Leaderboard

On day 3 and 4 of Photokina, I collaborated with Dave Altizer of Kinotika to record the first episode of EOSHD TV and an EOSHD Podcast. We discuss insider topics such as a rumoured on-chip ND filter by Panasonic, Fuji's "super full frame" medium format strategy and round up some of the highlights of Photokina (including the Panasonic S1R). Read the full article

Oly 12-100 & 7-14 ISO 100-800.

Bright conditions + wide apertures require very strong ND to control exposure and many ND filters don't block IR as well as visible light which the sensor can pick up and cause a colour shift in dark tones. Naturally you can also stop down the lens but then you may as well get a native M43 lens. I'm not seeing anything that couldn't be done with a GH5 or GH5s and a (heavy) grade - apart from the 4k 60p internal.

Big fan of Olympus. I don't see why they would have to enter 135. Love their cameras and especially the lenses. Smaller sensors have plenty of advantages. The question is when camera companies are going to fully embrace more computational corrections. With the faster read out and less heat, smaller sensors will always have the advantage in this area. I find AWB better in my iPhone than any camera I've ever tried. Smaller lenses is a real advantage. In time image processing should be able to make up for disadvantages like lower DR or low light sensitivity. An m4/3 sensor is quite a lot bigger than what's in a phone. 135 should become the new medium format. There is no reason for the average user to carry heavy and expensive lenses. The perfect camera for me would be the Hasselblad X1D but I can't afford it. It has plenty of disadvantages like being slow et c. But its strong points are unbeatable - being very compact but with a huge sensor. Likewise there will be plenty who needs a super fast camera with small lenses. The smaller the sensor, the faster the camera. The current 135 craze will subside, like all trends. It's laughable when you see someone argue that one particular system, or format, is the best for everyone. I would guess these are typically photographers with very little experience of different kinds of photography.

Shot in UHD Prores 422, with a mix of 23.98 and 60fps, slightly graded in DaVinci Resolve. ISO 400 to 3200. Lumix 12-35mm 2.8.

will share some PNGs tomorrow, even some comparisons.

I'm using the .64 Speedbooster XL on my Pocket4K and it works great with full frame lenses. There is a slight vignette on the wide end of my Sigma 18-35 1.8

Why? It's remarkably good as it stands.

I noticed some very interesting developments in the last few months. From 43rumors.com https://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-says-olympus-did-not-share-their-same-full-frame-vision/ "Lesnumeriques interviewed Panasonic manager Yosuke Yamane and these are some of they info: • Eight years ago Panasonic had the idea to go Full Frame but at the time there were technical and commercial challenges • Two years ago they started to look for an alliance around a Full Frame platform. At the beginning of 2018 they approached Leica and Sigma. • Why is Olympus not on board with this? Yosuke said “we do not really have the same vision. Our directions ARE DIFFERENT NOW, 'ON THIS FORMAT' (Capital added)“ • The new AI autofocus system works on the question of “where to focus”. For example we use deep learning to track flying birds or human eyes • Panasonic has abandoned the smart phone project and there will be no follow-up of the CM1 (here on Amazon). • Panasonic does not think the smart phone market is a threat for MFT" And https://www.43rumors.com/the-seven-full-frame-lenses-patented-so-far-by-olympus/#disqus_thread "I went through all the most recent Olympus patents. Here I recap the seven Full Frame lens designs patented by Olympus in 2016-2017. • 17mm f/1.4 • 20mm f/1.4 • 24mm f/1.4 • 28mm f/1.4 • 28mm f/2.0 • 35mm f/1.4 • 50mm f/.4 It might be that Olympus is just playing with the idea to go Full Frame but never actually will do the step into making a real product." There appear to be too many things wrt to what roadmap Olympus is on. From the 2 posts above, from 43rumors above, it appears that: 1. Olympus has patented 7 Full Frame lenses upto 2017, meaning these were in development atleast 2-3 years before that. So it's almost 5 years since now, that the Olympus Full Frame project has been in effect. Since Olympus doesn't make lenses for other manufactureres outside the M43 system, these lenses were, therefore for its own FF system. One of those lens patents also mentioned various technical aspects like DRAM built into the lense (WHICH I thought wad pretty interesting). 2. "OUR DIRECTIONS ARE DIFFERENT NOW, ON THIS FORMAT", means Panasonic is Aware that Olympus has a Full Frame roadmap, and that they (Olynpus) were unconvinced about the new L Mount Partnership for whatever reasons (I am guessing it may have to do with mount issues). Panasonic would obviously not have asked for licence fee, and it may not have to do with only full frame sensors being outside consideration for Olympus. 3. If Olympus is indeed on a Full Frame Roadmap, it would have obviously consisted many things including mount size, plane distance etc etc. IBIS would be huge on their list of things to do among other design considerations. If Olympus is INDEED looking to launch a FF Camera system, I hope they get a few partners on board Before they go ahead. They already make some of the best lenses around, and they are the pioneers of IBIS, High Res Image Stitching etc. They would benefit Greatly from collaborating with someone for video. Maybe Blackmagic and they could explore BRAW to outsmart other FF competitors, since neither has anything to lose and a lot to gain from such a collaboration. There are already a plethora of Sony Sensors being used by anyone and everyone (except perhaps Canon), and if Olympus can just Skip 10-bit internal recording and move to well compressed 12-bit internal recording (12:1 BRAW), maybe they could be back with a bang. It's also sad that the 10-year M43 partnership of Panasonic and Olympus has ended before they could decide on a Full Frame Camera (mount) Format.

