Which computer is best for editing Canon/Panasonic files?

R

RPLace

Carbonite Member
Hey guys, I'm trying to get a new computer soon, and because of the free video editing software found in Macs, I figure that getting a Mac would be a better deal - also I'm needing a computer that can actually play the files, as my current one can't.

Can anyone point out exactly which computer is best for editing-playing Canon/Panasonic files? Truth be told, I want a computer that of coarse can handle playing and editing the files, but I will not be doing extremely complex editing (mostly color correction, seaming, green screen, that type of thing - I will be editing for full-length film projects). I'm also looking to save as much money as I can, as $2,000 or so is a bit ridiculous.

Can anyone point me in the right direction? I truly need to know before the week is up!

Thank you!
 
Get the best computer you can afford while budgeting for other things. Use a mac if you like macs, if not use a PC. They do the same things. They both have free software, and neither of them can properly edit DSLR footage with those free editors. A quick Google search will tell you what level of compatibility they have, which I'm going to do for you.
 
You will most definitely get more computer for your money going down the PC route.
25 years ago, I was a Mac-only household. I definitely think they are well made and nice machines that will always have a special place in my heart. And I still recommend them to people who just want a decent all-around family-friendly machine that works well and does what they need, while also looking nice on their desk. However for my professional work I've completely switched to PC.
I don't care what my workstations look like or how pleasant the OS is- I want the most raw rendering speed for my money.

I highly recommend the Dell Outlet (outlet.dell.com), and check out their core i7 boxes.
 
I would pick my editing software first, then look for a computer that meets the recommended not minimal specifications. I think you will get more bang for your buck with a PC. Although a custom built PC is not required for most editing software, there are some advantages that will make things run smoother including specific motherboards, processors, ram, multiple hard drives and to a lesser degree video card. You could get a really good computer for editing at under $1,500. I got mine built by avadirect.com and have been extremely happy.

Although 2 years old, here is my system specs.
Edius 5.5 editing software, HDSPARK preview card, Asus P6T Deluxe mobo, i7-920 processor, Antec 900-2 case, Corsair 650 watt p.s., Corsair 3GB XMS3 PC3-12800 DDR3, Sapphire HD4830 video card, WD 160GB Caviar system drive , 1TD WD Caviar Black video storage drive, Lite-on IHAS324 DVD burner, Sound Blaster X-FI Titanium sound card, Vista 32 bit operating system, Amtron P2 card reader, Samsung LN19A330 realtime preview HDTV.
 
any modern mid to higher end computer will do just fine.

naturally get all the ram, graphics card and fastest storage format you can afford.

historically, ive been a mac guy. but with the way apple ruined FCP with the X release. if i were just starting out (and didnt already have several thousands invested in mac software) id definitely go with premiere on a windows machine. the "free" video software on macs really isnt that great if you intend to make money with video...
 
For the PC or Mac thing, I am a PC user. My system out computes some of the higher end Apple offerings at about an quarter of the price. It helps that I know how to put the right parts together. But I also have problems working with other filmmakers and production houses because they want editors who use FCP... although if your purchase decision is based on how much free software it has I'm not sure that's an issue you're going to face. And it doesn't come up often enough for me to be a real problem.
 
Mark Williams said:
I would pick my editing software first, then look for a computer that meets the recommended not minimal specifications. I think you will get more bang for your buck with a PC. Although a custom built PC is not required for most editing software, there are some advantages that will make things run smoother including specific motherboards, processors, ram, multiple hard drives and to a lesser degree video card. You could get a really good computer for editing at under $1,500. I got mine built by avadirect.com and have been extremely happy.

Although 2 years old, here is my system specs.
Edius 5.5 editing software, HDSPARK preview card, Asus P6T Deluxe mobo, i7-920 processor, Antec 900-2 case, Corsair 650 watt p.s., Corsair 3GB XMS3 PC3-12800 DDR3, Sapphire HD4830 video card, WD 160GB Caviar system drive , 1TD WD Caviar Black video storage drive, Lite-on IHAS324 DVD burner, Sound Blaster X-FI Titanium sound card, Vista 32 bit operating system, Amtron P2 card reader, Samsung LN19A330 realtime preview HDTV.
Click to expand...

Interesting hardware, Mark. That's a decent processor (amazing and excellent for 2 years ago, actually), but most of the rest of your specs are puzzling to me. Why so little memory and only a 32-bit OS? Especially back in the days of Vista, the OS was quite the memory hog. Editing HD video needs more RAM for performance, and most of the RAM is already consumed by your OS at that point. Even 2 years ago my editing workstation had at least 6GB of RAM.

Meanwhile, I admire your ambition to build your box custom. I used to do that when I took pride in my personal computer. These days, I don't get too emotionally attached because I upgrade ever 1-2 years anyway. I'll admit, I kind of miss the satisfaction of building my own, choosing the parts, and being proud of my creation. But, I have been extremely happy with the inexpensive refurb or scratch-and-dent boxes from the Dell Outlet.

