Hi all
The 4k camera of the Note 3 seems to be quite impressive. I'm actually thinking about buying the Sony RX100 II camera for travelling, but I'm unsure whether it is worth it. Since compact digital cameras don't support 4k yet I would just buy yesterday's technology.
What do you guys think, does it make sense to buy a compact digital camera at the moment despite of already owning a Note 3? Or is it better to wait for 4k digital cameras?
Thanks in advance for all inputs.
Depends on the price. The Note 3 camera is downright horrible in low-light, fluorescent light and with motion.
I'm a Canon-person (Technically I'm a DSLR user), so I can't say how good that Sony camera is. But the Note 3 camera is only good in bright sunlight, so it's probably a good idea to buy an additional camera anyway if you travel a lot.
As for 4K, that's only VIDEOS. You'd be hard pressed to find a digital compact camera these days with a resolution that low. For photographs, 4K is low: 3840 × 2160, 8.3MP. Anything above 8.3MP is a higher resolution than 4K, but only on STILL SHOTS.
I have both (as well as Canon dslrs) and the Sony blows away the GN3 for image quality.
I have both as well and the Sony RX100ii blows the Note 3 away especially in low lighting. I basically use to take spur of the moment pics. If at an event, party, or on a trip I would definitley use the RX100ii instead.
Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk
rx100ii is amazing, but it won't pair with the note 3, so it's slickest feature of using the phone as a remote viewfinder won't work
Have you tried the Sony software? Works great on my Note 10.1
Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk
ShadowLea said:
Depends on the price. The Note 3 camera is downright horrible in low-light, fluorescent light and with motion.
I'm a Canon-person (Technically I'm a DSLR user), so I can't say how good that Sony camera is. But the Note 3 camera is only good in bright sunlight, so it's probably a good idea to buy an additional camera anyway if you travel a lot.
As for 4K, that's only VIDEOS. You'd be hard pressed to find a digital compact camera these days with a resolution that low. For photographs, 4K is low: 3840 × 2160, 8.3MP. Anything above 8.3MP is a higher resolution than 4K, but only on STILL SHOTS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I understood him right, he's talking about video recording. A FHD is only 2K (not quite but very close), the 4K video on Note 3 is double that and there's no compacts able to record 4K video as of yet. Excluding a GoPro Black edition (which is around $400 +/- now) that records 4K @ 15fps, 4K camcorders start from around couple of thousand $$$.
4K video is a new tech and not standardized yet, so hold your horses - the video industry may decide to go another way, like it happened in a battle between BD and HD-DVD. Besides there aren't many TVs yet supporting anything higher than a FHD plus they're expensive.
Wait for this tech to mature a bit and it will also get cheaper. In the main time the 4K video on Note 3 will do the job (stock on microSD cards!)
If OP's question was whether to get a compact for stills - they the answer is yes - no phone can compete with a good compact camera and RX100 II is more than a good compact.
I'm a Sony shooter but I don't own the RX100 MkII, I DO, however, have a Canon shooter friend that owns the RX100 (1st version) and he absolutely LOVES his RX100. If you want something pocket-able then, you will NOT regret the purchase... but if you don't mind something slightly bigger, I highly recommend the NEX-5T... it literally does better in high ISOs than a lot of DSLRs out there (and the amazing thing is, while it's pretty compact, it sports an APS-C sensor!!)
Related
Hey guys.
There's a new competitor in town. SE is definitely looking to gain some market share with the Idou scheduled launch Q2 '09. some specs listed are :
Sony Ericsson Idou
GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
HSDPA 900 / 2100
Coming soon. Exp. release 2009, Q3
TFT touchscreen, 16M colors
360 x 640 pixels, 3.5 inches
Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g, DLNA
Symbian OS
12.1 MP, 4256 x 2832 pixels, autofocus, xenon flash, video, video LED flash, secondary VGA videocall camera
- Built-in GPS
- aGPS function
- Camera images geo-tagging, face and smile detection
- Google maps
- FM radio with RDS
- MP3/AAC/MPEG4 player
- Organiser
- Built-in handsfree
- Voice memo/dial
- Java MIDP 2.0
Some links:
Engadget
Phonedog
Some other video
What are your thoughts on this new model.
