« on: March 06, 2014, 09:22:05 AM »
IDC is such a joke.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
With a late 2013 8 Core Mac Pro and 32GB RAM, I'm not really worried about my machine freezing, but rather MY inability to correctly / efficiently post-process my video files. Despite using the same custom WB, my colors just don't seem as vibrant/accurate as my stills, and despite meticulous focusing (on a tripod,m statically shooting men's volleyball), the output is not as sharp as I would expect - so if any of the more experienced can point me in the right direction for fast-action video settings and post-processing tips, I'd appreciate that.
Your clip is simply underexposed. Expose it properly and you'll be fine. There's no way to fix a shot like that. And shooting All-I won't make any difference. Underexposed is underexposed. Additionally, shooting All-I is overkill for web video and the like. IPB is fine unless you're shooting for theatrical projection.
Remember, the c300 uses an 8K sensor and intelligently down-samples to 1080 in camera. So if we are only getting 2.5K reads off a sensor, then it's not like this "new camera" would necessarily be using as much or more image data.
Actually it's a 4K sensor downsampled in camera to 1080p.
don't care for video, don't need or want "global shutter" in a DSLR.
I'm having a hard time believing this. It seems like Canon would introduce this on their C series of cinema cameras before their regular DSLR line. Same being true with the higher resolution (2.5K) video.
HurtinMinorKey, Don't let them drive you off! More iPhone-itis quotes (either still or video quotes are just fine), please. & please, please, PLEASE keep quoting Ken Rockwell! (ur not Ken, using another handle, r u??)
& I thought being stuck at home on a Friday night was going to be boring....
I have both the T3 and 5D2, for anything other than landscapes and low-light I prefer the T3.
For size and convenience, the T3 is amazing.
When I took my first picture with the T3 in 2012 (previously using a SD780IS), I forgot to focus the image, and it looked better than anything I had seen come out of a camera to that point.
So, you're saying that combining the small physical size of the SL1 with the price of the T3 would obviously be stupid move...and that proves just how much smarter you are compared to Canon? Right.
Well, they already did that with the 100D, so what's the next step? Make a cheaper version that still makes the people who wouldn't pick up a P&S "because their iPhone's camera is almost as good" think that it's worth buying. Those of us who are already in the Canon ecosystem complain about Canon releasing a cheaper 100D instead of upgrading something we want. Canon doesn't care, because when the consumer with a smartphone looks a little higher than what they'd spend on a P&S and sees a dSLR, they'll think "it looks professional, so it must take better pictures", and they buy it. Canon has just performed a little upsell, and gotten more money from that consumer than they would have spent on a P&S.
Were we, dude? Only video?
Clearly you should not, dude. If Canon does release a body that comes in under the 100D in the lineup, it will be because they are pretty damn sure there's a profitable market for it. But I'm sure that you know Canon's customer base better far better than they do, it's not like they sell many cameras or anything like that.