MBFrancis

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yes, but it also makes it pointless swapping a Nikon mount version for a Canon mount version like the guy I quoted was proposing to do. 

Ah, yeah didn't catch he had one already

45 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

No version of the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 has image stabilisation. 

Which is why the IBIS would be perfect for compensating the 18-35mm's lack of IS

This happens with a lot if not most photography zoom lenses, no? Had it with a lot of Canon and Panasonic lenses. Even the 12-35mm 2.8 has it, flicker and all.

Thanks! I'm somewhat familiar with the approach but never fully quite grasped the use and effectiveness of proxy files. Is editing the proxy also editing the original media? Wouldn't it take up more space or am I getting that wrong? 

11 minutes ago, jgharding said:

If you want high spec for a low price try a Windows tower with a good Geforce GPU and Adobe suite. If you want to stay in FCP-X you'll need to upgrade your mac at some point.

I can't help much more because I moved away from Mac for this reason, perhaps others can give some more advice. I think FCP-X is very nice so I can understand the desire to stay Mac. Hate to break it to you though, but the sad reality of Apple is that you gotta buy a new one to stay in the race. They have a vested interest in selling new computers. You can't just swap out parts and stay on top like you can with a PC tower :/

I hope you find a solution!

Not sure if you use it or not, but would DaVinci Resolve be a good alternative? Seems like it would make for an easier transition.

4 minutes ago, dafreaking said:

Unless it's a fast RAID setup the SSD will always provide better read/write speed. Think  of it as faster scrubbing, loading of files etc. Should decrease render/export times too.

Ah, makes sense. I remember reading that SSDs don't work well with constantly changing data though? 

But yeah, a RAID setup through Thunderbolt is something I would consider too.

10 minutes ago, dafreaking said:

Does it have USB 3.0 support? Maybe invest 200-300 USD on an external SSD for media

I believe so. What advantages would an external SSD have over a fast external HDD for editing? 

Been working with a Macbook Pro 2012 for some time now, and while it does a decent job for smaller 4k projects, bigger files will slow the hardware down and sometimes crash.

All I've done is upgrade my ram from 8 to 16gb.

I have an external Touro drive running at 7200rpm but I honestly barely use it... would that help ease the macbook's strain by editing through the drive? 

Then there's the video card issue. It's an integrated Intel Graphics card which isn't much, but I hear a lot about external video cards. At the price though (around 800 USD at the very least), it seems like I could put those funds in getting a solid desktop or laptop, but then I couldn't work with FCPX which leaves me in a rut. 

Any advice? Trying to be cost effective here, so the lower the cost is, the better.

1 hour ago, Phil A said:

Are you sure? Everything I read points towards the G7 not doing 10bit but 8bit via HDMI.

Retracted. Seems the 10 bit is limited in 1080 for both 

You can go even cheaper. The likes of the FZ1000 and G7 CAN output 10 bit 4k.

This looks like phonebloks, aka Project Ara....

15 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Haven't read all the specs etc but it kinda seems like an LX100 with interchangeable lenses.
Which of course is a good thing.
However, one might consider the Leica lens included with the LX100 for less money. Either way, another great option.

  No other kind of lens for the m43 compares like the lx100 and it's great to boot. Other than the kit lens or a fixed focal pancake, any other lens defeats the Gx80's compactness.

But it seems environmental conditions still has an effect on it if external cooling actually does help. Regardless, any chance I had of considering the a6300 as an option has pretty much dwindled. If I understand correctly, Sony's own rx100iv seems to be built more operational even with the 5 min limit. Though I do still hear some overheating issues if not as glaring as the a6300.

So with Summer just around the corner, how more likely would the 6300 overheat even in milder conditions? I can't even consider this as a reliable backup if that's the case...

50 minutes ago, DayRaven said:

Imagine you were shooting a movie with a1st person perspective of a character who was drugged or poisoned, you could really use rolling shutter heavily as a style for that shot, but in general, you want to try to minimise it from the level some cameras display, because it is too much, but trying to avoid it on some cameras becomes more effort than it is worth - plenty of great movies have it, but people are too involved in the story to notice or care.

That's seems quite a reach, but a shot that specialized, might as well be done in post. 

1 hour ago, andy lee said:

It works well how Im using it so far no micro blocking and Im really playing in the shadows and printing it down

With or without the Atomos?

I've tested the NR on the G7, and while setting it at 0 does yield good results in most cases, it macro blocks just a bit at times especially in the shadows. I'm assuming though you're talking about it coupled with the Atomos? 

38 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

Buttons/joystick.

Not that hard on the 7DII to pull perfect focus with buttons. Actually I almost prefer it to moving my hand off the grip to touch.  