The SE Idou has a smaller screen, lower resolution, not WinMo, no North American 3G (Telstra model has 850).
The only positive that jumps out is the camera, but that's not enough to overcome the above negatives for me. Sorry, not interested.
I bet the Idou-NOT camera will still be shooting 3gp video in 320*240 resolution
My 3 and a half year old Universal has a bigger, higher resolution screen than the Idou. If that's progress I'm not impressed.
That phone was epic back in the day! Still has some decent specs now!
really cant stand all those nonstandard resolution.
heck, enough's enough already with vga wvga q and square stuff!
crashDebug said:
really cant stand all those nonstandard resolution.
heck, enough's enough already with vga wvga q and square stuff!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well get used to it - it's the same resolution that all the new touchscreen Symbian handsets are coming out with such as the Nokia 5800 and the Samsung OmniaHD.
The reason they've gone for it is that it's a 16:9 aspect ratio.
There's no point trying to compare the Touch HD to the Idou as one of those handsets isn't even available yet.
In fact, going on SE's recent form, I'd be very surprised if they get it into shops this year. And I'd even go so far as to say that someone like Samsung or LG will have released a different 12mp handset before Idou is available.
Also, why on earth does anyone think that 12mp on a phone is going to be a good thing?
Think about how poor the camera on the HD can be, do you really think cramming in an extra 7 million pixels will make things better?
Too low res for me - 800*480 is simply a sweet spot, it's the major thing HTC got right.
I bet the 12mp camera takes shockingly bad pictures too. That's more than almost all aps-c DSLRs out there (and the few that tried 14/15mpixel didn't sell, because they took worse pictures than the 10/11 models).
Idou would be a good phone. If this (or N97) is out now, I would not have bought the HD. Don't get me wrong. I am very satisfied with HD (with all the tweaks and cooked roms). Coming from a S60 N95/82 and after using HD for the last 3 months I have to honestly say somehow WM is still not as good an OS compared to Symbian. Symbian is still more robust, nimble and more efficient.
not impressed with it's spec's compared to some of the 2009 htc devices on the horizen...like the Firestone, etc.
I don't know for sure, but normally cameras with these resolution ain't better than any 5 MP camera. Its not the resolution that limits the capacities, but its the lens.
mib1800 said:
Coming from a S60 N95/82 and after using HD for the last 3 months I have to honestly say somehow WM is still not as good an OS compared to Symbian. Symbian is still more robust, nimble and more efficient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone has their own preferences.
Until the Nokia 5800 was released, I'd never used a Symbian phone that I liked. I just don't feel the way the menus are laid out works all that well.
johnpatcher said:
I don't know for sure, but normally cameras with these resolution ain't better than any 5 MP camera. Its not the resolution that limits the capacities, but its the lens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's both.
Yes the lens makes a big difference but so do the number of pixels.
By cramming more pixels onto the same size of sensor, each pixel is smaller and consequently less light hits it.
Because less light hits it, the picture will appear duller unless you increase the amplification of the signal from each pixel. But if you do that, you also increase the amount of noise, which is detrimental to the picture quality.
Even with premium components it's impossible to amplify a signal without having noise appear but there's no way that a phone is going to be fitted with premium components, so the noise will be much worse than it would be on a digital camera of the same quality, not to mention that proper digital cameras would also tend to have a physically larger sensor anyway, so they wouldn't have to crank the amplification up so much.
Even the C905 (which is, according to GSMArena the best 8mp camera-phone on the market from a camera perspective) already has serious issues with noise and, at best, Idou will have a sensor of the same physical size but with more pixels.
However I've already read rumours that the sensor will, in fact, be smaller than the C905's which will make it all even worse.
Step666 said:
It's both.
Yes the lens makes a big difference but so do the number of pixels.
By cramming more pixels onto the same size of sensor, each pixel is smaller and consequently less light hits it.
Because less light hits it, the picture will appear duller unless you increase the amplification of the signal from each pixel. But if you do that, you also increase the amount of noise, which is detrimental to the picture quality.
