Subforums
16,732 topics in this forum
-
- 5.7k replies
- 1.2m views
-
- 1.7k replies
- 353.9k views
-
- 0 replies
- 7.1k views
-
- 15 replies
- 267 views
-
- 8 replies
- 332 views
-
- 10 replies
- 215 views
-
- 0 replies
- 17 views
-
- 126 replies
- 3.2k views
-
- 20 replies
- 719 views
-
- 1.1k replies
- 126.8k views
-
- 4 replies
- 261 views
-
- 14 replies
- 3k views
-
- 25 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 423 views
-
- 100 replies
- 10.9k views
-
- 331 replies
- 74.7k views
-
- 2 replies
- 301 views
-
- 55 replies
- 3k views
-
- 13 replies
- 475 views
-
- 41 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 39 replies
- 15.8k views
-
- 443 replies
- 32.5k views
-
- 39 replies
- 6.6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 3 replies
- 619 views
-
- 235 replies
- 16.3k views
-
- 1 reply
- 341 views
-
- 53 replies
- 4.9k views
-
- 17 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 30 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 16 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 18 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 78 replies
- 14.5k views
-
- 17 replies
- 5.3k views
-
- 19 replies
- 2.7k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 473 replies
- 125.2k views
-
- 55 replies
- 10k views
-
- 2 replies
- 568 views
-
- 0 replies
- 297 views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics16.7k
-
Total Posts338.2k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
By John Matthews · Posted
I think I found the lens! It's the Angenieux Zoom 15x10B 10-150mm f/2-2.8 lens. This lens has "TYPE 15 x 10B" written on it and a red pinstripe around it. -
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
My guess is that Sigma and Tamron paid Canon to license the mount. They have enough profit margin that they can afford to give either a single pretty big upfront payment to Canon or to pay them a royalty/percentage on each lens sold. Canon makes a lot of money selling lenses and know that over time, they'll fill in any existing gaps in their lens lineup - but if they can also make money through licensing (with no need to even build/ship a product), why throw away the chance? -
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
If you're in the PC world, you're definitely better off editing on desktop vs laptop if you're working with high-res footage or doing effects, etc. Most laptops throttle down a lot when not plugged in and (in my experience) make a jet engine noise when dealing with a prolonged load on CPU/GPU. And as ac6000cw says, the mobile GPU's are almost always lesser versions of their desktop counterparts. Also when on battery, life tends to be very short because CPU/GPU pull a lot of power. My M2 Max, on the other hand, can handle 8k Canon raw acceptably - and I got the weaker variant of it. Performance is almost the same whether plugged in or on battery. Fans do ramp up when working it hard (now that I've added denoising to most of the scenes that need it, the 14-minute short I'm currently working on/grading definitely has the fans running full blast when I run an export). Basically, in absolute performance numbers a high-end PC desktop will beat any Mac currently on the market and at a fraction of the cost of a Mac Studio ($3k for a decent Ryzen + RTX 4090!). A top-of-the-line PC laptop plugged into the wall will also outperform the MBP in absolute numbers (except whoooooosh fan noise)... but if you want to actually be mobile, the Mac is the hands-down winner. -
I had my ah ah moment while trying Vision Pro and watching Adventure a couple of months ago. I then rented a Canon dual fisheye to use on my R5c, borrowed a Quest 3 and started experiment with some sports that I cover and so far, people are impressed and surprised. Will this time take off? I think we are still too early, but the experience is getting better. I wish Vision Pro would be priced lower and be more open to load content on it, something that with Quest 3 is super easy to do. I kind of grasp now the filming, editing and delivery other than sound. I need ambient sound of the sport event, no dialogs etc... I would like to create a bit of the feeling to be there BUT I don't want to spend a lot of time managing the audio. KISS principle as for now is just a side thing. I see two options, simply using a Stereo Mic or using a Zoom H3 VR and use the "straight out of the device" binaural (not sure how it can be binaural if the mics are so close together). I'm not too interested in dealing with the various ambisonic formats, editing, metadata etc... seems a huge pain and time consuming. Would people perceive a big difference between a stereo mic and the H3 binaural? Any other ideas/opinions? -
Haha I’d imagine some folks who own Sonys also love canon skintones. I’ll do some digging on the interwebs if nobody here has don’t it.
-
