jnorman34

thanks jon - how about this: what if I buy a desktop box with adequate specs (like dell 8700, i7-4770 quad core, gtx645, 12ram - $750) and remote into the box using my current thinkpad laptop for video editing? and btw, what was inadequate about the Razer Blade specs except for needing 8gb more ram?

so, can someone suggest an appropriate laptop that can handle editing and rendering 4k footage? I really do not want to get any larger than a 14" display, and I would prefer to stay with PC rather than mac. I am not seeing a lot of choices. the razer blade looks pretty good at $1499 (quad core i7-4702hq, GTX 765, 8ram, but the display is only 1600x900). the alienware are all too chunky looking. Lenovo, sony, dell have nothing comparable unless you go to a 15.6" screen. even mac doesn't get there until the 15.6" MBP at well over $2000. I don't think any of the intel on-board graphics would suffice, except perhaps the new Iris graphics on the 13" MBP retina?

thanks to you all for the excellent replies. quirky - my work is archival footage of architecture for the state historic society. I spent my career shooting architecture with a 4x5 for the library of congress, and all these little cameras seem like toys to me, so I don't think it is just GAS... I wanted to shoot this new archival footage at the highest possible resolution to achieve the best possible quality for long-term documentation purposes - I am not trying to shoot "cinema".

Austin. The external drives are only used for storage. All active files for editing are on the internal hdd. The think pad is a t410 with a 2.6ghz i7, 4gb ram, 500gb hdd, and nvidia GeForce 9100m.

Hi Jon I have 3 1TB external drives that I use for file storage.

I have a gh4 on order to replace the d5300 I have been using. I have downloaded a couple of 4k video clips to try editing them, planning to shoot in 4k and render in 1080. My computer, a think pad i7, just can't handle the files. I tried trial versions of movie studio platinum and powerdirector ultra. My current premiere elements 12 won't work with 4k. I really don't have another $1000 to throw down for a new puter right now. And I am wondering what might be my best bet for working until I can get a honkin new puter. Should I just shoot in 1080 for now, or should I go ahead and shoot in 4k and just archive the footage for a while? What kind of laptop will it take to render 4k video? Thanks.

same price range as the GH4, right? :D

sorry - I don't know why the first clip is showing as a link instead of embedded player...

here are 3 short clips from the D5300. please critique for sharpness, blockiness, etc. any comments are appreciated. thanks.

Danke max

Hi Andrew. When I copy a url from YouTube, I am unable to paste it into my post. That was the first thing I tried. I guess I can type in the URL manually. Thanks for responding.

So, I have a GH4 on preorder and plan to start shooting my architectural documentary footage in 4k. My question is - If I playback 4k video footage on a 1080 FHD display (like my TV), will I see any difference than if I had shot the same footage in 1080? If yes, please explain why. Thanks.

surely someone knows the answer to this....

The video is at youtube

I am new here at EOSHD, and I cannot figure out how to post a link to a video. I tried copying the link and pasting it into the thread, but it does not work. The HELP section shows an icon which lets you add a link, but that icon does not show up with all the other icons at the top of the new thread window. The "link" icon brings up a box which looks like it should work, but it never accepts my input, AND I cant ever get the box to close or cancel - I always wind up having to close the browser and try again. Anyway, how do I post a link to a video? Thanks.

I am still rather new to video after spending many years doing still photography of architecture. My new project is documentary video footage of architecture, construction sites, public spaces, etc. I am currently using a D5300, and have a GH4 on pre-order. After processing some footage from the D5300 in Premiere, I do notice a slight degradation in the rendered footage compared to the original footage. It was suggested to me that I convert the original MOV files to ProRes 422 using mpegstreamclip. With many hours of video to wade through, converting every clip to a new format for editing would add a lot of time to my post processing work, and I need to be certain that it is worth it. From some of the threads I have read, it sounds like only people who use FCP really need to do this, but it is not clear to me. So, how necessary is it that I convert my MOV files to ProRes 422 for editing? Does it actually result in cleaner rendered files than if I do not convert prior to editing and rendering? And, when I begin using the new GH4 at 100mbps bit rate for 4k, will converting to ProRes still be a necessary addition to my workflow? Thanks.

Thanks guys. The Edelkrone looks v cool.

