Monday, February 9, 2015

Got the Lumix/Leica/Panasonic 15mm f/1.7

Last week, I was down in San Diego and Orange County, California doing some photography and enjoying the time away from home.  While I was gone, I noticed that Panasonic started some quick instant rebates.  Are sales hurting?  They just had instant rebates before Christmas day.

I still haven't decided on my video-making lenses but I've been trying to do something to make food photography better for me.  In one of my initial digital-only shoots, I took an Olympus E-1 and the ZD 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 and used Ott-Lite lamps with daylight type bulbs for which they were known, to photograph ice cream without melting it, and to show sandwiches, waffles, eggs, and other items as realistically as possible.  The images hit home with so many people and people were yelling at me for posting desirable images of food at night when restaurants weren't open.

So, thinking more casually, the Panasonic GM5 and 15mm f/1.7 lens seemed a perfect combination for casual food photography--maybe, even for serious food photography.  While the GM5 also had an instant rebate available, I chose to wait, only buying the 15mm f/1.7 lens.

Either way, a US$100 rebate is significant--on US$599.99 or $899.99.  I'd still rather get the GM5 without the 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens.  The GM5 and 15mm f/1.7 seem a perfect combination, especially up against the FujiFilm X-100T.  I'm not saying that the GM5 is an incredible camera body but it's quite capable for its size and can generally keep up with the GX7.

So far, I've only had the 15mm f/1.7 lens on the E-M1.  It seems an appropriate lens for the slim E-M1.  The lens is tiny, given that it was meant for the GM1 and GM5 specifically.  It's not a Leica design.  It's a Panasonic design, approved by Leica.  From what I've seen so far, it has the Panasonic purple fringing, according to various web sites' articles.

15mm on the E-M1 looks reasonable with lens hood
Processing interior photos with some studio lighting, I don't see a problem, but with exterior shots at night, the purple fringing is quite noticeable, and Phase One Capture One doesn't have a lens profile yet for the 15mm f/1.7 lens.  I've only used it with the Olympus E-M1, so perhaps, it will be magically improved with the GH4.  I suspect that the focusing will certainly be improved.  It hunted quite a bit on the E-M1, whereas the GH4 can focus to EV -4.

I'm generally pleased with the sharpness and the ability to use it at a very close distance.

Outdoors, on the E-M1, it did well.

I need to take the GH4 and the lens out to see how well it will work.

15mm lens on the GH4 looks tiny
Update 2015.02.10: I took the GH4 and 15mm f/1.7 out tonight.  I was not surprised that the lack of stabilization was a problem.  I was surprised that the lens hunted for auto focus, just as much as it did with the E-M1.  I'd think that there will be a few firmware updates, although there should have been some already.

Thursday, December 25, 2014

FreedomPop for home

I've been using a phone or a mobile hotspot for my computer's internet connection from late 2006.  It started with a Samsung A900--Lex Luthor's phone in Smallville.  It was a lousy phone but the 3G connection was reliable, and the speed was better than my 3 Mbps DSL connection.

Lately, I've been using a Novatel Wireless MiFi device with Verizon.  Service was really good at my last location, but just acceptable here.  I gave up on Sprint around March of this year when the Sierra Wireless (now Netgear) device wouldn't connect for 6 hours.

Earlier this month, I was coming close to my full monthly allotment of 10 GB on the 10th day into my billing period.  Uggggh.  I'm currently about 4 GB ($40) over it.  I haven't noticed anyone else using it, but DirecTV seemed to be using a lot, even though I wasn't streaming anything.  I've been working on creating videos lately, but there wasn't that much I was uploading.  In any case, paying loads for extra use, and not knowing how it was happening was difficult.

I looked for FreedomPop after seeing an article about it.  Freedom Hub Burst is a home product similar to a mobile hotspot but without the mobile part.  It needs an AC electrical outlet.  They've been using ClearWire/Clear connections for quite a while.  The only problem with this is that I have some spotty service with Sprint at home.  Both ends of my apartment have LTE but my living room and part of my bedroom are a transition zone between 3G and LTE, so I end up with 1xRTT on my phone too often.

