Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
After so many threads I raised for this, eventually heard from an expert
David Kilpatrick wrote:Lightroom can use the GPS Data, but Photoshop is as yet badly equipped to handle it - I think the reason Expression Media 2 does it so well is that Microsoft bought this program before Phase One acquired it, and during their ownership, added their own Virtual Earth to the menus.
I've used PMB previously on the PC with the old separate Sony GPS data logger, but it's not a program I would want to use routinely - certainly not in place of Bridge, Lightroom, iMovie.
The AVCHD movie format is extremely computer-unfriendly insofar as very few programs will play the data files directly (Roxio's programs like Toast and Nero will do). That's because the format is basically imitating a DVD. I shoot MPEG4 just for ease of editing and to be able to upload unedited files to internet.
supernovak wrote:On my PC AVCHD files work like a charm - and I love how I can instantly burn BD disk using DVD medium.
The whole process atkes 10 minutes for full 4.5 GB disK (an hour of 1920x1080) material. Amazing quality on my HD projector
Also many software packages like Corel's $60 Video Studio Pro x3 do an amazing (and ultra fast) job with AVCHD files.
Many cool features, works really well on my i7 machine.
agorabasta wrote:David, the AVCHD video files are the same MP4 ( the .mts extension files at \PRIVATE\AVCHD\BDMV\STREAM folder on the card), and can be played if an appropriate video codec is installed on your computer.
But how can we import aVCHD directly? At least my Lightroom and PMB do not do this automatically
My reference points are Canon and Nikon movie files - or even the files off my Sanyo Xacti. I can browse these in Bridge and play them in the Preview window. On my Mac, I can even just view them in a column list view, select the file and 'play' the thumbnail!
AVCHD is fine - I have the tools to use it - but it is a limited format requiring programs or codecs to use. I have a PS3 and I have iMovie, so no big deal, but the files simply won't play at all on many products ranging from digital image stroage devices to Unix-based netbooks, without a lot of messing around.
For YouTube stuff I just shoot MPEG4 as it's far easier to deal with and there is no visible loss at normal viewing sizes.
This has some light sources right in-shot, from balloon burner to sun, and even some sensor dust (it's dusty place!) but otherwise is an amazing demo of what the A55 can do, and quite beautiful to watch.
It is a photo-show of a balloon flight above the Valley of the Queens and the Temple of Hatshepsut, Luxor.
supernovak wrote:On my PC AVCHD files work like a charm - and I love how I can instantly burn BD disk using DVD medium.
The whole process atkes 10 minutes for full 4.5 GB disK (an hour of 1920x1080) material. Amazing quality on my HD projector
Also many software packages like Corel's $60 Video Studio Pro x3 do an amazing (and ultra fast) job with AVCHD files.
Many cool features, works really well on my i7 machine.
agorabasta wrote:David, the AVCHD video files are the same MP4 ( the .mts extension files at \PRIVATE\AVCHD\BDMV\STREAM folder on the card), and can be played if an appropriate video codec is installed on your computer.
But how can we import aVCHD directly? At least my Lightroom and PMB do not do this automatically
My PMB imports all my movies, puts them in the same folder as my photos and gets rid of teh various meta files - so the only thing in m2ts files.
Make sure to check "import all media files" and not photos only when PMB import pops up after you connect your camera.
David Kilpatrick wrote:My reference points are Canon and Nikon movie files - or even the files off my Sanyo Xacti. I can browse these in Bridge and play them in the Preview window. On my Mac, I can even just view them in a column list view, select the file and 'play' the thumbnail!
AVCHD is fine - I have the tools to use it - but it is a limited format requiring programs or codecs to use. I have a PS3 and I have iMovie, so no big deal, but the files simply won't play at all on many products ranging from digital image stroage devices to Unix-based netbooks, without a lot of messing around.
For YouTube stuff I just shoot MPEG4 as it's far easier to deal with and there is no visible loss at normal viewing sizes.
David
I know my LG BD player opens my BD-formated DVD (BD-5) very nicely - and fiels are not encoded at all jsut moved as is to the stream BD folder.
Isn't it the native BD format (m2ts)?
Also it seems that I get best results if I upload AVCHD files and not mp4. I don't think it even has to convert it - it is available seconds after I uploaded in full 1920x1080.
