Mokara
-
Posts
744 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Mokara
-
-
On 2018-04-07 at 1:15 AM, jhnkng said:
Err.. what?
https://www.androidauthority.com/why-are-apples-chips-faster-than-qualcomms-gary-explains-802738/
TL;DR --
"There is no denying that Apple has a world class CPU design team that has consistently produced the best SoCs in the world over the last few years."Anyway, it's hardly surprising that Apple would try to bring their chip designs in house, like they have for pretty much every bit of their business (besides manufacturing.) In any case Apple sells a whole range of Macs, they're not all going to go internal all at once. At a guess the Macbook will be the first -- it's basically an iPad with a bad keyboard -- but certainly there may be Apple designed chips for the 13in Macbook Pro. We think Pro means heavy duty computing applications, but it's pretty obvious Apple sees "Pro" as meaning anyone who uses it for work. They've prioritised things like size and battery life over raw power, when to be honest I think I'd rather an option for raw power at the expense of size or battery life.
As a fun aside, I have a fully specced first gen 15in MBP with the Touch Bar, and my iPad runs Fortnite better than my very very expensive laptop. So don't discount what's possible with mobile hardware when you have the opportunity to really optimise for it.
Also, err, Prores RAW. Developing a new codec that will be invaluable to only a very core niche of video professionals is hardly the action of a company who are abandoning the Pro market.Those tests compare systems, not processors. They don't control for the effects of the OS and other supporting hardware that may impact on overall performance.
-
6 minutes ago, Django said:
agreed, but it's a real mystery then what they are going to be able to do to justify the expected $3500 price tag. especially with the $2000 A73 being so capable in low-light, stills & AF. maybe they'll just add this new "venice" profile, slap on a BSI sensor with the latest AF enhancements and price it at the current A7S2 cut-down retail which is $2400 (which is basically what they've done with FS5 II). seems like Sony's current strategy is to be agressive on price points to undercut competition rather than really pushing forward innovation...
55 minutes ago, IronFilm said:
Yeah if the FS5mk2 doesn't get 4K 10bit then I rate at near 0% chance that an a7Smk3 released this year will have 10bit internal.It depends. Recent camera releases have had their LSI chip updated, and sometimes an updated sensor depending on hold old the earlier sensor was. The first cameras with the latest LSI was the RX100 (and one of the RX10 models IIRC), so it is not necessarily the most expensive lines that get updates first. It all depends on the development cycle and how many cameras of a particular model they sell. The main upgrade in the FS5 II might be the LSI, which means greatly improved AF functionality.
At some point they are going to be releasing the next generation processor, and that is when we can expect to see performance increases. Maybe the first camera that sees it will be the a7S III or it could even be something with a shorter development cycle, such as the RX100.
A7S III can be expected to include a new sensor as well as the latest LSI. If the next processor is available in time it may well have to.
-
11 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:
Sony have just announced the FS5 II ahead of NAB 2018.
This brings with it a raft of improvements, including revamped colour profiles tuned similarly to the high-end VENICE digital cinema camera.
As well as HDR and Rec.2020 4K modes, it's also capable of DCI 4K (4096 x 2160) RAW to an external recorder, at up to an astonishing 120fps, although this frame rate is limited to 4 seconds of slow-motion capture. 4K 60p meanwhile is continuous externally, and internally the camera records 4K up to 30p.
Are the specs on that page you linked correct? According to those the max frame rate for 4K is 30 fps, they don't say anything about higher frame rates (in the specs).
-
10 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:
Why wouldn't it be an x86 instruction set compatible chip?
Just because they are currently making ARM based processors doesn't mean to say Apple can't do an AMD type CPU in future.
Laptops and desktops don't really need RISC architecture... Whether pro or not.
Apple will stay in the pro market and everything else is just speculation for clicks
Because to do that they would need to hold a X86 architectural license. Currently only Intel, AMD and VIA have licenses, and I doubt Intel have any desire to make that lineup broader outside of niche applications.