Even with premium components it's impossible to amplify a signal without having noise appear but there's no way that a phone is going to be fitted with premium components, so the noise will be much worse than it would be on a digital camera of the same quality, not to mention that proper digital cameras would also tend to have a physically larger sensor anyway, so they wouldn't have to crank the amplification up so much.
Even the C905 (which is, according to GSMArena the best 8mp camera-phone on the market from a camera perspective) already has serious issues with noise and, at best, Idou will have a sensor of the same physical size but with more pixels.
However I've already read rumours that the sensor will, in fact, be smaller than the C905's which will make it all even worse.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with everything you said, and being a photographer I'm very familiar with issues you described.
However, Sony is leading the market in compact digital cameras, and as such, it would not surprise me that these 12 megapixels turn out to produce "decent quality" photos.
Decent for average Joe Snapshooter, of course. Because, although for last 5 or so years I have been listening to "OMG, they're putting EVEN more pixels onto that tiny sensor", somehow the manufacturers are still running the megapixel race, and image quality has had a small but steady quality improvement. First time I heard this sentence was when first big megapixel jump happened: from 1 megapixel to 2.
So, let's just wait and see before bashing the new Sony, at least camera-wise.
I'm not waiting, I hold out zero hope for Idou or any other 12mp handset.
I've seen both 100% crops and A3 printouts from the C905 and as I said before, noise is a huge problem.
I just don't see how adding extra pixels is going to do anything but make matters worse.
Also, since when have Sony been leading the market for compact cameras?
I must admit I'm not as au fait with everything since the pixel numbers went through the roof but last time I checked, Nikon and Canon were sharing the spoils.
Rozenthal said:
Decent for average Joe Snapshooter, of course. Because, although for last 5 or so years I have been listening to "OMG, they're putting EVEN more pixels onto that tiny sensor", somehow the manufacturers are still running the megapixel race, and image quality has had a small but steady quality improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There have been tests recently that showed the best compact ever made was the Fuji f30, a 4 year old 6 megapixel model (people pay a ton of money for them on ebay). Even with improvements in tech since, they've not been able to counteract the quality decrease that cramming more megapixels in causes. Fuji themselves tried to reign back the megapixel race, hold at 8 max for quality reasons, but marketing trumps all and they've had to give it up.
I had a 15mpixel Canon pocket camera recently, the quality was awful.
arfster said:
There have been tests recently that showed the best compact ever made was the Fuji f30, a 4 year old 6 megapixel model (people pay a ton of money for them on ebay).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't suppose you have a link?
I tried my fair share of Fuji cameras in the past and was never hugely impressed by them, so I'm a little surprised at that.
Also, for them to try and position themselves as the voice of reason in the megapixel war is rather hypocritical since they were the manufacturer who traditionally always aimed for more, staying on with interpolation long after most other manufacturers had given up on it.
hello guys ,i want to ask if someone can explain this to me.
Nexus 4 records videos at 1080p in mpeg4 with 12Mbps
Movies we download etc are 1080p in mkv with 3-6 Mbps
The question is why do movies in mkv look so much better ??..is it a compression/container issue ?
Thanks !
Because the camera is crap..IMO.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
scream4cheese said:
Because the camera is crap..IMO.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
besides that looking at the info from the 2 videos, theoretically nexus recordings must look better.
but i'm pretty sure i'm missing something significant in this comparison that's why i asked if someone who has more knowledge on this, can give me an explanation ...
The camera lens, and light sensors are no where near the quality of Hollywood cameras. The bitrate supports the quality but the camera can never deliver it. Its like the megapixel fight with still cameras. A 3 megapixel camera with a great lens and iso sensor can completely blow away a compact 14 megapixel camera with only so so hardware.
username8611 said:
The camera lens, and light sensors are no where near the quality of Hollywood cameras. The bitrate supports the quality but the camera can never deliver it. Its like the megapixel fight with still cameras. A 3 megapixel camera with a great lens and iso sensor can completely blow away a compact 14 megapixel camera with only so so hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks man ! i guess we can blame the crappy lens for this one ...i think this explains why s3 or htc one x videos are looking way better despite having a lower bit rate than nexus 4 videos ....
