Originally posted by Qwntm I have a 28" 4K monitor and the difference is pretty obvious as well. You can really see the detail in Thomas Heaton or Ben Horne's sample photos during the videos. My internet used to kinda puke the 4K stuff onto the screen, but I replaced my router and now I can stream 4k all the time no issues.
The 4K workflow is no issue for me either, I buy a big off the shelf gaming PC every few years that just rips through anything. They're usually about $1K USD, while the same spec'd Mac would be around $5k. That's value for money.
(And I've used Mac's and they are just as big a PIA as PC's but in a different way, pick your poison, for me I'll pay less for the same hassles.)
I just have a standard cable internet connection and I'm in a backwater of NE Oregon (population 2000 in the town I'm in) so I'm either lucky, or it's a benefit of livin' in the USA.
Yes, it's definitely being in the USA - a PC like that here in Oz would be AU$3k (about US $1800), and you don't want to know how expensive the Mac is, but it'd start with four zero's in the number..
Ditto the internet speeds - our "National Broadband Network" has been capped at 100mBit per connection, though it may finally be shifting to join the 21st century.
---------- Post added 18-01-21 at 04:53 PM ----------
Originally posted by biz-engineer What's untold is that the larger the sensor , the slower the readout.
That needs a minor correction - the more MegaPixels the sensor, the slower the read out - it's not a function of the physical size, as a Full Frame sensor with 12Mp will read out faster then an APSc with 14Mp.
'Most' FF and MF sensor have more pixels, though there are a few that have lower numbers to get larger pixels, for superior low light performance - Se the Canon camera used for AppleTV's "The Earth At Night" doco series.
---------- Post added 18-01-21 at 05:01 PM ----------
Originally posted by BigMackCam Absolutely. Micro 4/3 seems to be (or have been) the sweet spot for many amateur and even quite serious amateur video applications. I'm sure what you describe above are major factors in that choice...
Nope, not even close.
AJA, Arri, Red, Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Panavision, Phantom, Blackmagic Design - All make "Super35" sized sensor cameras, which are effectively the same size area as APSc, and which match the size of the 35mm negative running vertically through the gate on a Film Camera.
Only BMD and Panasonic make M3/4.
This is also one of the reasons it irks when the Stills-Only mob tell us Video and Cinema Shooters we shouldn't be allowed to have video features on our Pentax cameras. They're effectively saying "Your art is less important then mine".
---------- Post added 18-01-21 at 05:05 PM ----------
Originally posted by biz-engineer - (I have a book about analog television electronic engineering) -
<giggles,...> I have Qualifications, both in the engineering and repairs for analog equipment,.... and they're practically worthless now in the digital solid state era.
---------- Post added 18-01-21 at 05:09 PM ----------
Originally posted by biz-engineer Marketing push hard to sell 4K video on FF mirrorless cameras, but no one every questioned if it's necessary, people just buy because now still cameras "must have 4K video" even if the vast majority of photographers never use it.
That's backwards - these days you can't
sell a camera for Stills if it doesn't have 4K video.
And that's not about whether you can broadcast it or even see the difference, it's that the Buyers know if it doesn't have 4K, then it's likely to be old technology, and likely to be lower quality then their phones.
In 2012, the same was true for HD.