Apple might be able to make something similar, but it would not be compatible with the PC universe. It is more likely that any move to use their own processors would result in a complete severing of the connection Apple has to the PC world.
-
On 2018-04-02 at 8:23 PM, NathanDrake said:
So looks like Canon won't release a 10-bit codec for the C200. Man what a waste of a camera. ATLEAST let me get an uncompressed SDI output to 4K. At the very least a 10-bit HDMI 4K output. It doesn't make any sense. They've really shot themselves in the foot here. With the RAW output from the panasonic and really any of the blackmagic cameras it seems like canon can't compete.
Hardware encoding is determined by what the processor inside is capable of, and the DV6 apparently has a more consumer orientated encoder than the DV5, probably because it has been optimised for use in DSLRs/MILCs/compacts.
Presumably the DV6 has other advantages over the DV5 when it comes to RAW, and that is probably why they used it in the C200 rather than the DV5.
-
On 2018-04-03 at 12:26 PM, MKSN said:
What if rgb boost is actually boosting each channels iso somehow? ? Should it be tested also with negative values and try to shoot 6400iso or something like that...
Example Red x1.99 is actually iso3200 x 1.99 = 6368iso for red channel...
I try to do my own tests also tomorrow. This is interesting.
I would guess that the sensor is returning something like 14 bits of data per pixel, but the processor is only actually using some lesser amount, such as 10 bits. When you increase or decrease the color channels you adjust exactly which 10 bits of the 14 gathered are used. So by moving everything up two notches and then reducing exposure by a corresponding amount, you are effectively increasing ISO without increasing gain. If NR is kicking in at a particular gain setting the net outcome is that for all practical purposes you could get an extra two stops of exposure before that happens using the OP's method.
I would guess that you can do the opposite as well, essentially adding an internal ND function to the camera if you had need for that.
The downside however is that data collected at the top and bottom of those 14 bits is likely to be less accurate, and that may cause other unanticipated issues, such as WB or color cast problems (since in camera correction of those properties requires some headroom in the color channels).
-
It is not like Apple mobile chips are better than anyone else's. There is no reason they will be better than Intel's chips on desktops/laptops either. The reason for development stagnation is that technology is approaching physical limits, and software demands are flattening out. For all of the spin that Intel is not moving fast enough, remember that Apple themselves lag behind when it comes to keeping their hardware up to date, with the result that high end PCs typically have better hardware.
I would guess that the real reason they are doing this is to make hardware that is not compatible with the PC universe in the belief that software would migrate to their systems. And maybe so that there would no longer be a direct comparison between PCs and Apple computers, that way they could camouflage their slow development cycle.
-
4 hours ago, IronFilm said:
What kind of audio work do you do?
As that is my line of work too:
http://ironfilm.co.nz/sound/
Nice, I also started out on the GH1 :-D
I think the message from the 5Dmk2 is that people wanted affordable ILC video cameras, which the C300mk1 wasn't. Yet the GH3/GH4/etc & NEX5N/a7S/etc is!
Yup, the C300mk1 was the hottest camera of its era!
Like the FS7 is today.The C100 was as affordable as a 5D2.
-
2 hours ago, mkabi said:
You can say that this is just an assumption from my vantage point, because I don't have the numbers... but its pretty much fact at this point...
Given that the following is coming straight from the horses mouth:
"Since the introduction of the EOS 5D Mark II DSLR camera in 2008, Canon has been a part of the full-frame video movement, and the introduction of the C700 FF has reinforced Canon’s commitment to this market."
And, Canon will continue to ride that wave to whichever sucker that wants to go that route for however long they want to...
In my opinion, the cine line is a big mistake as is many of what Canon decided to do with their 5D2 success... instead of creating a separate line, they should have had upgrades and add-ons, they would have made a lot more money that way. How hard is it to make add-ons like:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304877-REG/panasonic_dmw_xlr1_xlr_microphone_adapter.html
OR
https://www.slrlounge.com/nd-throttle-lens-adapters-nd-filters-built/
In terms of upgrades, I mean - they are already asking to send in the 5D4 for a C-log upgrade for $100 US... they could charge $1000 for 4K.... another $1000 for 120fps.... charge as you go. You upgrade for features that you want...
