kye

It would have been good if he quoted a percentage figure for how much faster the i9 was - those bar graphs all looked quite consistent at about 10-20% faster with the i9.

Is that ML records the focal length, or Canon records the focal length and ML displays it to you? I was hoping to get it for clips from the XC10 as well as my 700D.

Is there any way to tell what focal length a zoom lens was at from looking at your footage? EXIF data? any other tricks? I shoot with zooms and would like to know what focal lengths ended up in the final edit. (and no, I don't have logs or anything - I shoot completely unplanned home and travel videos, most of the time I'm just trying to capture and anticipate whatever is going on). I suspect the answer is no, but maybe someone will surprise me and make my day? ???

Nice video.. lens flares and colours look really good. But the content! All test videos should be so entertaining!!

That video is wonderful.. any camera in the hands of a skilled operator is a good camera. This is precisely my problem - good camera unskilled operator lol ??? I see the Moment guys always using counterweights and that anamorphic adapter looks pretty sizeable, so my guess would be yes to counterweights. Even if it was powerful enough, you'd save a lot of battery life by having the weight relatively balanced to begin with, although the battery life on these things is pretty amazing now.

Time to get into post sound too?

The Black Magic cameras all seem to share a similar look and feel with how they handle light. It is very nice, almost like they have put a diffuser over the sun. There seems to be nothing harsh about the image. What is it about their cameras that creates this effect? Is it the DR? Colour science? High bitrate (either prores or raw)? I really want to own a camera that has this look but my style of film-making relies heavily on stabilisation, zoom lenses, etc so they're just not the right tool for the job. Nice video - I particularly like the fun / different editing style!

Low contrast looks sure can look gorgeous - one of my favourites is Peaky Blinders on Netflix. It just looks spectacular!

For those of you who shoot (or are connoisseurs of) beautiful travel films, what types of movement do you prefer them to contain? I recently binge-watched a couple of hours of BMPCC travel films and I noticed that the vibe was quite distinctive, partly because the lack of stabilisation meant that most shots were static. What mix of freeform movement vs controlled movements (pans / tilts) vs static shots do people think suits the genre the most? I shoot mostly travel / home videos and the vibe I'm going for is kind of like the nicest version of real-life - in the same way that you'd take holiday photos using the best light / best angles / nicest smiles to create the warmest memories.

One thing I noticed about YT microphone reviews (from people who don't know much about audio) is that they tend to be judging the EQ of the microphone instead of the quality of the sound overall. I'd hear a microphone and think it would be fine with a bit of EQ and then the person would say something like "it sounds thin and hollow - not even usable!" and I'd just roll my eyes. @IronFilm is this something you also see across lots of reviews? In a way it's like filming in RAW and then saying the camera footage looks "too grey - not even usable!!".

In a way that's a side effect of the large aperture lenses - those things are so fat it's more like the lens is squishing your fingers against the grip instead of the other way around!!

@wolf33d interesting information - thanks. The internet isn't keen to tell you the weaknesses of various products! In terms of the size, I'm sure that lots of accessories are (or will be) available for making the camera bigger - if only there were accessories available for making a camera smaller and lighter!! Then I might buy a C700 and as many accessories as it takes to make it the size of an RX100 ???

Nice video, especially the funny bits from Grandma! I did a bunch of research before I ended up with RVMP+ and the TAKSTAR SGC-598 and Pixel MC-50 seemed to get positive reviews, and at $40 or less are HUGELY cheaper than the Rode or the Azden. However the reason I went with the Rode was that those two mics are quite large and I'm trying to fly under the radar with my setup, so that matters to me. I'd watch a bunch of reviews to see if there's a reason to pay more than $40...

My understanding is that you're right, in that it doesn't really matter if you have a disk speed of 2X your bitrates, or 10X your bitrates, however I have a thought. Fast drives tend to be SSD instead of physical drives, and one thing about physical drives is their poor latency performance, which does have an impact to performance. So, if the drives in question are different technologies then perhaps it's not the straight read-speed but other differences?

This is a good intro to the structure of proxies and caches in Resolve - it's from v12 but the overall structure is likely to be similar if not exactly the same in 15. There's also a google doc of the diagram: https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1pbBbA4I2q3RZYrOSELPXgfdzp0X6B9OngVimTeSmbuo/edit Resolve is a complicated beast. I had to watch a few tutorials on manual Online / Offline editing workflows to find one that worked, especially considering my proxy files were slightly different filenames (extensions were different than proxies) but this was one of the ones I watched and might give an idea about the logic involved.

Definitely done in post. Yet another example of when a capture resolution / format should be much higher than the output format.

