MurtlandPhoto

True, the FX3 has made significant inroads in the broadcast market. But still it's weird to call these "cinema" cameras. They are not. Maybe they're better described as broadcast cameras but that doesn't have the same cachet.

Thinking of you and your family during this impossibly difficult time. Cancer is a most cruel thief of good in this world. There are no words to comfort, only time. Your post is a beautiful tribute to someone I've never known, but now feel I have one small glimpse into. Take care of yourself, Andrew.

Hey y'all. I'm the developer of 5DtoRGB.
If you're wondering what happened, well, I stopped working on it a long time ago to concentrate on mobile apps. I removed it from the App Store because it needed a lot of bug fixes and I didn't feel right charging for an app that I knew wasn't going to live up to people's expectations.
I still have all the code, and if there's enough interest I can take a look at it. I actually planned on releasing a major 5DtoRGB update a while ago that would have dramatically sped up transcoding, but never got it stable enough to release. Then our Rarevision VHS mobile app happened, and uhm, yeah. That took priority, obviously.

It's nice to see this full admission, but I think everyone figured that out the moment the GH3 was released. Panasonic took massive strides to make that camera everything that a hacked GH2 was and more. Definitely seemed to have inspired them to big change.

It's nice to see this full admission, but I think everyone figured that out the moment the GH3 was released. Panasonic took massive strides to make that camera everything that a hacked GH2 was and more. Definitely seemed to have inspired them to big change.

It's nice to see this full admission, but I think everyone figured that out the moment the GH3 was released. Panasonic took massive strides to make that camera everything that a hacked GH2 was and more. Definitely seemed to have inspired them to big change.

It's nice to see this full admission, but I think everyone figured that out the moment the GH3 was released. Panasonic took massive strides to make that camera everything that a hacked GH2 was and more. Definitely seemed to have inspired them to big change.

I'm in love with my A7iv. It sorta of surprised me TBH. I've been making some major kit changes and decided to dip my toe into Sony with the A7iv just to see how I liked it. Within just a few days I was convinced that Sony was the right path forward for me and sold everything to rebuild my kit with the A7iv and A7s iii. No regrets whatsoever other than I wish I'd gone this route a little sooner.
The two cameras pair really nicely together, both with some unique features that make it worth having one of each. With all factors added in, I do think the A7iv is the better all-around video camera for most people's needs. 

I'm in love with my A7iv. It sorta of surprised me TBH. I've been making some major kit changes and decided to dip my toe into Sony with the A7iv just to see how I liked it. Within just a few days I was convinced that Sony was the right path forward for me and sold everything to rebuild my kit with the A7iv and A7s iii. No regrets whatsoever other than I wish I'd gone this route a little sooner.
The two cameras pair really nicely together, both with some unique features that make it worth having one of each. With all factors added in, I do think the A7iv is the better all-around video camera for most people's needs. 

Well, I just bought a Panasonic GH2 from Adorama in good condition with battery and charger for $109.00. Hot Damn.

Did you try swiping from the right of the screen to access the lens data menu? There you can manually input the lens focal length. I would think that would work for fully manual lenses. I plan on doing my own tests shortly.

They need to switch AF if only for the PR/marketing. 
The issue I have is that a lot of people spew the "Panasonic auto focus is useless" stuff without having used it. They're basing it off of YouTubers that only had the camera for a brief period and who did unrealistic tests. It's different when it's @herein2020, @MurtlandPhoto, or you saying it because you guys have used the cameras, learned how to work around the limitations, but ultimately decided that AF was necessary for your needs.
My work would greatly benefit from Sony or Canon AF. But Panasonic ticks every other box, giving me things that I value more. All cameras have limitations, unfortunately, it's just a matter of finding a camera that matches most of your needs. 
To bring this back to the R7, that's part of the reason I am complimentary about this camera even though it isn't perfect. Assuming the overheating isn't an issue, the R7 is a really good option for a lot of people like me that shoot events. And it's competitively priced. An event shooter could buy 3 of these and have a really strong multicam set up for under $4,000. That could be a huge deal.
I was leaning towards leaving Panasonic because I have concerns about its long term viability if it doesn't improve the AF and eliminate that stigma. To me, the long term viability of a company matters when investing in equipment. I don't want to sink money into a camera system that could be gone in 5 years, leaving me SOL if I need customer support, etc. Getting such a good deal on the Lumix S5 though got me to stay, at least for now. Things could change in a few years, but until then I'll keep getting the most that I can put of these cameras. 

For what it's worth, I'll be the second critic to say this. I shot with Panasonic cameras for over a decade starting with the GH1 and owned every GH camera through the GH5s. I then owned the S1 for about a year. I molded my shooting style around the strengths and limitations of Panasonic cameras with AF being their biggest limitation. The S1 was the best of the bunch. I worked within the limits of Panny's AF: well lit situations, with simple movements, usually in 60p, with middle apertures (f/4, f/5.6). Even then the AF only worked OK... I had to be hyper attentive to what the focus was doing to make sure it wasn't going awry. I thought it was good enough, even though I knew it was limiting how I could use the camera.
Then I switched to the Sony a7iv and it was a complete revelation. The AF is incredibly accurate, fast, and feature-rich. It works so well and is so intuitive that I have no reservations about using it for any scenario: wide open, poor lighting, fast movement, complex frames. It just delivers the goods. It allows me to take my focus (pun totally intended) off the AF and turn more attention onto sound, exposure, framing, action, and everything else. Switching to a camera with great AF made me realize how much I was compromising by using a camera with poor AF. Old schoolers might call it lazy but I don't care. I've been reinvigorated to create new things because now this critical feature has been unlocked for me. I wish Panasonic could have done it for me, but nope.

