AndrewM

I love so much about this camera (specs wise) but I am also pissed off because now it is clear they can do XAVC S in a small package. So why not the RX-10? Please, please Sony, a firmware update, I am begging you!

Looking at the test footage, both look really good, but... to put it in very unscientific terms, the Canon just seems to have "more colors." It seems like the main colors in the frame can be matched, but then the secondaries are kind of missing/washed out in the GH4. I'm guessing it is just a bit depth thing... Can't wait to see the 10-bit.

The rolling shutter that I really can't stand is on the GoPros. They are horrendous, and with the kinds of action people shoot on them, even more horrendous. It feels like the video is fed into some kind of hallucinogenic warp program. I know I am watching GoPro footage because I start to feel sick.

I'm really hoping this camera does turn out to be good. I'm looking at shooting sports, and when you start at the lens end of the equation I need something with a fair zoom range, decent brightness, and stabilization. A servo zoom would be really nice. The Sony SELP 18105 18-105 f4 looks like the best option for people who can't afford fujinon cabrios, but I've been looking for a camera to attach it to! If the autofocus lives up to the hype and the encoding doesn't suck then the a6000 could be it...

Here is a feature I have been thinking about that might make people happy. Sticking to US timing, if you are shooting 30p with a 180 degree shutter, then you are looking at a 1/60s exposure, with an exposure every 1/30s. If your camera is capable of 60p, then it can clear two images off the sensor in 1/30s. There is time (at least theoretically) to get off another (shorter) exposure between each frame of 30p. Originally I was thinking more about getting off a really quick short exposure to give you some more latitude with highlights when you work with the main 30p frame (as long as there isn't too much motion between frames). But you could also have that second stream be your stills stream, with full control over exposure (as long as it is sufficiently less than 1/30s). Of course, that would require your camera to be able to encode essentially 2 30p streams, which is more work than 1 60p stream, but at least conceivable.

I've been trying to find the reference, but haven't found it yet. But will post now/update later. Here is how I think it might work. Exactly how many bits of luma or color depth will be recoverable is going to depend in part on how sophisticated the processing of the original file is. In particular, it will depend on the extent to which dithering is used in the original algorithm. Using the example of one bit/two bit used earlier: Yes, if all the algorithm does is round each value at each location, then bit depth is lost and is unrecoverable in some instances (though the equivalent of pixel binning gets you some increase in many contexts). So 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 becomes 0, 0, 1, 1. But if dithering is used, then there can be more information. What that means is that you randomly vary your values so that they average to be a desired value that is not actually in your bit depth. So 0.7, 0.7, 0.7, 0.7 might be represented as 1, 0, 1, 1. If this is the case, then there are bits to be recovered beyond those is the bit depth.

This is late and I hope you are still reading this thread... It sounds like you have Panasonic's ear, so I was hoping you could pass along the following (if you think it is a good idea...). Given that a crop is used for the video modes, what I would really like to see is an "expanded" 4K or Ultra-HD mode, where it records a wider image with a band of extra pixels around the outside of the usual crop. That way you could do stabilization in post without having to upscale and lose IQ. You would lose a little on having to compress a larger image, but you would gain I think in both the simplicity and the quality of the stabilization, because you would just be moving around the 4K/UltraHD window. Thanks for all you do!

I had a question - you said in the article that the Sony AX100 has "much beefier processors." Not to challenge you in anyway, but is that something you know for sure? The specs just say Bionz X (like A7r, RX10). The reason I am hoping you are wrong is that that would mean it would be at least possible for a firmware update to bring AX100 features to the RX10 (though heat/power might be an issue). If Sony wanted to.... Also, for those of you who are arguing that it is codec, not 4k that is the issue I present - the also-new Sony CX900. Same camera, it seems, but no 4k, Has XAVC-S encoding of HD (it looks like 10 bit 4:2:2 is possible), 120 fps 720p. Hopefully full-sensor readout. And you save $500 and having to join this argument. THAT is the software I want on the RX10