This I will agree with 100,000%
At this point, I don't see a point in having a FF mirrorless with an EF mount - what benefits is it bringing?
Have you seen the weight difference between an A7III and the 5D4? Body Only, its less than a pound. Not specifically targetted towards Mercer, but if that 1 pound means all the world to you, I suggest you hit the gym instead.
I think Canon would be better off by introducing a Hybrid EVF/OVF in their DSLRs.
I think the problem with Canon is that the message they took home from the 5D2 experience is that users wanted smallish ILC video cameras, when in fact what they wanted was hybrids. And that is why they went down the wrong path and consequently opened the door for the likes of Panasonic and Sony to exploit, since those companies had a better understanding of where the consumer market was heading.
There were lessons to be learned from the 5D2 experience, but unfortunately it was not Canon that learned them.
1 hour ago, mercer said:An EF Mount brings millions of lenses to the table. It keeps professional photographers from having to fiddle with adapters or starting from scratch with a new lens line. It could also easily bring back the plethora of Sony users who left Canon for Sony but kept their Canon glass.
I have a couple of friends that are pretty serious about video and they only use native lenses. They would rather buy into a different system than use an adapter. And even myself, I’ve only just started using native lenses and I am already tired of adapting my vintage stuff... I’m tired of dozens of adapters lying around. So much so, I am slowly building a small set of Contax Zeiss that I am having modded with Leitax adapters. And once I know for sure that Nikon is introducing a new mount for their mirrorless cameras, I will most likely Leitax my ai-s lenses to EF as well.
I actually don’t care if they go Mirrorless, it just seems they will give more video features with a mirrorless cam than they do with their DSLRs. I love using DSLRs. I prefer the form factor and the weight. I get other people like EVFs but I literally only use the LCD screen.
The problem is that mechanically a lot of that older EF lens base is not responsive enough. Not good for manual focusing on MILC cameras either, since they tend to have very short throw distances that makes critical focus awkward. Plus, requiring the glass to be further away from the camera due to the mirrorbox results in lenses being larger than they need to be. A new mount with new lenses will result in smaller lighter systems.
If you move to a MILC format, optimal lens performance would benefit from a mount designed specifically for that. If you really wanted to use older lenses you could always add an adapter for those folk.
-
7 hours ago, TwoScoops said:
^ Quite fap-worthy, if true...
If it has a grip like the 5D it will be a non-starter for me, since the grip on that is way too big for my hands. Canon prosumer cameras feel very awkward for me to handle. They are just too big for anything other than a tripod.
5 hours ago, mercer said:@mkabi well like it or not, video users represent... what... 5% of the market for these cameras. You can call it conservative but I consider it being realistic.
5% of primary users perhaps, but the purpose of a hybrid is that you can shoot both stills and video when you want to. Even stills photographers from time to time might want to shoot video as the situation requires, and they probably don't want to carry around a dedicated camera just for that. And in fact likely don't - hence they don't shoot video because they don't have the tools to do it in the first place. Extrapolating the absence of tools to mean the absence of desire is unwise. It is that flexibility that makes a particular camera attractive in the modern market, and why cameras like the a7 and GH series are taking off.
-
1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:
Review of sorts of the New Canon Raw.
https://***URL removed***/articles/0483301097/quick-look-canons-new-compressed-raw-format
With the relatively low cost of media these days, why would anyone bother with compressed raw on a camera like this, especially considering the additional artifacts it introduces?
-
Is some sort of IS activated?
-
4 hours ago, mercer said:
Not really. Canon already outsells Sony with mirrorless cameras and it seems like most Sony users shoot with Canon glass, so as long as they don’t do something stupid like Nikon is doing with their mount, I predict a lot of users will switch over.
Only in Japan.
-
On 2018-03-26 at 1:10 AM, Dunjoye said:
In before people complain about 4k having a cropped view and no active depaf in 4k
A full frame prosumer camera will not be like the M50. It will almost certainly have the additional electronics that the 1D/5D/7D cameras have, which should enable PDAF and hardware 4K at the same time.