At $21.99 for 10 GB per month, it seemed reasonable, compared to $10 per 1 GB for an overage on Verizon.  Normally, FreedomPop hasn't been charging for the service, but this home service is a bit different, and I'm okay with it.  Like buying a phone with prepaid service, I needed to buy a device.  They supposedly included an extra USB-attached mobile modem but it wasn't included in the box.


Receiving the package on Christmas Eve seemed gift-y.  Opening the package and not finding useful instructions didn't.  Actually, there was a little pamphlet that fell between the cracks, and I found it afterwards.  It would have helped a lot but I already had a connection, read the instructions, and managed to find the page to get everything set.  Looking at the pamphlet, it neglects to tell you the default password for the connection to the device itself, so how do you connect without a current connection?


It has been simple enough to get online, once I set everything.  Speed is reasonable, though not extremely fast, nearly 5 Mbps.  Perhaps, the LTE will improve as Sprint/Clear finish their deployment in this area.  Response time seems minimal and it feels like a good connection.  Unlike my phone, I can leave the device near a window on the edge of the apartment where the connection is better.

Having an extra 10 GB for about the same as 2 GB overage isn't bad.  I can connect the TV and Blu-Ray player to it and they can update firmware to their CPU's content, even when I'm not home.  I'm thinking that I shouldn't connect my DirecTV receiver, as it will take advantage of the connection in big ways.  Now, my mobile hotspot can once again be mobile, and I can even update those extra iPhone apps without having to look for a WiFi connection elsewhere.

Update 2015.01.13: Saturday, I received a WiMAX/3G modem, like the one Sprint discontinued quite a while ago.  I couldn't download the connection manager software from FreedomPop, so I downloaded it from Sprint.

It connected but then told me that there was no free 4G service available and that 3G service wasn't free.  I only have one question--why send me this unusable piece of technology, to clear the warehouse?

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

iPhone 6 cases and screen protectors

Oh, the trouble with switching phones can be huge.  At least, this time I didn't have to get new accessories because I changed cables and connectors.

(tl;dr : I bought a Ballistic Tungsten Tough case and Otterbox Glass screen protector)

My iPhone 5c was about one year old and I switched from an iPhone 4s then, also switching from the 30 pin connector to the Lightning connector.  When I got the iPhone 5c, I bought another Otterbox Defender case at the same time as I bought the phone.

It was poorly designed, apparently to be first to market.  People were cutting out the screen protector because it was too far away from the screen it was supposed to protect.  I swore I'd never buy another case from Otterbox.

I'd seen a load of Ballistic brand cases in another store near the Sprint store, and I was close to buying something else.  A couple of months later, I ordered an SG MAXX case from the company directly, as the local store was almost out of them.  It was just as good as that other brand, but it was easy to take off and put on the phone.  Something that was practically impossible with the Defender case.

Okay, so, here I was buying an iPhone 6 with no Ballistic case in hand and I couldn't find a store ahead of time that carried them.  I ended up with a Griffin case than claimed 3 feet for drop protection, and an Otterbox screen protector made of glass.

The screen protector was of great significance since that was a huge problem with the iPhone 5c cases.  As I wrote earlier, many people cut out the Defender screen protector because of the gap between it and the screen.  Ballistic had an add-in screen protector that made it difficult to see the screen.  A corner of the protector would slip out on occasion.  I ended up with an Invisible Shield protector, as it seemed an early and popular choice.

After that year, the Invisible Shield protector had become rather nasty.  The instructions recommended installing it again from time to time, I guess so that you could clean the phone's display.  Even when new, it seemed a bit wrinkled, and that seemed normal.  Even car tint carefully installed can look like this because of the various layers.

The glass screen protector is practically perfect.  There is some adhesive keeping it tightly attached, and it feels as though I'm directly touching the device.

While I could appreciate the Griffin case for its minimalistic design, I prefer not to break my phone if I drop it.  No phone is attractive when it's in more than one piece.  I also don't care to advertise the Apple logo out the back of the case.  Why invite trouble?