Hi All, As someone who shoots 305MBit 4K and edits on a 2016 MBP with Resolve, there's one thing you should all keep in mind about Resolve performance. Resolve has several in-built features for caching and rendering, some are manual and some are automatic, and they can be used in any combination you like (ie, you can use all of them at the same time if you choose to). However, for editing 4K footage on a low powered machine they may simply not be enough, which is why some people use an Online / Offline workflow that they manage manually. This manual online / offline workflow is complicated, takes some time to get working and understand, but it works really well. I personally transcode my own proxy footage using "Prores Proxy" at 720p and edit with that - timelines with this footage play flawlessly forwards and backwards at more than 60p with no lag and editing is a breeze. This is with effects disabled of course. As Resolve is an NLE, a colour correction suite, a professional sound mixing and mastering suite, and is now a VFX suite, we have to be clear with our language around these things. I can EDIT whatever resolution footage I like because I use proxies. My proxy workflow doesn't help with mixing lots of audio tracks though. Nor will it help if you want to do precise colour or VFX work. You may be able to do simpler VFX work at a lower resolution and then just bump up the resolution when rendering out, but you may not, depending on your specific situation. Resolve is great in that you can have a 1080 timeline, you can edit 720p proxy footage on it, viewing it at a range of resolutions while you do so, then you can swap back to the 4K source footage and then render out at whatever resolution you like - all from that same 1080 timeline. In this way, you can do non-critical things at lower resolutions and get the performance benefits, but not limit the quality of the final output. So when someone says "I edit 4K footage in Resolve" the first step is understanding what they are talking about SPECIFICALLY. When people say that I just automatically change it in my head to say "I use Resolve with 4K footage in some unspecified way for some unspecified purpose" and then go from there. I hope this helps. K.

Has anyone shot anything really impressive with the A7III yet? I did a big comparison of the 'look' of the BMPCC vs the A73 by binging on BMPCC travel films for 2-3 hours and then trying to binge on A7III films, but the only real observation I made was that A7III owners can't edit for sh*t! The only A7III videos I've seen that aren't terrible are these.. Matti Haapoja (he had focus issues - I think from not using the right focus modes) Christian Mate Grab:

I agree with previous comments about this not being value for money. This is a new space and early adopters will pay heavily for the privilege - either navigating software limitations and customisations as @Don Kotlos mentioned, or by buying plug-in solutions that aren't great value from a power:dollar perspective. For those unfamiliar with the eGPU space, this is a pretty good resource (this link is for Mac, but the site covers everything): https://egpu.io/setup-guide-external-graphics-card-mac/ Totally agree. Basically everything is more expensive for laptops - just look at the prices for the BM external monitor cards for PCI vs USB.... The 4K PCI card is $199, but I think the Ultrastudio 4K is the cheapest external 4K converter and it's $995! I think the only reason not to have a desktop computer for editing is that laptops are portable. Obviously if you're a pro working from an office (with controlled lighting etc) then this isn't an argument that applies, but if you're like me and edits on the move, or even someone that doesn't want to run two computers (and manage all the syncing that requires) then a laptop is the only option. Travel film-makers, YT creators with demanding publish-schedules, etc are in this situation. I read that more and more producers and directors want a colourist on set to provide feedback on the 'look' of footage, so flexibility might be worth something. Or, if you're at the lower-end of the market and using Resolve as your all-in-one (I hear the Media Management features are excellent for ingesting footage) but can only afford one computer then a laptop might also be a compromise that makes sense. I'm waiting for the support for multiple eGPUs to take off, and then it won't matter what the computer is because you'll be plugging in 4 or 6 of them and having a real-time render farm. Resolve should be well suited for this as I hear it's more reliant on GPU than CPU, and if they're partnering with Apple that might give them access to the MacOS bits that might need to change there too. Plus, the ability to sell multiple eGPUs to each person would be a huge deal.

Now it's my turn to not understand. If you know all of that, then why did you ask this? And then why did you criticise when my answer was clearly stated as being generic about testing. It sounds like you're the one with the contacts etc, and we should be asking you!

OK, let me have another go. A camera can be released with what you determine to be major imaging problems because....... it wasn't you making the decision, and they care about different things than you do. I'd suggest that you're very lucky to not understand. It's not uncommon for decisions in large corporations to be made straight after the boss says something like "either the product is going to be out on the street tomorrow morning or you are!"

LOL.. I guess you know better than all the people who actually do this for a living. I look forward to you releasing your prefect camera!!

Yeah, context is king. Every tool has pros and cons depending on the situation. That's one of the biggest challenges in these forums, we're all shooting different stuff in different situations but we don't reliably communicate what our unique needs are.

A 24-70 f/4 kit lens is a pretty nice offering, and a good strategy if you're releasing a new mount. If they released a 24-70 f/2.8 and a fast 70-200 for it at the same time it would cover a lot of bases for those looking to switch systems.