gsenroc

49 minutes ago, DevonChris said:

I thought I'd give an update on the conundrum.

I coaxed my Macbook Air back into life and will keep it for a while. Apple must be close to releasing updated Macbooks soon so it is worth waiting a few months to see what they release.

They are falling badly behind in the specs race so their new specs must be good to be competitive.

I did buy my wife a Dell XPS i5/8GB with1080 screen though and wow it is good. As gsenroc said, the screen is really good and very sharp. We're not using it for editing videos, but photos look really great on it.

It is very fast and the improved wifi makes a real difference. Dell support has been great too, so it has been an excellent purchase so far.

I think the version with a UHD monitor will be fantastic so I am very tempted.....

That's great!

In fact I nearly pulled the trigger on the XPS15 when it came out, the Thunderbolt 3 connector is a killer, and the Razor external video card module is about to come out.

But still I think Mac is more comfortable to work with.

It's already in stock here in NL. I'm looking forward to the reviews. This little camera would be a very nice documentry tool, for video as well.

38 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Don't listen to the average person over the internet. You have to calibrate the monitor or at least download the profile that was developed at notebookcheck. 

I have been using the previous generation XPS and it has a great monitor. Peple were just using the wrong settings! See a report at anandtech.  

Dell monitors are very nice, including those in their XPS laptops indeed. In fact I know most of my friends are/were using Dell for photography editing and they do recommend them. For the price it's really nice.

I was very tempted to go for the micro studio camera just for the 4k, but it seems the dynamic range is not that good and no raw, so I'm still waiting for the micro cinema.

2 hours ago, DevonChris said:

Thanks. yep, its good to see Thunderbolt 3 becoming more widely available. The Dell XPS has a Thunderbolt 3 port now whereas the 2015 Macs have Thunderbolt 2 ports :-(

Yea the Macbook Pro is now spec wise falling behind, but they are not far away from a new release cycle. We probably will see Thunderbolt 3 there.

I have a custom built PC as well. It's really hard to beat the price and performance, and most softwares I use are cross-platform or even cloud-based so I'm quite happy with it

But just don't consider surface pro/book at the moment, not before they fix the battery issue. It's still horrible, making my SP4 a bit hard to work with.

I think the new technology is coming, those Thunderbolt 3 external video cards to make laptops more powerful when it's not being mobile. If you only occasionally need to edit on the run, maybe using proxy would be a good idea to save computing power?

Windows 10 is working flawlessly on my desktop though, but I would still suggest a Mac.

2 hours ago, araucaria said:

You can make them both double gauss, or whatever you want to invent, the larger 50 2.8 will be about the same size as the 25 1.4, but the quality will be better on the first.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/768816-REG/Panasonic_H_X025_Leica_DG_Summilux_25.html

this one even has aspherical lenses, should make it tiny.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f28-m.htm ("tessar")

Which one is smaller?

What about these 50 2, and 50 1.4?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f2-m.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f14-asph.htm

Making the 50/2.8 into Double Gauss doesn't necessary mean it will be optically better than the Double Gauss 25/1.4. Maybe the 50/2.8 can have higher resolution, but the 25/1.4 has more light. Still a tradeoff, better or not really depends on the design objective, resolution/sharpness etc. are just one of the performance criteria.

Yes it looks compact on Leica lenses, but the MFT ones have focus motors and electronic aperture mechanisms, so you can't just compare to the external dimension. The MFT glass is still a bit smaller in this case, not by much though. We don't know whether the 25/1.4 has implemented some retro-focus mixed optical configuration (probably not), but yea the size is really dependent on the design they choose. Zeiss Milvus 50.1,4 is a good example of how the design can have an impact on the size.

Those Leica lenses are indeed extremely compact, really nice lenses.

BTW,  aspherical glass doesn't make the lens smaller, it only changes the optical performance, small or not is dependent on the overall optical design, as stated above.

16 hours ago, araucaria said:

A 25mm 1.4 m43 lens is equivalent to a 50mm 2.8 lens on fullframe, both will give the same image and boh are tiny lenses. If you think otherwise I can't/want help you.

 

I think roxics was talking about the lenses with same max. aperture.

From your points I can say something though. You gain a shallow dof with larger sensor on F2.8 already, but it's 50mm, doubles the distance between the focal plane and the lens. We can make the lens smaller by using a compact optics design (Tessar in this case), nice. On the other hand, if we need F1.4 on MFT to achieve the same dof, we don't use Tessar anymore, we need Double Gauss. It becomes about the same size as 50mm Tessar on full frame or even larger, but it gives four times the light, and the Double Gauss has better optical performance.

They all have tradeoffs, that's principle of optics, can't really argue about that.

I had a Samyang 35mm T1.5 VDSLR for a while. It was not heavily used but already started to develop some backlash in the focus ring. Later I found out they use the focus mechanism of the AF lenses, which is not helicoid threads. I believe that focus mechanism is the cause of the backlash in my 35mm T1.5.

Below is a photo I found from internet, showing the internal focus mechanism of a Samyang 85mm F1.4

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gigel/5790956193

9 hours ago, Michael Scrip said:

Thanks for the info!

Yeah the reviews say it's got some color and contrast issues.  I would be using it just for framing and focus.

My camcorder is a JVC HM150 with a pitiful 2.8" low-res screen.  I usually drag around a 20" computer monitor when I shoot... but a 7" field monitor would be much easier! :D 

The Neway CT710HO that was posted earlier looks good too.

