Emanuel

Can you do one of those of your tests with native lenses at least? Don't you feel tempted to buy a Viltrox?

Metabones, I suppose? What about native lenses? Or then the Viltrox adapter.

@Mattias Burling More moire than the a7...?! I really don't think so :-) BTW @Charlie how much did you pay for? In Spain? (Going below FF I'd have chosen 4/3" instead: cheaper glass, more options and sweet spot in-between the G7 and GX85 without mention the potential use of affordable adapters towards to mimic larger formats)

Are you sure it isn't manufactured by Sony?! :-D (Only a joke from rumor on Starvis sensor eventually used but promptly denied by Panasonic on their new born GH5S)

Funny, ended duplicated... LOL It looks like we need to say the same for both halves ;-)

Part II still on topic to @mkabi People tend to misshape 4:2:0 in a intuitive reading from there. Adam Wilt gives a fair explanation on it: https://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html#colorSampling So, actually what do we mainly have here? Color is sampled at half in both ways (horizontal & vertical). And on 3:1:1? 3:1:1 is a third (1440 / 3 = 480) but keeps the full vertical resolution as much as: 4:1:1 where only a quarter and horizontally the chroma is subsampled; and 4:2:2 for the double half of that quarter above-mentioned in the previous line instead, that is, in a half of the horizontal resolution. So, we still have a midway from 4:2:0 (25%) to 4.2:2 (50%) -- color information in parenthesis for half of that value now without parenthesis: 33% to my math; but don't forget, like Italians say, math is not opinion ;-)

I stand corrected for 66,6% if we'd take the native HDCAM 1440x1080 resolution (using non-square pixels with 4:3 storage aspect ratio, reason why there's the same 16:9 display aspect ratio) and my calculation is correct: Y' 1440x1080 = 1,555,200 Cb 480x1080 = 518,400 Cr 480x1080 = 518,400 1,555,200 / 1,036,800 I bet for some reason Sony wanted to beat the competitor Panasonic used to implement 4:2:2 in their alternative DVCPRO HD system based on 1280x1080 anyways. What do I know though?! ; ) Maybe that 1920 quarter -- that is, 1440 / 3 = 480 (without mention some sources mention some other 640 value as a third of full HD/1920 for HDCAM chroma subsampling), may convert all the math in some other numbers... :D But in one line, better than 4:2:0 indeed.

Apparently the same --- 25% of the color information available*. But I don't take those numbers as accurate: 3:1:1 is a middle way towards the 4:2:2 from 40% ratio instead. HDCAM 3:1:1 format is actually 75% from horizontally 1920 pixels (so 1440) and a third chroma sampled (480 for a quarter of 1920), but it is full vertical resolution (1080) rather than a half for 4:2:0 on chroma side, even though with chroma subsampling going with half from full horizontal HD (aka 1920), so here you have for your maths now ;-) In a line? :D Take a look on this article by Barry Green: http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/colorspace/ * https://wolfcrow.com/blog/chroma-subsampling-numbers-explained/ https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/chroma-subsampling

OK, now the BS/hype is 8K for 8K LOL :D Nice to read you over here BTW (Salut! : ) I guess you may have spot it. Players need expensive tech to keeping their fees on high as already recently written (E :-) I think he's doing his business to end in a camera module for their marketing sake.

Yeah, chill out guys : ) Both sides' scopes have their merit by their own :-) No need to going extreme here. We are all a family under Reid's umbrella. Yeah, chill out guys : ) Both sides' scopes have their merit by their own :-) No need to going extreme here. We are all a family under Reid's umbrella.

Hacking is a road for international fame in these YT days... from behind the camera... and desk ;-)

I know it isn't the GX series but still a Panasonic combo :-)

What puzzles me is to see some guy from anywhere to become an authority on cameras! When he's not reviewing the 1st class of any air company service... ; ) Like his likings could interest for anything :X Should be just me! No worries, fellows, I survive! LOL :-D

I believe the fact Jim and Jarred are very silent on this one means your bet on high-end to fall down face to face with GH series 10-bit and other goodies to come and already here seems much more pretty accurate for sooner than we tend to think, hey Don @webrunner5 ? ;-)

Connected with the Hydrogen camera module, very likely, I guess.

Funny the way people are surprised with such 8-bit news... LOL (Quoted yesterday from another thread with two years and a half BTW) Well done, mate! :-)

Internet is a double-edged sword. People tend to take opinion for fact. Half part, even worse when not nonsense (let's keep it civil :D) for facts. There's no other way to let it somehow expressed in order to avoid the misinformation effect. Or plague will be a solid dictionary entry for inaccuracy. BTW, I find (more often than the contrary) Don's input pretty on the spot. I got your call though. The question is we have here people from very different ages and courses of life, experience and so on. Patience too! LOL Hence the matter. Typical of boards. :-)

Well, "while..." I wrote ;-)

There will always be high-end while industry lasts as the way we know so far. Players need it for protecting their fees. You're right on something though: the gap is becoming tighter ever than before -- that's pretty true. Take a look on the display case for example among TVs in disguise of professional monitors as you wish. Let IPS and Direct LCD technologies inside the cup or even consumer projectors to be used in the arthouse circuit if you get fast refresh rates to mimic larger chip size and increase your lumens basis with easy tricks like this one here:

Yes, this camera is a no brainer. But, this doesn't mean you are accurate when you infer no one will choose the Panasonic model you mention. Only if because there is a GH5S instead ; ) Never mind... Please take a look now in those links in my signature and tell me I am not a serious player ;-) GH5 is my favorite cinema camera today if I would have the need to choose only one camera FYI. GH5S is a better cinema camera but for some reason I'd pick the standard GH5 at first rate.

No one can practice medicine becoming retired of any field else, correct? ; ) Worse, to be entitled as an authority, lecturer, whoever at a certain level and degree. Why should the things be different with cameras from one day to another? ;-) No Christmas fantasy can save random internet when shit happens...

Only a bit?! Nah, where have you gotten such idea?? Nowadays, it is the user who makes the cinema camera (specs are the most irrelevant), not the opposite... actually, never was! LOL ; ) That part where you mention "more important is autofocus" mixed-up with the meaning of a cinema camera is also fairly funny... OK, got it, you mean from 2018 on. :X Let alone your negative considerations on a small format factor (towards the 4/3" size, go figure!) in the same line or paragraph(s) along the usual AF mantra these days, oh yeah! Cassavetes, among many others, must find out now the meaning for his actor career in his case study, poor guy ; )) Jonas (Mekas) -- if one of these days, you'll read these lines, let me tell you straight away: "YOU ARE AN IMPOSTOR !!" (Finally, we got it all clear! hehe) (Internet is a comedy at times!! :D) Again @Yurolov you meant accurate focus, right? ;-)

LOL Sure, it is. Just nothing impedes you to have a better omelet with two eggs rather than strictly with the double... that's the whole point. As much as a millionaire is made after the 1st million, not nolens volens a couple of millions later as a few idiots want to always (or almost that) misshape ;-)

Man, wrong camera thread... "@#%

On this 8-bit vs 10-bit thing, I recall when I almost was crucified :D in a thread two years and a half ago only because I had tried to justify 8-bit is nothing but a spec. Others can count much more to the outcome. Here is only to begin with: To follow in the next pages. Have a good read! ;-)