We used each program to create a test project, using identical elements for each one. We timed how long it took each program to import our test video files. Then we timed how long it took us to make our test video. We finally recorded the time it took each program to export the final video. A program that performs even marginally faster can save you dozens of hours.
True. The 80D “only” shoots up to 1080p HD. If you want 4K, look elsewhere — if you’re into landscapes or travel videography, this may matter to you. The world though is still mostly operating in 1080p. Keep in mind, 4K will multiply (significantly) your storage requirements, in addition to processing power needed to edit and render. Only you can decide if this is the time to make the jump (I still think mainstream 4K adoption is 2+ years away). I love my 4K computer monitors because fonts are razor sharp. Yet, I don’t see substantive different between 80D images and those, say, from a Panasonic G7. The latter looks somewhat digital to my eyes, though it’s still a fine little camera.
Hay un par de cosas que no me gustan tanto: lo primero es que algunos videos cortos (menos de un par de mega bytes) pueden retrasar el software, y te llevará mucho tiempo. para terminar de subirlos a Windows Movie Maker. Por ejemplo, a veces, cargo un video corto para editar, y está listo en unos segundos. Pero luego, cargo otro video más corto para editar, pero esto lleva mucho tiempo para estar listo. Lo último que no me gusta es que el software deja de funcionar algunas veces.
×