Jump to content

Brett Stark

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Brett Stark

  1. 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

     

  2. 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.

     

     

  3. 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

  4. 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

     

  5. 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

  6. 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

×
×
  • Create New...