Exactly the lens and camera sensor quality is more important than the pixel account. I saw to many cheap 14 mega pixel cameras pictures that are worst than good 3 mega pixel pictures took with good old cameras. My Nexus 4 doesn't beat my old Pantech Element pictures...On the PC you see the differences.
rockfreak said:
hello guys ,i want to ask if someone can explain this to me.
Nexus 4 records videos at 1080p in mpeg4 with 12Mbps
Movies we download etc are 1080p in mkv with 3-6 Mbps
The question is why do movies in mkv look so much better ??..is it a compression/container issue ?
Thanks !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You cant compare. Such type of compare is irrelevant.
Movies are captured with professional cameras like RedOne at 4k resolution without heavy compression in raw format, further being processed and compressed by professional encoding softwares and so on...
Nexus 4 uses commercial consumer compression algorithm on the way, thus the output result is obviously worse.
That's is one of the major differences.
See it here.
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_z3_compact-review-1135.php
So according to this review, the screen, the speakers/audio quality and the camera aren't that great. ... What gives?
according to the review the screen, audio quality from the speaker and camera are better than the Z1C. I own a Z1C and a bunch of Samsung galaxys, that's how I see it:
I found the Z1C screen to be great except in sunlight. (better colors than my AMOLEDs, but the AMOLEDS worked a tad better in sunlight)
GSMA says the Z3C is similar but is better in sunlight.
Audio on my Z1C from the speaker was good enough that i never had an issue with it. Mainly, I listen to audio through the headphones most of the time (which has good audio quality) - but the few times I didn't it was decent. The iphone 5s of a friend did a bit of a better job tho. So anyway, thats supposed to be better in the Z3C according to GSMA.
The camera.. the camera has pros and cons on all the xperias IMO (Z1, Z2 and now Z3). It does look better in 20MP mode and I don't know if they changed the processing, lens, tweaked the sensor, or a bit of everything.
On the Z1C it made great pictures, worked well with low light, but in some conditions the sides of the pictures wouldn't be as great. You can look at the user samples on XDA, which are IMO a much better benchmark than the crops of GSMA. Almost every phone has a thread about photography.
In my eyes the competitors here are:
- iphone5s/6
- galaxy alpha
- z3c
and while they all have some advantages here and there, the z3c seems to have the most advantages where it matters to me: much greater battery life, very good camera, good audio via the audio jack, waterproofing, fast CPU/GPU, sdcard expansion slot, supports a bunch of frequencies.
Sony also support USB audio out of the box if you want to pipe out to a quality USB DAC
Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk
I wasn't that pleased with the review part of the camera especially =/ I was expecting much improvments with software/lens/everything this time around. I had a s5 for a while and i really liked the camera on it and i was hoping to see similar results from this camera - but i still need to check some more samples to see analyse photo quality better. I might check the z1c and z2 camera threads as suggested, but i thought they improved some things on this camera so i guess the results can be a bit different
The second I saw that battery rating, it was a done deal for me. I had heard the Z1C was already pretty amazing, but to find out the Z3C had double the rating was shocking. Now I don't expect the Z3C to last twice as long as its predecessor, that would be absurd (and a pleasant surprise), but if can last as long or longer, that would be fantastic!
With my current phone, I'm getting on average 6hrs on screen time (no power saving or dimming of the display), lasting me the whole day, that is for 24 hours, not just the work day, so if the Z3C can match or exceed that slightly, which I'm expecting it to, I'd be VERY happy!
techguyone said:
GSMArena Review in - and it's a cracker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cracker? (I assume that means "and it's a good review")
For those who don't want to read through the full thing, here's a highlight of points by GSMArena's review:
Built quality is top notch, and stands apart from the rest of the Z3 series
The display is adequately bright and has good sunlight legibility
Battery life is phenomenal
It has an all-round connectivity package including LTE, USB Host and FM radio
Speaker loudness scored an Average rating, likely due to the IP rating
Benchmark performance is flagship grade, although helped by only having to push out 720p pixels
Audio quality is very good, with minor exceptions in some areas
Video player handles all the major formats except for AC3 audio and AAC audio with AVC video
Camera is OK, but not as good as competing offerings from Samsung. 2160p videos come out smooth
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes good review, good phone hopefully, might be my next as motos latest are woefully short in battery and almost phablet size elsewhere. z3 c might just fit the bill.
