[Craig Seeman]

Without any details, perhaps your computer is struggling with playback.
Have you tested with Sony’s own software used to log XDCAM EX video?

[Craig Seeman]

[Andrew Kimery] ” “If X adds back in Avid/PPro/FCP 7 features I need/want at about the same pace that Avid, PPro, etc., add in new/X-like features I need/want will I ever get to a point to where I feel the need to learn X?”

“

That seems to be assuming FCPX is behind in every feature. On the other hand there are things in FCPX that the others are behind in and/or may have decided not to approach at all.

[Craig Seeman]

Given your source is VHS, I’d recommend capturing in ProResLT rather than HQ. That’ll save you a lot of space and not much difference in quality given the sources.

iMovie can burn basic screening DVDs if you wanted to do that.

Personally I’m concerned that a lossy codec on potentially noisy sources isn’t going to yield great results so I’d personally avoid another round of compression to save the bits after chopping. If you must, you could use a very hight quality H.264 setting.

[Craig Seeman]

[Jeremy Garchow] “With all do respect, sir, I’d stay away from this. The plugin circumvents the native MXF nature of 10.1.4.”

BPAV folders are not .mxf. The media is .mp4. It may be supported but that would not be due to .mxf support.
XAVC-L .mxf confirmed not working. Sony states there will be a plugin update.

[Craig Seeman]

[Oliver Peters] “Which is ironic, considering you can’t use iCloud Drive with 10.9.5 or iOS versions older than iOS7. That’s looking out for your customers. :-/”

But the OS updates are free. Apple wants you to keep moving forward. As one moves forward with the “free” software one gets the “incentive” to upgrade hardware as the performance suffers… but the feature beckon (at least in theory).

[Craig Seeman]

[Oliver Peters] “Aperture users simply got tired of waiting for Apple”

Not unlike FCP users who saw not much change from the release of FCP6 in 2007, although, they had no compelling competitor to move to. Even in 2011, Adobe had a lot of work ahead of them to make PPro more attractive. Aperture users have Lightroom. I still think Apple could have made a case to wait for the “awesome” thing coming.

[Oliver Peters] “I do believe they are endeavoring to develop applications that require the performance of their newer machines,”

Yes they are a hardware company or, at least, an eco-system company. They want the pieces to work together and they want you to keep buying new pieces. I find it no more distasteful than those wiling to submit to Adobe’s subscriptions. Each has a price to pay.

I don’t doubt that Apple is aware that all their competitors have an OS exit plan as each is cross platform except Apple. They are faced with providing a compelling reason to stay Mac.

BTW iCloud Drive and iTunes both are available on Windows as means to offer iOS users a means to “exit” the other way.

I can’t predicate success (and Apple certainly fails at times) but I can’t help but think Photos is part of an effort to move more people to Macs.

[Craig Seeman]

Or maybe
https://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/micro-xdcam/resource.downloads.bbsccms-assets-micro-xdcam-downloads-XDCAMSoftwareDownload.shtml#apps

Camera Import Plug-In for Apple Final Cut Pro X (FCPX)

PDZK-LT2 – Camera Import Plug-In Version 1.0 for Final Cut Pro X | Release Notes

This plug in for Final Cut Pro X can be used to ingest video shot on Sony SxS cards in either :
XDCAM EX format: FAT/.MP4
XDCAM HD422 memory format: UDF/.MXF (i.e. PMW-100 and PMW-500)

Optical XDCAM users can use XDCAM Browser version 2.1 to ingest material into Final Cut Pro X

I believe the new .mxf supports may help with most Sony codecs with that extension with the exception of XAVC-L in which Sony says another update to the plugin is forthcoming.

[Craig Seeman]

[Oliver Peters] “While true, there might not be that many Aperture users left. A lot migrated to Lightroom. So in reality, Apple might not have as much to lose.”

Probably, in part, due to more bad (or actually no) marketing from Apple. They’ve done virtually NOTHING to even hint that Photos will allow a smooth transition of libraries and something that might approach a similar feature set (even if implemented differently).

[Oliver Peters] “Honestly most of their latest moves seem designed (more blatantly than ever before) to sell new hardware, like Retina iMacs. I would certainly imagine that’s the main purpose for Photos”

Superficially I can’t see that as their intent because it would mean even more motive to buy a Mac than iPhoto offered (and to some extent Aperture).

I think their intent might simply be unification of code and much better integration into the ecosystem than either iPhone or Aperture could do.

[Craig Seeman]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “whether the aperture people are currently left holding their own… “

Consider the difference in this case. Apple announced EOL in advance and, in the meantime, Aperture is still for sale. The test will be how well one can transition from Aperture to Photos and what the functionality is. I think one change, as noted in iOS, is a form of third party plugin support. Could be Apple has learned from the X release.

[Craig Seeman]

[Michael Gissing] “If you know for sure that roles were there from the start but not implemented then by all means enlighten me.”

In the first release there was a pulldown with the initial Roles designation included. They didn’t do anything but they were there. Sorry but I can’t prove sans screenshot from X 10.0.0 but I certainly saw them and suspected their utility would be added in the future.

BTW there’s other metadata stuff in there which don’t seem to be implemented yet. I believe EXIF info is one example of that.