jaybirch

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=841.msg6074#msg6074 date=1339689247] Are you implying that I am using my blog as a platform to bash Canon for reasons unrelated to the actual facts? [/quote] Currently, yes... I'm not even implying it, it is just true. Everyone knows the reason why the 5DIII does not have a swivel screen... absolutely everyone, including you. [b]Still shooters would hit the roof.[/b] Ban me... I only come here because my cousin was looking for a budget camera and asked for advice.... this [i][b]was[/b][/i]  a good round up of budget stuff.... now it is just another blog with an agenda. Hopefully you come to your senses and just get back to posting reviews and insights.

Another day, another thinly veiled dig at Canon. Why no articulated screen on my high end stills camera  :'( Would you even have written this article if it hadn't given you a platform to bash Canon?

The canon's still seem to have an extra stop or more DR over the GH2. For some, that is more important than resolution. If I were doing a narrative on a shoestring budget, i'd still pick a Canon DSLR over the GH2

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=803.msg5812#msg5812 date=1338730798] Well that would explain why Sony won in 2010 then. [/quote] Sony have done more than any other company to push digital imaging into the home and theatres. It is like reading the ramblings of a mental patient..... I really must stop coming here, but it makes me laugh.

"Above: the potentially Emmy winning sensor which I had to dismantle with cocktails sticks in an attempt to get acceptably detailed video" Do you not see the irony in starting the article with yet another dig about your 5DIII resolution..... then praising Gale for his use of the 5DII on House? If it is good enough for prime time, isn't it good enough for most of our work? Please, please, please.... for the sake of the blog, just let it go now. As for the Emmy.... don't they give all sorts of awards we don't really hear about, for technical stuff? Hasn't this always happened? Do any of us care? Didn't some 5 year old technology win a technical oscar last year? Corporate back scratching happens all the time, why only pick up on Canon? I can't see past yet another thinly veiled article designed to slate the 5DIII and Canon.

The GH2 can be used in a professional capacity... No doubt about it. I've paid for mine many, many times over. I was very close to jumping in with the BMCC.... But realised I don't [b]need[/b] to buy right now, so will be patient and see the results of the first batch. Sounds very interesting though. I care mainly about DR, rolloff and skin tone... It seems to check all the boxes.

I've used the C300 and Scarlet... the resolution is better, especially with a touch of sharpening, in post... From what I have seen from the F3, i'd say the same (the Gh2 is very close though) I think the C300 codec is better. 4:2:2 and 50mbps beats 4:2:0 and mega high kbps. Of course, that is just my opinion. The other cams beat the Gh2... goes without saying (assuming you use an external recorder with the F3) I haven't seen this zacuto test, but unless they lit the whole scene for around 9 stops, then latitude and rolloff becomes a major limitation of the Gh2 (in my eyes). Even Joe Public will respond well to nice latitude, roll off and colour (more so than resolution). This is why I would like to hear far more opinions on this shoot out before the internet starts toasting the GH2. Maybe this guy was pixel peeping for a certain aspect (say, noise)... and didn't take in the whole aesthetic. I love everything about the GH2, for the price and size.... But it suffers big time for latitude and rolloff. In controlled lighting though, I would happily use it on a bigger job.

I have a hacked GH2... I love it. But before we all open the champagne.... If it came 3rd place above the C300, Epic and F3.... It has to be down to operator error, poor post or a biased viewer (this is one person's view, right?). All of those cameras have better resolution, better latitude, better highlight rolloff, better codecs, better low light and similar rolling shutter. They are simply better cameras and, in the right hands, will [b]always[/b] get better results. This is nothing to be sad about, they are all 20X or more the price of a GH2

I have a BMCC on order... amazing, what they have done.... but I am very excited to try the FS700 too... and even the1D-C if it hits for $12k... that is 3 amazing options to get on differing technologies that were out of reach for my budget (4k, super slow mo and raw/12bit/13 stops DR). Would I like it all in one package? Sure, but I don't have that top tier bugdet, yet.

