newfoundmass

Give me that Super 35 sensor and M43 mount and take my money.

This is great news. Filled out my survey!

I used to be a regular viewer of Max but yeah, over the last two or so years he has done quite a few tiny things that made me question his credibility overall, particularly in his camera comparisons. The blatant dishonesty with the thumbnail kinda sums it up.

You had me up until CFast cards!

How'd everything come out?

You sure about that? I've never used them together, but Sony colors in the A7Sii aren't very good. Wasn't until the A7iii that I saw improvement in Sony's color.

For things like auto focus I don't think it's so much about tech really. With a focus puller you have complete control over it. You can pull focus as slow or as fast as you want. You can set multiple focus points. There are just so many reasons for why manual focus is preferred and why AF isn't something they need or want.

After some of the discussion about Cloud storage in this thread and concerns over increasing costs, I laughed this morning when I got an email from Dropbox telling me that their price is in increasing by $20 a year. Granted they doubled the space from 1TB to 2TB, but still.

I don't personally know a single narrative filmmaker that uses auto focus even when using cameras that have good AF. They all use manual lenses, which gives them complete control over focusing.

Ha ha, I don't envy this at all for a variety of reasons. Neither of those cameras are ideal for this kind of work due to battery life, though I'm guessing they'll be rigged up. A lot depends on the switcher and whether it's capable of tweaking the colors for each input. Once you've custom white balanced everything and have them using similar picture profiles, you'll probably want to head into the camera options and tweak the settings so that they match as best as you can. Hopefully then the switcher can fine tune it, cause I'm not sure how close you'll be able to get things just through the more broader image profile settings. I've avoided mixing camera brands for live switching like the plague for this reason. Even if you can't get the same camera for each angle, you're in the ball park as long as they're the same brand.

Don't they have a file size limit? Correct. If you're only storing a couple hundred gigs, or even a TB or so, it's not too big of a worry. It's when you start getting in the 10's of TBs or more that it becomes an issue where you're kinda held hostage. It's not as simple to switch Cloud services when you're dealing with such a massive amount of data.

Storage and back up is increasingly becoming a bigger problem for me. I want to have a local copy, but also having cloud backups are kind of necessary at this point. Amazon Web Services Glacier storage is the most cost effective to store but slow, and costly, to retrieve. When you've got dozens of TB of data though your options dwindle, and the costs quickly get into enterprise plan territory which can costs thousands and thousands of dollars a year. Once Amazon cut the unlimited storage for Prime users it became clear to me that this was only going to become a bigger issue / problem.

You're comparing the price of a car in 1903 to the prices of a MacPro in 2009 and 2013? The US dollar in 2009 is equal to $1.19 today. Using inflation to justify this is ridiculous. Yeah, I could buy another iMac and experience the same limitations as before. Oddly buying a machine that's not easily/fully upgradable isn't high on my to do list though. Selling and buying a new work station every couple of years to avoid the increasingly rapid drop in value isn't appealing to me. I'm sorry I'm not as understanding of Apple shafting their customer base as you are. I love Mac computers, but there's nothing Apple apologists won't defend, huh?

You realize that has been the entry price for the last couple MacPros, right? I think the 2009 MacPro I bought was $2800? Maybe $3000? Acknowledging you royally screwed up with the Garbage Bin MacPro and, as part of trying to win people back, launching a MacPro that has worse specs than your best regular iMac (not even the iMac Pro!) and for twice the price is asinine. That it's upgradable is wonderful, but not $6k wonderful, and certainly not the $10k you'd have to spend to get the machine you'd really need. This is clearly a company that has lost its way. Style over substance to a ridiculous degree. That they've simultaneously done this while dumbing down/simplified their "pro" apps like FCPX makes no sense. The core of the Apple's creative community, and those that were most vocal about Apple losing their way, are the ones Apple has decided to ignore. Everyone in this thread complaining WANT to give Apple their money, FFS!

Who are these people? Where are they? Examples?

