leo

This is big, for videography this is seriously big news.
That GH4 peaking is damn misleading, it takes practice to really know when it's in focus at large apertures.
They have my money, i hope they can keep up with the orders.

I am very satisfied with my gh4's but the hype around this firmwware got me to expect more.
For me, V-log won't matter, i struggle with gh4 in low light shooting weddings that i constantly switch between different profiles for daylight and indoors, flat profiles for low light is a disaster, especially for gh4 sensor.
i.Dynamic pushes the DR to the max, there is little one could do in post, even with v-log or RAW, you get noise and detail that it's unsuable from all the noise.
I watched the camerastore review of the firmware and damn that noise, gh4 can do better but not by much, better bring that speedbooster and that 1.4 lens if you want to shoot in low light, and forget about v-log.
I would've wished for 10 bit 422  internally for better grading with masks, even if it was FHD.
Panasonic already has my money, good stuff this new firmware, for some people.

This is almost everything you would want in a 4k camera, right now, just amazing specs, except the price.
At almost 16k $ this puts the camera in a different category, at least for me, i shoot weddings and it's impossible to justify this kind of camera for the prices i have.
I might be wrong, but, in the long run this camera might lose it's resale value very very fast, with companies like samsung and panasonic that have nothing to lose ( they have no serious market share in any category, proffesional or consumer), anytime they could launch a little hybrid still/video GH or NX camera that does almost all of what c300 mk2 does and more, like 4k 60p.
I hope i'm wrong and c300 mk2 has a long life, hardly the chance when samsung is serious about this and panasonic keeps pushing for more, right now nx1 is 1300$ body only on B&H.
Still, amazing camera, right now this would be almost everything i would want for what i shoot, if someone here can justify the purchase, do it, it really is a very good camera.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

​I do 1000$ weddings and can only take 20-25 a year, so i can't ever justify buying even one c300 mk2, let alone 2 or  3 as ideal for my needs.
For US top weddings, something like ray roman does as someone mentioned him here, i think he can afford these cameras, so i see wedding videography using this but only at the highest level of work for this kind of bussines.
Sure, features like raw and 400mb  bit rate are overkill for wedding, but it's not like it can only shoot like that, the headline here is 4k on a 1.5 crop with great ISO and DR, this sounds exceptional for events.
I don't see the filmakers market as an atractive one for canon and i don't think they targeted one specific market, seriously, filmakers rent, videographers buy it for good and are way more than filmakers.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

This is almost everything you would want in a 4k camera, right now, just amazing specs, except the price.
At almost 16k $ this puts the camera in a different category, at least for me, i shoot weddings and it's impossible to justify this kind of camera for the prices i have.
I might be wrong, but, in the long run this camera might lose it's resale value very very fast, with companies like samsung and panasonic that have nothing to lose ( they have no serious market share in any category, proffesional or consumer), anytime they could launch a little hybrid still/video GH or NX camera that does almost all of what c300 mk2 does and more, like 4k 60p.
I hope i'm wrong and c300 mk2 has a long life, hardly the chance when samsung is serious about this and panasonic keeps pushing for more, right now nx1 is 1300$ body only on B&H.
Still, amazing camera, right now this would be almost everything i would want for what i shoot, if someone here can justify the purchase, do it, it really is a very good camera.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

You've seen what samsung did to apple with phones, man they are gonna bring chaos to the market with these little things, i love it !
I imagine a future where filming equipment is dirt cheap and only talent counts, i imagine samsung and panasonic is gonna do this for us because they have nothing to lose.
 

You've seen what samsung did to apple with phones, man they are gonna bring chaos to the market with these little things, i love it !
I imagine a future where filming equipment is dirt cheap and only talent counts, i imagine samsung and panasonic is gonna do this for us because they have nothing to lose.
 

That video is brilliant!
 

While I like the advantages of speedboster I hate that I lose touch focus.

If the prosumer camera footage I watch on vimeo is indicative, 99% of the people who will buy this camera won't rack focus, let alone pan the camera. I'm pretty sure non professionals who buy multi thousand dollar cameras just buy stuff to produce test footage. In other words  the A7s will be just fine for filming bridges, people walking, and sunsets.  :P

If the prosumer camera footage I watch on vimeo is indicative, 99% of the people who will buy this camera won't rack focus, let alone pan the camera. I'm pretty sure non professionals who buy multi thousand dollar cameras just buy stuff to produce test footage. In other words  the A7s will be just fine for filming bridges, people walking, and sunsets.  :P

Believe me, A7s isn't "everything we ever asked for". If it was, it'd have 10-bit at the least. Have you ever worked with a true 10-bit video image as opposed to 8-bit? It's a world of difference. Anyone that tells you otherwise simply doesn't understand colour-science, colour-precision, dynamic-range preservation, nor colour-grading.

Further, every one that goes on and on about "the benefits of full-frame" either doesn't realise that full-frame is very hard for precise focus-pulling, nor do they understand that, when shooting 4K, your focusing better be on point. Full-frame is actually very unfriendly for filmmakers - especially "one-man-army" type filmmakers. In indie filmmaking, a small sensor is actually your friend.