An interesting read: http://www.focuspulling.com/bmpcc4k-learning/ For example, "Bob insists that the Pocket 4K’s sensor is not the same manufacturing part as the one in the GH5S", Bob being Bob Caniglia of Blackmagic Design. Also, on P4K ("Quattro Kappa" for Italians) memory cards and SSD, USB-C variants, audio XLR and 4 mics on the camera, bluetooth remote control, Extended Video, dual ISO, shutter angle vs. speed, window(ed) shooting, etc.

I love it when a thread goes full Partridge

Which native zooms have a 1.2 aperture though? Agree it's not a workhorse / walkaround but it's got exceptionally good IQ ( doesn't need software distortion correction like native M43 lenses), low light ability and it's a zoom! I'll only use it in low light situations as the amount of ND filtering needed for bright conditions is an issue esp if the IR filter on the P4k is not that effective?

To understand Olympus's position you have to go back and look in recent history. 1) In 2008 its digital imaging was profitable and had annual sales of US$3bn. In the following 10 years sales have shrunk 85% to US$550m and the imaging division has lost money in 9 out of the 10 years. 2) For the current year Olympus forecasts a loss of US$70m which equates to US$150 on every ILC it sells. 3) So realistically management cant go to shareholders and say - we started the 43 format, lost money and closed it down - we started the M43 format and lost money. But we have a great idea - lets get into FF and directly compete with Nikon, Sony and Canon. So where does this leave them? Well they can stick with M43 and hope it comes good. But Panasonic seems to be looking elsewhere (whether that is a good idea is another question)? (I am not really sure that Olympus has much faith - they have released 3 cameras in the last 2 years.) So they could exit the business altogether. Alternatively, they could turn themselves into being purely a lens manufacturer (more along the lines of Zeiss (cough, cough)) for existing mounts. This is where their value added/expertise really lies(and has synergy with their highly successful medical optics business. They could eradicate their massive (relative to the size of the business) sales, marketing, administration and service overhead of their camera business. Furthermore, the industry seems to have a very large amount of new mounts desperately short of native glass. Now, of course, some of these new mounts are fairly proprietary but there is nothing to say that Olympus couldnt design and produce lenses for other brands (and already might do as far as I know.) All conjecture but I dont see an Olympus FF mount on the horizon.

Yep - I am not an autofocus user either..

Insanity:

Olympus is in a tough position, as pointed out, they're not exactly setting the world on fire from an earnings standpoint. Like Fuji they're a small niche brand with a tiny market share. And most reports show Instax is keeping Fuji's imaging division afloat, if you removed Instax would a small volume system like the GFX even exist? Olympus has no cash cow like Instax and they're painted into a bit of a corner by having nothing outside of m43 and compacts. The lack of cooperation between Panasonic/Olympus is a big failing, they should have worked together on things like lens compatibility to strengthen m43, instead they both went their separate ways and fought over a minuscule amount of market share. The most likely scenario for Olympus to add to its lineup outside of m43 is joining another mount. I just can't see how they can justify the expense/risk of a new mount when m43 isn't really helping the bottom line. The L-mount makes most sense, they could do FF, or pivot away from the $3000+ FF bodies and do APS-c. But a larger sensor version of the EM1.2 would be significantly more than the EM1.2's $2k launch price - again painted into a corner by their non-competitive pricing. They could make lenses for other mounts like the EF, F and E-mounts along the lines of Sigma/Tamron/Tokina, but that doesn't seem likely. A few of those FF lens patents sound awesome, but given Olympus pricing, they all sound like $1500-2000 primes, and that's not a very large market either. In a 2-3 years everyone outside of Pentax will be heavily into mirrorless, in a declining market some will really feel the pinch. IMO Fuji (when Instax hits the saturation point and sales fall off a cliff) and Olympus will be hit hardest since stills shooters are still the main driving force behind high end cameras - and the IQ just isn't at FF levels. That combined with the fact top end m43 pricing is moving into FF territory, its easy to see why the a7III has been such a runaway success. Quite frankly, its tough to see where Olympus can grow or even keep their current volume levels if they stay m43 only. But its also tough to see where they can move forward without partnering with someone else. Chris

