[quote name='MattH' timestamp='1348142087' post='18678']
We had interlaced to make progressive – not so good.
Translation:
You thought you were getting progressive video from the GH2. but you weren’t. It was interlaced that was converted to progressive. This is one of the reasons the GH2 had such a strong video look. Plus we spent so long doing that, we forgot to add peaking
Is the HDMI output 4-2-2?
No its 4-2-0. Why would we spend so long designing and optimising a stable high bit codec in camera if we wanted you to use a fucking ninja?
The output is perfectly suitable for a field monitor, but you won’t be recording shit out of it.
Is it a Sony sensor? No comment.
Translation: Yes it is it’s the same sensor from the EM5. We saw Olympus taking all the glory for having better quality so we decided to sacrifice the multi aspect sensor for the slightly better dynamic range of the Sony one.
This will have an effect on the overall video quality as well. The footage will look less like the old Panasonic video-like look and more of a Sony video-like look. So if you want a more film like look you will have to save up and either put up with the artificially crippled detail of the 5dmk3 which should be sharp as a tack due to the 4*4 pixel binning, or put up with the rainbow moiré of the BMC because they skipped putting in an optical low pass filter in this version to get the camera out the door.
One more question. Electronic follow focus....?
Response: (Gets notepad out.)
Remember when I said There are over a 100 members researching all over the world? I Lied!!
[/quote]
@MattH:
Inoue would probably say: Ahh, MattH ... you are very difficult ... but funny man :-)
