Julian

Shame we can't see those fields in the ZEISS image. I'm sure they'd show the same

A6000 is the first that comes to my mind too. Great for stills, good sensor, nice EVF, decent video quality/options.
A5100 is even better for video (XAVC-S) and cheaper, but less practical for stills (no EVF).

Nikon dslr's are no options since your Canon glass won't fit. Canon dslrs are no option anyway A6000 beats Micro Four Thirds for stills.

I don't think there's a better option.

Here's another Sony A7R II image, full size, 3:2, 59MP!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5EDFmJX3LNKU1FpbUxmZWdsQTg/view?usp=sharing

​True, but pixel shift would show movement when shooting non-static objects like this portrait.

Also, if this shot would have been taken with pixel shift, it would be a lot sharper and more detailed. The OM-D E-M5 II pixel shift images visibly beat 36MP Nikon files for example regarding to color detail/sharpness.

Look at the noise of this '56MP' image on the top left. Not a 'sharp' grain structure. Upsized, obviously.

Come on Andrew, don't let you fool yourself so easily. The picture has a weird aspect ratio, it has been cropped. Look at the image at 100% view, it looks upsized. Most of those sample images ZEISS published have pixel dimensions that are different from the original pixel size, although most are a bit smaller. Those images are edited and this one just has been exported with a higher resolution.

Rumors about the A7R II have been pretty consistent in saying it will get the same 36 MP sensor, with added 5-axis stabilisation. I do believe Sony will come with a high resolution competitor, but it makes more sense if this will be something like an A9 Pro camera. Rumors about a camera like that have been doing the rounds last year a lot. It makes sense since Sony already launched a Pro program like NPS (Nikon) and CPS (Canon).

And 8K video... really? Sony couldn't make 4K internal in the A7S. There has been a lot of talk about the Sony A7000 with 4K coming, but being delayed because of heat issues.

What route are you going?

Thanks for the tests!

Most of the filters feel kinda Instagram-like. Including the names Mostly because of the lifted black point I think. Might like it more with proper blacks...

Would be stupid to do after sending out the beta firmware and letting people publish footage with it.

Also a paid upgrade would be lame in my opinion... wouldn't expect this from Panasonic.

Wrong aspect ratio. Let me fix that for you:

In my experience it looks just as good as on a native 1080p screen.

The Eizo CG318-4K has similar specs to the LG, costs 4000 GBP. I'm sure the EIZO will have better uniformity, it's also self calibrating.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/monitors/1000369/eizo-coloredge-cg318-4k-review-to-4k-and-beyond

Still it's amazing you can get almost the same quality for a quarter of the price with the LG.

Right now dpi scaling in Windows is what's holding me back. I like Andrews way of changing the DPI for different use. In Windows that would be annoying to do because you have to log off and on to change the scaling. Does anyone know if Windows 10 improves this?

I want to be excited. But 120mm... 2KG... yikes. And only 1.3x... why can't someone revive the Iscorama...?

Perfect for 2x anamorphic, result will be 2.40:1 after desqueezing.

I don't know.. Atomos uses IPS. TN is really horrible compared to that. I can't imagine BlackMagic using a TN screen on this though. Even the cheap $80 tablets from China come with IPS screens.

​How about EF mount, so we can put it on a speed booster on M43

I'd also like Image Stabilisation, half the weight (this monster is 2KG...) and a maximum price of $3000...

So on paper BlackMagic beats Atomos hands down. Has anyone seen the Video Assist in real life? The specifications says it has a viewing angle of 135 degrees, which would suggest it uses a TN panel. That would be a mayor disadvantage for monitoring if true.

The minimum (widest maximum) focal length depends on the anamorphic. On 16mm you won't need 85mm, but you will need something that gives an equivalent field of view as 85mm on fullframe. 16mm is like 3x crop factor compared to fullframe I think, so 28mm on your Krasnogorsk will give the same field of view as 85mm on a fullframe camera.

Or something like this

Olympus VF-4 external viewfinder. 2.36 million dots, tiltable and very compact. costs only like €200. Would be cool to see a small/cheap optional evf like that which works over hdmi. Shame it's impossible to power it over hdmi.

​Could still be the same sensor. The Pocket uses a Fairchild cmos, from what I've read, it seems to be this one:

http://www.fairchildimaging.com/files/data_sheet_cis_1910f_0.pdf

This sensor supports Global Shutter and Rolling Shutter. It is possible that they just changed the image processor in the new camera to support both modes and higher framerate.

It's not exactly new. Not available, but has been announced before. There has been coverage about it on EOSHD: http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/surprise-4k-super-35mm-jvc-gy-ls300-costs-just-4k/

​That's good to know! Makes my issues non existent.

I do agree with wolf33d though.

Wouldn't it be cool if BlackMagic made a system like the Ricoh GXR!?

They already have the most important components: sensor block (Micro Cinema Camera), screen/recorder (Video Assist).

The only thing that is lacking is a housing/grip with some basic controls (and hotshoe for EVF, like the GXR) - and proper connectors to 'click' everything together without cables.

It would become like a URSA Micro

Kinda reminds me of the Polaroid SX-70 with sonar autofocus  

I know it has buttons. But I can't imagine they give control over everything a regular camera interface does, like changing aperture/shutter, formatting an SD card, activating peaking, zooming in on the image, change the framerate, etc. If they do it must be terrible to use without a screen. I already get frustrated setting up a GoPro on those 10 pixel lcds.

My point is, if the camera has not interface /menus, adding an external lcd is not going to make it a pocket-like camera. 

Show me some technicolor that looks like that... I can't imagine it looks the same. The look sure shows the power of raw, but I really don't like the hdr/over saturated candy colored style. Doesn't have anything to do with a proper monitor or not.