Jump to content

independent

Members
  • Posts

    330
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by independent

  1. It can't record Raw internally? The 8K is 420, really? 30-min limit? $6500? What a miss. I'd rather drop a copper heatsink into a R5 and save $2500. And it would still be a better camera.
  2. No, it's a flawed comparison. For example, the data pool of the 2019 chart draws from Rotten Tomatoes rated films, the 2020 from a Thriller opinion piece. Next, the RT chart pulled a random number of movies, 43, while the Thriller list collected an equally random, but much fewer, 24 movies. A meaningful comparison would be choosing the same metrics and meaningful, bias-free sample size. Why not compare all Netflix originals films in 2019 with those in 2020? Because that would actually require work and competent journalism.
  3. Andrew's not wrong, but I'm not surprised by the corporate-speak. This is nothing new...execs want to maximize profits for the company. Why can't the a7siii turn off noise reduction? Why does the fx6 have crippled AF? Why does camera have a YouTube channel? There's no question Canon wants to upsell customers on their cinema cameras or upcoming R1 or R5ii. Did Canon strike out by selling a flawed camera that nobody asked for? Tell them their strategy is wrong by voting with your wallet. But I'm guessing Andrew kept his R5; he does seem to like Ferraris over Fords.
  4. Pornhub definitely is keeping tabs. Dropping cookies in all your jars.
  5. Well it depends on what you want or your tolerances are. If you want max image quality, the r5’s 8k raw is arguably among the best for any camera. The dynamic range figures have to be contextualized with NR. If you want great useable dynamic range straight out of the camera, the c70 is great. The R5 8k raw requires work in post, but that’s any raw camera. With some NR its DR and high ISO end up being quite competitive or even better than the A7s iii. But the 8k raw’s detail and color are superior to anything under $15k.
  6. The Sony a7s3 isn't advertised as having a dual native ISO because it doesn't have it. Does anybody have any information that 12800 is a non-amplified ISO? The Sony "behaves" like it does because it applies heavy in-camera noise reduction starting at 12800, which makes the footage increasingly cleaner at the cost of losing detail and introducing artifacts such as smearing. This has been depicted in nearly every relevant review of the A7S3. This isn't to say that the NR feature is bullshit. It's useful if you have a fast turnaround and your footage is good enough at those high ISOs. But you also can't turn it off, which is why the Sony FX6 is the better low light camera. Also clearly demonstrated.
  7. Hybrid camera of the year: Canon R5, the NSX to the A7Siii's Accord Video camera of the year: Sony FX6, the Tom Cruise to the C70's unChristian Bale Audio product of the year: Tentacles Sync Track E, Zaxcom version Biggest Innovator: Apple. M1 (agreed) will push all editing machines and software, but Apple has also promoted pro/cutting-edge features in its iPhone such as Dolby Vision, Lidar autofocus, IBIS, which challenge standards even in the pro industry. AI and machine learning, though not exclusive to Apple, will definitely change post-production processes in the very near future. 2020 was a great year in filmmaking tools that make the job easier. Now, getting jobs.
  8. As standalone cameras? Sure. As part of a pocket computer, aka smartphones? The market size will approach the human population. How many people buy a phone because of how well it makes phone calls? How many buy a phone based on the improving cameras? 4K 10-bit, IBIS, Lidar, Dolby vision. Sadly, some traditional camera companies have been having trouble putting these features in their flagship cameras. Consumer digital cameras are simply being displaced and integrated into another product, which isn’t unusual, as seen in the case of cassette players, CD players, MP3 players, pagers, cell phones, blackberrys, watches, etc. Thus, those graphs are misleading. The market for better digital cameras has never been bigger. The problem, if there is one, is that some old camera companies haven’t been able to justify their existence. Never have consumers, hobbyists, and professionals had such access to creative video filmmaking tools as we all do now. Innovation hasn’t slowed, it’s accelerating—over the dead bodies of dinosaurs.
  9. Quite a few successful docs and feature films were shot on the c300, including the Oscar winner OJ: Made in America and the great German film Victoria. Cameras get better, but talent stays the same.