So, I was in a Best Buy a few days later during the Christmas rush and found three Ballistic cases that were not on the company's website.  I'm guessing that these are higher profit, lower cost cases made specifically for Best buy.  I'm cynical, but is that wrong?

$34.99, $39.99, or $49.99?  I wasn't sure what to trust.  I still wasn't sure if they were fakes.  I chose the $39.99 Tungsten Tough case, labeled 7+ feet drop tested.  It's not as thin as the $34.99 case, but I had been using a case with a holster previously.  I'm thinking that I still want that extra protection, although it's a pain to get the phone open quickly to answer a call.

How much is $849.99 worth to you?  If you don't have enough protection and need to have the device fixed or replaced, what if that cost exceeds $49.99?  Is a pretty case worth the extra cost of repairs?

Monday, December 15, 2014

Sprint "Cut Your Bill in Half" deal only on plan, not your device. Is that a surprise?

It's apparently not quite the deal you'd expect, and of course, it depends on Verizon Wireless and (the new) AT&T's bad plans.




 DSL Reports

I'm not sure that there is a real story or not.  I don't expect miracles anyway.  The big two have been working a little bit more to be balance plans with service.  However, if you get great coverage where you are--watch out for fake coverage maps from any of the big 4--Sprint should be a good deal.  Now that Nextel is all but dead and the 800 MHz frequency band is available, there is a huge chance that Sprint could be dominant in certain markets.  There are Spark areas like Milipitas, CA where Sprint is using 800 MHz, 1900 MHz, and 2500 MHz combined.

Verizon has dual frequency bands with their XLTE but who knows what device you need to make it work right now.  I've searched multiple times to see if my current mobile hotspot will take advantage of it but they're not telling apparently.  I'd prefer enhanced throughput.

Update 2014.12.30: I've been a Sprint customer since September 2000.  I've seen great service and weird, poor service.  Lately, it's very good everywhere but home.  While I'm feeling just more than neutral about Sprint, Verizon (my mobile hotspot) doesn't really make me feel better, and the stories about AT&T and T-Mobile keep me away.  YMMV--Your mileage may vary.  Do your research.

Sunday, December 14, 2014

Sprint has decided to hide coverage deficiencies on the map with 100% LTE, then Spark

I came to this area about five months ago.  I noticed that the majority of this city of 70,000+ people were covered by 3G, while the adjoining city of 22,000+ had strong LTE.  I also noticed that Sprint seemed to be working their way up California SR 99, but skipping this area north of Modesto and resuming near Sacramento.

As time progressed, they added LTE capabilities and they've slowly crept into my apartment, but I'm still at many times seeing 1xRTT as LTE and 3G/EVDO fight over my phone.

I mentioned this to @sprintcare a while back, noting the huge roaming area encompassing the shopping area on the east side of the city.  I was told to look at AIRRAVE as an option.  It isn't a portable option and it doesn't fix the lack of coverage.  It could only cover it up.  Since that conversation, I started another with @sprintcare, as I noticed that the map showed LTE coverage while the behavior of the network had not changed.

They told me that there were no towers in the area.  I told them that the maps didn't show that any longer.  They told me to look again and again.  I finally made screenshots of the map at the cross streets I told them, and the map near my apartment, on the edge of the roaming area.  They never replied.
What roaming area?

What roaming area?

It's apparent that marketing is more important than truth.  I assume my previous conversation about the roaming area caused them to falsify results on the coverage map.  What else (and where else) have they modified the truth?

Update 2015.01.23: Two days ago, there was almost no service and my phone spent almost the whole day on roaming, not only near home, which wouldn't be unusual, but in other areas where LTE is usually strong.  According to an acquaintance on Sprint, service was also bad there, so apparently, it was up and down California SR 99, not just where I live.

What was naturally amusing is that @sprintcare told me that there were no reported problems.  Cable company, much?  I made the comment that since September 2000 when I became a Sprint customer they only admitted to one problem.  Later, they decided that there was an outage.  They didn't mention that it was over multiple cities.

Turbo 1xRTT? Spark? I wish.
3G map shows roaming area
Voice is fair but data is 100%?

