Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Brian McKee

Member
  • Content Count

    597
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

About Brian McKee

  • Title
    Member
  • Birthday Mar 30, 1994

Profile Information

  • Location
    Florida
  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Photography, Gaming, Technology and Astronomy!
  • Occupation
    Potato

System

  • CPU
    Intel i5 3570k
  • RAM
    G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB
  • GPU
    Asus GTX 770 2GB
  • PSU
    Rosewill RG630-S12
  • Display(s)
    Hanns-G HL227DBB

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Assuming the camera itself does not change bitrates in the background, yes. You will use half the data (theoretically, probably not exactly) using 30 over 60.
  2. In terms of pure cost efficiency right now to complete those tasks the M1 will be better. But obviously if you planned to do anything else on your computer like play games then it obviously swings in the opposite direction. If you're making money from this and need a system immediately I'd recommend the M1. If you got the starting capital to pay some serious scalper prices then I'd suggest the PC.
  3. Don't believe I suggested otherwise, just a thing to consider since some cameras offer multiple codec options.
  4. One distinct advantage of the A7 as a budget option is the fact that it's a cheap full frame mirrorless that's easy to adapt a lot of glass to. I think that has a lot of value but I can certainly understand the hesitancy of recommending it since I think it has some crippling faults like battery life.
  5. 5D MKIII, Nikon D750, original A7 all around that range yah. I think a buying guide doesn't need to be exact in pricing, it just gives people ideas. Personally whenever new people who are interested in mainly stills ask me I suggest stuff like the Canon 60/70d, Nikon D7100/7200 or the Pentax K-5IIs/K3 as their build quality and general features will be much better for the average (stills) user than some low tier mirrorless. To me the only real difference between systems these days is the glass you put in front of the sensor. And each system has some truly cool and unique options.
  6. Surprised you needed ISO 6400 for this shot, but a little grain never hurt. Love a bit of bokeh in street photos, puts more of a central focus in the shot. Well done I like it. Here, have a duck. Pentax KP with the SMC M 75-150 f4.
  7. Why is there no DSLRs on the list? They have cooties or something? Also what's with nonsense like this? People still shoot professionally with 5D MKIIs, let alone an A7III. Unless you're shooting with an ancient mirrorless where you have issues like lag in the EVF and god awful focusing, anything past 2012 has barely improved in image quality and anything in the last 5 years is almost indistinguishable with featuresets. Cameras are not commodity devices, they don't become out of date in 2-3 years from planned obsolesce or some huge jump in tech.
  8. Since I assume a lens is part of the budget I'd highly suggest a Panasonic GH2 and hacking it for higher bitrate video. It is by no means ideal but it's about as good as you can do at that price. Another option is the Canon 60d but it'll be much tighter to get a lens with this budget. The big benefit of the 60d is that even though it's cheap as dirt and old it still has very capable AF tracking in video if that is necessary for what you need. You can also optionally hack the 60d with magic lantern if you need more functionality, though the video is pretty good out of the box.
  9. It took me many hours of research for my current audio setup. If you need any help you can shoot me a pm.
  10. Since he shot a Nikon DSLR I'd suggest getting him a Nikon DSLR. Something like a used D610/D750 and kit lens would probably brighten his day. Might even be better than the kit he ran with. You'd have to do a bit of shopping to get a great deal though.
  11. Depends on your use case. In general the reason most people shoot film these days is for: 1. The look. Film generally has colors and looks that change with the film you use. Think of it being like having the ability to change the sensor on your camera whenever you wanted. Fine grain, cool colors, whatever you want. 2. The process. Analog photography is a much more "connected" experience to your work, especially when you use very old cameras like a pentax spotmatic or a film leica. Having to imagine your scene without chimping is really fun. And all the manual dials and
  12. Linus is a bit of an archivist and I'm sure he wants footage for everything to look good 20 years from now. Is it necessary to even shoot above 1080p for youtube these days? Not really. But it's fine, it's his money.
  13. I think the shotgun mic suggestion is a very good one since it's incredibly directional. But any cardioid/supercardioid microphone should work. Something like the Shure SM57 mounted on a boom arm directed towards your scene with the gain bumped up. The interface you use will need a decent noise floor so I'd suggest something like the MOTU M2 or the Tascam 1x2HR. I'd avoid behringer like the plague for a project like this. Goodluck!
  14. It's not only the bitrate itself to consider it's also the codec as well. A camera that uses Motion JPEG for example can have a much higher filesize than equivalent quality h.264 for example.
  15. http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/ryzen-game-perf-increases-with-new-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-patch.html 15% isn't underwhelming. And I'm sure there's more performance to be had especially in games that are built from the ground up for many cores. They aren't the same though, especially under nvidia GPUs. Not that you'd expect them to right now. But the real question is intel worth considering over Ryzen for a few frames? I'd probably say no.
×