Yep, this will be my next phone - sorry to let my S4 Mini down after only one year but this one just looks great (and the battery!)
Btekt just posted a sample 4K recording and the audio is pretty bad:
Sony Xperia Z3 Compact 4K video sample http://youtu.be/ak9Q4c6m534
Especially when compared to the Galaxy Alpha sample:
Samsung Galaxy Alpha 4K video sample http://youtu.be/kRK48rDnjwk
boojay said:
Btekt just posted a sample 4K recording and the audio is pretty bad
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I personally don't give even the slightest consideration to 4K recording when I buy a smartphone.
The main things I care about is the size, battery life, screen quality, and camera.
That did sound terrible. Oh well. Can't win them all can we.
I currently run the z1c
Camera on z1c is terrible in my opinion... I have little faith that the z3c camera will be a vast improvement upon the z1c camera
This typical scenario on the z1c detailed in this thread is very annoying indeed http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2780290
I hope Sony has rectified this bug within the z3c - otherwise poor show.
never had the slow loading issue except on cyanogen roms on the z1c
it always loads at worse in like 1 second at best instant
dillalade said:
That did sound terrible. Oh well. Can't win them all can we.
I currently run the z1c
Camera on z1c is terrible in my opinion... I have little faith that the z3c camera will be a vast improvement upon the z1c camera
This typical scenario on the z1c detailed in this thread is very annoying indeed http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2780290
I hope Sony has rectified this bug within the z3c - otherwise poor show.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's an interesting result though; I tried viewing the same two sample clips I shared in my previous comment at home on my theater system, with the volume turned up relatively high (I watched them on my work PC and mobile earlier), and I got the exact opposite result. That is, the Z3C footage sounded better and the Alpha fared worse. The latter was too bassy and the former's quality improved a great deal. Weird.
Also, in terms of picture video quality, the Z3C was the clear winner on my HD LED TV.
charliebigpot said:
Yep, this will be my next phone - sorry to let my S4 Mini down after only one year but this one just looks great (and the battery!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what I'm doing too.
Apparently this guys at DxOMark do not know what they are talking about?
I have the same result with this video comparison:
iPhone 5s vs Sony Xperia Z3 Compact http://youtu.be/M3SZQCm2DDM
That is, the iPhone sounded better on my phone, but the Z3C was much clearer sounding on my home theater system. The iPhone was muted in comparison.
While the Z3C was overexposed, its colors were more accurate, autofocus and image stabilisation were better, and it let in more light in the shaded areas.
Can't wait for the low light video comparison. The Z3C should be crushing the competition!
Wow... Battery life is out of this world. I have never seen any results like this before, not even on the LG GFlex. Wow.
Sent From my Nokia Lumia 635
Even though GSMarena does their own audio tests, can someone with a Z1C please confirm the audio quality is very good?
(I know, everyone has their own opinion about sound quality)
I remember that in a video someone said that the software they were reviewing were not final. So could it be that these more disapointing results of the camera were due to that and that it can be fixed?
I was curious which had better video. My GoPro hero3 Black or my shiny new Note 4. So I attached them to a board and took some side by side video. I feel like the GoPro still wins but it is close and the Note 4 does a lot of things better, Especially OIS. Anyway, what do you guys think. Sorry I don't have the Hero 4 black yet.
http://youtu.be/LdLsR_VbB8E
http://youtu.be/PN2iuNgMbBw
Great thread! The images are definitely sharper on the Note. It seems the GoPro has a higher exposure and a wider lens. Slow motion, the Note appears much slower but GoPro, again, has more to see around the subject. I think if we go 4k, there won't be a challenge lol A real technical comparison would be great.