The M50 is a basic model with stripped down internals to save on materials costs, FF prosumer MILCs from Canon will not be done that way, and we can expect superior performance. The M50 will be to the new prosumer FF MILCs the same as Rebels are to the 5D series in terms of performance.
-
On 2018-03-22 at 6:02 PM, jonpais said:
But in this case the feature is already in the camera. Since the M50 4K crop is already 2x, I don’t see how enabling DPAF is going to strain the new DIGIC 8 processor. I prefer Sony’s business model of putting the 693-point AF from their $4,500 a9 in their $2,000 a7 III. As do virtually all reviewers outside the apologists in this forum.
Because that additional processing being done in the 5D4 is performed by a second processor that is not present in the M50?
The Digic 8 processing capabilities are likely not all that different from the Digic 6+, the main difference is the added logic for the 4K hardware encoder. Running the hardware encoder is going to generate a lot of heat and that will limit what else the processor can do since it has to remain within a safe thermal envelope or it will fail. If they stick active cooling onto the processor it probably would be able to do both 4K and PDAF at the same time, but a fan in a small MILC body is not practical.
The reasons these things are not implemented together is because of the limitations of the hardware inside the equipment. It has nothing to do with some kind of artificial market segmentation.
-
NX2 rumors
In: Cameras
12 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:Codependency is unhealthy. It states, I cannot survive in any capacity without another person, which is clearly a self delusion.
The only time codependency is healthy is a parent/young child dynamic. But even here, the goal is to ween towards independence.
What you're talking about is interdependency, not codependency. Interdependency is when you are in a relationship that enhances your existence, yet does not define it. It doesnt become your core identity but you fully acknowledge and accept this role in your life. You are a willing participant rather than a victim of it's trappings. This is where unconditional love exists, and is very rare in romantic relations.
Sadly, 99% of "love" relationships are codependent in structure and expectation. And though some people are complicit and mutual in that illusion of true love, (known as taken for a ride) it doesn't take much for the relationship to crumble when someone changes the priorities around, hence the astronomical divorce rates. Marriage, as most of is know it, is merely a contract of self and exclusive interest. For the state it's even more nafarious.
The truth is you don't NEED anyone else but yourself to survive on any level unless you're a young child. But you can desire to be in the company and companionship of others as a matter of conscious choice, if that makes sense?
Codependency and interdependency are the same thing. What you are calling "codependency" is actually dependency.
Redefining terms to suit yourself does not negate someone else's argument just because they used those terms.
And btw, you do need other people to survive, no one is an island. If you doubt that, try discarding everything made by someone else then walking off into the woods some day and see how long you last without any sort of input from anyone else (and that includes all the tools they have made). No doubt there will be the odd one or two people who would be able to survive solely by their own hand, but almost everyone would die in short order. There is a TV program called "Naked and Afraid" that tries to look at that as entertainment, and if you have ever watched that show it becomes immediately clear that almost everyone in the modern world, even self proclaimed "survivalists", would be dead within a month if left solely to their own devices without any assistance whatsoever from other people.
-
11 hours ago, jonpais said:
Sorry, but that is not what the interviewee says. He unmistakably says 4K DPAF is technically feasible (ie workable, achievable, realistic), but Canon doesn’t want to trample on the toes of the 5D Mark IV. The executive makes no mention of either hardware or software limitations. Canon has made it very clear for a long while now that professional videographers need to step up to one of their cinema cameras if they want 4K, exposure tools like waveform monitors and zebras, 4K HDMI out and decent codecs. It is the position of the product, otherwise known as marketing, that determines which cameras get what, and not feedback from filmmakers.
That is what he is saying. 4K DPAF is technically feasible, but not in the hardware choices made for the consumer products. The processor has the capability of doing one or the other function, but not both at the same time, at least not without additional hardware support. There are reasons for doing it this way, first and foremost being the cost and what the target market would be prepared to pay. Deliberately ceding market sure to competition is a stupid strategy, and whatever else I might think of Canon I am pretty sure they are not stupid. They don't have these features in the camera because it would make it too expensive. You are not going to sell too many cameras in the entry level market if they cost $2k. Those sorts of people will buy some other camera that costs less instead.
