Franka Mech T. Lieu

A bit of curiosity, I was reading their feature page and come across this, a build in 3 stop ND filter on the 24-85 model ( no mention of this in the other two ) but its not stated on the spec sheet ... interesting one there. Anyone had any idea 
 

Exactly! If they put all that stuff in it would double the price and more importantly it would never be released because they would never finish it.

And lose any weight advantage :/
Hilarious that almost a year after they announced at NAB pre production units are starting to filter into the world. After the first few releases I was hoping BM would pull it together with its release schedule, but it's been more of the same. Delays, delays, delays. Weird strategy: get everyone all hyped and then make them wait just long enough that they've forgotten about it completely and are hyped about something else. Then release it. 

why GH5 .. I see no reason for Panasonic to abandon the M4/3 format that Panasonic take so much effort and time to build for themselves. That said, why not take the Varicam line and build something along it as the Super 35 platform , who is to say Panasonic cannot have 2 platform of a system, one 4/3 sensor sized, and one Super-35. Canon Cine EOS is pretty much taking the same route, just in a different fashion.
A VariCam model that kind of matching the FS5/FS7 , and yet another one a hybrid like the GH, but likely with interchangeable mount ( active ) for M4/3, PL, Canon EF and might be even Nikon F. Its easy to dream up a GH5 with Super 35 sensor and all the bells and whistle, but seriously that mean a total re do of almost all the lens and that certainly is not a simple undertaking , not to mention having the complexity to serve 2 format, and several cause with the same lineup. By splitting the so call super-35 GH5 and refit it into the VariCam lineup ( even if it still use the M4/3 mount ) it can be easier go for both. Might be just call it the VariCam H ( for hybrid ).
In short the GH can stay GH and M4/3 , we just have the VariCam lineup expanded downmarket to include it all the way down to the Super-35 GH ( super GH , should we call it .. lol )

I read the whole article before first responding. But I still disagree. Like I said before, full frame and APS-C existed before Panasonic and Olympus consciously made the choice to build a smaller m43 system. They did this to reduce size of all components and carve out a niche for themselves. Now you're asking them to confuse their niche. They're already competing just fine and GH4 sales are good. They can continue this with a 60fps GH5 and 10-bit internal. Those two alone will sell the next camera to a lot of people. Let's say they dd this tomorrow, who else on the market is offering you a 4K 60p 10-bit camera for under $2000? Will Sony catch up, sure. But that's just the nature of the game. That's why you don't pick cameras based on the latest specs but the one that works for you when you need it. 

Again, adding a S35 sensor is just going to upset people who are already invested in m43 glass. Because now they can't get the most out of their new camera with their investment in m43 lenses. Which will make them not want to invest further in m43 lenses going forward. If Panasonic makes APS-C lenses as premium glass, that just fragments a system that doesn't need to be fragmented. The only reason APS-C DSLRs exist is because Canon and Nikon needed to find a way to get better yields on their sensors in the early days when making full frame sensors was a lot more expensive and more prone to error on the larger waffers. So they fragmented out of necessity. M43 doesn't need to go this route and I don't think they will. Nor do I think they will become irrelevant if they don't.   

What you're looking for is a cheaper/smaller Varicam. That's what you should be asking them to make. Not disrupt their m43 line.      
No they would not. Larger sensors require a larger circle of confusion which requires larger glass elements to retain certain speeds. Why do you think 16mm lenses are smaller and medium format lenses are bigger?   