About a month ago, I was eyeing this:
XPS 830
Intel Core i7-2600 processor (8MB Cache, 3.4GHz)
8 GB DDR3 SDRAM 1333MHz
1.5 TB SATA II Hard Drive
Windows 7 64bit
Price :$569.00

I didn't buy it because I needed to purchase some other gear and didn't want to spend so much at once. But after the holiday season, I'll bet the outlet will be teeming with cancelled orders and returned boxes. Prices drop when the warehouse needs to move inventory.

BTW- if anyone is interested in finding a deal like this, I highly recommend either calling or using e-chat. The outlet representatives have access to stock that isn't on the realtime online inventory.
Been buying computers and laptops like this for the last 4 years. Each time I purchase, I consider a Mac... I do sometimes miss the aesthetic of them. And as Cassius mentioned, it would be nice to be compatible with others in the industry who are stuck on Mac platforms. But then I look at the prices (even refurbs), and what I get for those prices, and quickly realize I just can't justify it.
 
One thing I would recommend is a Nvidia graphics card, not because it's necessaraly better, but because more software is nvidia specific (Avid and DaVinci come to mind) than aren't.
 
definitely choose your software first: CS5.5 production premium costs a lot more than the PC that M.Gliden posted!! even with all the jokes around and with it being obviously not geared towards pros, FCPX seems to be the cheapest half-decent editing software around, and it only works on OSX; also, you may want to check nofilmschool's hackintosh guide (I've never gone that route, but there are some happy users there): http://nofilmschool.com/build-a-hackintosh/
 
I agree with everyone above that said to chose your editing software first, As far as a computer goes, I have been super happy with the ASUS, g-74 sx, 3d ready, blueray burner, i7 sandybridge,usb3.0,two 7200 hdd's,17" screen. It's been a good pc, I like it much more than any other laptop I have ever had.
 
Macs are a waste of money -- you pay extra for aesthetics; that's it.

For under a grand you can put together a killer PC.

Start with the 2600K CPU and 16GB RAM and go from there.
 
You know what? It always pi$$es me off ($$ Intentional) when I see what you pay for computer kit in the States, you could pretty much double that in dollars for what we pay over here.
 
Phil1076 said:
Macs are a waste of money -- you pay extra for aesthetics; that's it.

For under a grand you can put together a killer PC.

Start with the 2600K CPU and 16GB RAM and go from there.
Click to expand...

That's a bit harsh. Its more than the aesthetics for some people- its a culture thing. A lot of professionals in the media industry use Macs and Apple software- One of my colleagues always laughs that I run a PC shop these days, saying that from a client's perspective it is a blow against my credibility. Compatibility is also very often a consideration, and worth the money to someone who considers that important.
Also- who's to say aesthetics are a waste of money? Heck, even Dell sells laptops in custom colors and patterns that cost extra. And people buy them. Because sometimes someone doesn't mind paying more to like how their computer looks.

Do you *NEED* a Mac OS box to work in this industry?
Absolutely not (and hey- props to there being so many PC users here! You guys make me proud!).

Is having a Mac "better"?
Not really, unless you need to be compatible with FCP or working with others in a Mac workflow.

Is it a valid choice for a solidly built product that looks nice and gives some extra street cred?
It sure is. If you've got the money to spend on it, they also hold their value a bit longer than PCs, so upgrading isn't as big of a deal if you sell it later.

Also- Apple is great for folks who are more artistic than they are tech-savvy. I come from a family of technical engineers (my father and his father before him worked in computer and bio-tech engineering) and part-timed at a computer repair center in my High School years. There isn't much that could go wrong with a PC box would make me flinch at all. But there are plenty of less technical folks who panic when something doesn't go as planned. The benefit to Mac is that it is harder to screw it up (dare I call it, more "idiot-proof"?), and if/when something DOES go wrong, you can go back to the Apple store and talk to one of their "geniuses" who are super willing to help you out. I swear, I've seen folks bring in their iMac and their iPod just so the Genius can demonstrate how to sync with iTunes (really? you can't figure out iTunes??).
In the PC world, you don't get that kind of support- there are too many third parties involved who just blame the other company when something doesn't work.
I know quite a few people who used to call me for help with their PC every other week. I told them to switch to a Mac, and they have stopped calling and couldn't be happier with it.

So, there is merit to the choice for some people. But I still stand behind my decision to get a rendering farm of PCs for the price of a single Mac workstation. For the same amount of money, my AE comp will render in 1/10th of the time. :D
 
Last edited:
M. Gilden said:
Editing HD video needs more RAM for performance, and most of the RAM is already consumed by your OS at that point. Even 2 years ago my editing workstation had at least 6GB of RAM.
Click to expand...

3gb is close to maxed out on a 32 bit system.
I have never seen Premiere use a lot of RAM.
Can definitely max out all my cores will rendering though.
YMMV on other NLE's.
 