Dennis, you know it may become pretty misleading without proper testing and time for checking the best from your settings out. Balcony tests are rubbish : ) Thanks anyway to hear especially from you (E : -)

Can you share any samples?

That's what everyone said about Panasonic's advent into Full Frame. If one doesn't take risks, there is no purpose for entering a business. I agree that Olympus needs atleast 1 strategic partner. Sony's earlier cameras were better on paper than in real world use (quite correctly pointed out Tony Northup). And I feel, it's only after the A7iii that they are poised for market domination, by having the perfect balance of features and price. Olympus needs to partner with someone, I guess, that is the common consensus. I guess if the Olympus EM1 Mark ii had some kickass video quality with atleast 8-bit 4-2-2 LOG pushing around 12 stops and good autofocus, the GH5 wouldn't have been as successful. The video on the Olympus isn't that bad, but it isn't great either. Actually Computational Photography needs at a more processing power than companies as other realise or want to admit. Also the algorithms are still in the very infancy stage. So that is going to take a while. Sigma won't make Olympus glass. They make equally good glass and both are extremely innovative. And sigma won't bring anything new to the table. A collaboration with Samsung would have been ideal. Their weakness is PDAF and Video Codec, and they could do with 14-bit in photo. Their body design, weather proofing, menu layout, IBIS, lens quality and design, photo quality etc are all pretty amazing the way they are. Except for the Sony Sensors, there seems nothing else adding to the Sony partnership. But the sensor division is a different company (wholly owned subsidiary of the parent company with different management teams), so it doesn't really matter there. PDAF could be a benefit of a collaboration between the two, but that too is unlikely. And the XAVC codec is hardly open source, so no benefit in the video department either. Plus if they made lenses for Sony Zeiss would throw a fit. I agree that Full Frame needs to down size literally. The bodies are way too large. If a Hasselblad X1D can stuff a Medium Format sensor in that body, there is no reason to carry such enormous bodies around, except perhaps for way longer video recording (battery size) and 10-bit internal (heat dissipation issues). Also the Nikon Z has opened up a Pandora's box, regarding the importance of choosing the right mount size and flange distance, since the majority of Full Frame sensors are just off the shelf products (with minor adjustments made either in-house or during the fabrication process) and exactly the same size in height and width. The GH5 was introduced one and a half years ago and ILCs are still stuck with Limited Recording Time and No 10-bit internal codecs. Plus the single SD Card slots in both the Nikon and the Canon is just criminal. As is the crop factor on the Canon. I believe M43 sensors and cameras are still very far from their full potential. Not importantly, this years Full Frame Mirrorless releases have shown that the Full Frame market had been mostly disappointing in everything except perhaps PDAF. Everything else is Only a minor or incremental improvement. There have also been regressions with removal of an SD slot and no limitless recording in yet another iteration. The FF market too has space for a new player and Olympus should find a partner to try and enter the market.

That would be a pretty tough test on Any camera. Actually not too bad. Desirable well no, but common, yes...

You’re misreading what I wrote. I expressed the opinion that I see a sentiment that Olympus is somehow doomed because they haven’t launched a 135 system. I see the notion that all one needs is an A7 or a Z6 because if you put a small lens on it’s a small camera. It surprises me that you haven’t noticed this in comments sections everywhere. It’s true it’s less of a problem here since this is a video-centric forum where sensor size is discussed differently. I have no idea why you took it personally or even why you think I was talking about this forum? 135 is clearly a trend in 2018. I didn’t claim 135 as such would disappear, merely the sentiment that it is the end all format will change. That was my main point. Besides, I don’t understand what reasons you have for your fucked up attitude, that I witness again and again on this forum, but I hope your day gets better and that you find a more constructive place to deal with your frustrations.

