RichST

I'm just not seeing how a hack could improve resolution; to get better resolution requires a redesign of the sensor. From the looks of the early footage it looks like the only improvements in their new sensor is that it nows bins in both directions (which helps with moire and low light sensitivity but does nothing for resolution) and has less rolling shutter due to the extra number of channels. Apparently this requires three years to do (slight sarcasm there) but it's not like the pressure is on to produce anything better in the price range. Their only serious competition is coming from Nikon and Sony, the GH series just doesn't sell in high enough quantities to pose any sort of real threat.

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=372.msg2344#msg2344 date=1331206890] [quote author=RichST link=topic=372.msg2340#msg2340 date=1331187156] [quote author=ted ramasola link=topic=372.msg2336#msg2336 date=1331165338] Looking at the stills of the ferris wheel, I saw the resolution of the mk3 similar to what a mk2 would look like with a VAF5d2. Si I think its what canon did to reduce color aliasing and moire, they placed an agressive OLPF. [/quote] Surely not, an OLPF that strong would be unacceptable for stills. I suspect - but certainly can't prove - that they're doing something like 3x3 binning now instead of the old 3x1 binning + skip two lines. That would jive with the reduced aliasing and better low light performance we're seeing as well as the minor differences in resolution. The sensor also looks to be scanning faster which explains the reduced rolling shutter (they didn't double the number of output channels for no reason). All in all these look like simple, common sense improvements, nothing revolutionary but still good to have [/quote] Nice analysis. What trick would you say the GH2 has up her sleeve to get the video resolution it does from a 18MP native chip? What is the next step up from 3x3 binning? My guess is that the GH2's processor is reading out a 4MP or even 8MP 4K image from the sensor and downscaling intelligently to 2MP on the image processor itself. I cannot think of any other way it would be better than so many cameras that do binning on the sensor like the NEX 7, 5D Mark III, Nikon D800, etc. [/quote] I'm at a loss on that one. I don't think they're getting 4K worth of data and downscaling, resolution should be higher if that were the case. FWIW I don't think the Nikon and Sonys are using full binning of all pixels on the sensor, if that were so then those shimmering fine lines that dance and change color shouldn't be there. But we know from Sony's presentations that they [i]do[/i] use 2x2 binning. My guess is that they are either binning groups then skipping over some columns or they're just binning one color at a time to get a reduced Bayer pattern. Who knows, Panasonic could be using a similar technique but are maybe just adding a little extra secret sauce to the formula, like sampling more greens (that's just a[i] total[/i] guess and probably not correct). Whatever it is it's not only better than Sony Canon et al it's also better than their own non GH-series sensors. The downsampling methods shown on that Cambridge site all assume you are sampling every pixel on the sensor and reducing it from there, that would require a full sensor scan in video mode which no consumer camera can currently do (the Nikon One is fast enough but they don't make use of it). I take that back: JVC's ugly little camcorder can evidently do that with a tiny chip but the processors aren't fast enough to properly deal with all that data, it has to get butchered in the process of converting it to video

[quote author=ted ramasola link=topic=372.msg2336#msg2336 date=1331165338] Looking at the stills of the ferris wheel, I saw the resolution of the mk3 similar to what a mk2 would look like with a VAF5d2. Si I think its what canon did to reduce color aliasing and moire, they placed an agressive OLPF. [/quote] Surely not, an OLPF that strong would be unacceptable for stills. I suspect - but certainly can't prove - that they're doing something like 3x3 binning now instead of the old 3x1 binning + skip two lines. That would jive with the reduced aliasing and better low light performance we're seeing as well as the minor differences in resolution. The sensor also looks to be scanning faster which explains the reduced rolling shutter (they didn't double the number of output channels for no reason). All in all these look like simple, common sense improvements, nothing revolutionary but still good to have

Why don't you just use a simple rewrapping program like Clipwrap or (if you're cheap like me) Rewrap2m4v? They are very fast and do nothing to the output quality.

I guess I'm just the only person in the world who prefer's the 5DII's videos with the sharpness turned off. It's not like they don't need sharpening - they do - but Canon has this outdated coarse, harsh way of sharpening its video image that is a turn-off for me. Panasonic is, among other things, handling its sharpening a bit better though I think it has a little more information there to begin with. Can't wait to see what the 5DIII brings, it will be disappointing if it doesn't have the same IQ as the upcoming 1Dx