I think for framing it's nice, the screen is quite easy to use. For focusing it can sometimes be tricky because of the contrast, very little detail in the middle to shadow area so it's a bit hard to see whether it's in focus sometimes. If feels to me that the monitor degrades the image quality for some reason, looks like the effect of compression or something similar.

If you only need it for framing and focus, maybe the VS-1 FineHD is more cost-effective though.

The Neway looks good!

11 minutes ago, Michael Scrip said:

I was interested in something like this to turn a relatively cheap Android tablet into a field monitor.  Decent field monitors tend to be very expensive.

And then I heard about the Aputure VS-2 FineHD.  Article and video review.

Under $300 and it's an ACTUAL field monitor at 1080p with focus peaking, zebras, histogram and all sorts of other things that real field monitors have. Sounds great.

Sure it's got a big Sony battery sticking out the back... but in the places I would use a field monitor I'd be plugging it in anyway.  And not moving around.  The Aputure monitor is definitely on my wishlist.

I dunno about this device though.  It's $400 by itself and I'm guessing its compatibility with Android tablets might be sketchy.  How many tablets have USB 3.0 input? And it still won't have all those features of real field monitors.

This device might be better served as a capture device into a computer. That's the way it's decribed on its website.  This article is only suggesting it might work to allow an Android tablet to be a field monitor. But I have my doubts.

 

I've got the VS-2 FineHD monitor. But I think at the moment it's not very usable. The image on the screen is way too contrasty, even with the contrast dialed down, no details in the shadow, it's crushed to totally black. Color is wrong too. I am able to adjust the RGB settings to make it close to the LCD of the camera or other field monitor, but it's still not very good. I hope they can fix it with firmware upgarde, but I'm not sure.

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

You didn't read the post did you!

Of course I do, I read every post of you Andrew :D

But what I was thinking about is that they wouldn't want people to just buy a camera and done. They make profit with their lenses for this kind of camera! After all it's not a PL mount and it's not a BMD camera right? Even if they keep MFT mount, not all those M43 lenses can cover s35 sensor.

But how about the lens? They don't have any s35 lens to support a new format yet. It could be very difficult to step up for them imo.

I think the battery drain of BMPCC would make the "fun" factor less. I'm waiting for the Micro and once I get it in my hand my NX1 will become a pure photo camera. I'm not sure whether I'll get the MFT system for photos though, it's so compact and compatible with the Micro, of course the image quality is great as well.

15 minutes ago, MattH said:

Is it possible to turn the off the new audio notification of new comments?  I obviously dont want the sound disturbing whatever im listening to in another tab. So am I now forced to close the eoshd tab completely?

You can turn off the nofitication by clicking the bell of the notification on the top right side of this page, then click the notification setting. There you can turn off the sound, or do everything you want.

Still I feel a bit unbelievable that there is a 2.3x crop with 4k 30p as 25p is full sensor readout. This is too stupid for the engineer. Are you sure about this Andrew?

2 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

Thank you for pointing that out ! Swore i seen an aperture ring on these oops ?

Yea I fell in that aperture ring trap once when they only had classic line up. Bought an ZE for sony mirrorless, then jumped to NX1, doomed XD

16 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

Yeah but its not clickless ! For some weird reason i am not seeing the same sharpening artifacts i got with my other lenses in the nx1 video. Think my theory is correct about the body. Anywho im for sure sticking with these lenses just probably in a different mount. may need to go to the 5d and use the ef mount version. Strong feeling they are too heavy for the nx mount

No the Milvus ZE do NOT have aperture ring!

http://www.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_us/camera_lenses/milvus/milvus1450.html

Zeiss doesn't have any ZE lens that has aperture ring.

If it can output 4k, is that 8bit 4:2:2 or 10 bit?

11 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

So to recap on the all important crops...

24p = no crop Super 35mm 4K (1.5x crop vs full frame)
30p = 2.3x crop 4K
120p = 2.3x crop 1080p

Looks like the Samsung NX1 has an ace card here.

But I am sure the A6300 will have the dynamic range advantage... and proper LOG profile.

The compact body could be the cause of this crop factor. Processing power needed for full sensor readout may need a larger space for cooling, and that's probably why NX1 is much larger but is able to do full sensor readout, while the NX500 is not.

If 25p is also full sensor it will be fine for EU users, but 30p with crop is not forgivable. It seems they are planning for a A7100 or something with full sensor readout.

+1, I'm still waiting for the BMD micro cinema camera, but this A6300 could be a good gimbal camera with AF on.

according to the specs from dpreview, it says 14 stops dr with s-log 3. I'm not sure how it will perform.

I'm curious about how 5D3 works when taking video. Does it oversampling the whole FF sensor then output 1080p at 24/25/30p?

Yes indeed, Final Cut is very fast. Adobe is actually kind of famous for the low efficiency of their softwares since long ago.

I use an i7 4790k and GTX960 with only 16GB memory. I transcode my h.265 files to ProResHQ and it seems Resolve can handle them well. However in the grading tab the resolution of the video looks much lower, don't know why it's like this but I can live with that.

I think you can't compare laptop components to desktop components, even my 4790k is much faster than any new generation laptop cpu at the moment, the same for the video card.

Here is a good website for a general performance comparison: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Hope that helps.