F4 is very shallow on full-frame - usually one has to stop down to F5.6 to even make the focusing manageable (and by doing so, you'll be pumping up the ISO to compensate for closing your aperture down), let alone viewable. For some strange reason, shallow depth-of-field has become synonymous with "cinematic". For me, when I see ultra shallow depth-of-field, especially the overuse and abuse of it, it simply screams "amateur", "novice". Especially when it is accompanied by God-awful jitters and micro-shakes.

People need to concentrate on composition more than shallow DoF - and in my humble opinion, light and shadow gives a sense of depth far more than shallow DoF, or the Z-Axis benefit that comes with full-frame sensors (which is a concept I've never really agreed with). Light and shadow is far more important when creating the illusion of three-dimensions through a two-dimensional medium such as film.

But to each there own. For me, tha A7s will be something I buy more for my street photography than video. I'll throw my old Canon FD and Nikon-F glass on there. I don't need auto-focus. In fact, I detest the hell out of auto-focus.

For those that go A7s, be sensible in your composition. The last thing anyone wants to see is 95% bokeh like we did during the 5DMKII days.

In my opinion, A7s is probably the more "fun" camera. I think it benefits still photography more than it does video. The GH4 is by far the more sensible video/film camera - 4K 10-bit at up to 30FPS, 1080P 10-bit at up to 60FPS, a sensor-size with manageable DoF - especially for "one-many-army" type filmmakers.

But like I said, to each their own.

My experience with sony products has been of getting ripped off, almost always I had a better choice from Canon, Nikon or Panasonic, even a blank DVD costs more if it has a sony badge.
The thought of having 4k on a full frame sensor is amazing, even with a 1.3 crop, I woud drop every gear I have in an instant for an FX 4k.
I doubt this will happen, there must be a catch if they give 4k right now, it will eighter be very very expensive or have some basic features cut off, maybe some bad codec that breaks up, who knows.
At least I know I won't be buying anything from sony until I see 10 reviews discussing every litte thing and maybe waiting even half a year to see user impressions :), that's how bad I see sony products.

While some of you complain about c100 and c300 being to expensive, it's not a problem for canon, they don't even want hobbyist to have these cameras.
Those 10k cameras are for professional's that shoot low budget commercials to weddings and music videos, there is plenty of money in that segment for gadgets like these.
Imagine the profit they get from a puny c300, that thing has an asp-c crop sensor, they say "canon digic III" processor and unrestricted codecs, nothing exotic like full hd at 200 fps, cpu on that thing is slow, all of that for 14000 $ :lol:, t2i sensor with proper processing and video camera features at 14000$, funny shit.

While some of you complain about c100 and c300 being to expensive, it's not a problem for canon, they don't even want hobbyist to have these cameras.
Those 10k cameras are for professional's that shoot low budget commercials to weddings and music videos, there is plenty of money in that segment for gadgets like these.
Imagine the profit they get from a puny c300, that thing has an asp-c crop sensor, they say "canon digic III" processor and unrestricted codecs, nothing exotic like full hd at 200 fps, cpu on that thing is slow, all of that for 14000 $ :lol:, t2i sensor with proper processing and video camera features at 14000$, funny shit.

When you can buy a 4K cell phone, but not a 4K DSLR, something is seriously wrong.  The camera market tanked in 2013.  It's really simple.  The camera companies are not innovating.  You can't keep selling the same old thing year after year, and expect people to buy it. 
 
Michael

What filmmaking are you talking about, school project ? kiddie stuff for no money ? there is no paid job where you go with mark3  and magic lantern firmware, shooting raw on hopefully fast CF's hoping it won't drop frames.

I don't understand this post.

DSLRs are for photographers. They are made for stills and not video. It's just so happens that we have adopted it as a filmmaking tool.

If you are a serious filmmaker, Canon want you to buy the Cinema EOS Line. Nikon aren't interested. Fuji, erm... No need to bother. Panasonic...they have plans and want you to buy into their M43 system. They get punters in with the GH line, to then offer video based models later. ;)

So what if Nikon haven't bothered with a video feature in this camera, who cares?

Technically, hobbyists don't need professional features. Professionals need professional features and therefore buy professional cameras.

Blackmagic cameras are for pros and lack many pro features. Canon etc, I expect, don't care. It's very niche.

I'm not sure why ML RAW comes into this in any way at all. The effect this has on the market is literally nothing. It's a hack. It's not a feature of the camera. ML RAW is a discovery, it's not a market leading feature.

The annoying fact for most is that if you want a camera with better features, you need to get shooting and earn some money. If it's just a hobby, then why would the camera manufacturers screw their business models by giving top features to people who just want to point and shoot? It doesn't make any sense.

There is a feeling that manufacturers (Canon especially) are not putting in the juice they could even into their pro cameras. This is true, and it happens because they are a business who want to make a profit.