It is funny that last week... this place was going crazy about the FS700 and now Sony are back to being an evil company.... Somehow, Panasonic get thrown in too.... even though the gh2 is ridiculous, for the price (and it is not crippled.... they kept it at h264 standard, so it would work on all SD cards... consumer, you see). Hell, even canon just launched the world's smallest, lightest and cheapest 4K camera and the only 4K camera with a large than S35 sensor.... I love the blackmagic move....but the evil corporations stuff is just whinging, to me.

[quote author=Tzedekh link=topic=579.msg3986#msg3986 date=1334522708] Well, you can forget Panasonic. They rehashed AVC-Ultra, showed a new $16K 2/3-inch 1080p camera, and announced they will be charging $250 for a minor AF100 firmware upgrade. Although they showed a 4K Varicam mockup, it won't be available until sometime next year. Maybe their worst showing in years. [/quote] Actually, the combo of AVC-Ultra and Micro P2 cards could well be some of the best news EVER for the budget indie guy. Panasonic often give away more than they should at consumer level... It would not shock me one bit to see the GH3 launch with the above combo. You could be looking at the birth of 10bit 4:2:2 recording on consumer products.

This is a good article and much needed. There was a backlash yesterday, which is fairly understandable (I think the low budget users should just stear clear of any EOS-Cinema announcements!). But when you let the dust settle, this is a really ground breaking camera. If this camera was in a body more like a C300 (even without HD-SDI etc)... People would be hailing it as the second coming. But people see a DSLR and have a price ceiling for what the top end DSLR should be ($7k-$8k) .... They then compare that figure with the $15k (street, $12k?) and think "RIP OFF". Step away from the DSLR packaging... Look what is actually on offer. APS-H sized 4K, 4:2:2 internal codec, 12+ stops DR, amazing low light, C-Log and more.... (plus a top range still camera). We are talking about the world's smallest and lightest 4K camera, with a cinematic image, that uses cheap batteries and media.... for a street price of around $12k. Let the dust settle, think outside the DSLR casing. This is a truly ground breaking move from Canon.

I'm sorry to go against the grain, but I am buzzing. This is (hopefully) a full frame, 4K C300 for less money PLUS an amazing stills camera. If the IQ is the same as the C300, but 4K... I'm all in. Amazing. FF, 4K, great codec, C-log.... sure, some things are missing, but DSLR users have all that stuff. I feel sorry for Canon, they fixed all the complaints that 5DII users made, yet got no credit for it. The 5DIII is good enough to win you an oscar, stop fixating on paper specs.

Canon look set to release a Full Frame 4K camera for under $10k..... and the majority of people say it is overpriced  :( Based against what? It literally has NO competition, ZERO. If $10K (or rental of a $10K camera) is out of your budget, you simply do not need 4K. 1) Your money is better spent elsewhere, 4K will not sell your film. 2) There are extra costs required for things like set design in the 4K world.. (compared to shooting on 5DII, for instance) and, of course, editing, storage etc. btw - the C500 sounds stunning. I was about to buy a Scarlet, but will hold out for more news. I hope it shoots 4K to a nice internal codec too. RAW is great, but not always needed, even on a 4K production.

Fair play fella, that must take nerves of steal... I've done my share of meddling with computers and such, but that is a step up.

[quote author=Tzedekh link=topic=548.msg3654#msg3654 date=1334065556] I don't get why your AF200 should cost so much, other than Panasonic wishing to increase profit margins. The HPX250 (with 1080p, P2, and AVC-Intra 100) is less than $6K, and the AF100 less than $5K. [/quote] Well, i'm just guessing, so don't hold me to that price.  :P I just think a large sensor, 10bit architecture is going to cost. I don't know the ins and outs of sensor/camera design.... but $8k for a 10bit 4:2:2 internal 100mbps Camera seems about right.

I think people will overlook the crop factor for internal 12bit 4:4:4 People always gripe about something or other... but push comes to shove, would you prefer full frame 4:2:0 8 bit or M3/4, 4:4:4, 12 bit (not to mention 4K). Only a few times have I ever stressed about a wide shot on the GH2

[quote author=Axel link=topic=548.msg3620#msg3620 date=1333995244] Only later did they compare the AVCHD-version from the SDHC-card, 24 mbit VBR, we know it. There was almost no difference (seems the HDI-SDI-output was simply not 10-bit 4:2:2). [/quote] Well, yea... the camera needs 10bit architecture throughout. Hopefully this new breed will (although I could see an 8bit cripple of the AF200 if they bring it in the $5k-$6k market). Even then, 4:2:2 internal would be sweet, if the 8bit is well implemented.

