John Matthews

Please explain to why Fuji, Nikon, Olympus and Canon can have PDAF on their Sony sensors but Panasonic cannot.

I've heard about DFD tech forever...incremental upgrades..."now it's a viable option"... blah...blah...blah...except it isn't PDAF and doesn't work nearly as well FOR VIDEO. For photography, it's great! I'll tell you this: if the GH6 doesn't have PDAF, we'll really know about the intentions of Panasonic to let go of MFT or not. It's THE spec that EVERYONE is going to care about, regardless how good they make DFD or repackage it and call it something else. No one is listening anymore IMO. Just pay the piper and pass it on to the customer.

If this is true, it's a sad state of affaires. Personally, I doubt they'd impose that sort of thing- a highly monopolistic move. And why would Sony say it's fine for Fuji, Nikon, and Canon? Would they actually be THAT scared of MFT? I think Panasonic has invested too much in their contrast system that they can't turn back. How much does it cost to the customer to put PDAF on a sensor anyway? 100 Euros? I'd pay it! What are they doing?

So, can I have some perspective? If pushing an image 100% is doing something crazy like changing all reds to greens (with clean results), 50% is adding 2 LUTs, 25% is adding 1 LUT and some color correction, 10% is color correction only, and 0% is out-of-camera results. Where is 8 bit, 10 bit, and RAW?

Can someone please explain why 10 bit is needed? What situations? The only major benefit I've seen is banding in LOG profiles in 1080p. On my Olympus, I never see it in 4k.Am I missing something?

@Andrew Reid I'm in complete agreement with this article. I've said it before, but Sigma, Olympus, Nikon, and even Pentax are in a unique position of being able to seriously undercut Canon, Sony, Panasonic, and maybe Fuji in terms of their pro cine camera lines. I seriously doubt Nikon (head in their keister) and Pentax (the forgotten one) would do anything as they are trying to put out fires on two fronts. However, Sigma and Olympus (JIP) could have real opportunity here to do damage to their competitors.

Looking back on the announcement for this firmware update, they say "RAW" video data". I assumed it was 10 bit... or is it 12 bit as Apple Prores RAW is 12 bit? I know regular Prores is 10 bit. I guess Olympus (non) LOG or flat profile anything wouldn't come into play because that would require interpretation of the processor where as RAW goes straight to the HDMI recording device. Clearly, I've never used one, but just trying to understand.

Yes. That's what I meant.

Don't be cynical unless you have good reason. Sure, JIP is an investment firm- this is what Olympus should do when it can't make it work (for whatever reason). Would you prefer those close it down? One more opportunity is a good thing, regardless. Speaking of opportunities, JIP has a serious one if they can get pro-video results from their PDAF cameras; this announcement is a step in the right direction, granted it's not from JIP officially yet. Also, JIP won't have a cinema line to protect like Canon, Sony, Panasonic, etc. Nikon has its head so far up its keister that will be dead or irrelevant IMO. I'll be a cheerleader for JIP until I they produce crap.

The 8 bit doesn't bug me, especially when I have to carry an external recorder to get the 10bit. However, I'm VERY curious to know how the E-M1 III will perform with its (non) log and flat profiles. Also, will JIP take it further? All speculation at this point. Please post video of the 10 bit when you get a chance!

Equivalency is such a silly topic, especially with mirrorless. Who actually walk around with a MFT, APS-C, or medium format camera and says: what would this look like on FF? That person is missing the point IMO. Is it really that hard to understand that 24mm f2 is a 24mm f2 regardless the size of the sensor or lens? The only question that comes into play is: does the image produced by the lens cover the sensor or not. This is easy to know because we now have mirrorless WYSIWYG.

The worst of this is that soon some will add on top of it "8k" as a "necessity." ... FF at all costs, never mind lens selection.

That would be cool, but those lenses will cost too much to produce IMO, judging from what has already been produced. Mind you, only 700 Euros for the Sigma 18-35... make it a native MFT mount, smaller, and it could be a winner at that price. But with the lenses like the Panasonic 10-25 at 1700 Euros, they can kiss the market goodbye... would rather zoom with my feet, have better optics, and save a lot with a prime or two. Still, super practical. I think if they make more lenses, they'll need to be small, fast primes at a low cost- bringing into question of why go FF or APS-C in the first place! Of course, they already have a ton of F1.7, F1.8 lenses; so, they'll need more F1-f1.4 lenses on the cheap. Not sure if that's even possible. Remember they're competing against the used market as well. Right now, you can get a 17, 25, 45 f1.8 for 500 Euros easily on the used market.