Actually after watching these videos again. I think the image stabilization on the Note 4 makes for a better video over all. I'm tempted to buy one of these, http://www.amazon.com/Magollc-TM-Waterproof-Shockproof-Crashproof/dp/B00NOO74VM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1414165936&sr=8-2&keywords=waterproof+note+4+case for when I'm goofing off around water and don't want to bring my GoPro. Add in the fact that the GoPro doesn't have a camera that can do 4k in 30fps and has a view finder, really makes the Note 4 the better camera. If someone has the Hero4 Black, I would love to see a side by side 1080p in 120 fps and 4k.
I tried a head to head shooting 4k. It isn't a fair comparison cause my GoPro only shoots 4k at 15fps, but it shows just how much better 4k shooting has gotten.
http://youtu.be/2IIlEYf76V4
http://youtu.be/6yCD6c-s11s
Sony and others big corp. with big R&D cant keep up and outsell GoPro. Why?
chong67 said:
Sony and others big corp. with big R&D cant keep up and outsell GoPro. Why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GoPro does one thing and they do it well that's why.
I wish Samsung would widen the field of view on their cameras. That is the only complaint that I have had about their smartphone cameras since the Galaxy s II. It is surprising that we have a smaller FOV on our phone than competitors with smaller camera footprints. Namely, iphone, htc m8, z3. Look at the rear camera module on those devices and the lens isn't as big as ours, yet they all have a larger FOV. I think Samsung should reduce the amount of space around the camera modules as I see no benefit to it.
**** Go Pro. Might as well strap a **** to you head and run around. No one cares about your nature hike hippie.
number01pup said:
**** Go Pro. Might as well strap a **** to you head and run around. No one cares about your nature hike hippie.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ROTFLMAO!
Hi all,
I've had my Xiaomi RedMi Note 2 for a while now and thought I would share my video review and hands on unboxing videos:
Unboxing:
Hands-on gaming, benchmarks, thoughts, opinions.
Overall this is definitely one of the best bang for you buck mobile phones around. The Mediatek 6795 Helio X10 runs great and the GPU is fastest enough for even the most demanding games. LTE/4G is crazy fast for me, I had never got 75mbps speeds before, not even on my LG G4. which caps at around 50mbps for me. The screen looks great and there isn't much to not like on this mobile. The 13MP camera is good in anything but low light and macros come out amazing (see my samples). What I find disappointing is the sound on video and in lower light the video frame rate drops below 30fps. Indoor low light shots are very average.
The phone has now been passed on to my wife and she loves it, complete overkill for her needs. MIUI also might not be for everyone. And the build is very plastic and cheap feeling compared to metal framed phones. I got it from GearBest here: http://www.gearbest.com/cell-phones/pp_229217.html
Day video sample (1080p):
Sunset (1080p):
Night video (1080p)
Camera samples:
Like on my Note 4 I get over 120 Mbit/s over LTE but Wifi, GPS and 2G/3G/4G is 2-3 times better than on my Note 4. Sometimes I can't belive this.
Sent from my Redmi Note 2 using Tapatalk
The foliage looks really washed out on those samples, was it windy or does it really do such a poor job? The rest of the samples seem really decent for the price.
Crim Soukyuu said:
The foliage looks really washed out on those samples, was it windy or does it really do such a poor job? The rest of the samples seem really decent for the price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was windy and low light in some of the later shots. Low light pictures are not good at all.
I think that lack of optical stabilization makes video recording really bad. I think that the quality is descent, but the everything is kind of up and down all the time, a little cranky.....
MIUI 7 Slow motion samples:
MIUI 7 Time lapse samples:
Thanks mate. Can it does slower than this?
Nope. There's no other settings for slow mo.
TziMmysGr said:
I think that lack of optical stabilization makes video recording really bad. I think that the quality is descent, but the everything is kind of up and down all the time, a little cranky.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Definitely I have a G4 and now a Note 5, I miss OIS, even DIS would help out here. The quality is good, but the audio is a bit washed out. But still for a $165 dollar mobile it's decent.
Hi,
could you test HEVC encoding capabilities for us, it's a little tricky, only "CINEMA FV5" app could support HEVC encoding for the moment, and if you can test [email protected] and [email protected] and Manual Focus as well it will be great, thanks in adavance
Very nice review and some of the only slow motion footage on youtube, thanks! :good: