Franka Mech T. Lieu

sounds like we are finally getting somewhere with real world possibility of 4K for most of us mere mortals. One thing though I disagree with the point about still using the codec. Might be still off the Video feed it would be. But not specific still capture. Notably we have already better file format, the RAW file for still capture. Unlike Video a Still Capture is just 1 frame, and 1 frame only. I can see future in camera processed image to go away from the 8 bit file format, but this is not likely to happen for a long while. Not until the display media can catch up. Right now its not like we do not have better still image format. Far from it, we can have loseless PNG full 16bit. But its of little use to the wider market if the display do not match up. File size is not much of a issue with stills.

Oh BTW, I find that asking for an HDSLR and ditching the Still capability a joke. SO if we are to take Video , and no still, then why the hell do we need the SLR part. The cam need to operate in the mirror up and live view mode anyway. And that is another thing about all these. it can go so over the top that we forget some finer points. Video capability in a large sensor body simply demand the form factor of a mirrorless. DSLR of all sorts just happen to have that as bonus add on, but ultimately the SLR form factor is a still photography specific feature. Unless some one happen to re-introduce the old rotating shutter and prism viewer of the old film cine days ( kind of hard to do if needing that to run 60P though and probably will be too big and cumbersome for something like a FF sensor )   Instead , I was wondering, if Sony had something different to come off from the A7/A7r. well clearly not all of us need the F55, but a beefed up A7 that can deliver 4K RAW as a hybrid platform would certain made the market happy and likely able to get some business too. 

  LOL .. so basically you are saying that the photography equipment Mfr should not made photography equipment and instead .... @.@ let's face it the world do not revolve around cine / videographers. there is nothing wrong when a company like Nikon offer their core customer what they want.   So yes, all those argument are valid, but heed this, those are photography equipment first and foremost, not Video Cam ... What you are asking for is large sensor video cam .. well, that's why there are BMCC and now KineRaw. Oh of course Canon C series. And not to mention Sony F5/F55 ...    I do not seem to recall photographer complaining about their old Bolex doing lousy still or similar. So why & how come we've come to the point that we would hijack the photography sector for Video. I understand many people's asking for that wonderful all inclusive platform from a DSLR, but is the market really big enough for the Mfr to shoulder that enormous R&D ( and needing to be able to recoup and profit ). What Canon did with the 5D-II is that they've shown us an alternative, not that its without limit. Ultimately these company, most of them are photography equipment Mfr and its the wider and ( business vise ) more profitable photography sector they have to deal with. Video is always 2nd or even 3rd or 4th down the priority list, and if they really wanting something, they deliver something specialized that way ( like Panasonic GH, or Canon C )

Like you've stated, certain camera, and the Df is not that certain camera, so why bother worrying about it. The brand answer a call from the much wider, much more potential ( think volume of business ), and much demanded ones. let's face it, Nikon is no where near capable in term of Video as that of Canon,Panasonic and Sony. So why bother fighting on somebody else's turf. And while upon that, Nikon could probably re-introduce Cine-Nikkor ( they used to have this product line way way way way back , I mean really way back when I am shooting 8mm and 16mm ). Something for BMCC on M4/3 mount perhaps. No don't worry about that. I am sure Nikon are well aware of the need for a true hybrid, but again they are well aware that that market sector is but niche and small compare to the totality of it. And when and if they do it, they have to do it right. That likely is not going to just come by without some effort.

