend any good blogs with really decent beginning/how to articles or an ebook or something or even kindle book etc that will get me into this film/video stuff?   Or would you recommend say the GH2 and 50D guides on this site?   thx Brett   PS - Andrew - I am sure the guides are great:). Just checking if there is something even more intro I could get into first.    

ok, well i got the rx100 II today! should be here tomorrow. glad decision making is over:).   maybe a nex or something next yr....thx

Thanks a lot for your help!! Tough decisions! I feel i might go for the rx100, have it as a great tool/asset and look at a non fixed lens system in 6 mths or so..am sure the g6 will be cheaper then.   Is the guide ok for complete beginners or would u recommend anything else first?any other book/guide?   As for g6 vs sony....I agree that likely from what i have read g6 is the better choice...issue for me though is with family etc, if i don't have the camera on me, obviously i ain't taking nothing! I have an old EOS canon SLR that is gathering dust through lack of use. I think it's a 30D. Someone is borrowing it now. No video on it though.   Brett

Hi -    I am v. basic photographer but want to learn...mostly travel/family etc...Would love to get a bit more serious and learn about video etc.   So...I currently have a Pana LX5 which I find generally nice.    I was going to upgrade to the RX100 II to get really great shots in a compact form for again, travel/family etc.   My first question is on a slightly different tangent...I am looking at non fixed lens cameras..And came down to NEX 6 vs Pana G6. Both seem to get pretty good universal reviews.   I guess on this forum most people would recommend the G6 for better video?   If am pretty keen on small form..Would the NEx6 be OK/nearly as good but with the better/smaller form?   And if the answer is the NEX6 would likely be pretty good for me. I wonder if I shouldn't get the RX100 II and just step straight to the NEX6.   NEX 6 with a lens vs RX100 II is almost the same price on Amazon in the US.   Any advice/thoughts appreciated.   thanks, Brett  

Hello -  So, as a hybrid - wanting both great stills and video in compact form -> rx100 II or lx7? I guess the answer is Rx100 II although i have seen some comparisons say there is very very little difference to the average human. LX7 is on sale at amazon for i think $350!!   Why should i get the sony?   Thanks! Brett

How is the G6 for stills? Sounds like a great camera. Have to wait for the Gx7 though i think..

Hello - Thanks for the review and your site. I just found it!    I have a panasonic lx5 as a somewhat decent point and shoot...just for family stuff, kids etc. I was thinking of going up to a 4/3. There seems to be different views whether the rx100 wins vs a mid tier 4/3 or not. It seems to get the benefits of the 4/3, you need a high end 4/3..so $1k or so..Then a great (non kit) lens with it. Is this true for a real step up in terms of video and stills?   Would you still recommend the rx100 as a great (the best), portable camera? Is the $150 price difference to this new 2nd version worth it? What are perhaps the tiers? 1. rx100 2. big step up in stills/video? -?  3. dream set up, no $$ worries?   thanks! Brett