newfoundmass

You can often see postings in larger areas, like NYC, that are literally giving them away so people don't have to go through the "hassle" of selling/disposing them. We're such a wasteful society.

The absence of other features I understand, given the limitations and compromises needed to make such a small drone. Not allowing 24 fps though feels like they're blatantly crippling the drone's capabilities so lower budget filmmakers have to spend more if they want 24 fps. I'm all for offering a low cost option, because like I said in a previous post not every release is geared/targeted for us and that's okay. But removing something like that feels very petty and a play straight out of Canon's playbook.

I will say DJI not including 24 fps is lame. Just saw that in one of the reviews.

Good call! Share your thoughts once you've put it through it's paces!

It really depends. Screen size is a huge factor, for one. The smaller the screen the less apparent upscaling is. I think most people would have difficulty differentiating between 1080p and 4K on a 55 inch 4K screen unless they were literally a foot or so away. I know I do! Streaming is a whole different animal too. If you upscale 1080p to 4K and upload it to YouTube it'll look better than native 1080p because of the boost in bit rate that comes with 4K. I've actually done similar with standard definition video, upscaling it to 1080p for the better bit rate because it looks better on YouTube. My general opinion is that bit rate is overall more important than resolution, both in production and delivery. When it comes to viewing content I just care that it's watchable, resolution is ALMOST irrelevant. Very few of us will ever be able to afford an 8K TV that's large enough to actually benefit from all that added resolution. I don't even have a place in my home to put such a monstrosity! ?

The Minolta is a lovely, lovely lens. Those Rokkor lenses are among my favorites. Wide open it's a little soft. Still useable, I think, but it really shines starting at around f2 and is tack sharp at f4. It has lower contrast than modern lenses but that's not too unusual for vintage lenses and I often find that I prefer the look. Plus you can easily "fix" that in post. My biggest complaint with these Minolta lenses is the flaring. You'll wanna get a lens hood for outside shoots for that. The build quality is great, the focus ring is smooth. Just a really, really good lens. Haven't used the 7artisans but I've heard decent things about those lenses when factoring in the price. I'd be surprised though if it matched up with the Minolta.

I'm less interested than I've ever been in getting a new camera. I'm still curious of what's coming out, and there are times when I'm very much tempted by something, but I expect to get a lot more out of my GH5 before I upgrade. Realistically I think I'll get at least another 3 years out of it before making it my B cam. I've started selling quite a few of my lenses lately. I always felt like I needed a large lens collection, but so many just weren't being used or had things I didn't like about them. I do think I'm going to start building a set of matching primes, likely out of vintage lenses, I've just gotta figure which ones I wanna go with. Getting the most bang for my buck is important. Lighting is something I've found myself investing more and more into. I picked up 3 Godox SL 60w lights, as well as a few smaller lights that I can use in a ton of different ways. I'm also getting ready to get some Glow soft boxes from Adorama. I've used them before and they're so great. One of the best values out there today.

The primary reason I won't jump on this is the bit rate. That's the deal breaker for me personally. If they'd gone up to 100mbps I'd be all over it. 40mbps though is too low; you can't work with the footage much in post at that bit rate and it has to struggle with fast movement/details I imagine. Still it's an exciting look into the future.

I have an old phone that I use specifically for filmmaking apps. I understand your frustration but there's alternatives out there.

Budget wireless really depends on your uses. A lot of people will bash budget options because they don't match the performance of higher end options, but for really basic stuff they're often fine. I have an Azden system that's under $200 (I got them on sale a couple years ago for $129 on B&H) and I've had virtually no problems with them, but I also have only used them in situations that fell well below what their specs say they're capable of in terms of distance. I did use them in a venue Friday that had about 300 people all using cell phones and had no problems with interference even though they're 2.4ghz. That made me happy! I'd say if you're within 25 to 50 feet of your camera/recorder and with a relatively clear line of sight you can get away with using a lot of the budget systems. Your mileage will vary when it comes to audio quality (that though often has to do with the mics that come with those systems and can be remedied with nicer ones.) Currently I have the aforementioned Azden XD system and a Sennheiser XSW set. Both are under $300; the Sennheiser is quite nice, though unfortunately doesn't allow you to limit the output so it runs too hot for my GH5, which won't allow me to lower my preamps any lower. I've looked into getting the Sony UWP D11. You can find some good deals on them used. My biggest fear is buying a more pricey system only for the frequencies to longer be useable as they get purchased by private companies or phased out, but that might be an irrational fear.