Actually I now think it's better than an Arri Alexa and at least as good as 70mm film ( i.e as good as the GH5). This is just a personal view from seeing it on youtube but I'm totally convinced! ?

As much as f/2 on MFT or f/2.4 on APS-C (Fuji users tend to appreciate their 16-55mm f/2.8... but I second that one, man ; ) In any case, my 24-105 f/4 is one of my favs ever : -)

Yes, 70D works well. DPAF also.

I don’t see anything to indicate that screen is anything special in terms of glass. I’d have thought it would be an advertised feature if it was gorilla glass or similar? Might have missed it however! It’s s pity it doesn’t have a plastic cover of sorts because there is a lot of surface area to scratch.

That's my plan as I have about 8 LP-E6's from when I last owned a 5DII. Even if I only get 20-30 mins from a battery this will be plenty of time for a long take. I've used external batteries on my A7s and A7r2 but the extra 'rigging' and bulk was more hassle unless it was in a fixed studio situation so in the end I just bought more internal batteries and swopped them between takes. Try one for an ipad mini or other tablet as it will be big enough to cut down without needing to have a hole in it. If the screen is gloss I'd say such a protector is essential unless you want to keep wiping away finger marks every few minutes.....

The screen is highly reflective so eliminating the reflections might make it more easily visible. Cutting reflections means the screen has less to compete with. I'll try to pick up a cheap phone version tomorrow just to see how it works and if it's good, get a proper 5" screen protector without the phone button cutout.

Some AF video stabilization test. I those videos, the AF looks very very good (I mean as if using tripod), stabilization looks very good from a standpoint but I dont know what to say about the only walking I saw. It doesn't look good, but I don't know if someday I would walk like this shooting a video. People who have been using more IBIS might have a better idea if it is good or bad. In this one you have those walking stabilized shots, AF sometime is sick in this thing another more general video test of z7

5" Loupe https://www.gridaccessories.com/products/grid-5-0-viewfinder/ Doesn't look too big? If you are concerned about size does this also extend to lenses? The 18-35 1.8 + speed booster is a bit of a beast....

And price it under $5K please

@Kisaha I agree.. I was shopping second hand stuff this summer in Stockholm's Södermalm (clothing, furniture, watches) and pricing was all over the place.. some real bargains for sure, but some over priced stuff as well. Some dealers confessed pricing changes depending on season (sometimes week to week) which kinda surprised me. Again supply/demand but it's a different market for sure then other capitals I've been to. @jonpais Second hand A7IIIs (and i think D850s) actually sold above retail in places like the US where the launch was delayed from other parts of the world..

They also offer the longest warranty in the whole industry. Koreans started as a low cost solution but now they make some of the most reliable cars in business. In another note, from Mattias words I understand that Swedish market is unique and it doesn't match most things I know from other markets. He shouldn't try to impose his views as the norm though. Nowhere else in the world a camera will loose such a big percentage of its value in day one, and maybe nowhere in the world a shop will buy a camera you bought from them in the same value - actually those two contradict one another - first the shop loose 400-600€ fron day one, but after 6 months buys the same camera as high as was new 6 months ago? What are they? Charity?

Banding test. HEVC 10-bit vs H264 8-bit. 4k and 1080p. Eterna vs F-log. All at 200mbps. Just used levels and pulled mids all the way down. Same settings on all clips. Uncompressed TIFFs. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yhu4rqvum10zvpa/AABiaNuKfXRf33LKLvi7epAja?dl=0

If the distortion is simple barrel or pincushion it can be fixed in most NLE's. Even if it's more complex it's likley it can be made good enough for most and unless the image has vertical straight lines near the edges it won't be noticeable in the first place. Additionally if you fix it in your NLE it will probably be done with less loss of quality than if it's done in camera as in camera processing has to be done with minimum processor load and not maximum quality concerns. There are other issues to be more concerned with over lens choice - focus breathing, MF action, Bokeh, CA and image stabilisation. CA can also be fixed in some NLE's or you can import clips into photoshop as a smart object and correct with the filters ( inc distortion). I've seen loads of footage on TV and in the cinema that has uncorrected CA and distortion which may or may not have been added to create a certain 'look'. A lens can also be technically perfect but this doesn't mean it makes for a pleasing image......