Strongly doubt Panasonic will go S35 for the GH5 and make obsolete overnight their entire lens collection!! That is just business madness.
You could say "oh but it will still work with all the m4/3 glass in cropped mode". No, just no. This could spin into a marketing disaster for Panasonic, as it would be a very bad look for them and would send out a terrible signal about the m4/3 system and its future.
MAAAAAYBE they might do S35 with an "AF200" (kinda like an ultra low end Vaircam S35), but absolutely not with a stills camera.
All Panasonic needs to do is DCI 4K 60fps with 10bit internal and people will go absolute nuts over it buying the camera, and then Panasonic will easily maintain their lead over Sony for another year or more.
But I won't deny, also getting as a bonus a multi aspect ratio sensor like in the GH2 would be nice. This would give it a "larger" sensor kinda, but still would work 100% with all their existing lenses. Plus of course I want full sensor read out for 4K with no additional crop.  VLOOK or raw to an external recorder would also be nice too. When it comes to ergonomics, if they took a leaf out of Sony's book and had a detachable handle on the GH5 like on the FS7 so you could rig up a GH5 into a mini FS7 style camera that would be aaaamazing (however photographers would hate this! So don't see this happening). But the first two of 60fps 4K and 10bit internal are all a GH5 really needs to make a hit on their hands!

Well there is no BSI image sensor in Panasonic stable, but they have something called SmartFSI ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPec2EaBSSM  ) that's actually very smart technology , but looking like Panny is still struggling with yield and they probably still unable to put the tech onto a large sensor application. The other big sensor tech is stacking , but right now only Sony shown capable to do it on a scale. Ominvision and Samsung all shown them but can only do very limited delivery and they have not employ it on anything big. My take is Sony also is trying to further the technology. So until they can safely made all or some of them to fit together in a sensor and give good yield. The stick with the trial and true older tech but made do with still more improvement.
The new Organic Thin Film Sensor development Panasonic just announced was in itself a BSI structure but its not likely to even hit production until he 2020's and this is likely for industrial, automotive and medical application too. So for now I am more willing to believe Panasonic is simply running with limited set of technical know how that they can deploy to a 4/3 sensor ( or Super 35 as in their VariCam). I wonder though if intrim they can take their tech that step further, say bring that SmartFSI to 4/3 or perfect their BSI fab so they can employ that to a traditional MOS sensor
 
The XC10 is one of those love it or hate it affair, Canon should ditch their marketing saying its for Still and Video ( the still capability is a joke ).

This is going to be such a popular camera.
A real bargain for $1000, you're getting the image of an FS5 with better AF system, better EVF and 4x cheaper in a MUCH smaller body.
Shame no IBIS but it is only one third of the price of the A7R II!
Samsung NX1 only other APS-C camera to do 4K from 6K readout.

Seriously this article is one of the worst I've seen posted on EOSHD. Its a gross mis-interpretation of events still unfolding and basically none to do with what the author argue upon ( notably artistic and creative freedom ) I do agree and abide with him upon the need to protect such rights. But seriously Mr. Clarkson's action past and well this one is not having anything to do with that.
I suppose its just basic human decency that its yes, its OK to offend, so long you having a just reason for that That though does not include discrimination of sexual role, race, gender, or even simple thing like preference for mode of transportation ( if you might , check many previous episodes and you will note that ).
Upon the incident, being a frequent business traveler myself too. I can relay with the frustration of the ill prepared dining arrangement ( if that being the truth ) but I guess that's no reason for any form of fracas. We all have such from time to time and we do not go out and well punch someone for that. To be very frank, I do not think the show would really suffer without him. For certain I do not watch the show because of his lively artistic show of what you call. 

​This Dan's of this world did no such thing, but i'm sure that small detail wont inhibit the raging angry white man that thinks he can speak for me.
Perhaps in your world its acceptable to beat the staff when not up to scratch but in a modern civil society you'll get a criminal record, hopefully.
You seem to forget just how long this guy's record is and imagine some senior manager at BBC HQ flippantly allowing this story to escalate into the red top headlines, despite the show grossing c. £150 million? Dah! I've worked in production for c. 20 years and my experience tells me if this went public then something definitely happened and the BBC didn't want to get caught out with others reporting on this before they did.
So Will, reading between your lines, maybe you'd like to keep him on, perhaps you identify with him a bit and think case not proven and racism is no where near as bad as the sexual assault of minors (while on BBC property) for example. But then that's a distinction more easily made if you or your loved ones are not from a visible minority with long painful experiences of being racially abused and mistreated. And you probably don't make a correlation between the casually expressed racism of establishment figures (like Clarkson) and things like the experience of the Parisienne violently stopped from boarding his train home by racist chelsea fans. If indeed it even showed on your radar, it hasn't impacted you so what can be wrong?
Time for people to have some imagination, the world will keep spinning without jeeza and his mates, formats don't last forever, and despite a few retro racists floating around in the media currently their time is done and if you can't get your head round that then may be yours is too.
 
atb.
 