I think it would be wise to wait and see as translations by google, especially of this length, are almost always flawed. I was hoping that a bilingual Japanese/English speaker could enlighten us on what exactly it says. Again, I find no problem with JIP using OMD/Zuiko or even Olympus for synergy of JIP's current businesses as that would be very normal. Olympus branded (anything related to imaging and audio) would be in this category. If JIP "only" released a E-M1 III with 10-bit, better log, maybe some more monitoring tools, and better slow-mo, they'd have a hit on their hands. Actually, I'm fairly sure these things could happen even WITHOUT a new body, just wit firmware updates of the E-M1 II or III. Just a few talented engineers could turn this around. Think of what already exists with MFT: 1. over 95 lenses at every price-point to choose from 2. excellent, robust bodies of all sizes and shapes 3. a wonderful used market worldwide 4. "good enough" quality for most pro and hobbyist work, proven over and over by content produced 5. for Olympus specifically, they've already got decent PDAF, something that other MFT manufacturers have not undertaken 6. did I mention over 95 lenses to choose from RIGHT NOW, not on some lens map or "maybes", especially in a shrinking market? Sorry, had to mention it twice as this is incomparable with ALL other mirrorless cameras. IMO, more important than sensor-size or the marginal quality benefits with other systems. Sadly, their biggest asset might be one reason why JIP or Panasonic won't do well. With those 95 lenses at all price levels, there might not have the same revenue stream possibilities. My fear is that they won't turn a profit on bodies alone- no matter the cost; so; it will all be about getting production costs down on high-quality bodies, something that doesn't always mix together. No, I'm not an analyst in the industry... just a guy who has an opinion to share with some business and company knowledge and likes video and photography.

That doesn't really register on my "common sense" radar. They apparently say they'll keep the Olympus name, but just make surveillance cameras? I have nothing against surveillance cameras sporting Olympus optics as that would make sense in some ways, but I imagine there would be better avenues for enriching JIP... speaking only on speculation, of course.

Here's an interview reported from 43rumors.com that happened with JIP director Shinichi Inagaki by Toyokeizai. According to 43rumors.com, here are the main takeaways: Original interview: https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/374348?page=3 This could be interesting in the sense that Olympus/JIP has nothing to protect in terms of the higher-end video market, unlike Canon, Sony, Panasonic, etc. I know most people think they're dead, but I'm going to wait on making that assessment of the situation.

Given the prices you mentioned, the G80's crop isn't a big deal and you'll probably really appreciate the other features too. I had the Gx80 for over two years and it worked great... I wouldn't worry about the crop too much, especially if you have a speed booster of any sort. If not, you might get murdered by using FF glass on MFT- the only way to get wide will be with native glass (a kit zoom will work). In terms of pure video quality and IBIS, I would agree with Andrew that all the Olympus cameras you mention beat G80, but the edge is only minute. When it comes to Olympus, I go used because many people are getting rid of them, but they're still great cameras. Again, go cheap; otherwise, get the better/bigger camera. I haven't seen dummy batteries unless they come from China. I have one for the PL9/ E-M10 III and it works great. Go t mine on ALIBABA. Judging those cameras above, I'd go with the E-M1 II if AF is a necessity. For you it's not because you're using Canon glass. The E-M10 and PL9 offer the best video quality. The E-M10 III has the best IBIS (not by much). The PL9 has a down-floppy screen (not important to you). For only 90 Pounds more, the G80 is the way to go IMO. The difference in "crop" is only .3 at best, meaning if you put a 14mm on, it'll be 32mm FF, rather than 28mm- not much, but you gain the mic input and flippy-screen. I guess it's up to you as to determine what's the most important. Good luck. They all take great video and have great-decent IBIS.

If you accept buying used, you'll find E-m1 ii by itself for 600 euros or less in the USA. In Europe, the deal you'll find it for as new will be 1399 Euros with a 17, 25, or 45 mm 1.2 (great lenses that can be resold after). Personally, I wouldn't pay more than 250 Euros for the E-M10 III (used, body only). If you find it with the kit 14-42, you can resell it for about 80 Euros. Instead of a grip, you could get a cage. If you're after battery life, you can get a USB to 7.2V adapter/dummy batter and you'll have almost unlimited life out of it. If you're working on a tripod, skip the E-M10 III and go for the PL9. It has the same features, just no viewfinder and only 3-axis IBIS. Hope that helps.