Sorry EOSHD, I think you are too immersed in this DSLR Video thing. First and foremost there is nothing wrong about diversifying and specializing in a market that's saturated. A product that trying to reach out to different sector. That sector just happen not to be Videographers. Beside, you really have to take a look at the real public response. Though there is much debate over its styling. there is no doubt that there is a large market for this back to retro approach of a DSLR. Besides, we have to admit, the market right now simply do not favor .. PRO have their Large sensor Video cam like the RED or Sony F55, Semi-PRO and dedicated amateur are looking at specialties like the BMCC, 5D-III, or Panasonic GH. To be fair , and fdair to Nikon. Without a breakthrough performance and feature, putting Video as a forefront to a new model in their DSLR lineup wouldn;t help. This is not the sector like D3200 or D5300. The mid range DSLR is a very large market sector catering to the more demanding amateur and enthusiast but sorry that sector is also mostly photography, not Video. Video centric product is already there and they at best only carve a niche. Its not like when 5D-II first come out when no one had an answer until Canon just plant the BOMB. No I am not with Nikon on the styling. Its more like cheesy 80's again , rather than the lean back to basic and simple straight forward the FM series deliver. But I do think the comment that any new DSLR ( or mirrorless ) body need to serve the Video sector is pretty much wishful thinking. There is already the Panasonic GH, the Canon 5D family, all the amateur and consumer end product. There is really little room for maneuver. And speaking of Magic Lantern, I guess the future must lie with the way how most already did with their system, that is , to opwn it for developer to directly access, control and deliver functionality in form of opening up API or even making the firmware open source ( Samsung ) on their platform. You know why the iPhone and Android become what they are, they are today. They offer that stepping stone, that foundation to be. Nikon had almost always been an engineering based company, ( hardware read ), and less of a solution based one. They offer the platform and the ware to do the contents. They still do, Might be they should think about opening up API or even making their camera firmware open for others to improve and add onto. Its tempting for a company to try to control everything and get into the act ( thinking of the profit it might gather ), but in the end, the effort simply might not profit the investment. Nikon simply choose a way that they can do well. Instead of trying to find what others are good at

  Actually Android come before iOS. What Apple did is the total integration of service, hardware and software. Peope usually see only the iPhone, but its the adoption of the Apple Store that come inbuild into the iOS and integration with the hardware that give the smartphone the de facto route. Of course these are nothing new. As most enduser level Open Source project had been done that way long before Apple did that. What Apple did and should get credit for is to provide that solution, that one way we can made thing work.   And that's what Canon, Nikon, and almost all Videography and Photography Mfr had been lacking. the vision to see that we do not just need a product, a piece of hardware, or something. We need a SOLUTION.   And yes indeed I can see the demise of the consumer DSLR. It's only the slow introduction of system depth into the mirrorless that keep this bracket of product alive. But upon that I must say I am less optimistic about the Mfr actually going out and exploit this considering the economy. No less these Mfr are also way too conservative, and mostly they do not have the mass to absorb the damage if they do thing wrong. I was looking at the material Nikon puts out about their new D5300. And except for the rather ingenious use of composite material for that one piece shell and the articulating LCD. I fail to see any bright spot in there. DSLR will have to evolve and they have. It will be sort of like the old day when we photographer talking about a Hassy vs the Nikon. But I guess the real problem with Canon, Nikon, and many alike ( even Panny and Oly ) is that they are too afraid to introduce true innovation that advance the product enough to made an impact. We do not see 4K output from Nikon 1 despite the hardware is perfectly capable to do it. We do not see RAW output ( for external recording say ) from the EOS-70D despite the fact that its again doable.   All these Mfr's are still lock into their traditional thinking of only providing what used to be " asked for " and only step by step improvement instead of gicing us true new capability. And they won;t do it unless being pressed to ( say , the EOS-70D's PDAF on chip )   In short I think they have put themselves in this predicament, they have made their own product irrelevant.  

Made you wonder , right ... Any form of decent ( still ) digital camera had option for RAW, recognizing that the RAW simply will always outdo ( and likely outlive ) the JPEG. It does not take a rocket scientist ( or rather Video scientist ) to figure if any of these hybrid camera are serious about Video, then they should give us RAW build in also ( OK so it might require an external recorder ) ... ah .... To be fair, after testing out the Canon C series and even the 1DC I am left with an impression that Canon is not really knowing what they are putting themselves into. For the price the 5D-III is looking even more enticing

I truly do not understand why Sony choose to not include 4K and high bit rate in there , clearly their various product team do not communicate well. Now if their top of the line F55 and their more consumer end smartphone both offer 4K, You would think 4K would be right across the line for the top end ( respective niche of product ). At the very least they should have RAW high bit rate 4K off so one can choose to use external decode / coder and recorder.   That say, I do not exactly agree with the article regarding the UI, the Tri-Navi in fact is a very good UI , I've used it for good measure. Its just a different take on the control, and I feel its a good one. Speaking of that, so What would would Sony do with their NEX-7 replacement regarding the Video. It beckons

You know what, I wager this is where Sony sees it, its a still camera . They are probably wanting all of us to use the VG series or at the very least the NEX to do Video instead.