I am running a lean editing only system. 32-Bit system cannot effectively use over 3.5 GB of ram. Never had a problem with 3GB of ram and editing AVC Intra100 and DVCproHD in real time with Edius 5.5. Muti-tasking while encoding to DVD no problem. Never have had a crash. Would have liked to have chosen a 64 bit operating system instead to future proof, but at the time Amtron P2 card readers would only work with 32 bit.
 
M. Gilden said:
That's a bit harsh. Its more than the aesthetics for some people- its a culture thing. A lot of professionals in the media industry use Macs and Apple software- One of my colleagues always laughs that I run a PC shop these days, saying that from a client's perspective it is a blow against my credibility. Compatibility is also very often a consideration, and worth the money to someone who considers that important.
Also- who's to say aesthetics are a waste of money? Heck, even Dell sells laptops in custom colors and patterns that cost extra. And people buy them. Because sometimes someone doesn't mind paying more to like how their computer looks.
Click to expand...
Aesthetics is an important thing for consumers - not so much for professionals. However, more worrying is the misinformed bias. One would think any professional would choose the best tools - not the ones they are more emotionally attached to or culturally relevant. It's a shame really, I am not sure they realize they are taking 10 times as much time to render their AE comps!
 
Cassius said:
For the PC or Mac thing, I am a PC user. My system out computes some of the higher end Apple offerings at about an quarter of the price. It helps that I know how to put the right parts together. But I also have problems working with other filmmakers and production houses because they want editors who use FCP... although if your purchase decision is based on how much free software it has I'm not sure that's an issue you're going to face. And it doesn't come up often enough for me to be a real problem.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it ends up being a wash either way. CS5.5 is pretty expensive, but FCPX requires a Mac which can be much more expensive than a comparable PC.
 
To be honest, of coarse I'm not looking to have a "cool computer" - I want what's cheapest and does the job, hands down. However, a current explaination is that I currently have a Canon T2i and a Windows Vista - Basically, long story short, I haven't been able to use my camera for anything. Photo editing crashes, my computer won't play any of the videos on any program (they freeze and crash). Windows Movie Maker doesn't even read the native files, and I've yet to discover a proper (free) transcoder to convert them into something it can read. All around, if you're looking for freebies, Windows seems to suck. However, I've read many cases of (especially students) putting together amazing short films on Mac's video editing software, color editing, stitching, fairly complex features, ect ect. I've seen the videos myself, so I can't say there's something wrong going on, unless, say, it only outputs to 720P or only 30P or some weird mess like that. That's basically all I'm looking for, as I'm not even sure I'll involve green screen in any of my productions - mostly the basic production styles just for full-length films. However, of coarse it makes most sense to get what you may need down the road, and wether I get a Windows or Mac, the first question is obviously - which editing program handles BOTH Canon and Panasonic files, as I'm studying to use both cameras in production. And, with that, which computer does that editing program go to? Basically, one last thing, I'm not at all technologically savvy. I know how to do most anything ON the computer, but when it comes to external devices and internal mechanics, I have no clue. It's why I really am hesitant to copy and paste anyone's set-up because I just don't know what I need if I can't understand it. Of coarse, no one here can spend the time to teach me all the stuff, but mainly, I'm just saying again that I'm looking to save money, that I don't run an extremely complex production scale (not out to make Transformers), and most of all, I do not work with anyone else in terms of editing and production - I definatly don't care about street cred.
 
In addition to my post right above this one, I should add that I am indeed looking to buy a laptop, so that I can travel and work on productions wherever I go.
 
RPLace said:
Windows Movie Maker doesn't even read the native files, and I've yet to discover a proper (free) transcoder to convert them into something it can read. All around, if you're looking for freebies, Windows seems to suck.
Click to expand...

Are you sure MPEGstreamclip and VLC don't offer saving in Windows Media format? I think there are plenty of "free" transcoders that will work. That is, if you really were set on using Windows Movie Maker (and I really don't think anyone should be!).
But it all begs the question- why are you willing to invest in computer hardware, but not software? Why the obsession with freebies??

I mean, if you are willing to spend more on a Mac just to get iMovie for free, why don't you just use that extra money to buy a half decent video editor?
Just to put things into perspective- A half decent i7 PC box can be found around $700 these days (or much less on the Dell Outlet). Add Adobe Premiere Pro for $400-500, and you're up to $1100-1200.
Or better yet, add the entire industry-standard Adobe Production studio 5.5 for around $850 or so, and you're up to $1550. The cheapest iMac with an i7 chip I'm seeing for sale is easily $1800-$3000, and you would be stuck using the more home-video oriented iMovie.
But hey, if you wanted to go cheap and CS 5.5 is overkill for you, get Sony's Vegas Movie Studio 11. Its under $50, and is loads more capable than iMovie. I'm actually a big fan of Vegas Pro personally, and Movie Studio is the cheaper consumer version for just basic edits and cuts.
The nice thing about Vegas and Adobe Premiere software is that you don't need to transcode your footage first like other editors do. Especially with the more recent versions, you can just drag both Canon and Panasonic footage directly into your timeline and start editing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top