Those Sigma lenses are absolutely lovely and a steal. My only complaint is they're a little big but I'm guessing that's because it just uses a different mount than their other versions and is essentially the same exact lens. Fine by me if it means they keep releasing M43 lenses! Most Laowa reviews I've seen have been positive and the images look very nice. I was in kind of the same position, with the Panasonic 7-14 f4. It's a very nice lens, but I hated the inability to put filters on, and just felt uncomfortable with the front of the lens. Those extra stops will be quite welcome, as will the standard lens form factor!

I'm more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt than others, given the goal was obviously to release a drone that went under the limits that would require licenses, e.t.c. When that is your goal some compromises must be made. The lack of 4K, RAW images, custom options, e.t.c is unfortunate. If you need that stuff then this isn't the drone for you. I feel like people are increasingly spoiled and unable to grasp that last part: not every product released by these companies is for you, stop whining every time they release something that doesn't completely measure up to your specific needs. If you need 4K the Mavic Air can easily be had for about $100-150 more used, or about $200 more refurbished/open box. But sure, fuck DJI, the company that has allowed people like us to actually afford drones. ? As an addendum: $399 for a drone that weighs less than an iPhone, is pocketable, gives you the ability to fly pretty much anywhere without a license, with 30 minutes of flying time per battery, and in 2.7K seems like a pretty good deal to me. That's a pretty big technological leap forward, even if it lacks features I'd want out of a drone.

I have the Sigma 16mm 1.4 currently and then the Panasonic 20mm 1.7, and the Panasonic 25mm 1.7. I'm just not sure I'd have much use for a 17mm between those 3 primes. The Laowa 7.5 and 9mm are ones I'm looking at for real estate/landscaper work, since I sold my Panasonic 7-14 (lovely lens but I hate the design.) I've got a Rokinon 12mm T2.2 lens that's doing the trick for right now, but i definitely need some wider lenses.

You got a steal then. Haven't been able to find one too far below $300 and I've been looking! I'd jump on this if I felt like I had a use for a 17mm, but I don't know that it'd do much other than take up space in my bag. I've really been tempted by their ultra wide lenses though. I've been impressed with the footage I've seen!

Azden has a decent sub $200 system that I actually like better than my Sennheiser XSW set. The XSW set works really well but it doesn't allow you to adjust the output levels, so I'm getting too much peaking from my GH5 since I can't lower the preamps low enough Are those among the frequencies that will be phased out over the next couple of years? I heard that is going to be an issue for some wireless systems over the next couple of years.

I'm not arguing that he's a great person, but comparing him to people accused of sexual assault is pretty unfair.

Regardless of RED and their business practices, Jim changed the landscape, disrupted the status quo, and helped push video/filmmaking forward. He deserves credit and gratitude for that. I just wish RED hadn't taken the path they took.

This would make more sense if they weren't facing more competition than ever in the mirrorless full frame market. I'm not sure I'd choose now as the time to coast, but that's just me. The landscape has changed over the last year. Others are innovating and moving forward while Sony seems stagnant.

It should be able to handle h264 without any problems. Worse case you can use proxies. As a rule though it's not ideal to transcode for editing unless you absolutely need to. Back in the day h264 and Final Cut Pro 7 didn't play well together at all, making it a real pain in the ass to edit, especially for large/multicam projects. I would transcode out of necessity back then. Now everything handles it well.

Those are all welcome improvements but they wouldn't be enough for me to upgrade if I had the A7 III. It's more interesting to me that they're again reusing sensors. That isn't necessarily bad, if they're able to get more out of them, but it's still a bit curious.

I never felt that way about sliders, as they're great for establishing shots. Using one just for the sake of using one though is obnoxious. Everything in moderation!

Gimbals are great, don't get me wrong, but I've largely eliminated my usage of them in favor of a shoulder rig. I prefer the natural handheld look more and more, especially now that everyone over uses gimbals. I really like how my GH5 footage looks with IBIS and a cheap $60 shoulder rig. I have been looking for an affordable motorized slider to use for interviews. I think at this point I'd get more use out of it than my gimbal

Yeah, you're not going to get anymore out of the original file by transcoding. If anything you'll lose quality.

It might be modestly discounted, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Older models might, but they're not ideal for vlogging.

Sports and other events.