I don't think the camera companies are out of touch. This forum is out of touch. The camera companies believe they are catering for you, and as we are all buying their cameras, they are. ;)

Strange conclusion, huh, 5d mk 3 best of the 3 ???????
First of all, playing with ML shooting raw is not an option for a paid job, unlles you have some low end jobs where people don't care much for the work you do and get the "cheapest one", I guess you can screw up there, nobody cares.
Then the pocket cinema, good video quality but very poor ergonomics, how much will you pay for that quality, well, less than 5d mk 3 but still, you can't go shoot a wedding with one little pocket cinema, you need a few and some patient people.
Then the gh3, the most balanced out of the 3, amazing ergonomics, for chirst sake you could do rack focus by tapping on the back of the screen, instant auto exposure by pressing one button, you can even go all auto and works like a camcorder but we are pro's so no need.
In the world of event videographers those 5d's are dying in favor of modern tools made for video, fs100,fs700,gh3 DUH,c100,c300, all of these little babies have good ergonomics and image that looks professional, not that plastic look of the standard canon DSLR's.
My point is who the heck uses 5d mk3 shooting RAW an event like a wedding, or uses pocket cinema with that tiny sensor, in the real world where money is made you can't be toying like that.
My rating for money making in event shooting is 1. gh3 by far for anything 2. 5d mk3 as a second camera for details and use of full frame sdof 3. pocket cinema for moments when you have all the time in the world from shooting to postprocessing.
 
 
LE
OR none of the above in favor of fs700 or c300.

If this is in relation to showcasing the raw hack I have one complaint, why is everything shot on a tripod, no moving, no steadycam run and gun, it's like those promotional videos for a camera where you see static gorgeous footage but as soon as you buy it and you start using it is not the same, I want to see some fast action and how it looks.
Let's see how it handles fast action.

What is that company that recycles the same sensor tehnology for quite a few years ( DX ), is it Canon ? and what is that company that charges almost double ( at least in my country ) for the "new" 24-70.
Check out XF100/105 price, or :D wait wait :lol:  Canon XA10 price against a Panasonic camcorder like ag-ac90, it's a joke, if it were for Canon the air we breathe would cost money.
 
The hell are you talking peederj ? are you from this planet ?
We can agree on one thing, Sony and Canon are the most greedy of them all but at least Sony has some new sensor tehnology.
 

Doesn't matter much wich camera is better, storytelling, composition, lightining and sound are more important than the resolution or dynamic range the camera has, sure you need a bare minimum but for sure that bare minimum is not a c100 or a 500, you can even do with a couple of gh2's as Upstream Color movie showed us.

Anyone who's done a bit of photography knows the power of raw but it's way to much trouble for anything  more than experimental work.
Someone earlier asked for advice on a camera for events, well, nothing comes close to a gh3, you can have the mother of all hacks that gives you 4k,8k, doesn't matter, it's a hack that has severe limitations and in the end you can't risk go to a job with unstable gear.
First I was excited but then I thought, if you have the money you can have c300, fs700 with future 4k upgrade and already amazing ISO that obliterates 5d mark3, sure 5d  is nice but serious event videographers are switching to the real deal, real cameras designed for this.
Now about the gh3 vs tons of DSLR's that offer better iso, sure 5d gives way better iso, even Nikons do now but then you look at other things, silent autofocus, touch screen autofocus, wayyy lighter and easier for long steadycam shots, sharper image, articulated screen, tons of settings for making it easier and faster.
Then you think about the ISO, when do I ever use iso 6400 or even more, in events ( by events I mean weddings ) almost never, you light it or carry a lamp is need it but with a fast prime you can go anywhere, so you probably max at  3200 and very very rarerly, and you have neat video to clean up the footage.
In my opinion if it is for events go for cheap gh3's or expensive c100,c300,fs100,fs700, market changed in what it can offer, if years ago DSLR's where the only thing to give amazing iso and easy SDOF now we have a hell of a lot of choices.

Anyone who's done a bit of photography knows the power of raw but it's way to much trouble for anything  more than experimental work.
Someone earlier asked for advice on a camera for events, well, nothing comes close to a gh3, you can have the mother of all hacks that gives you 4k,8k, doesn't matter, it's a hack that has severe limitations and in the end you can't risk go to a job with unstable gear.
First I was excited but then I thought, if you have the money you can have c300, fs700 with future 4k upgrade and already amazing ISO that obliterates 5d mark3, sure 5d  is nice but serious event videographers are switching to the real deal, real cameras designed for this.
Now about the gh3 vs tons of DSLR's that offer better iso, sure 5d gives way better iso, even Nikons do now but then you look at other things, silent autofocus, touch screen autofocus, wayyy lighter and easier for long steadycam shots, sharper image, articulated screen, tons of settings for making it easier and faster.
Then you think about the ISO, when do I ever use iso 6400 or even more, in events ( by events I mean weddings ) almost never, you light it or carry a lamp is need it but with a fast prime you can go anywhere, so you probably max at  3200 and very very rarerly, and you have neat video to clean up the footage.
In my opinion if it is for events go for cheap gh3's or expensive c100,c300,fs100,fs700, market changed in what it can offer, if years ago DSLR's where the only thing to give amazing iso and easy SDOF now we have a hell of a lot of choices.