I was shocked to find that they updated the map to show Spark, not only over my city, but the highest performance over my apartment.  It was amusing to see 1xRTT while viewing the new coverage map details.  I believe that they might have a plan for Spark here, but I think they're jumping the gun with their marketing efforts.  With the roaming hole, they shouldn't be able to claim coverage anyway but their map legend has no extra provision for Spark or LTE roaming.

Wouldn't it be wonderful to have three frequency LTE coverage?  I haven't exactly seen it working yet, although parts of the San Francisco Bay Area are working quite well.  I've seen something upwards of 30 Mbps on occasion.  I'd be really impressed to see upwards of 70 Mbps, especially since Verizon is working on two frequency LTE coverage, on capable devices, which my MiFi 5510L is not.

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Panasonic GH4 vs GH3 vs Olympus E-M1

I've had the Panasonic GH4 a little over a week now.  I just did some video clips yesterday, pretty much for the first time, although I took a couple with the GH3.

I had the GH3 for over a year and wanted to trade it before the trade-in value dropped too far.  Unfortunately, it took a while to get a GH4.

I was enthusiastic about the changes to the GH4 because the GH3 was occasionally inconvenient, particularly, the EVF.  Given that the GH3 was the first mirror-less camera body I'd ever used, getting used to the electronic viewfinder was difficult enough, but it always felt a bit broken.

I even had a problem when I was wearing non-polarized sunglasses where the viewfinder at some angles would be blacked out.  I seemed to have a similar problem with the Olympus E-M1, but that seems occasionally to be a problem with the proximity sensor.  I realized that when I saw the image on the rear display.

In any case, the viewfinder of the GH4 seems much better.  There may be some odd behavior but I've only noticed positive results.  As usual, the viewfinder is so bright that I can see better than just using my eyes.  Despite the size difference between the E-M1 (0.71x compared to 135 Format) and GH4 (0.67x), I find the GH4's viewfinder to be very good.  Size is not an issue.  It is surprising that 1024x768 is an advanced resolution for an EVF.  The FujiFilm X-T1's viewfinder is bigger at 0.77x but doesn't seem incredibly better to me, though I don't use it every day.  The GH4's functionality is good enough that I could give up optical viewfinders, and that is difficult for me to believe.

Just today, I had a positive experience with the GH4's magnified manual focus view, unlike that of the GH3.  My experience with focus, whether manual or automatic was difficult on the GH3.  I was just moving from optical viewfinders and the resolution on the GH3 viewfinder was not great, and the distortions were not helping.  Plus, the magnified view was just a huge problem, getting in the way of my ability to follow the action while focusing.  Using the GH4, the magnified view was shown in the center, and I was able to see around it to keep up with the action.  It's apparently possible that you can move it to suit you.

The battery is the same as the battery of the GH3, and the GH4 seems to sip battery power, though I generally leave the rear display in the closed position, rarely browsing what I have just taken.  I wish that I could have done this with the E-M1.  Its economical design seemed more of an attempt to use already-available parts than to create a serious replacement for the E-5 dSLR, for which it seems Panasonic created, with the GH3.

The rear display of the E-M1 can't be protected because it can't be reversed.  It can be accidentally activated (far too easily, though I'm adapting), especially showing the focus point selection display, further depleting the battery life needlessly.  Practically the first thing I noticed when I got the E-M1 was that I could not fold out the rear display to take a portrait-oriented photo of a building from a very low angle.  You can slide it down or flip it up, but it shows a consumer-oriented display mechanism, unlike that of the E-5, GH3, or GH4.  Of course, my E-1's rear display couldn't be reversed either, but that came with a plastic screen protector and of course, didn't have touch capabilities.

The E-M1 does not seem to sip battery power, and my first experiences with the camera body was that I would run out of power early, and end up with a door stop, and would have to get the E-5 out of the bag.  As the battery is small, so is the grip.  I have acclimated to the E-M1's grip, but it can be uncomfortable coming from a dSLR, unlike the GH3 and GH4 grip.

Using each body, I find myself referring to every SLR, all the way back to my first Fujica SLR but focusing on the Olympus E-1, my first dSLR, which felt instantly intuitive.  The GH3 and GH4 have the drive mode selector on the left shoulder of the top plate.  I feel it might be better to have exposure controls there, including ISO and exposure compensation.