Purists have always been pretty animated about lens distortion. Obviously any lens distortion with a film camera would show up in the print. With a DSLR the distortion would be evident in the viewfinder but could be corrected. With a mirrorless you can correct the distortion in both the viewfinder (with lens profiles) and the image (in camera or in post.) Obviously software correction of optical distortion requires a small degree of stretching of the underlying pixels which equates to some loss of image quality but it is relatively minor. I feel it is actually an advantage of mirrorless that you can effectively use both software and optical solutions to correct distortion allowing cheaper and lighter lenses (the FE 28 2 is a good example). Pretty much any zoom like an M43 12-100 or FE 24-105 will tend to have quite a lot of distortion at the wide end.

I’m think this or the Panasonic 42.5 f/1.2 equivalent for the P4k but from your experience the Olympus sounds like a good choice. I want to try the AF - usually use Voigtlanders.

As mentioned in the video - Panasonic GH5 / GH5s / G9 AF guide Link

I don't know if this has been shown??

If it were me, I'd probably use a variety of programs to use the strongest tools of each. I'd animate the text in Blender (or the 3D package of your choice), as well as some of the other solid, static "hero" elements the camera mainly just circles around. For example, the room and chain at 0:16 in the embedded youtube video. I'd prefer to do objects like this in a legit 3D package, because they can be modelled easily, have few moving parts, and I don't want to fight a software layout designed primarily for compositing. After rendering out the 3D parts--possible in a few layers or maybe a separate Z-depth render, I'd bring those into After Effects or another compositor. There are some 2D elements which I'd do the compositor, on top of the 3D renders. Elements that either don't require much perspective change, or are particle based (fireworks, smoke) are usually easier to fake in 2D than to simulate fully. The asteroid field from the dailymotion link, and the planet in the background would also be in AE. Some of the foreground elements, such as the trees at 0:30 in the YouTube video, can be sourced from real photos of trees and then composited in. If I was feeling adventurous, I'd use Fusion instead of After Effects. I've never used Fusion on anything complex, but AE is an unintuitive mess, so I'd love to give Fusion a spin. Remember that little things, such as proper motion blur, will help sell it. Depending on how well you want it to match camera footage, you could compress it in H.264, add noise, or something like that before use.

After Effects is the obvious choice. The easiest way to go about this is to buy a stock After Effects project template, take it into After Effects and then customizing it to fit your own vision, logos and video. Here is an example.... https://s3.envato.com/h264-video-previews/492678.mp4 ...but there are literally thousands to choose from. You would have to be pretty brave, skilled and have a lot of time to do it yourself in After Effects from scratch.

Have y'all seen this? "As you know, Fujifilm has announced that by then end of 2018, there will be a firmware update for Fujifilm X-T3, that will add support for video recording in the Hybrid Log Gamma (HLG) and also give the X-T3 the ability to simultaneously output Film Simulation video and F-log footage." https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-x-t3-new-firmware-will-add-exfat-file-system-support-eliminating-4gb-file-size-limit/ I knew about there being an upcoming update for exFAT but the simultaneous recording is news to me.

this makes me feel old. Wait, I am old! That'll explain it. Still in 30 years time you may be on a forum saying "i remember the days when... a) I used to manually edit video rather than telling the editor ai roughly what I wanted". Or b) we used to have this thing called "video", it was like VR only flatter...

Please give us a believable source. You’re not Luke Mason in disguise are you? Back with a vengeance, dropping “knowledge” here citing no one except yourself or, in this case, some obscure Weibo account.

I'd love to see a under/over dynamic range test for the XT3.

And we see absolute magic coming from people that wouldn't have been able to operate or afford to make anything on that old equipment. The old days aren't better, or worse, they are just different. Get over it. Anyone who has the privilege to be able to do something and is complaining that too many people also have that privilege is just showing fear of being inadequate. Master artists aren't campaigning for schools to stop giving students access to art supplies!

Here is one video taken at 4k60p. I'd be interested in seeing how 4k24p with the Extended Dynamic Range compares.

Wow at last! Didn’t buy the original but loved using it (due to the image). My wild prediction: - S16 sensor - Detachable 4” touch screen (fit it on the camera or off camera) - CFast slot and SD slot - 4K 60fps (at a stretch, I’m expecting at least one “wow” feature ) - Canon LP-E6 batteries - 13 stops DR - ProRes RAW in future firmware - Price $1295 I hope it will be like that..... please. They’ve had 5 years to make it. I hope it’s as charming as the original.

@Mattias Burling certainly, we are all ready for your 1.500 Canon cameras from day one.