I don't believe this camera has one, certainly nothing official. Also, getting a grip defeats the purpose of this camera IMO. It's all about being small and lightweight. If you rig it out, you might as well go for the E-M1 II as you can find them dirt-cheap right now (if you're patient). The bonus will be microphone jack, headphone jack, PDAF, better IBIS and battery life.

I really liked reading this interview and I appreciated that he seemed rather honest and not BS you. He knows the limitations of his camera's sensor and he says it. He doesn't comment when he knows the answer might hurt the company's business... all normal responses from a company head. I've been so close to getting their point and shoot Merrill series because they're so small with such great color and detail out of that Foveon sensor. Sure, batter life and workflow really killed these cameras, but man oh man the quality of the image is like no other. I really wish they could carry that over to video... wishful thinking maybe. I really do believe that Sigma could kick some video butt due to their not having higher-end cameras to protect like Canon, Sony, and Panasonic.

Volontier! That's not fair to compare me with this guy. I've lived in France for over 20 years. My French isn't perfect either as I speak English almost all day with my family and for work. I was not trying to be condescending, put this guy down, or even be grammar nazi- everyone needs to start somewhere, right? I'm almost certain he's got a decent vocabulary and writing skills, though I haven't seen any product. However, this isn't a matter of a cute accent that Panasonic has chosen for a product launch. He's incomprehensible and Panasonic knows it because they put the closed captions baked in. Poor guy must have been so stressed doing this too. His boss probably said he had to do it. Not trying to be a a-hole; I'm just speaking to the video they put out. Should we accept it all? Did you understand without the closed captions? If so, I'm clearly out of practice listening to Japanese people.

Why is it that almost all the manufacturers choose to have a launch-day "blitzkrieg" of videos. Is it just to "own" the message for a few days on Youtube until it actually comes out? I find this marketing strategy annoying, but it seems to be the adopted protocol for most of the manufacturers now.

As an English teacher and having spent years with students from Asia and Europe, this guy's English pronunciation is almost incomprehensible. They need to do better than that! The music makes it worse. Intonation is all wrong. Come on guys- delivery is important! The worst of it is that it was obviously rehearsed. Sorry for my rant.

"Everything is the best in the best of all possible worlds." It's all good. Liberty and freedom "should" reign and everyone "should" deal with it because if you disagree and think the world "should" be different, you must be dealing with your own issues anyway. Kye, our discussion has plunged into semantics, the bastion of all war. Since this is a forum and we're meant to talk, I propose we have the right to make some generalizations and have some freedom of opinion. In other terms, I believe clickbait should go away because I don't like it. I would prefer to be manipulated differently. As a participant on the internet, I have the right to say what ought to be. I want change because the world sucks for so many reasons. Sure, in capitalism, we have the right to vote with our wallets, but I'm not going to stop there because I think the world should be different and that's o.k. as long as I don't infringe on other people's freedom to do the same. Should Canon, Toneh, Fro, Sony, etc. be called out for who they really are? A resounding YES. And we should have the right to say how things should be different.

Hmm... I don't know how to respond to this, Kye. Saying that I'm "susceptible" to such marketing would indicate that I'm not aware of it in the first place, making me an internet noob. I have been surfing and developing websites since 1993; so, I've seen it evolve quite a bit. Personally, I'd say that I really noticed the rise of clickbait with the rise of Digg, buzzfeed, and reddit. It all started with titles like: "10 ways to improve your sex life" or something stupid like that. It's safe to say we've moved passed that now. It's sensationalist stuff like: "Micro four thirds is dead" (from the Toneh), money-making headlines only that really don't offer anything we don't know other than some (non)expert's opinion. "Clickbait" a derogatory meaning in marketing. The marketing I grew up with was a higher quality, often more subtle- they were trying to sell me a product and when I pay for it or talk about it to someone, the marketing works. With clickbait, the goal is to take my limited time and effort on this planet for ad revenue (which is also clickbait); sometimes, they get more money if I use an affiliate. It's a vicious circle with clickbait feeding more and more clickbait. IMO, the end result will be an exploding marketing balloon into an ether of nonsensical human effort, lacking any substantive result other than a colossal WASTE OF TIME. In the end, clickbait sells and that's why they do it. The only anti-clickbait response is to ignore it (harder for some than others and I'm also guilty of it). As I said earlier, many youtubers weren't using these tactics in the beginning, but now many are now they have a million subs. Sadly, more and more people are getting duped by this. I can only hope the end is near and we can get back to a more "convince me to buy your product" type of marketing. It's more sain. Maybe Youtube should consider completely stopping all revenue to "content" creators because it's completely broken. Just a thought.