As well, Olympus should have done something similar with the E-M1, assigning it to aperture control rather than having the front dial assigned to exposure compensation.  It was uncomfortable moving to the E-M1 from the E-5, and there are still times when it has been unintuitive, making for accidental changes that I didn't want.

I could hope that all companies come to use a standardized menu interface, but it feels that it won't happen any time soon.  Olympus' Super Control Panel is really amazing, and Panasonic's Quick Menu is satisfactory.  The regular menu systems are the opposite with Panasonic's being more easily navigated, in contrast to those from Olympus (8 levels within the Tools Menu, seriously, Olympus?).  The extra video options on the GH4 should make professional people working in video happier.

I've recorded a few videos and it went well.  Outdoors, it looked very real in 1080p, much like some documentary.  Indoors, there was a similar feel, even though it wasn't extremely bright.  Having been at the skate shop and their half pipe a couple of weeks earlier with the E-M1, I was surprised at how responsive and accurate the GH4 was.  I used the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens in both cases.

Checking the photos and videos later, I was so pleased that the focus was great, surprisingly great.  The photos and videos looked as though there was much more light than what the E-M1 had.

While I was taking video, I tapped the shutter release a couple of times and ended up finding two JPEG files.  I need to analyze them further, but they were taken at unfortunate times and I wouldn't be able to use them.

There was a problem for me finding the button for video recording, but even when I left my thumb on it, I wasn't always able to start or stop recording when I expected.  It's recessed to avoid accidental use.  I'm sure I'll become acclimated to it eventually.  I was thinking that it might be better if the video capture button was near the shutter release--in the front.

Many people value image stabilization and it may save me at some time.  I haven't noticed that it works or not, whether it's in a lens or working the sensor platform.  With the GH4 (and previously, the GH3) and 12-40mm f/2.8, I have no image stabilization, and I don't see any problem.  I finally bought a tripod about a year ago, and I've used it so few times.  When photographing sports in lower light situations, what will help other than more lighting?

At ISO 3200, you probably don't want to use the photos as your best work but from what I've seen, that could be the story for APS-C and 135 Format sized sensors, as well, except for a very select few that include ISO sensitivity at 102,400 or greater.  Regardless, film didn't do so well at ISO 3200.

Panasonic GH3 Pros:

  • 1080p image quality and video format/bit rate flexibility
  • Video industry support
  • Grip comfort and battery life
  • Multiple function buttons
  • 5 custom sets--3 positions on mode dial
  • Fully-articulated rear display
  • Silent mode

Panasonic GH4 Pros:

  • Lower light auto focus ability and responsiveness
  • 4K/C4K video
  • Video industry support
  • Video format/bit rate flexibility
  • Grip comfort and battery life
  • Improved EVF over that of the GH3
  • Multiple function buttons
  • 5 custom sets--3 positions on mode dial
  • Fully-articulated rear display
  • Manual focus magnification mode
  • 1/8000 of a second shutter speed
  • Silent mode

Olympus E-M1 Pros:

  • 5-axis image stabilization
  • Electronic ViewFinder clarity
  • Button feature set toggle switch
  • Responsiveness
  • Phase Detection pixels for tracking, and PDAF with Four-Thirds lenses
  • Effective Face detection
  • 1/8000 of a second shutter speed

I appreciate the Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic GH4 equally.  The extra money for the GH4 is consistent with its extra functionality and ease of use.  While I felt a bit betrayed by Olympus for the mess they created after the E-1 (Four-Thirds) body was released, the E-M1 is a very good camera body on its own.  10 fps (E-M1) vs 12 fps (GH4)?  They both work really well.  I've seen plenty of reviews that say that none of these bodies are good for sports but I get my shots, though the GH3 made it much tougher and caused me to return to the E-5 dSLR in many cases.  The only real problem is the lack of wonderful lenses but Olympus is working on that.

