rjbray01 said:sorry but what is BLE ?
ahsanford said:saveyourmoment said:would like to see spot-metering linked to af-point...
+1.
- A
since the metering sensors in these cameras are just low res imaging sensors now, I don't think there's anything particular about the hardware that would be required. Just sampling from a particular area when making the decision.Fatalv said:ahsanford said:saveyourmoment said:would like to see spot-metering linked to af-point...
+1.
- A
+2 but I thought this was dependent on a hardware implementation. Maybe we're lucky and the hardware was there but hid by nerf/firmware?
One can dream! ;D
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
Frederik_Bo said:new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
midluk said:- selectable high speed burst rate (and increase to 9fps)
...
- food mode
Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
Frederik_Bo said:Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
I find that har to believe. Especially as it is not reading the hole sensor in 4k mode.
Further more they have been doing h264 in camera for HD for years. It would seem odd if they can't do it with 4k By now.
How do you know it's not to cripple the usage to make us want another type of camera for video. They did ti with the c100 vs c300. They had camcorders with MPEG 2 but gave the c100 and even c100 mark ii the compressed and more cpu intensive avchd.tr573 said:Frederik_Bo said:Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
I find that har to believe. Especially as it is not reading the hole sensor in 4k mode.
Further more they have been doing h264 in camera for HD for years. It would seem odd if they can't do it with 4k By now.
being able to efficiently (in a power and heat sense) process 1080P is in no way an indication of being able to do so for four times that amount of data. You can believe what you like, but Canon only touts stills extraction and the ridiculous video bitrate as a "feature" because they have to make the best of the situation they are stuck in with mjpeg. If they could do 4K with a better codec in camera, they would be doing it already, at least with the 1DC or the 1DX2, and they aren't.
Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 02:11:44 PM
Quote
Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
I find that har to believe. Especially as it is not reading the hole sensor in 4k mode.
Further more they have been doing h264 in camera for HD for years. It would seem odd if they can't do it with 4k By now.
being able to efficiently (in a power and heat sense) process 1080P is in no way an indication of being able to do so for four times that amount of data. You can believe what you like, but Canon only touts stills extraction and the ridiculous video bitrate as a "feature" because they have to make the best of the situation they are stuck in with mjpeg. If they could do 4K with a better codec in camera, they would be doing it already, at least with the 1DC or the 1DX2, and they aren't.
RayValdez360 said:How do you know it's not to cripple the usage to make us want another type of camera for video. They did ti with the c100 vs c300. They had camcorders with MPEG 2 but gave the c100 and even c100 mark ii the compressed and more cpu intensive avchd.tr573 said:Frederik_Bo said:Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
I find that har to believe. Especially as it is not reading the hole sensor in 4k mode.
Further more they have been doing h264 in camera for HD for years. It would seem odd if they can't do it with 4k By now.
being able to efficiently (in a power and heat sense) process 1080P is in no way an indication of being able to do so for four times that amount of data. You can believe what you like, but Canon only touts stills extraction and the ridiculous video bitrate as a "feature" because they have to make the best of the situation they are stuck in with mjpeg. If they could do 4K with a better codec in camera, they would be doing it already, at least with the 1DC or the 1DX2, and they aren't.
Frederik_Bo said:Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 02:11:44 PM
Quote
Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
I find that har to believe. Especially as it is not reading the hole sensor in 4k mode.
Further more they have been doing h264 in camera for HD for years. It would seem odd if they can't do it with 4k By now.
being able to efficiently (in a power and heat sense) process 1080P is in no way an indication of being able to do so for four times that amount of data. You can believe what you like, but Canon only touts stills extraction and the ridiculous video bitrate as a "feature" because they have to make the best of the situation they are stuck in with mjpeg. If they could do 4K with a better codec in camera, they would be doing it already, at least with the 1DC or the 1DX2, and they aren't.
Well the 5d mark II did it with Full HD in 2009. The mark IV came out in 2016. That gives it 7 years on the Mark II which amounts to 84 months. Moores law says that processing power dubles every 18 months. This would make the current 5d mark IV be 4,6 doublings a head of the mark II. This gives us an exponential funktion looking like this: 2x1^4,6=24,25. Meaning that if the processors in the canon cameras, have been keeping up with Moores law, then the processor in the 5d mark IV should be roughly 24,25 times as fast as the the mark II. I think the processing of 4 times the amount of data should be possible. No way is processing power the bottleneck.
tr573 said:Frederik_Bo said:Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 02:11:44 PM
Quote
Quote from: Frederik_Bo on Today at 01:36:02 PM
Quote
new 4K codecs,etc .. most of that has to be done in hardware and not software.
How so? Codecs are a softwere property. I am sure the processor can handle it.
the reason they do mjpeg is the low cpu cost. they can't dissipate heat fast enough to do h.264 in camera, so they stuck with mjpeg.
I find that har to believe. Especially as it is not reading the hole sensor in 4k mode.
Further more they have been doing h264 in camera for HD for years. It would seem odd if they can't do it with 4k By now.
being able to efficiently (in a power and heat sense) process 1080P is in no way an indication of being able to do so for four times that amount of data. You can believe what you like, but Canon only touts stills extraction and the ridiculous video bitrate as a "feature" because they have to make the best of the situation they are stuck in with mjpeg. If they could do 4K with a better codec in camera, they would be doing it already, at least with the 1DC or the 1DX2, and they aren't.
Well the 5d mark II did it with Full HD in 2009. The mark IV came out in 2016. That gives it 7 years on the Mark II which amounts to 84 months. Moores law says that processing power dubles every 18 months. This would make the current 5d mark IV be 4,6 doublings a head of the mark II. This gives us an exponential funktion looking like this: 2x1^4,6=24,25. Meaning that if the processors in the canon cameras, have been keeping up with Moores law, then the processor in the 5d mark IV should be roughly 24,25 times as fast as the the mark II. I think the processing of 4 times the amount of data should be possible. No way is processing power the bottleneck.
I did not say the cpu can't do it at all, I said it can't do it in that form factor without drawing more power and thus generating more heat than the whole unit can handle reliably.