[quote author=TC link=topic=548.msg3603#msg3603 date=1333982418] Jay, I've never used P2, no.  But in terms of solid state memory reliability I would rather trust a specialist manufacturer like SanDisk, Lexar or Intel than a generalist such as Panasonic. [/quote] From my understanding, the P2 is, in essence, an array of the highest quality SD cards (4 cards, if I remember rightly). It is very unlikely that Panasonic produced the SD cards, probably SanDisk or Lexar. It is top end stuff, just like a RED SDD or Sony's latest media. Perhaps there will be an option to record the AVC-LongG (10 bit, 4:2:2 long gop) codec to SD or CF though.... With P2 as an option for highest quality work. You will be paying more to have the P2 infrastructure.... But your camera has a built in upgrade path. Best of both worlds  :)

Have you guys actually used P2? It is faultless (from my experience, at least)... I never dropped a frame. It is so easy to suggest some cheap, high spec SSD that has been built for laptop use. I'm talking about paid film work here where losing a frame could cost me ALOT. Duel P2 is safe, reliable. That is worth the money. If you want to go a different route, get an external recorder and try the cheap SSDs.... You might be very happy, you might be crying into your beer at the end of an expensive shoot, gone wrong. Propriety hardware might seem like a rip off, but it is built for a reason. Reliability.... Whether you think reliability is worth 4x the price is your choice as a film maker.

Sounds like Panasonic are about to shake up the industry. I just hope they have paid attention to increasing DR. 12+ stops and we are into filmic territory (imho). Hopefully 128GB and 256GB P2 cards at reasonable prices too. ($900 and $1600?)

I think there will be two 4/3rd cameras.... AF200 (1080p, P2, AVC Ultra, 10bit, 4:2:2 $8k) and AF500 (4K, P2, AVC Ultra, 12bit, 4:4:4, $16k) and possibly a 1/4" or 1/2" camera for broadcast. AVC Ultra will be immense. No more external recorders and P2 is not as crazy expensive as a few years ago. Anyone here who hasn't used P2 are in for a treat... Such a great, reliable system.

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=494.msg3232#msg3232 date=1333117307] I am not sure where you got 10 stops of DR from. The FS100 had at least 11.5! 4:2:0? Again - not a very good guess. This will be 4:2:2 as the FS100 also does to an external box. [/quote] I don't think the FS100 has close to 11.5 stops.... Maybe some butchered test has led you to believe that. My eyes KNOW it doesn't. I agree that 8 bit, well implemented is under rated (C300 is evidence of this). But the 8 bit on the FS100 is not perfect and banding can still be an issue. Thankfully, I don't have time to look for examples. I imagine your users are clever enough to understand that 10bit is a huge benefit when dealing with 14 stops of DR info. Fair enough about 4:2:2.... both will need an external recorder to go higher than 4:2:0

I don't really understand the talk of an F3 Killer.... even if it is 4K (btw - shouldn't it be an F65 killer?) I assume most every F3 has been purchased to make beautiful 1080p images for broadcast... The minority that purchased to make films will know the quality of it's 1080p is good enough to hold up on most big screens. [b]F3 - Perfect 1080p, 14 stops DR, s-log, incredible low light, NDs, 4:4:4, 60p, 10 bit[/b] [b]FS700 - 4K (not perfect), 10 stops DR, Great low light, NDs, 4:2:0, 30p, 8bit, 1080/60p (purely my guess work)[/b] That is quite alot of lower spec just to gain 4K. Why would an F3 owner care? Sure, they could downscale and get the perfect 1080p... It may even do it in camera.... But if the DR, s-log, 10 bit and 4:4:4 aren't there... then I can't see F3 owners crying or broadcast shooters being put off from buying an F3 (4K is not on the broadcast radar, yet). The FS100 didn't cannibalize the F3, because of what was missing.... adding 4K wont change that. Speculation, on my part, sure.... But that is how I see it going down.

Crop mode looks very nice... but worth noting this is a pre-production model and the guy filming actually says he thinks there is something wrong (with the camera) in full frame mode.