How many of you use a slider regularly? Do you consider it a "must have" piece of kit, or have you decided it is too much to carry around for minimal benefit, or do you manage to achieve slider type shots with some other technique or piece of gear? If I purchase one to try out, can I achieve a decent result with a shortish slider, like 24" or 30"? This will be for documentary work shooting buildings, engineering features, etc, and I need to keep my kit lightweight and easily portable, as I often have to hike quite a distance to get to certain sites. I assume to get the best effect, you want to place something in the foreground to provide perspective for the sliding action, correct? Is there a reasonably priced slider you would recommend for me to try? thanks.

now that we have had a chance to see the specs for both the GH4 and the AX100, we see that the GH4 has 4k at 100Mbps while the sony only offers 60Mbps (though using the XAVC-S codec, which may be better codec?). Do you consider the lower bitrate on the sony to be a deal killer? After working with a DSLR in the field, I find that I would really appreciate the fast AF, power zoom and overall simplicity of the AX100 as opposed to manually zooming a DSLR lens. A GH4 system would cost a couple thousand more after I buy a couple of lenses and a couple of the ridiculously expensive UHS1-U3 memory cards, plus another couple thousand for a whole new computer to process the 4K footage, but I am still learning and would like to hear some more experienced opinions before I make my choice between the AX100 and the GH4. Thanks for your thoughts and advice.

Andrew has aimed a lot of negative comments directly at nikon which apply to nearly every camera maker out there. I agree that 4K is the future, and panny seems to be leading the way, but to hammer nikon seems a bit inappropriate. I own a D5300 and chose it specifiCally for its balance of ability to shoot both high quality stills and 1080p video without moire and aliasing. I looked at many cameras from the nikon D800 and D610, canon 6D, and panny GM1 and GH3 to sony nex7 and was unable to find a better all-around solution. Perhaps if Andrew approached his review a bit less video-centric and recognized that many pros require a camera that can do both stills and video to acceptable stock photo standards, he might realize the humble little D5300 is, right now, about the best balance available on the market. That said, I appreciate Andrew's website, insights, and all the work he does helping the video community.

Andrew - I purchased a D5300 after taking a careful look at the BMPCC. It came down to the kind of work I am doing, and the kind of look and feel I want from the resulting footage. I do not want a "cinema" look - I shoot documentary, and the D5300 is delivering that for me very effectively.

max - please link some examples that make you think the D3300 is sharper than the D5300. The 3300 may be the same as the D5300, but there is no reason to think it would be better. here is a clip I did on D5300 -

inre: "the market is too small" - I am not sure I agree with this comment. I think most all of us professional still photographers are getting more and more requests for video footage for all types of applications. I spent most of my career shooting architecture with a 4x5 for the library of congress, and later with D200 and D2x for book projects, etc., and have for the past 3-4 years gotten more and more assignments which mix stills with video. my current project is all-video, and I am trying to play catch up on achieving super high-quality video of architectural subjects. I am currently using a D5300 which has given me some very nice sharp video, but after watching the sample videos from the new sony AX100 and the GH4, I can see I need to go to 4K for this project. I highly doubt that I am the only one seeing a near-immediate desire and need to have a machine that can shoot high-res video, while being able to also shoot high-res still images. the GH4 appears to me to be the only real choice for this combination at the moment, but I think this market will only grow.

My first post here - I am currently shooting urban documentary material (lots of buildings, construction sites, bridges, street views, etc) with a D5300 w/12-24mm Nikon, which is giving me nice footage. however, for this type of work, the extra resolution offered by 4K seems like it would greatly enhance the results. I am considering the two almost-available 4k units - the sony FDR-AX100 (camcorder form factor) and the Panasonic GH4 (DSLR form factor). I will be keeping the D5300 for still images, and in case I need a B cam for some shots. I am NOT trying to get a "cinema" of "filmic" look - I need super sharp renditions of buildings with no moire or aliasing with minimum post processing. shallow DOF is a disadvantage for my work. I also need a good wide angle solution (my favorite focal length is 18mm equivalent), which I can get with a 9-18mm on the GH4, but would have to use a WA adapter on the sony). I also understand the panny GH series has broad industry acceptance while camcorders seem somewhat passe in this newish world of DSLR videography. however, dedicated camcorders are totally optimized for video work, with excellent AF, no overheating sensors, etc. I have been a professional photographer for many years, shooting architecture with a 4x5 for the library of congress, but am still very new to video, so I truly need some advice from you guys who have much more experience in video than I do. I would really appreciate your opinions/recommendations on which unit to go with for my video purposes. thanks.