The GH3 should be a great body for anyone who is interested in high quality 1080p video, with still photography on the side.  The price has come down quite a bit and it's a good compromise, especially with the fully-articulated rear display.  I was able to get some good architectural photos at a very low angle, thanks to it.

I'm not even sure that the E-M1's video capabilities have improved over the E-5 and without the fully-articulated rear display, it's not nearly as flexible.  Still photography is its domain and for the size of both the body and the system's lenses, I doubt there is a better compromise.

That said, the E-M1 is now the second most used body in my bag, rather than the E-5.  I doubt that will change once I'm more accustomed to the GH4.  It is both supremely comfortable and it's extremely capable.  The little problems I had with the GH3 seem to have been fixed.

Update 2014.12.13: I've found that the GH4 and E-M1 really automatically focus micro Four-Thirds lenses well (although there is an odd performance issue between the E-M1 and 35-100mm f/2.8).  I'm seeing mixed results with my Four-Thirds lenses.  The E-M1 and 50mm f/2.0 macro are a great match.  The E-M1 works better with the 50mm lens than any other body, including the Olympus E-1 and E-5.  I need to really plan and test, but my 2004 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 wasn't very good with the E-M1.  I suspect that Olympus only tested with the SWD version.  It seemed that it worked well with the GH4.

As I'd found when I was using the GH3, auto focus was better with my Four-Thirds lenses than with the E-1 in low or ordinary light.  My E-1 may have had a problem with auto focus, though it seemed okay in bright light.  The E-5 is still faster with Four-Thirds lenses than the GH4, GH3, or E-M1, except with the 50mm macro.  The 14-35mm f/2.0 is often a pain with auto focus but usally works reasonably well even with the GH4 and E-M1.

Update 2014.12.26: The GH4, as with the GH3, often focuses on something else entirely than what I put in the focus area.  It often finds a fence way behind the person I want to photograph.  Apparently, face detection is not useful.

Update 2014.12.30: Face Detection asks me to register a face when I try to use it.  If this happens every time I need to use it, it's going to be a pain.  I hope it works beautifully.

I shot some 4K video the other day.  I tried to pass it through the Sony 4K-upscaling Blu-Ray player and it wouldn't handle it.  Maybe, it didn't like the file format.  I need to transfer to a USB stick and feed it directly through the TV's port.

Still having more fun/frustration with the auto focus.  It seems to randomly lose focus in the middle of what I'm shooting.  For a professional, it shouldn't be a problem since they won't likely be using auto focus at all--or the native lenses that suppose auto focus.  I'm learning, although, I'm looking at lenses that aren't native or those which won't have an electronic interface.

Update 2015.01.20: I went to take some portraits.  I'm not a portrait photographer but the E-M1 is quite good, partly because of face detection.  Focus rarely fails.  I really need to set up face detection on the GH4 to see how it works with the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens.

I keep wondering about the value of Panasonic going it alone with their DFD technology only working on their lenses.  They need to work with Olympus for the sake of the format.  On the other hand, I've noticed the slower performance between the 35-100mm f/2.8 on the E-M1 versus the GH3 or GH4.

Update 2015.02.09: The GH4 continues to impress in most cases.  The auto focus is still a bit inaccurate and it would be better if it worked better with Olympus lenses since the premium Panasonic lenses are generally only adequate.  That said, I bought the Panasonic/Lumix/Leica 15mm f/1.7 lens the other day.  It has the typical purple fringing that seems to define Panasonic lenses.

I took a trip down south to San Diego and the LA/OC area, photographing at skate parks, both still and video.  I also used the GH4 and Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 at a small concert venue and it performed very well, and I managed to hold it fairly still.  Even though I was close to the speaker, it recorded the sound very well, and the video was good.

I bought some new USB drives, with USB 3.0 speed and copied the 4K video files onto one of them.  After connecting it to the USB 3.0 port on the TV, I didn't really see improved performance.  I'm just not sure the problem is with the TV or the GH4, given that they cost me about the same amount of money.  There was something in Panasonic's latest firmware for the GH4 that mentioned improved playback of 4K files but I figured that it was for the rear display or the viewfinder.

