Brian Williams

After reading this, I really hope this rumor is true.

No no, I do care about it for that purpose, hence my initial excitement about the A7s. I just meant that I don't care about doing final outputting to 4K. At least not yet.

You are absolutely right, I would consider the trade only because I can't justify having both the pocket cam and a good camera for stills (I currently have none for stills); I want something that can do both, especially with a full frame. All that, and an evf. I realize it's a step down in image quality, but I had high hopes for 4k shrunk down to 1080, the loss in IQ would be worth it to me for those extra features. But for some reason, I'm just not excited about the GH4 like I was for the A7s.

No, you're right, I was exaggerating a bit, I don't care about 4k yet either, only care about good 1080. It's just that this seems very comparable to the GH3, which is an older and already replaced camera. It has full frame over the GH3's smaller sensor, but then again it only offers 50mbps, which isn't great, at least the GH3 offers 72mbps. And I know people will say codec isn't everything, and it's not, but it is really important- I can absolutely tell the different between my BMPCC's 176mbps ProRes vs 24mbps H264. Put a speed booster on a GH3 and they're really comparible, though the Sony sensor will probably be way better than the GH3's. I'm still interested in this camera, I just had higher hopes, and not sure that it's enough to make me sell my pocket cam (which I actually already went and put up for sale this weekend, along with the bmpcc meta bones speed booster over on Fred Miranda, in anticipation of the A7s).

Sony introduces GH3 killer! So disappointing.

Having played with ML raw on the 50D, I appreciate the enthusiasm for it, but I really don't see how this would be considered a superior raw shooter to the pocket cam; comparable, but not superior. The 7D can't shoot full 1080 without crop mode (which in my experience was completely useless and unworkable without a tripod). It has a viewfinder, but doesn't work when shooting video... moire hasn't been a huge issue with my pocket, the pocket is smaller, its raw recording is way more reliable, the smaller sensor allows for things like speed boosters that allow crazy fast apertures, pocket has audio with raw- crappy audio, but audio nonetheless. I mean, after reading this post, I kind of want a 7D to play with, but I don't see how its considered superior. But I'm open to having my mind changed! EDIT- ok, I'll admit the pocket does cost more, and I have the BMPCC speed booster which really boosts the cost, so the 7D does look like a good deal when considering price.

I feel like a lot of the cons on your list also apply to the original BMCC, but yet you loved (still do?) that camera; doesn't that seem a bit unfair? I know its two years on, but the BMCC is still one of the best out there.

Exactly, this thing could end up just recording iPhone quality video- unless its something more than avchd or mp4, not too exciting. Looks cool, but it needs some pretty impressive specs to justify that price.

This makes no sense. I have a pocket, I don't have any rigging on it 99% of the time, nor do I have (or need) an evf. You'll be able to format your cards in camera, but that's not a big deal to me. The GH4 will require the same amount of $$ for lens as the pocket. And shooting 4k on it, you're gonna pay a pretty penny for your sd cards, too. The GH4 sounds great, but don't be so damn negative about other cams!

It definitely needs to be fixed, but I really don't think this auto-exposure glitch is nearly as big of a deal as you've been making it out to be in all your pocket posts. It literally takes five seconds to readjust the aperture when you turn the camera back on; If its a run and gun situation, I'd be more concerned about the camera startup time than the time it takes to redo aperture.

  I had the BMCC and traded it for the pocket cam. With the exception that the BMCC has 2.5k raw, most would say the picture quality between the two is the same.   So, picture quality aside, there are- for me, at least- definitely other reasons to get the pocket cam over other cameras, including its big brother. I shoot handheld footage of my daughter running around the park all the time, with nothing added to the camera but a lens, and its great. Hoping to use it for more 'art films', as you'd say, but for everyday, pocket-use, its f'ing awesome as it is.

Having this feature would really be incredible.

If you had the choice between this setup, or the original BMCC, what would you go with, and why? I realize that that's a somewhat stupid question, and that the answer is "whatever works better for you", but I'm being insanely indecisive these days, and want to hear what other people think of the choice.

I don't know if that's gonna happen anytime soon, that sd card slot it has is pretty slow.

In the context of what we are talking about, which is "8bit compressed H.264 codec'-based cameras, then yes, the GH2 and G6 fall into the same category as most DSLRs. Call them whatever the hell you want, these two cameras absolutely are the kinds of cameras Andrew is talking about. Or at least they could be. I believe Julian when he says they're not. At least he's not a smartass about it.

"I can never go back to an 8bit compressed H.264 based codec, especially not an implementation as bad as we find on most current DSLRs."   Wait, does this mean I should disregard your recent, glowing review of the G6 or stop reading your GH2 shooters guide I bought recently?   Also, obviously the 50D can't record audio (no mic)- do we think the 7D will ever be able to record an audio track while capturing raw? Can the Mark III do that?   That was one thing that had me bummed on my 50D and why I let it go; obviously not expecting to use it as my main audio, but a scratch track for syncing would be nice.

Since this doesn't have the 5axis stabilization, what advantage does this camera have over, say, my NEX-6 or even my RX100- they all shoot 1080p at 24mbps, and the Nex has a larger sensor, so why would this camera be considered better for video? I'm not trying I challenge anyone, I am genuinely wondering, I would consider selling my camera if I could be convinced it was worth it. I mean, I understand why a GH2 with 178mbps hack would be a serious video camera, but I don't understand why this camera is considered to have GH3 quality if it's only 24mbps? My RX100 shoots at that rate.

True, but not comparable, unless you're talking 5DmIII (which, when price is factored in, obviously isn't camparable); I bought a 50D last month, solely because of ML hack, I played around with it, exciting stuff, ended up selling it after a month. It will never have 1080p without using stupid crop mode which makes it unusable IMO, left with 1600something by 800something. Awesome hack for sure, but not equal to dedicated RAW camera.

  Maybe so, but doesn't really come anywhere close to being comparable to a RAW video camera.

I'm scheduled to go the event in LA next week, will be curious to see what the status is. Probably cameras inside a glass case.

This is from my Computar 12.5mm/ 1.3 Picture was taken with my Nex-6, which has a 23.5" sensor, so I adjusted accordingly.