Mokara

They don't make ridiculous mistakes like the Italian court system does. And just for the record, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/italian-scientists-get/ Maybe the decision was reversed on appeal, but they were still arrested, tried and convicted on absurd charges.

By "organic", do you mean it looks like manure? Not really. The Panasonic is consistently under exposed compared to the Sony. Also, in the first set the Panasonic is focused over most of the scene while the Sony has been focused behind the principle subject matter. They are not equivalent comparisons.

Not all encoders are the same. Although they may produce encoded data using the same format, the algorithms used to arrive at that format are proprietary. Some may dump more information but still need a high bit rate, so you can't judge different cameras solely on the bit rate used. The quality of the final output depends on exactly what parts of the image are being sacrificed to fit into the bandwidth. If your encoder can't make that judgement efficiently and accurately enough, it has to rely on high bit rates to get the same visual quality. For example, if your encoder can't tell the difference between an area with fine detail and an area with no detail, it has use extra bandwidth to cover both to avoid losing something important in the image. An encoder which can tell the difference will use more bandwidth for the fine detail and less for the no detail, which equates to fewer mbps required overall.

Ok, so to minimize compression artifacts resulting from the use of ALL-I then. Anything with a lot of detail has to give up something to fit in the bandwidth, and detail is the sacrifice you make with ALL-I. Which you do not want if you are doing editing later.

To minimize compression artifacts in the tailing edge of motion? At least until you have had a chance to do any post-processing/editing you might want to do.

If they have an audience, those are the people they are speaking to, not you. So why should they change their formula to suit you? In many of those videos you hate so much, the audience is tuning in to listen to the presenter, not to what he/she is saying. The entertainment is not the content as such, but the presenter themselves. A subtle difference, one you possibly don't get.

There is if you want to add supporting logic. So, if EV 10 represents a minimum acceptable dynamic range, the Canon can go to ISO 1600 while the IMX455 can go to ISO 6400 and the IMX555 to ISO ~12000?

You will probably need to use a different computer or do a fresh install of windows. You can get the monthly plan instead of the annual plan if you want, it is just costs about $20 more. That may be the simplest solution to your problem if you just want to finish off your existing projects.

Not necessarily. PDAF can find a focus point faster but is less accurate than CDAF. With a very small dof you probably will get better performance from a CDAF camera, so while it might be counter intuitive, the Panasonic camera might perform better with a fast lens like this if the focusing algorithms are better than the ones Canon uses in spite of DPAF.

I guess that is why NZ cities have departments devoted to consents, permits and licenses then. Because you can do anything you want without authority from local government. Right. Try setting up shop in your local mall selling rat kebabs and chilled moonshine, and see how far you get before the neighborhood gendarme shows up.

The problem with that idea is that every person has a different view of what is "just and fair". Your idea of what respect is may not be the same as Joe's idea of what respect is, so what happens then? That is why we have laws and regulations, so it is reasonably clear to everyone what "just and fair" and "respect" actually means. That is why anarchists are idiots … there is a fundamental flaw in their philosophy that they choose to ignore. Or, more precisely, if you don't share their view of what "just and fair" means, they put a bomb under your bed.

Your local town/city/municipality likely thinks different.

I think he is referring to a business licence. That is required in most developed countries, even the US. You can sell stuff individually without one, but if you actually set up a physical business you need a license. It is primarily for local/state/federal authorities to track your activities when it comes to regulatory practice and tax collection. If you are supplying a service and do not have a physical place of business then you generally do not need a license.

It is a question of supply and demand. In the old days when gear was expensive then relatively few people could afford the investment to get into the industry, hence low supply and high demand. Now pretty much anyone can afford the basics so there are a lot of wannabes and other folk who would have been filtered out of the industry as unprofitable in the old days. They might have had dreams but no means to execute on them, so they would have earned a living doing something else instead The flood of marginal producers into the market as a result of readily available cheap equipment means supply exceeds demand, and the people creating the demand get to set the price, not the other way around. People still have their dreams, and now the equipment, but there are not enough clients for them to actually make a living doing it. So they will get back to doing what they should have been doing in the first place, and that is making a living doing something else. Greece is an economic basket case not because of laws or regulation, but because for a long time they have spent more than they earn (the government that is). It is not rocket science, sooner or later the chickens come home to roost and the free lunch ends. Laws and regulation are a good thing really, as long as they are sensible and not enacted on ideological grounds. They create the groundwork for a fair and level playing field. In Canada if you are self employed you have to contribute to CPP yourself. However, since CPP contributions are made by both the employer and employee (50:50), if you are self employed you have to pay double what a normal employee would contribute, since you are both employee and employer. That can come as a surprise for a lot of people come tax time, since they don't know that and are suddenly faced for a demand for a sizeable CPP contribution when they file. There are other things too. As a business and service provider you are required to collect the goods and services tax that would normally be charged, and if you have not been taking that into account your extra bill on filing can be very substantial. In short, if you are going into business for yourself you need to do the things every other business needs to do.