  10. But masses and masses of shitty cameras are indeed still being made—for smartphones. But they're not built by Nikon. The shitty camera market exists, and business is booming; every person on the planet now has a shitty built-in lens camera—right in our smartphone. That's just the evolution of technology. Sony Walkmans have also disappeared, but not the market for portable audio. No need to pour one out for the standalone compact camera market, good riddance! But the overall camera market is alive and well, and cameras ostensibly have become a feature that drives competition among smartphones—how often is the camera the most heavily marketed feature every release? Nearly all of the time. Now on to the subject of Nikon. Whether it's because corporate culture, Japanese or otherwise, there's nothing unusual about large companies going under. Regardless, Nikon's products weren't competitive enough, just like Olympus. Maybe Nikon should have paid more attention to mobile (See Samsung), but maybe not (See Red). Regardless, I think you are a bit sentimental about these camera brands. But they have to justify their existence.
  11. And you’d be wrong, because nobody is editing iPhone footage on Final Cut Pro on Mac Pros, iMac Pro’s, etc. Nobody. iPhones aren’t selling Macs. And please stop with the “shrinking market” phenomenon. The market for shitty cameras has shrunk. Actually, not really, because that market has been displaced and coupled with the smartphone industry. So the market for shitty cameras has actually grown. Everybody in the world now has a shitty camera in his pocket. However, the market for interchangeable lens cameras (non-shitty) has stayed relatively constant over the past decade, because these are the cameras that pros are using. And we still see significant innovation and evolution in professional cameras, and more importantly, a gap between amateur and professional content. That’s what will drive that market and keep it alive and lucrative, until that gap is closed. Nikon isn’t struggling because of a shrinking market. It’s struggling because its cameras can’t compete with Canon and Sony. Thus my argument for Apple: they can quite easily develop an even better camera than either company. And there’s money in that.
  12. Red is for sale? If they are, Apple just might, just to own the patents. My guess is that JJ will never sell, because he loves himself more than money. Apple's patent challenge against Red is a much stronger sign of their interest in the pro camera business; Prores Raw is limited to mostly Atomos external, which is a bottleneck in many ways. In fact, think about the Canon R5 and Sony a7s3's HEVC h.265 footage, which is impossible to play or edit on most machines. Except of course, the new Macs, which can edit them quite cheaply. Bingo. Again, why wouldn't Apple want to release a professional camera that would boost their entire ecosystem? They are pushing various technologies that really only make sense if they add the final piece to the puzzle.
  13. No complaints about the dynamic range in 8K Raw
  14. Well, Samsung is mostly an electronics company. Apple is much more than that. They develop their own codecs to be edited in their own software, run on their own computers, viewed on their own monitors, and published to their cloud services. The only thing missing is their own pro camera. The iPhone cameras don't require any of Apple's hardware and software, so nothing is to be gained there. Only a pro camera would really take advantage of Apple's ecosystem (and help sell products and services). Of course, Apple doesn't need Nikon; its brand is plenty strong enough, and whatever savings in R&D might not matter because Apple would probably pursue a radical redesign of both internals and externals. Also, Apple is close enough already; how hard would it be accommodate a large sensor into their existing iPhone camera processing infrastructure? They're 99% of the way there.
  15. No I think Apple is in it for the money. Their $10,000 Mac Pro and $6,000 monitor and $1,000 for a stand isn’t for mass consumers. It’s just economics; the high price reflects the smaller units to maximize profits. But it also shows apple’s willingness to develop niche products that fit into their ecosystem. And that’s why I think it’s a no brainer for Apple to produce a completely reimagined and redesigned pro camera, because they have the pro software and pro hardware for complete integration. They can make the most efficient camera with the most cutting edge technologies with brilliant design, and you will shoot on their codec, edit in their software suite, on their computers and monitors, and publish on their platforms.
