Andrew - EOSHD

iFFMPEG is not slow. H.265 is complicated. There's not a faster converter available and there's not really the combined hardware / software support available to improve performance for H.265 yet. Intel's performance has flattened out since 2012, they are shrinking the chips, running cooler... but they're not giving us much extra performance.

The old firmware would constantly refocus during the shot after a one-touch AF at the start, or refuse to record if AF was locked. This is a nice improvement!

Just a quick note: had to remove the 4K samples in the post, may have been causing the server to crash. Will reupload tomorrow.

I'm interested in the LED ring lights. They had them specially made for Lucy. Wireless dimmer switch Do any exist with dual temperature LEDs and plain old non-wireless dimmers?

Nice glass, good luck with the sale Vintage F0.95 c-mount stuff is pretty special, not much of it about.

Go to preferences and select 4 cores. It will now do 4 clips at once instead of waiting for 1 clip to finish and starting on the next. 2009 iMac is 6 years old now so don't expect miracles though. H.265 is many many many more times CPU intensive than exporting ProRes in FCPX. FCPX does not support H.265 yet.

It's still there. Please can you guys upload profile pic to help brighten the place up a bit?

EditReady blog on why it's so fast. http://www.divergentmedia.com/blog/editreadyperformance/ So how is FCPX even faster for ProRes... hardware ProRes encoding on the GPU?

Very interesting info, thanks joema. I was transcoding 4K MJPEG -> ProRes though, not H.264. But still felt there should have been a big difference to the MBP. No longer in any rush to upgrade to a Mac Pro! As for I/O, wasn't a bottleneck... did the test on the internal SSD.

Last February I made the first EOSHD video quality charts 2014. This was an at-a-glance chart of image quality delivered by every camera I can possibly think. This year I've decided only to include the cameras I've direct experience of shooting with in my own filmmaking projects, with only a few exceptions such as the Sony F35 and Canon C300. I've also removed cameras that have been superseded by very similar ones (such as the GH2 by the G6, sharing the same sensor). Here are the results... Read the full article

A story of the $1999 SLR Magic cinema lens versus a $7999 Cooke S4i Mini. Read the full article

Just tried a 2014 Mac Pro (4 core) with Edit Ready and FCPX. Virtually zero improvement in transcoding speed compared to a 2.3ghz i7 Macbook Pro Retina (Nvidia 750M 2GB). Really surprised at that. Edit Ready took 2.03 to transcode 1 min of 4K 1D C footage on the Mac Pro compared to 2.08 on the Macbook! FCPX transcoding to 4K ProRes (optimised media) wasn't really much either. Same story with the 5K iMac, not much improvement. How can that be?

Ah I see, press X to select entire clip range before dragging. That does it. Getting used to it... it's not bad actually.

When I drag a clip onto the timeline, is there a way to stop accidentally dragging the in / out points over the clip instead? It's infuriating.

​And another result... EditReady was slower on my Hackintosh, 670 GTX 4GB, arguably more powerful hardware than what's in my 'proper' Macs. The GTX 750 and 775 2GB in my Macbook and iMac seem to do a good job.

FCPX vs Premiere is the new PC vs Mac debate isn't it!?

Results for 4GB 1 min 1D C 4K... EditReady - 2m18 (ProRes LT) FCPX - 1m05 (ProRes 422) However the EditReady file is 2.77GB vs 3.6GB for the FCPX one and it looks slightly nicer, even with the lower bitrate (350Mbit/s vs 450Mbit/s) I bought it. I like it.

EditReady is interesting. Faster than all but FCPX it seems. But with the advantage of being able to select the transcoding codec, naturally

With the clip placing tool the magnetic timeline acts like a normal one. Much more sensible now. I'll give it a go. I need to place clips perfectly in sync to an audio track and the magnetic timeline would knock everything out.

​Yeah. No batch convert!

Yes, it works for 4K. Tried it. Sorry Nick I missed your suggestion. It ended up being suggested on Twitter and I tried it from then on. Shame to lose LT but 422 will do me... better than silly old MJPEG anyway!! And 3x faster than Premiere... can't sniff at that. Going to save me HOURS.

I don't use FCPX as my editor, and why should I use it to transcode media when we have Compressor for that? The answer may surprise you... Read the full article

The plan is to use the speedy FCPX transcoding and then import the ProRes into Premiere which is my favoured editing software. PS - It's not just the timeline in FCPX I don't like

By the way your RX10 clip seems much more compressed in the YouTube video than the D5300 clip, what did you do to it? Flush it down the toilet?

Hacked D5200... Is it just the bitrate change or have they progressed much further since I last looked at it?