And No you can't talk to the camera.

Well, you can,

if you really want to 

 

That doesn't seem like it would go well during recording as those hard presses can potentially cause jitters. The 7d Mark ii looks plenty robust and weighty to offset that kind of force, but Sony a6300's little body on the other hand is definitely questionable for that sort of use.

I would definitely prefer using the camera's respective smartphone app for any touch focus application even if it's a bit out of the way for quick shooting. 

2 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

 

And more lenses from now on zooms are all coming with the PZ connector, including high end constant aperture L glass and low-end zoom lenses.

 

Constant aperture is one thing, but they would also have to develop a zoom mechanism that doesn't flicker from all the shifting during zooming seen in most photography lenses with zoom.  

Thanks for the advice everyone, at this point I may just pick up Neat Video after all. 

12 hours ago, M Carter said:

 

Any shoot that you fear dealing with noise - high ISOs or deep shadows - shoot a second or so of a flat surface, not overly dark or bright (no channels clipped. so avoid intense colors), the more it fills the frame the better. Defocus the lens so you're just shooting noise, and shoot it at the same ISO and WB as the shot. Slate your noise clips if necessary (but generally, if you have three takes followed by a clip that's a tiny file size, you'll know it's your noise clip). Or make a point of sticking a card in at the head or tail of a shot so your noise profile card is part of the clip. Use the noise clip to make the auto noise filtering profile and apply that. And try to save your profiles intelligently (IE, make a folder with camera name, and name the clips with ISO and WB, like --folder: NX1--> filne name: daylight-1600iso). I don't know how important WB is for fine-tuning noise, but since WB is adding gain to specific channels, it's probably key for accurate noise removal. And if you use custom WB you won't have an existing profile.

I remember seeing that tip in a tutorial when I had considered buying NV. Thanks for that!

12 hours ago, M Carter said:

Try to render neat video only once; on some NLE timelines, you'll force a re-render if you tweak any setting like color or contrast or opacity. So do your edit, and then render out prores (or whatever) of your clips in the edit (add heads & tails for transitions if needed) with NV and re-import; color correct on top of those.

Would that not create a degradation of IQ by exporting and re-importing, even in prores? I use FCPX for my NLE, and I'm not sure if AE or Premiere has a similar output but would creating a new compound clip copy help the process instead?

To keep it simple, my concern is using the LX100. Apparently the native ISO is 200 I believe, but I still find the noise (even if in a fine pattern) to be quite distracting.

As for a demo on Photon Pro, I don't seem to be able to find one. Some reviews of crashing has me concerned, with positive ones only coming for earlier versions and those with high end hardware. Oddly enough, one review claims rendering times are worse than Neat Video.

I have similar concerns upgrading to El Capitan. Considering many people's mixed experiences, I'm not sure I wanna risk possible improved performance for a worse one.

I have a mid 2012 13" Macbook Pro just to clear things up.

I haven't really been messing with my camera settings as I keep Highlights/shadows normal and leaving contrast at 0. It's not bad noise per se, but I do notice very fine noise even at 200 iso, something that apparently gh4/lx100/g7/etc users say they notice as well. 

I have yet to use filmconvert which is expensive and assuming just as taxing on my hardware. Some film grain samples such as ones from color vision are nice, but I have had varying results with some samples only making more a of noisy mess on targeted areas rather than seamlessly blending it in altogether. 

That Hitfilm tutorial does sound intriguing though.

Just to keep the workflow streamlined, I would prefer not working with plug-ins if possible. I have tried the Neat Video demo, and while definitely a great tool, it really bogs down my older model MBP. Again with Resolve, my system is too limited to handle the system requirements.

What is your experience with Photon Pro? 

Also, it seems M43 cameras, Panasonic in particular which I'm working with, have quite a bit of noise around darks and midtones even at low ISOs, so I'm not sure how I could avoid the noise floor if possible.

Without Filmconvert, Neat Video, any plug-ins or extra software other than perhaps LUTS, what are some ways to hide noise in FCPX? 

I can think of crushing shadows, but to my knowledge with FCPX, it's not exactly as precise as I'd want it to be not to mention contrasty looks aren't my sort of thing. Am I missing some key stuff here?

Beny has that great LUT Flattener that was being shared around here. Wish there was more of that sort of thing being shared with the LX100 users. 

So say in FPCX, I just stack it over the video I want to put grain on in the timeline, and overlay in blend mode? Seems cool, but how would I make the duration of the grain video longer to cover a longer clip? It's 5 seconds or in Beny's version, 10 seconds short (Thanks for that btw!). Is it just copying a desired amount of the grain video and making a compound clip or am I missing something here?