However, what it does mean that if Canon were to produce a prosumer MILC, it most likely WOULD have that added hardware that would make the features practical to implement.
-
NX2 rumors
In: Cameras
5 hours ago, Arikhan said:It seems to be a misconception out there...You can't increase DR endlessly - this would be a perpetuum mobile and so...impossible. At the end of the day, output DR is limited by the maximum DR-capabilities of the sensor.
By stacking together you can only get more and more near to the DR limits given by the sensor - and get more maleability in post by gathering useful information to work with in highlights, mids and shadows. So, that's a kind of optimizing and NOT increasing. Only sensor manufacturers can increase the DR capabilties of a sensor...
Not true. You can get beyond the inherent sensor dynamic range by stacking images acquired at different gains and/or ND settings to get a final image with a DR much greater than the individual images.
-
8 hours ago, wolf33d said:
With DPREVIEW:
- The EOS M50 offers 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS AF, but not at the same time. Is there a technical reason for this limitation?
"With the EOS 5D Mark IV, we do offer 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus, so technically it is feasible. But given the position of the M50 in the lineup, we can’t include all of the features available in a product like the 5D IV. Given the position of the product, we wanted to achieve the optimal balance [of features] in a camera in that range."
We all knew Canon was crippling its products. Now is another proof. How can they dare sell you completely crippled shits for so much money? And people buy that.
What a ridiculous company. I am speechless.That is not what they are saying at all. In order to shoot 4K and use DPAF the 5D4 needs to use MJPEG to reduce processor overhead to the point where it is feasibly. This in turn requires very high bit rates that the UHS-I slot would have trouble with, and that most likely is the "technical reason" they are referring to. The 4K shot with the M50 is done with hardware encoding, allowing much lower bit rates to be used. But, apparently that doesn't leave enough processor overhead to handle DPAF as well.
It is not deliberate crippling, it is just a consequence of the limitations of the processor.
At least some of the high end DSLRs include additional dedicated processors for focussing as well, it is possible that the M50 lacks that in order to cut costs.
-
NX2 rumors
In: Cameras
1 hour ago, Attila Bakos said:Yeah I get this and this is fine, but last time I checked the bitrate of 4K 12/14bit uncompressed RAW at 25fps exceeded the maximum continuous write speed of the fastest UHS-II cards. How do you solve that bottleneck?
You can't. The fastest cards available will be able to just cope with 10 bit at most, and that is assuming you only use a 4K crop (in other words, no oversampling).
-
NX2 rumors
In: Cameras
On 2018-03-16 at 11:57 PM, Attila Bakos said:Yeah, "must be capable" is all we can say, but noone knows for sure (yet). Just check writing speeds of the best UHS-II card readers and even there you will see big differences. Somehow I seriously doubt that the NX1 will be as fast as those, but obviously I'm just guessing too, so let's say you're right, then we are looking at 8bit 4K RAW tops, for continuous recording without frame drops.
The difference is due not to the interface itself, but what is happening internally in those devices. Just because an interface is capable of a particular speed does not mean that the device can generate or receive data at that rate. To use a UHS-II spec label they have to be capable of meeting the 300 mB/s data transfer requirement however. In the case of a camera like the NX, for example, there is a bunch of processing going on that limits the availability of the data, and that results in lower speeds when recording natively. However, we know the minimum base internal data rate of the camera since it does a 6.5k sensor read at 8 bits/30 fps in preparing data for 4K video. That is a bandwidth of approximately 630 mB/s. The camera does processing on that data however, and the bottleneck for data delivery is the processing itself, not the UHS-II interface. If you found a way to side step that processing you should be able to deliver enough data to swamp the interface, since the camera is dealing internally with at least twice the amount specified by UHS-II. If you only used a crop of the sensor however you would be able to (in theory) deliver a RAW data feed as I explained earlier.
