IronFilm

I'm no professional grader, but damn after t3i and Gh4 the grade just cuts through like butter. 

From Kinemax the same sensor as Terra 6k
 

This has the touchscreen I so wish my a7rII and a6300 had.....

Zero excitement from me over this, except...   this should apply pressure on the DSLR/mirrorless manufacturers to add 4K 60fps to their cameras. As consumers will ask why can't it do what their iPhone does already??

Maybe they'll respond by making a camera that doesn't overheat....  but I won't hold my breath!

Just checked Whois - www.craftcamera.com is registered to: E.Saawadi, Mansoura, Egypt
Yep, I'm just kidding.

Perry Mulder on the Kinefinity facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/kinefinity/) gave it a quick grade the sample footage to try it out:
 
 
 

So? They're lower end models you're referring to, so of course they should be replaced by something better fairly quickly.
Additionally the GX series is aimed at photographers, thus naturally their video specs should be easy enough to beat with a soon to come out new model.

No price yet. 

I am guessing more than Sony's 18-105mm f4, but less than their 28-135mm f4

Ty Harper, the H4n had shit shit pre amps. But the H5/H6 pre amps are a leap forward.
 
And the F8 preamps are better than anything Zoom has ever made before!
And the F4 pre amps are the same as the F8.

Ty Harper, the H4n had shit shit pre amps. But the H5/H6 pre amps are a leap forward.
 
And the F8 preamps are better than anything Zoom has ever made before!
And the F4 pre amps are the same as the F8.

I got Netflix recently and, for example, watching Narcos, I miss the grain. Mostly on night scenes. Clean 4K night scenes remembers me we are watching actors on a set!!! 

I suspect the look of film is too in-grained (weak pun intended) for everyone to agree on that, but its an interesting point.
Emulating film is why Arri are still in business after over 100 years and why most modern cinema cameras are continually trying to emulate the characteristics of film negative derived from an optical process. Digital noise in many cameras is still judged by how 'grain-like' it appears. Post process of log and raw images are treated with tools that were built to mimic photochemical behaviour of stock emulsion/print process and chemical bath treatments...all focused on making digital images more relatable to work with and for audiences to accept the look of. It's proof that film is still regarded as the 'gold standard' for digital imagery to aspire too...sometimes including its grainy warts it seems. 
But modern cinema is already at a point where 360 degree shutter, rolling shutter, HFR have crept into modern filmmaking - things that could be regarded as completely non-filmic aesthetics by traditional standards...but the cinematic language has a history of changing...so yes - grain will most probably be eliminated from movies eventually and be considered an unwanted artefact of an 'antiquated' format. Its implementation as an easthetic choice for digital is sometimes subjective but the only bad online examples I've seen are from people who don't seem to understand the basics of colour correction and grading let alone the advantage that denoise and grain treatments can offer.

The specs are listed on the product page. And if you check out reviews people are happily comparing it next to their Sound Devices equipment.

For under $1000 I remember the Nikon D5300 wasn't that bad at high ISO.

Seriously enny?? That is an incredibly clueless statement to shit on Arri cameras because of their resolution. 
Maybe Kino is from Egypt?

The G8 is gonna be announced at Photokina and sounds like it'll be pretty nice. And the GH5 should be out in a matter months and has people very excited. I'd be patient. If you prefer an older model, should be some price drops after Photokina.

Hi.
You may think I'm a brand ambassador, but lets examine what that would actually mean. It would mean that I get paid to promote and generally aid the cause of Blackmagic and their brand awareness and experience with their users, is that right ?
I am not a Brand ambassador for Blackmagic, mostly because I don't get paid to be one, and I'd rather speak my mind openly in public forums like this.  I've believe I've been honest in my views of the pros and cons of their products.  I have a personal relationship with many of the people that work there and I've had a lot to do casually with helping with test shoots, iterations of changes to fundamentals,  which again, I'm not paid for.  In return I get to be involved with the development of cameras, furthering my own understanding of how a camera is built from the ground up, I get to see some of my input make it into the development cycle and I get some cameras.  Blackmagic once flew me to IBC to help with the launch of the MFT version of the 2.5K, a version I strongly lobbied for internally with BM.
None of my involvement with Blackmagic has EVER lead to me getting work as a DP, or increasing my profile.  If you think that's what producers go for then you'd be wrong.
If you don't think I'm polite enough then it's really your problem.  I would much rather remain independent and be able to speak my mind frankly.  It's exactly because I'm not a Blackmagic Brand ambassador that I can do this and the more I do this job, the less patient I get with armchair experts like Kino.
I feel like I've earned the right to be able to speak on that which I know something about and I don't really have the patience to argue points of fact with someone anonymous like Kino who has no ability to back up his claims nor legitimacy in his identity.  Anyone who's been on camera forums knows me and my history and has that posting history to inform them.  I have been on CML since nearly the begining, on C.com for many years and DP review, REDUSER, DVXUSER  all long before Blackmagic came along.  I have a blog where I try to write meaningful and helpful work and share my very own camera tests from actual shows with anyone who wants to see them without monetising it or having any kinds of adverts or kickbacks.
Because I like to be able to speak my mind when I wish to. I'm not building a profile with this audience because I am not tied to you guys for money.
JB
 