Monday, December 8, 2014

Video seems so intensive in contrast to still photography

The Panasonic GH4 hasn't really made my life easier.  Yes, it's great equipment.

I've taken roughly 49 video clips since getting the GH4.

Hold the camera steady.  Follow the motion.  Oh, and remember to remove the lens cap and power on the camera.  Yes, that's it.

Once I got the clips onto the drive, I was confused about what to do next.  I started iMovie (I have Adobe Premiere Elements on the way) since that's my only video editor.  Suddenly, I need to deal with Events and Projects and Importing.  Am I confused?  Am I.

I managed to get a video onto YouTube and Vimeo.  That seemed a little problematic, but not horrible.  Horrible was the description for dealing with Instagram.  It saw my video, but refused to process it, possibly because it was too wide.  The solution?  Dropbox on Android was extra helpful in exporting to Instagram.  It somehow found the face in the video and kept the person in the video, regardless of the location.  That was quite amazing, and better than I could have thought to do at this point.  The iOS version of Dropbox didn't have such an option (or any export to Instagram) that I could find.

After getting the first, very raw video on all three networks that I use, I felt better.

The next day, I tried working with iMovie further, without any extra support.  I made mistakes, and learned.  Finally, I managed to learn enough to put a bit of the video into slow motion.  Then, I found that iMovie could immediately send the final product to Vimeo and YouTube without much more than e-mail addresses and passwords.

I still have something like 10 videos to process--out of 49 I took.  Some of the videos need pieces thrown away.  I should be able to learn.

Update 2014.12.13: Finally worked with the last nine of the videos, added some transitions, and wrapped them into one video of slightly under two minutes.  Am I proud?  Am I accomplished?  I don't know.  I'm satisfied to be able to finish something else, and do more.

I got my copy of Adobe Premiere Elements, along with Photoshop Elements, today.  I'm not sure it's easier or better but the multiple levels of assistance will probably be useful.  (I use Photoshop so little since working through Phase One Capture One that Photoshop is all but obsolete for my workflow.)

Apple doesn't seem to care about helping the user, except through some videos.  They'd started a tutorial system way back in Mac OS 8.x but they killed it fairly quickly on the way to Mac OS X.

Still, iMovie is more confusing than difficult to use.  Hopefully, Premiere Elements is also more confusing than difficult.

Update 2015.01.15: Premiere Elements is similar.  It's just giving me a load of new user problems, as is iMovie.  Why am I not going for a professional product?  It really doesn't matter at this point.  I still have to learn to work with taking the video, working with equipment, and processing the clips, understanding the software.  If there is magical software to help do what I want without requiring learning something, I need that kind of software.  I don't believe it exists.

Also, I'm looking at which lenses might help me.  It matters about whether I'm going to take video clips or make films.

What does that mean?  Serious equipment will require more than just a monetary investment.  It will require a mental investment, planning any move.

I'm more of a run-and-gun type of photographer.  I'm ready at any moment.  I don't tell people what to do--I ask what they want to do or use what they are doing.  Sports photography is like that, though working around skate parks is more flexible.

I've been thinking about cine lenses.  I can use those in a way that isn't completely different from the way I work now, but these are adapted or otherwise, manually-operated lenses.  There is a recent crowdsourced group Veydra that will be able to provide supposedly high quality cine lenses at low prices, in contrast to Zeiss--US$900 vs US$5000 for each lens.

What's different is actually setting the various parameters of exposure, which may not change a lot from minute to minute, and focus.  This should not be a problem because, as I've found photographing sports, auto focus isn't always all that reliable, unless maybe you're using a camera body over US$5000.

However, I'd found that the Olympus E-M1 and 12-40mm f/2.8 lens was fairly good for run-and-gun situations.  Perhaps the GH4 with Panasonic's 12-35mm f/2.8 lens would be equally good.  The really great solution would be for Panasonic to work with Olympus and vice versa, to add the higher end Olympus lens profiles to the GH4 for Depth from Defocus application.  It doesn't feel as though the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens from Panasonic is all that great with the GH4 but it wasn't all that great with the GH3 either.

I'm still considering all of the options, but quick auto focus is certainly effortless, mindless--if it works.