I take it ALL back! I looked at this mic for my stereo mic search and it definitely piqued my interest, but $299 was just not feasible right now, since I needed two. I ended up going with the Tascam TM-2X which I like a lot and got one of them used in like new condition for a steal, but I'm definitely looking at this for the future. These mics interest me, especially for my pro wrestling work, because I think it can help make it more immersive because crowd reaction adds so much to the overall performance, and sometimes it can come off as a lot more muted than I'd like even when I try to mic the audience since the audience is on all sides of the performance. WWE, the major league, obviously handles it well given they have major league production. But for these smaller events the budget obviously isn't there for me to have an intricate set up with multiple mics all over the building, so something like this that does a "good enough" job of getting all sides of the action / crowd makes me kinda salivate! Hoping the two TM-2X at least improves things a little bit! ?

I hate you!

You're one of my favorite users @BTM_Pix. Thanks for this!

OSX for video editing has always been more stable for me, even when using the same programs across platforms. FCPX though really kinda made having OSX less important for me and one of the reasons I moved to PC. If I wasn't using FCPX then it made less sense to stay with Mac. Still though, I miss it, especially for 3rd party programs that work better on Mac than PC, ProAnimator being one of my favorites that I would use when I just needed quick 3D text / animations. The PC version is pretty much unusable.

Too true! We're so spoiled!

That's my worry, though I'm wondering if this new approach will make that less of an issue. In the video Max released that @Robert Collins posted he said that it can now use off the shelf parts. That would seem to possibly open the flood gates, so to speak, as the biggest issue with Hackintoshes was hardware compatibility, or so I've read.

? Jeez!

One good thing about this announcement though is that they stuck with Intel. I know there were many in the Hackintosh community that were worried that they were going to start making their own processors again, with 2020 being the year a lot of them said it would happen. I wonder too if, by being more "modular", if this also makes building a Hackintosh any easier? I've really been thinking about building one as my current system gets older, I've just always been worried about something going wrong at a crucial point while working.

The article I read didn't mention that it was upgradable. That's great if it is, though I still can't justify $6k for it. I think that's double what I paid for my last Mac Pro nearly 10 years ago, if I recall correctly! Mac has always charged a premium, but it was still feasible for enthusiasts and smaller creators to scrape together the money to get a professional machine. Not so much anymore. They've moved on from those folks, unfortunately. If you want a real Mac and don't want to have to take a second mortgage out on your house, you have to get iMacs and overpriced MacBooks with shitty keyboards. Neither are ideal solutions for me, given how rapidly those machines become antiquated. I built a custom PC in 2015 for $1k that blew my 2014 iMac that cost nearly 3 times more out of the water.

I don't know if their sales numbers have been overstated, but I do wonder if they partially appeal to a different market than a lot of the others do. Most of the Sony mirrorless shooters I know are really plugged into the YouTube world, as opposed to the corporate/event/commercial world that I shoot in. The rest are your indie filmmakers and some one person crew journalists. I do wonder if your numbers indicate that the latter are the types that post here, as opposed to the YouTube content creators. When I shoot weddings, or when the events I shoot also hire a photographer, most of them shoot Canon, Nikon, and Fuji, in that order. I've definitely seen a real uptick in Fuji users these last couple of years, especially around the time the XT-2 came out. I don't know if Canon's and Nikon's FF mirrorless entries have hurt that, I'll know more as work picks up this summer and I see what people are shooting with, but Fuji hit a real sweet spot I think with capabilities, size, and price. I do wonder though if we overestimate Sony's dominance in the professional, and even the hardcore hobbyist space. When you really think about it Sony really does cater to that YouTube crowd a lot. The Axxxx series have come out pretty regularly, when you compare it to their competitors. In the time Panasonic released their two popular vlogging cameras, the G7 and the G85, Sony has released 4 or so Axxxx series cameras that became popular with that crowd. And I very rarely see anyone using those cameras outside of YouTube stuff. That's all, of course, speculative and based on my experiences though!