 

So Kino once again dodges his assertions with claims about his academic prowess.
Notice readers, once again, Kino avoids rebuttals on his claims and moves to...ahhh..defense of his academic prowess.
Anyway, last I heard patents weren't the only way to protect IP.  In fact, the most enduring way is to keep it secret...like Coke and Colonel Sanders do. Having or not having a patent is indicative of nothing at all. 
Once again, a very old fashioned out of date view about how IP is protected.
But again we're just diverting the conversation again aren't we. Something Kino always does.
How about this.  Do you think RED don't work with their sensor fab partner in EXACTLY the same way Blackmagic or ARRI or Digital Bolex do ? You don't cause that's what you're saying, but you actually don't really know do you because all you can do is dig up a quote about ASICs and Sensors, without knowing what you post about.
Of course you are trying to perhaps have me confirm a technology partner of BM, when you know full well I'd never be able to disclose that without breaking an NDA, but I can assure you, the sensor used in the UM4.6K is not an "off the shelf sensor", nor is it one that you can just go order from whomever you think the vendor is. I know this because of actual personal involvement with its development.  Please explain how I can have that so wrong and your version be more correct ?
It's very usual for camera manufacturers to partner with companies making sensors to also spin off the development costs to amortise them for other uses. I bet you can't name me another sensor company that has done this after developing a sensor that never came to market....cmon now, you failed on the ASIC questions...You should be able to get this one...
The fact is you're wrong.  You make wrong claims, and for an academic, you fail to make bullet proof arguments about your claims, backed up by anything other than second hand information.
I also don't believe you own any of the cameras being discussed, nor do I believe you've used them.
Here are some of my favorite collected Kino quotes and please tell me this isn't the same Kino from another forum.....Please note the regular contradictions and backflippery.
"With every 4.6k video that is posted, the lack of a pleasing highlight roll-off is more and more apparent. It could possibly be a highlight recovery issue in post, but it is a characteristic of this camera in several videos that we have seen. It's like the sensor hits a wall and cannot reproduce the gradations of luminance one would expect from the shot."
"4 stops over-and-under is a very respectable performance. It's not going to equal an Alexa or Weapon, especially in the highlights, but the 4.6k's blacks are very clean. Its noise performance is pretty impressive and, while it is losing saturation in underexposure, the footage is still usable. "
"This is exactly why I said 10-12 stops for the 4.6k,"
"I cannot imagine at this stage that BMD is having quality control issues."
"Obviously, that is a serious problem. That purple/blue clipping is from the camera, not any lens."  - Which was said in relation to an obviously mis-graded clip that had the "old" Resolve BM 709 LUT applied.
Some of my favourite Kino posts relate to a conspiracy theory he ran for several pages about the 4.6K not having the DR everyone now accepts it has because some early clips that were released didn't to HIS EYE appear to have any DR and then he really got excited because a post of a photo of a XYLA chart on facebook by a senior ASC technical committee DP shot on a computer screen in shot while a 4.6K appeared to be tested didn't appear to show the correct DR and yet didn't seem to want to accept it could never be an accurate image because the lights were on in the test environment for the purposes of taking...the photo...
He doesn't even understand how the test conditions would change that result, even when told, he still posted this kind of garbage...
"Yes, final results are necessary from an independent source (Cinema5D, for example), but that image was pulled because it was revealing, not because it was misleading." He didn't know the image WAS an independent source, namely the individual ASC technical committee members facebook page, but whatever...
"So even when there is evidence there is no evidence. Of course, I anticipated this day. Put a Xyla chart or waveform in front of them and they still cannot acknowledge that the camera's performance does not meet its advertised specs."
"The spikes I'm referring to are clearly visible in the waveform monitors sitting on the table in the released image of the 4.6k test. The "waveforms" you have posted are of your own fabrication and not from any test of a RED camera. There is a fundamental difference. Besides, the question remains: why was the entire post, its conclusions, and its uncontaminated Xyla (if any) taken down?"
He also continues to ridicule and attack individuals that have no ability to answer because of the very fact that they ARE under NDA.  This is also why i like to hold him to account for his reckless and misinformed claims.
"Now, of course, I understand you are under NDAs and your responsibility is to report such problems back to BMD and not this forum, but you can't turn around and argue that you were the ones who brought the magenta issue to our attention. That's a joke, right?"
But my favourite of course also in the same thread many of the above posts were in was..
"This camera is finally ready for prime time and for my wallet."
Sorry if this seems harsh.  I just don't like debating what I know to be factually untrue with an anonymous grandstander.   I prefer to hold someone that posts that kind of ill informed guesswork to account.  All I ever used to do was challenge Kino's claims.  He just ignores that and never retracts or admits getting it wrong.
I'm happy to be proven wrong if all this is untrue.
 