Andrew, I just couldn't let this post go.  I guess I would fall into the category of the "privileged few" having been a "film" director for over 35 years and having shot film almost exclusively.  Let me start by saying while I do have a certain sense of nostalgia for film,  I'm not someone who doesn't enjoy and in fact embrace new technology.   I've been happily shooting "video" for the last 5 years with a ML equipped Canon 5D Mark 2.  I have been waiting for the "perfect digital cinema camera" to come along before I upgrade.  That has yet to happen.  Because I'm an old  guy, perhaps I may have a different prospective on this issue.  The fall of film (in my demented perspective) is not that digital is better.. but because its cheaper.  The seeds of the fall of film I think began in the early 80s.  When I made my first film, I shot it in 16mm.  At the time, a 400' roll of film (about 10 minutes running time) cost $34.00. Because of the Hunt Brothers trying to corner the Silver market, within a few weeks, the price of Silver went through the roof.  Kodak raised the price to $76.00, which of course also included raising the price of print stocks.  After a few more weeks, the price of Silver collapsed.  Kodak never adjusted the price back down.  Since then the prices of film and processing continued to rise until film and lab work fell out of reach of all but high end users.  This left a huge hole in the market that video filled. In todays economy film cannot survive.
Regarding Film versus Video;  I made a film for Warner Bros in 2001.  It was shot on an Arri 535 (Super 35mm) and was posted completely digitally.  It was only the second film ever done that way at the time.  The very first was the Cohen Brothers "Brother Where Art Thou?" The film completion bond company called it "Voodoo Technology".  Now looking back on it all these years later, I still think this marriage (Film Capture/Digital Post) was the best it ever was.  Let me be clear, you can get some terrific looking images with digital cameras but if you look at films made 10-15 years ago there are still looks you just can't get with an electronic sensor. There is a smoothness.. a silkiness that's just wonderful.  
For me digital has three big problems.  
Number 1  Rolling Shutter.  LISTEN UP CAMERA COMPANIES!!!  Don't even think about putting out another video camera with this problem... This is NOT a minor issue.  (Yes I know some of the cameras are coming out with global shutters...and I know there are work arounds).   You shouldn't have to rethink how you shoot something to accommodate the camera.
Number 2  6 O'clock News Syndrome  - I guess that I'm the only one who sees this as I've never heard anyone else mention it but it drives me crazy. During some action scenes you suddenly become aware you're watching "video" and it takes you out of the story.  The movie suddenly looks like the 6 o'clock news and the illusion of film is suddenly gone.  This seems to only happen during moving or action shots.  I wish I could finger the culprit here but I just can't tell what's going on. Maybe someone can tell me. 
Number 3 And this one is HUGE.  Archiving of Images.  Many of the major film studios still do Black and White film separations of their movies including motion pictures shot on digital.  Film has a shelf life of at least 100 years.  This is now a proven fact. To date there is no safe and foolproof way to ensure what you shot will survive longer than a few years. I believe this era will be a period of the greatest loss of photographic images... It saddens me deeply... 
So will I go back to film? Probably not (except for shooting some art projects with my old 4x5 Grapflex). Do I miss it? Yes.  There is something very tactile and wonderful about it.  You open the side of the camera ... " I love the smell of Silver Halides and Acetate in the morning.... Smells like ... Victory". 
PS sorry for being so long winded.
WM

A short stint for tiny market. ​But now there are many mirrorless cameras and dedicated camcorders with large sensors, which weren't around in 2008, 
 People overestimate the significance of DSLR for video market. This remains a very tiny (probably insignificant percentage error level) market. 
DSLR remains primarily a photo camera.