sandro

Even if it has XAVS-C it doesn't mean it would have great quality. They could cripple the video details since they are experts at this :)

I wouldn't shoot anything above 1/50-1/60 so for me ND filter is a must.

It seems to be a common mistake to associate video card = video editing. That's (almost) completely wrong. GPU acceleration is used only by some editing software like Premiere Pro and only for some effects, actually from CS6 they added a lot of effects. Also keep in mind that GPU acceleration is used only for rendering effects not for decoding and encoding. 

So my advice is not to spend a fortune on video cards, just the best you can get that supports acceleration with your editing software and invest on CPU, RAM and dedicated HDD for videos. I'm not saying that GPU doesn't make a difference, I mean that high end GPUs can be an overkill.

If canon introduces the ultimate APS-C action camera (which it will), it would be a must for Nikon to also introduce a D300 successor for action/sports, otherwise will lose a very big market. 

Where video fits in all of this? as much as the companies want. Canon could completely ignore video on the 7D, line skip or something and keep the C100 as the upgrade path for video, or they could make the ultimate s35 Canon DSLR for video (which I expect, and hope).

I want a s35 Canon DSLR I can use all my Canon lenses on fully, with no aliasing/moire, Canon colours, and great low-light performance.

It looks like the 7D successor is going to be a significant product for Canon, and they waited 5 years for it so makes sense. Talk about "entirely new sensor technology" being introduced in the next 7D, and "next generation of Dual pixel AF", could that mean exceptional resolution? or dynamic range? or low-light performance? all of them? There's talk it's going to be a mini 1D style body with an integrated battery grip and 1D top plate, maybe 10 fps? I am waiting for the 7D successor in Photokina and quite optimistic about it.

Canon says those magic words for every upcoming announcement.  

The GX7 would be with or just above the GM1 (same image, more features).

 

The A6000 would probably be just below the D5300/D5200 (similar but inferior image quality) or perhaps equal (easier to use than the Nikons).

From what I've seen I'm not that sure that the A6000 in terms of details is worse than the D5300.

Resolution looks promising.

I completely agree with the video. Nikon is being really stupid. They have no video market to protect and they could destroy everyone.

I read that with the Nikon with "digital" lenses you can't change the aperture in live view and when recording. Is that true? That would be a real PITA for me.

I believe no manual controls for video right?

That was outstanding, greak work!

Can I be your friend? :P

I bought my 550D for video only, the pictures part for me is an add-on. Would you exchange your g6 for the a6000? Why not/yes?

What would you say are the a6000's problems? For starters its not as sharp as the Panasonics IMHO.

Can you change the aperture while shooting? I know the Nikons have issues like these.

I live in Italy

Me too :) You can the find the g6 + 14-42 for a little less.

That's honestly the first time I've ever heard anyone complain about Panasonic's prices (GH4=4K pro video camera for $1600!!!)! This is a filmmaking forum after all. Panasonic are the only company making true hybrid cameras. Sony coming a close second ...

 

I was talking about the G7X only! Do you think it's OK that (based on amazon prices) the GX7 costs €840 body only with a great 1080p60 video but on a m43 sensor where pictures will be undoubtedly worse than the say the nikon d5200 or sony a6000 that have medium to decent video but great pictures quality on APC-S sensor but for €300 less? I don't think I'm spoiled, I think that considering the smaller sensor and notsogood pictures quality the Panasonics should cost the same since you gain from a point and lose from another. Don't you think?

The G6 is more balanced.

@Kangaroo where do you live?

Anyway I would honestly buy the G6 today but as I said, I would totally be a problem the lack widelenses for less $ for me :(

I'm definitely into Panasonic since the GH1 hack but I was never courageous enough to buy one. For instance if I wanted to achieve the same look of 10-11mm (APS-C) on the m43 how much would I need to spend?

Anyway Panasonic should really lower their prices, they ask too much from a "compact" m43 sensor camera that can't compete to APS-C sensors for pictures.

Why do you think the gx7 is better than the g6?

Is the low light performance bad?

a6000 has fairly poor low light performance. Especially in comparison to the D5300.

 

I agree 600D would be a ridiculous "upgrade" from the 5D2. 

Worse than the Canons?

I'm downloading the files, does it resolve more lines in 24p?

I don't think Canon would release anything beyond the capabilities of the new Sony A7s. But this doesn't matter because we have the Sony A7s :)

 

I'm sure there will be even better options in the near future too. Just keep your eyes peeled!

Even getting a decent 1080p from Canon would be miracle after 6 years of the same crap.

welcome to the forum , I use the G6 and it is a superb camera plus once you have glass for micro 4/3 when the time comes to get a 4K G4 it will all carry over to a G4 with no issues

 

ps its not difficult to get wide shots on micro 4/3 just get the superb panasonic 14mm lens and the stunning olympus 17mm  both are cheap and readily available on ebay

 

low light on the g6 works great use f1.4 lens and it kicks ass

 

Fujinon 24mm f1,4

sigma 30mm f1.4

canon 50mm f1.4

carl zeiss 50mm f1.4

 

Tokina ATX PRO 28-70mm f2.6 on a Lens Turbo speedbooster makes it f1.6 and great in low light

 

 

Yeah it's not difficult to get wide look on m43, you just have to spend a lot of money!

As for me I see no point in going with the 600D, it's the same old shit over and over. 

I would get the a6000 for the big sensor and better video quality than the old Canon. The lenses selection is limited though.

The G6 is the best for video quality but being drawn to wide lenses and low light scenes I see the m43 can't compete, unless again you have thousands of euros to spend on lenses.

The final shot looks very sharp.

Still looks pretty DSLR-y to me ... with lots of aliasing.

now I see ,there are many canon lens owners like you,hoping that canon can do something,but those line-skipping Dslrs really wasting all your good quality lens ,moreover if you think about no power-zoom , quite-AF motor and smooth focusing ring ,ect

There are endless demands, dude

A non-Canon 1080p in 2014 is not really a high demand, but i understand that would possibly destroy the C300 sales since you would expect similar image details with a newer sensor.

I really don't understand why there is a lot of people still moaning about canon not releasing new cameras. There are so many other brands that did just that and are great, why do people always use canon cameras as a comparison. Or why are people always asking " Oh why canon, why? Why aren't you listening to me?". 

 

Get over it.

My biggest problem is lenses.

With Canon I can get a 10-18mm  for €250 ,  50mm 1.8m for €80. Now say how much would it cost to get the same FOV and light on m43 sensor? Or on a Sony-E mount? The sony version of the 50mm 1.8 costs €250 alone and I don't know about the quality, secondly the 10-18mm variant costs €800! So I would need to pay like 10 times for what I have now but with a good 1080p. Thus a good quality 1080p with cheap DSRL form Canon would fix my problems. Am I the only one?

The next Canon move would be Photokina right?