MurtlandPhoto

According to Grant during the livestream, the camera is actually done development wise. They just have to scope the manufacturing process. I still wouldn't hold my breath for a pre-September release, but I think BM has learned from their past not to be overly optimistic on delivery dates.

Thank you! That's where I thought it would be

Mind saying from where?

Anyone have an idea when preorders will open? Sometimes they come with announcements, other times not.

The pop out section around the lens mount, the space between the mount to grip, and the space on the opposite side all look larger than the GH5 to me. But, yeah the lens does look a little larger by comparison. Hmm.... Veryyyyy true! Hadn't thought of it.

From above. The Pocket looks massive in comparison.

From LM Mullen in GH5/s Facebook group. I spy a little shutter release button for stills and two record buttons. What is that flash-looking thing on the right?? Correction: photo originally from Videotex Systems on Twitter.

The price will intimidate many GH users. A large chunk of them like to think that their camera is the very best: anything more expensive is stupid overkill and anything equal or less is garbage. This price bracket seems to be where the most fragile egos exist.

Just ordered a set of C47 Pro's!

Oh I completely agree. It doesn't belong in the Pocket cam. I'm just saying that for certain applications it's very useful. More of a comment on the industry overall

+1 IBIS is an excellent tool when it's needed. It's one of those features that's radically changed the game.

Depends on the users is right. I wanted to love the original BMPCC desperately. I bought and sold it 3 separate times because it kept drawing me back. The image is beautiful, but the horrible audio preamps and battery life, poor screen, and overall ergonomics trumped the amazing IQ for me. The GH5s is exactly the kind of camera that suits me best: an all-in-one unit that gets out of my way when I shoot. And it has excellent IQ to boot. If the new BMPCC can come close to that level of usability, then it will get my attention.

Ah I gotcha now. I thought the y axis on the chart literally meant log profile, but I see that it's actually referring to the curve of the chart itself. I guess my sticking point is in the strict definition of native vs. base ISO. From what I understand, native ISO refers to where a camera performs best in regards to DR, highlight rolloff, and noise (debatable). Straying away from that native ISO, up or down, leads to a drop in that maximum quality. That's why dual native ISO is so powerful; it gives you another upper option for maximum quality. From what I've read there are two distinct circuitry pathways required to implement dual native ISO. I could definitely be wrong, but I believe that some of these cameras are actually implementing a second base ISO. It will give some of the benefits, but not all of them. At this point I'm less confident in my opinion though, haha

The chart shows the DR curve of the A7s in s-log. The native ISO of the A7s in s-log is 3200, so that explains the behavior there. I wish I had more hard data on hand, but anecdotally Panasonic have heavily marketed their dual native ISO tech in every camera they put it in. It is a big deal and a real selling point. Kinefinity has it and now so does RED, and they all market it heavily because it's a big deal. So, I doubt that Sony (or any company) would just stick this feature in there and not shout it from the rooftops. This is interesting and does seem to fit into the real definition of dual native ISO.

I think there's some blending of terminology here. The Sony's have a base ISO in standard picture profiles and a different base ISO for log profiles, but this isn't dual native ISO. In the past, Red cameras have used a technique for HDR by alternating ISO values every other frame, but again this isn't dual native ISO. Or the American Gladiators

Yes it does. Keeping with the car analogy: to the average consumer A/C is a basically a necessary feature in all cars, and we pay for it accordingly. A rear LCD is the camera equivalent of a car A/C: required but we still pay for it. A better car analogy is people wanting 4-wheel drive and a trailer hitch on a Ford Focus. Better buy an F-150.

Woah awesome. Downloaded to my phone and tablet. Thanks!

Agreed. And that's sort of what I meant above re: the additional features that made IBIS impossible according to Panasonic. I don't believe it's simply the slightly larger sensor; it's the delicate balance of available resources, both hardware and software, that determine the camera's capabilities. I operate under the belief that Panasonic does not artificially cripple their cameras in order to protect margins, however they may have decided that adding the feature would have cost them (and consumers) too much to be viable. There is a distinction there. Regardless, I'm excited for my camera to arrive next week

"So I simply dont get 'the sensor is actually larger than the entire imaging circle of a m43 lens' because they are exactly the same sized sensor with exactly the same sized image circle." The effective imaging area is larger than most other m43 chips, thus making the FOV wider on the GH5s. It's minimal but IBIS on this sensor could cause vignetting on native Panny lenses; something they would not want to happen (my opinion). From DPReview: "Well I dont have any evidence apart from the fact the fact that I dont understand why the same size sensor with the same bit rate as the GH5 would have any reason to over heat." Even if those two factors remain constant, there are other variables. The cameras have two completely different sensors with vastly different circuitry. The sensor readout speed is faster and AF is improved (minimally) on the GH5s. Also, anecdotally my GH5 always has run hotter than my GH4. A symptom of IBIS? Maybe. My point is that numerous Panasonic reps have stated their reasonings for omitting IBIS from the camera. I don't understand how so many people think they know better.

The GH5s has a multi-aspect sensor meaning that the sensor is actually larger than the imaging circle of a m43 lens. When speaking out the amount of room needed for IBIS, we're not just talking about physical room in the camera body but also room within the imaging circle. You make a pretty bold statement yourself regarding overheating. What evidence or data do you have that suggests IBIS wouldn't introduce an overheating issue?

The omission of IBIS is not a 1-to-1 tradeoff. The numerous additional features of the GH5s plus its target market made IBIS impossible.

This is where the magic is for me: I love shooting wide open with my 17.5mm at ISO 1600, but sometimes I need more DoF and would love to use my Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8. The GH5s will allow me to shoot in those types of scenarios at ISO 3200-8000.

IBIS has been a blessing and a curse for me, personally. The freedom of shooting handheld has opened up many possibilities for certain productions. I can be light, nimble, and unobtrusive. On the other hand, sometimes having a camera on sticks gets people out of your way at events and overall puts out a more serious aura. Same here. I have several cameras with IBIS; I'm happy to soon have one that performs well in low light.

Yepp. There was nothing else on the market that could do what the hacked GH1/2 could do without spending 10x more money. Many of the artists that would have started on the GH2 back then would probably choose a Blackmagic if they were starting out now.