Well, I have major issues with the testing methodologies espoused by many that produce the magenta corner result.  I was sent an image from a RED DRAGON that had the same test results applied according to the author, a 400% boost in saturation to bring out the result, and it looked worse than what's usually cited on the UM4.6K.
JB

Video shot with a Nikon D5 (a BTS of a D500 photoshoot):
 
 

Ethnics statement... How about you telling us your name. Everyone knows Johns relationship to BMD. You could be the president of Red for all I know.
Also I've never seen an authors before that didn't want to say their name. You know, to sell books. 
Honestly, at this point it seems you are just trying to dodge his questions to save face.
Prove us wrong.

I think what's beginning to be increasingly obvious is that Canon is seriously limited in its ability to install high-capacity processing power into its products, which is a big reason why so many of its cameras seem crippled compared to the competition. Now, there is market segmentation at play here in regards to the cheaper cameras. Canon is obviously trying to protect the Cinema EOS division by limiting the feature-set in the DSLR range. But the C700 is top of the line. There's nothing above it, and yet it still looks inferior on paper compared to the Varicam, Amira and F55.
One of the reasons why the NX1 seemed so advanced when it came out was because Samsung is the second largest manufacturer of semiconductors in the world. Sony is up there too. So is Panasonic. Canon (and Nikon as well) is a camera-maker first, electronics-maker second. So the hardware is always gonna be a step behind, even if the color science and image quality is there. At the same time, Canon serves a mass market and needs to use economies of scale, unlike Red and Arri, which are tiny companies in the scheme of things, but use pricey halo products in order to develop bespoke hardware that trickles down to lesser models. Scarlets were made from rejected Epic sensors. The Raven is a Weapon 8K sensor cut in half. The development put into the Alexa 65 made the Alexa Mini possible. People forget that an Alexa SXT costs over $100,000. If Canon made a camera at that price, would it be world-beating? And would that hypothetical technology trickle down to lessor models?

There's a price bracket/performance sweet-spot where a camera magically disappears into complete irrelevancy for 99% of people. This one hits that sweet-spot. I'm sorry, but $30K (likely more)?! I'm sorry, but that places it squarely as a rental cam in almost every case, and up against ARRI/RED offerings. 
I know what Alexa (and even Amira) can do, and sorry, but a Canon won't come close. Not even ballpark. I feel gross mentioning them in the same sentence. And if ARRI ain't your style, there's a high chance that RED has you covered, and in many cases for well under $30K.
If by chance you're REALLY docu, I'd throw my money at however many Sony FS-5s you need. That new electronic ND should be a complete run -n-gun game changer.
If you're still not covered by those options, you're either Nolan/Tarantino, and only film will do, or you're one of the countless professionals that realize: any of a number of DSLR/mirror less cameras will get you damn near close enough, for 1/10th the cost, in 90% of situations, if you know what you're doing.
I LOVE pouring over gear specs, especially cameras, and mentally crunching the numbers. But almost since the 5DII, Canon have been consistently making cameras that just don't match up in the price/performance categories. I'm not saying they don't make good cameras, they do. But they're either too pricey vs the competition, too late to the party, or too flawed.
At the risk of being "that guy" that brings the Samsung NX1 into every thread, that's what I've shot on since it came out, and I fully expect it to last another 1-2 years as my a-cam. I have ISO mapped to one wheel, Aperture to another, and Shutter Speed to the third. White Balance is a button press away (though quite frankly the AWB produces more pleasing color than the presets 90% of the time), and a variable ND filter fills out the kit alongside that killer 16-50 zoom, which pulls focus like a champ with no hunting. It truly resolves UHD and 1080p. Works for me. There are folks with Sonys, Panasonics, Nikons, Fujis, and even Canons that would say the same. 
At this point I glance at new Canon offerings, and read them in-depth later when I need a good laugh.

Video shot with a Nikon D5 (a BTS of a D500 photoshoot):
 
 

Seriously enny?? That is an incredibly clueless statement to shit on Arri cameras because of their resolution. 
Maybe Kino is from Egypt?