Primarily my workstation is built for 3D work using 3ds max, but it has to do AE work as well because I can’t justify a second workstation on top of a $15k machine. But to be honest, other staff in the office have different priorities and have Titans and 1080s and the AE performance is just as bad. They do see some improvements in Premiere compared to my Quadro. But not in AE.
My understanding is the architecture between Quadro and GEForce is largely the same but the drivers are different. And the Quadros are available with a lot more Video RAM. Which I use/need.
So I guess my answer is two fold. I need the Quadro for other things, and the top GEforce cards don’t improve AE performance over my setup anyway.
Could not agree more.
My 5yr old, quad core macbook virtually keeps up with my 24 core, 128GB RAM, Quadro P6000 workstation. And that's not an endorsement of the macbook, but an infuriating truth about how bad AE is at using resources.
We've started looking at Nuke and Fusion. I think we'd recover the cost of Nuke relatively quickly compared to how long we spend waiting for AE to process anything.
Ha - I was involved in the research from which that NZILA document was produced. Some of it is very poorly worded, but the technical aspects of this guide are mostly correct.
If you take a panoramic image around the nodal point of a lens and stitch those images together accurately, you will get the same result with a 24mm lens as you will with a 50mm. The image produced with a 24mm lens will only require 3 individual photos to get the 124x55 degree fov. The 50mm lens will require 10 individual photos. If you use the same sensor, the final resolution, will therefore be much greater in the 50mm image, but once scaled, the relative position and scale of all objects within the shot will be the same.
If you're interested, this book is a good reference;https://www.amazon.com/Windfarm-Visualisation-Perspective-Alan-MacDonald...
Correction on my original post - FOV of a 35mm lens on full frame is actually 55 x 38 degrees. Accidentally had my app set to Nikon DX and not full frame. My point is still correct. This is no where near the FOV of human vision.
What absolute rubbish.
A 35mm lens on a full frame sensor will give you a field of view of approximately 37degrees x 25 degrees. The human field of view is widely accepted to be (it varies person to person) 124 degrees x 55 degrees. Even though this FOV is for both eyes in tandem, the second eye gives width, not extra height and at 55 degrees vertical, you can see that the eye has more than double the FOV of this lens.
It is also widely accepted that perspective does not change with focal length, but with distance to subject.
Samyang have no idea what they're talking about.
These are "DG" lenses designed for full frame. The 18-35 is a "DC" lens designed for APS-C.
One thing that people don't always consider is the resale value of hardware once you're done with it. Apple hardware is often more expensive up front, but I've found that the "total cost of ownership" is often less with a Mac, since you can still get good resale value 24mnths later. I always try and sell my Macbooks before they are 3 yrs old and within the Applecare period. This will definitely depend on your local market, but here in New Zealand the resale value for second hand Macbooks is very good.
That being said - get the tool that is best for your workflow. I was very disappointed not to see a Macbook with 32Gb RAM. But for me, my laptop tends to be for personal use and only occasional post/editing work. At work and home I use much more powerful Dell Workstations. I prefer OSX to windows. But do what gets the job done efficiently.