They could announce the Pocket 4K Pro B, which is the same camera except that it has the letter "B" stamped on it and is actually available

The processors they currently have could likely handle 8k, but they would need a lot of cooling to do it and that is simply not practical in this sort of camera.

The heat comes primarily from the processor working. Panasonic processors are thermally more efficient than Sony's, so they can do more before running into heat issues. Canon's processors have even worse thermal efficiency, which is why they can do less. All of the manufacturer's processors can do what they would need to do for very high spec cameras, the problem is that is smaller bodies without cooling they get too hot and that limits what they can actually do before having to shut down to excessive heat. The more thermally efficient the processor is, the more functions the manufacturer can include. Panasonic has the most efficient processor, so their cameras can do more with a specific package size. It is all about the thermal efficiency of the processor. The more efficient it is, the more it can do.

Not really. The rumor was that there were two A7SIII protoypes, an incremental model and an advanced model. Probably Sony originally had the idea of the incremental model being released in late 2018 with the more advanced prototype being released a year or two later once the rough edges were ironed out. With the imminent release of Canon and Nikon's full frame cameras they probably decided to drop the incremental prototype and develop the advanced one instead. Since that was going to take longer there was a delay. Because they stopped development on the incremental prototype, all of the resources would then go into the advanced prototype, meaning it would arrive soon than they had originally planned. At least that is how I see it. There is no way they would have started from scratch once they realized the incremental prototype was not going to be advanced enough to dominate they way they want. If it is oversampled (which will be necessary to maintain enough of a competitive position over the opposition), it will need to shoot in at least 6K and probably 8K. That would be the dilemma Sony engineers would have faced - how do you keep that low light performance while at the same time getting enough resolution performance to compete. When you start increasing the pixel count then the camera would become more like the III or RIII, so it would need some differentiating technology, otherwise why bother with a new model? IMO it will have to be something like 8K, high frame rates at 4K or a global shutter sensor (which is entirely possible, since Sony had lower pixel count global shutter sensors available a year ago)

If the A7SIII can shoot 8K then it will enough pixels to be a competent stills camera in almost every application.

The key factor in getting a new camera is cats. This is well known.

Well, the A7S and A7SII both have low pixel counts, so I don't see why the A7SIII would have something different. You do know that the A7S series have a low pixel count sensor right? The only reason to increase the pixel count above what it is now would be 8K, and the pixel count will not go lower than what it currently is due to the compromise it would impose on resolution. The A7S sensor is designed around video, low light stills photography is secondary to that.

For an oversampled 8K sensor you would need about 48 mpixels. I doubt it will have that though, more likely oversampled 4K, which you can do with 12 mpixels. High frame rates at 4K are likely, along with higher bit depths and some sort of raw capability. Much improved AF is a certainty.

The C700 is ideal for cat videos....I am surprised that no one has posted theirs yet.

RAW still needs to be debeyered, so if it was shot at 2160 lines of resolution it would debeyer into about 1400 lines of actual resolution (less if the lens being used does not resolve fully). Unless you are shooting on a greyscale camera which has had it's Beyer filter removed. The only way to get full resolution without oversampling is to remove the Beyer filter or shoot objects that have no color (such as black and white/greyscale test patterns).

Maybe the implementation on the S1 is different, but in the NX1 80 mbps was not enough to avoid larger macroblocks in some places and blocky artifacts trailing motion. You needed the bit rate hacks to minimize those, at 160 mbps most of those problems went away since the encoder had enough bandwidth. Those sorts of problems might be less noticeable on a camera with a less detailed image than the NX1, since the camera is not sacrificing subtle contrast areas of the image to make bandwidth for the resolution.