  16. Incorrect. The market that is “shrinking” is the smartphone market. Everybody already has one, and apple has marginal advantages over the competition. Again, apple hasn’t seen growth here, which is why it’s pivoting in other industries - and succeeding. The iPhone wasn’t the first smart phone, nor was the iPod the first MP3 player, nor was AirPods the first Bluetooth headphones, nor the Apple Watch the first smart watch, and so on. But they were the most successful because they reimagined existing products. The pro camera market has been shrinking not only because so much money/innovation has been put into the smartphone race, but also because of the lack of innovation by Sony, canon, Nikon, etc. That’s exactly the kind of good opportunity for Apple. They don’t invent products, they reinvent them. The key issue is you’re stuck in that same mindset...pro cameras haven’t peaked, the existing companies have peaked. See also Tesla and the automobile industry.
  17. Business mercy? It’s Apple’s modus operandus to generate growth by penetrating other markets with disruptive technologies - the way they did with watches, headphones, phones, mp3 players, etc. In fact, Apple’s growth has come from wearables and services; their phone, computer, and tablet sales have been stagnant. However, if Apple put their Ax or Mx ARM chips in a full sensor camera, with neural processing, software integration with Prores Raw, lidar-boosted autofocus, etc., they would likely crush the pro photo/video market. It’s almost a logical move. Apple has already a complete ecosystem for pro photo/video, hardware and software. They’ve had relationships with R3d and Blackmagic, but neither can keep up. Let’s put it this way; Apple made $10,000 computers to accommodate professionals. Then they showed how by controlling a codec, an $800 iPad could edit 8k. They put internal 4K 10-bit in an iphone, while that feat had eluded the major camera manufacturers until this year. Anyways, Nikon has the infrastructure for rapid integration of Apple’s technologies. If Apple developed a full frame camera with all the technologies and features in the iphone, I’d buy it.
  18. Apple should buy Nikon and bring all their innovative technologies to professional cameras.
  19. Truly mind-blowing. For all the shit Apple gets, and often well-deserved since they do put out a lot of bullshit, the M1 is an industry disrupter. Processor clock speeds and ram sizes are rendered meaningless now, especially with the optimization w/ macOS. Sure, the next more advanced M1 Macs will be insane, but I'm not waiting if I can do basic 4K-8K editing for the next few years with a cheap, small, quiet computer. I can't wait to get this damn egpu off my desk, farting hot air into my face. (If only SSDs would improve in $/TB, and I can get rid of this 8-disk raid too). With the M1, Apple hasn't created a more innovative product since the original iPhone. Speaking of which, I'm returning this 12 pro max for a Mac mini. Why would I need a new phone during another year of lockdowns? Fooled me again, apple. But M1 is a Great Leap Forward.
  20. The inability to add RAM or an eGPU means these macs better do everything you need now and the near future. They do need to sell iMacs and Mac Pros, though.
  21. So all three Macs share the same M1 chip...wouldn't they all perform roughly the same? Also, sad to see the Mac Mini top out at only 16GB of ram and drop the 10-bit gigabit ethernet.
  22. I owned the a7s and skipped the a7sii for the a7iii, which had been the best all-around hybrid camera for a good time. The internal 10-bit codecs are a necessary upgrade, as is the improved color, but I think what's most interesting is the gyro-based catalyst browse stabilization (like the SteadyXP module). What's slightly disappointing? It seems that the low light isn't that much improved, with both noise visible in higher ISOs combined with noise reduction that you can't turn off, which affects resolution (no oversampling). It's unequivocally a more reliable camera than the R5, but if one can accept the overheating limitations, the R5 has better image quality—bleeding edge actually, in 8K raw. The Sony a7siii is a safe, great all-arounder, but nothing really all that exciting about it.
  23. C70 is the best bet at the moment for your budget. Weddings and docs should prioritize usability over all else. You miss the shot, you're fired! You just need to choose what's practical for a dynamic shooting environment. The c70 is unique in that price range for internal NDs, superior dynamic range, clean low light, great color, all leading to minimal post work, which also allows for fast turnaround. Of course the on-board audio features, AF, lightweight, etc. all contribute to what helps a solo shooter or skeleton crew. You certainly can make it work with other cameras, but they won't be easier. But for commercial work, generally speaking, camera systems are far less important than the production elements (location, lighting, crew, etc.). And you'll probably rent anyways, because if the producer or client wants a specific camera, it won't be the one in your price range.
×
×
  • Create New...