Few examples with crappy and wonderful C-mount 35mm 1.7 - extremly dark in both videos, taken wide open (1.7) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZTVtr4pWvM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPn7sR3zdYM
The 'problems' with AVCHD ease of use are created intentionally by the vested interest of quite certain entities.
Both Sony and Apple are on the board of directors of the Blu-Ray Association.
Then Microsoft, to the contrary, is not even on the list of contributors...
The Sony 'PMB' may get installed with or without AVCHD support activated. The newer versions of PMB ask you to connect a camera during the installation process, and then activate the video capabilities depending on video formats supported in that cam.
The whole point of AVCHD is that it's native to DVD and BD. Copy the same files to any-old-computer and there's no guarantee of being able to play them even if you know which of the several folders, databases and directory structures contains the actual movie data. Of course it copies to BD and plays, because BD players and DVD players are set up to use AVCHD.
It is definitely better than MPEG4 on the camera, I've done comparisons and the extra detail is clearly visible. But it's still not as simple a 'portable' movie file format as MPEG4.
The AVCHD data is a subset of MP4. All the problems arise from the copyright-related metadata and then the AVCHD data may also be encrypted (which is not the case with the consumer cameras AVCHD).
Ken Rockwell has his review up (well I use the term vaguely) Leaving aside some points I don't think are relevant he does raise a few points that are valid.
Just read a few lines from Ken Rockwell and I know now that he's probably (re: definitely) a Canon guy.
Just one line as a quote: "Quality - made in Thailand"
Frankly, I would classify such an article as a very poor one and a cheap method for praising his beloved company.
Most of all, it's not donations that we should make to keep his web running, but on the opposite he should pay us to read such garbage.
Come on Barry, be serious, he's not worth to be mentioned in our forum.
bfitzgerald wrote:Ken Rockwell has his review up (well I use the term vaguely) Leaving aside some points I don't think are relevant he does raise a few points that are valid.
As usual Rockwell's report is full of quite damaging and silly errors. His constant comments about 'doggie-doo' on the SD card simply show he hasn't used a camera which records AVCHD before, and as for cards being unreadable by computers, that is nonsense. My guess is that he's got some card readers which are not compatible with SDHC and has used a (normal size now) large card, but his MacBook Pro of course has a slot which is compatible with new cards. I have several card readers which don't read any SD cards over 2GB.
His CAPITAL LETTERS about not having a HOT SHOE (it does, of course, it just doesn't have an old-fashioned hot shoe to 1935 specifications), error in saying the GPS does not record altitude (it does, most likely he's using software which doesn't read it), and his very peculiar comments about the colour/quality of the images just indicate an odd bias. He seems to be a JPEG shooter. Nikon have just released a Firmware bug fix for the D7000 which he will appreciate.
Maybe it's down to whatever conditions Rockwell shoots in, his colour preference. I find the A55 colours not far removed from Nikon's colours, and rather better than Canon's, for my environment. He goes on a lot about not being able to find tune AWB and it would, indeed, be nice to have fine filter and WB controls like the old KM A2 had - funny how much has been forgotten. But he has probably not tried the AWB Bracket function, where the camera shoots a single frame, then generates three RAW files with three different WB adjustments (or three JPEGs, of course).
I never use this because it's a total waste of card space, I process from raw and I can set the WB to be anything I want. All three raw files are actually identical with just a different embedded preview, and a different tag in the header for the WB!
I only posted it out of interest. Personally I take his comments with a bit of humour and not that seriously. Don't agree with the no hot shoe fluff either course it is a hot shoe just the inverted one Minolta did. As it happens I'm neutral on that one never really bothered me one way or the other..some pros and cons with that design.
I do agree with the white balance stuff though and I've had problems with both bodies not being able to fine tune WB enough. In addition in very low kelvins the 2500k just is not low enough sometimes. Agree it's not as quiet as I would have expected considering the non moving mirror. Also agree on some other points such as in camera corrections (CA etc) about time bits like this were added to A mount. Also agree on P shift for the intended user it's a silly thing to leave out. Image quality is down to taste I'm ok with Sony, not so keen on Nikon and Canon can be nice but other times it can look over processed (out of camera)
I wouldn't say it has too few AF points either though they could be spread out more and more cross type ones might be nice. Course he's biased and I'd expect that he rarely says anything bad about Nikon or Canon..bar the odd jab at a weaker model (D3000 for one) Still a few decent points there though.