Thanks for clarifying, just like to add , still the IBIS part is all Minolta ( yes even Olympus are just re using that technology courtesy of their patent sharing agreement held between the old big 5 ) but the utilization of the 5 axis senor feedback is something new to Photographic use ( but not new in other imaging fields ). Somewhat now it goes full circle I wager. Sadly no one yet still able to figure out a reliable way to do sensor tilt yet. That would take care of many " camera shake " issue which the plano movement cannot cure.

I just like to pint out ; regarding the TEXT on the article ... Sorry, but please do some background check and research and ask someone to proof read before posting , will you. The IBIS was originally intorduced by Minolta way back and Sony acquire that technology when getting theirs from Minolta. IBIS is already on their Alpha Mount DSLR from the 1st model on ward .

The main issue with both Canon and Panasonic had always been tryoing to balance the Photographic and the Video capability upon the hardwre. A GH-X highly optimized for Cine / Video with Panny's own sensor would be very welcomed. But I would say the Mfr also need to take that sensor and apply it to a photographic platform as well ( perhaps the GX-2 ). The GH3 is sort of like Canon 5D-III, trying to be good t for both and turning out that bit wanting ( if I am just a photographer, I might just as well get the Olympus E-M5 or the Nikon D800E , and if I am Videographer I might be tempted to stick to a hacked GH2 or getting the BMCC or even the NEX VGs )   Other than tht stated ND FILTER / articulated screen , I say there's need to be a retjink of some of the control ergonomics and both Canon and Panasonic are guilty of being too conservative. Personally I really like the AF control / focus wheel aka camcorder style as implemented by Sony on the A99, and their tri-navi on the NEX-7 are pretty nice.   The greatest mystery right now is the sensor ...

I never think 3D ever got any chance. Until naked eye visual holographic display I guess.   But then I digress here, I think 4K is valid in the long term future. The point is the Display will not be just for the Movie / TV viewing anymore in the future it will be an hub for info / interactive visualization, etc in and among the house. Think about it, you are in the kitchen peering through the door at that 4K display with the Recipe when trying to grill the onion while chopping up the carrot, or using that 4K display to read news ( on line news paper ) .. and I forsee integration of mobile device into the chain. The Tablet acting as an visual cue as well as an input device linked to the 4K display ( think browsing your travel photos or editing them ) ... there is much to just the Movie and TV viewing 

The case of most start up hobbyist is better served with a more liberally defined DSLR. 1DC and c50 would not be the idea. Sony almost get it right with the A99. It had the small focus fellow focus wheel ( its on that AF switch ) What it need is a Video specific manual mode, and Variable ND can be had via filter placed in front of the lens.   That stated, there need to be a rethink of the compact setup. The BMCC essentially point us to a sample. But this is hardly good for most hobbyist. Ditto with GH3, but I am hoping that Sony would take the current NEX format ( the 5, 6, & 7 series ) and expolate from there instead. They won;t be the light of such to replace say VG series, but with enough of customization, firmware, and lens that support. it can be made a setup   Canon's sin is also what they used to do well ( in term of photographic equipment ) .. that is they aim for a platform that decently work well for most, but not excel at any. And this approach is hurting them. Cause the 5D-II really break new ground and establish a new threshold, and that threshold is now exploded in numerous fashion to suite vastly different clientele with product that cater. The one size trying to fit all at that price bracket is not going to work, unless that new threshold is archived on all the performance and feature ground. I would say Canon know about this also, but being Japanese, corporate and notably also conservative. Their response is the C series and not seeing the indie / hobbyist / dedicated Amateur as much ( well I guess they do now )