-
NX2 rumors
In: Cameras
2 hours ago, Attila Bakos said:Exactly. That would require 1.14GB/s continuous write speed at 25fps. The NX1 has an UHS-II interface, the maximum bus speed is 312MB/s. But that's only theoretical, afaik the body can't even reach half of that. It's not even close to the requirement of UHD 14bit RAW at 25fps. 1080p maybe...
If the camera has the UHS-II spec then it must be capable of that sort of transfer speed by definition. That is the whole point of a spec, if something complies with it, it has to meet it. If there is no processing going on then there should be nothing stopping the camera from achieving that.
We know the camera can natively shoot full sensor 12 bit RAW+JPEG at 15 fps at a minimum (it can likely do more than that in practise if it only collects data and nothing else). What it can't do is process the files fast enough to clear the buffer, but presumably if the data is written directly to media without any processing then that should not be an impediment. The camera is capable of outputting a full sensor read at 30 fps with at least 8 bits of depth, it may do more but just not normally use the extra bits due to computational overhead. So the data is there, it is just a question of in what form it can be directed to recording media.
If he is recording a crop rather than 6K then it should be almost possible to do what he says he is doing (it would require 350 MB/s). A 12 bit 4K RAW image at 25 fps would require a data transfer rate of 300 MB/s, which would be within spec for the card slot. The bigger question is what cards would he be using, AFAIK the best UHS-II cards have write speeds in the 260-280 MB/s write range, and to do that consistently without dropped frames would be asking a lot. More realistic would be 8-10 bit 4K RAW, that would provide enough headroom for fluctuations. 8 bit 4K RAW at 25 fps would only require 200 MB/s for example, while 10 bits would require 250 MB/s.
-
6 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:
If you don't care about 4K while blogging then the M50 looks a very decent camera (I never understood the need to see a babbling face in 4K
)
In 4K other than the crop and lack of dual focus, there is massive rolling shutter that would make it useless for blogging anyways. Good thing is that you still have the 4K option for deep DoF static shots/interviews etc...
Bad aliasing artifacts at around 5:50 on that building in the rear.
-
23 hours ago, webrunner5 said:
I think I would have to go with the Sony A7 mk III since they are the same money. But good lenses for it are more expensive. A7s mk II is same money also.
I am done with m4/3 stuff. And the AF on the GH5 is well, it blows. 10 bit is nice buy how often does it really matter. The A7 mk III is using the A9 AF so that is a Good thing. You have the s35 crop mode, clear zoom, better eye control, on and on. It is a damn nice camera. But so is the GH5 on the most part. Tough choice.
The lens issue is about to go away since most of the major third party lens manufacturers seem to be getting on the E mount bandwagon now.
Right now the A7III is probably the premier hybrid choice for the prosumer user.
Sony FS5 II announced with 4K 120fps RAW recording at NAB 2018
In: Cameras
Posted
Why not? Canon have done that in the past as well, with incremental upgrades that sometimes get out of step. The G20 followed by the G30 about three months later springs to mind. If you bought a G20 when it was released you likely would have been less than happy about that.
When these sorts of things happen very often it is due to a specific upgrade being delayed for some reason, but in order to remain competitive something else has to be released in the interim. Then, changes on the competitive landscape necessitate the release of the next product much sooner than otherwise would happen.
Sony bodies remain essentially the same, the main upgrade in any cycle is usually one of the sensor, processor or LSI, sometimes more if there has been a particularly long gap between updates. They may be holding off on the processor upgrades until the FS7, with the FS5 targeted at the sort of market something like the C100 occupies, for instance. For that market the specs are likely fine, the biggest drawback of the FS5 I would have been AF performance versus the C100M2, and the FS5 II is probably an attempt to address that deficiency. If the C100M3 comes out with higher specs, such as internal 4K60p, then you would probably see an FS5 III sooner rather than later, but otherwise it will show up in about 2-3 years from now. For higher performance applications you would need to get the next gen FS7, or (potentially) an a7S III for less formal production applications.