For what it's worth, I'll be the second critic to say this. I shot with Panasonic cameras for over a decade starting with the GH1 and owned every GH camera through the GH5s. I then owned the S1 for about a year. I molded my shooting style around the strengths and limitations of Panasonic cameras with AF being their biggest limitation. The S1 was the best of the bunch. I worked within the limits of Panny's AF: well lit situations, with simple movements, usually in 60p, with middle apertures (f/4, f/5.6). Even then the AF only worked OK... I had to be hyper attentive to what the focus was doing to make sure it wasn't going awry. I thought it was good enough, even though I knew it was limiting how I could use the camera.
Then I switched to the Sony a7iv and it was a complete revelation. The AF is incredibly accurate, fast, and feature-rich. It works so well and is so intuitive that I have no reservations about using it for any scenario: wide open, poor lighting, fast movement, complex frames. It just delivers the goods. It allows me to take my focus (pun totally intended) off the AF and turn more attention onto sound, exposure, framing, action, and everything else. Switching to a camera with great AF made me realize how much I was compromising by using a camera with poor AF. Old schoolers might call it lazy but I don't care. I've been reinvigorated to create new things because now this critical feature has been unlocked for me. I wish Panasonic could have done it for me, but nope.

I said something very similar on one of these threads. I became an AF gymnast when working with the GH5 and S5. Basically MF everything, with the GH5 I didn't even bother getting anything but manual lenses. Everything was about jumping through hoops to work around the limitations; wider lenses, deeper F stops, maintaining an equal distance, knowing the footage would be mostly soft but hoping some of it was still useable, etc. etc.
The C70 doesn't even have that great of an AF system IMO but it was such a huge upgrade for me. Of course the R5 was a decent upgrade as well for photography, but since my 5D4 had good AF for photos it is not as big of a deal as the C70. Knowing I just have to put that box on whatever I want in focus frees me up in the exact same way....to be more creative, to really focus on framing, composition, lighting, audio, etc etc; vs hoping I haven't violated one of the many rules of a one man band run and gun MF.

For what it's worth, I'll be the second critic to say this. I shot with Panasonic cameras for over a decade starting with the GH1 and owned every GH camera through the GH5s. I then owned the S1 for about a year. I molded my shooting style around the strengths and limitations of Panasonic cameras with AF being their biggest limitation. The S1 was the best of the bunch. I worked within the limits of Panny's AF: well lit situations, with simple movements, usually in 60p, with middle apertures (f/4, f/5.6). Even then the AF only worked OK... I had to be hyper attentive to what the focus was doing to make sure it wasn't going awry. I thought it was good enough, even though I knew it was limiting how I could use the camera.
Then I switched to the Sony a7iv and it was a complete revelation. The AF is incredibly accurate, fast, and feature-rich. It works so well and is so intuitive that I have no reservations about using it for any scenario: wide open, poor lighting, fast movement, complex frames. It just delivers the goods. It allows me to take my focus (pun totally intended) off the AF and turn more attention onto sound, exposure, framing, action, and everything else. Switching to a camera with great AF made me realize how much I was compromising by using a camera with poor AF. Old schoolers might call it lazy but I don't care. I've been reinvigorated to create new things because now this critical feature has been unlocked for me. I wish Panasonic could have done it for me, but nope.

For what it's worth, I'll be the second critic to say this. I shot with Panasonic cameras for over a decade starting with the GH1 and owned every GH camera through the GH5s. I then owned the S1 for about a year. I molded my shooting style around the strengths and limitations of Panasonic cameras with AF being their biggest limitation. The S1 was the best of the bunch. I worked within the limits of Panny's AF: well lit situations, with simple movements, usually in 60p, with middle apertures (f/4, f/5.6). Even then the AF only worked OK... I had to be hyper attentive to what the focus was doing to make sure it wasn't going awry. I thought it was good enough, even though I knew it was limiting how I could use the camera.
Then I switched to the Sony a7iv and it was a complete revelation. The AF is incredibly accurate, fast, and feature-rich. It works so well and is so intuitive that I have no reservations about using it for any scenario: wide open, poor lighting, fast movement, complex frames. It just delivers the goods. It allows me to take my focus (pun totally intended) off the AF and turn more attention onto sound, exposure, framing, action, and everything else. Switching to a camera with great AF made me realize how much I was compromising by using a camera with poor AF. Old schoolers might call it lazy but I don't care. I've been reinvigorated to create new things because now this critical feature has been unlocked for me. I wish Panasonic could have done it for me, but nope.

That's been my sense as well. It seemed clear when they released the Broadcast G2 with the 6K sensor and specs. I think I remember Grant Petty saying essentially they couldn't source any more of the original Broadcast sensors so they cannibalized the 6K ones for that line. 

Well don't buy it.
 

Why not just get the Pro then? All the Pockets have the gyro already.

Why not just get the Pro then? All the Pockets have the gyro already.

My understanding is that there's a ton of work in designing a PCB, and it looks like their main PCB is large and potentially has almost everything on it (I haven't studied it though).
4K PCB:

6K PCB

Anyway, making the 6K the same as the 6K Pro (notice how the 6K is now the same size as the 6K Pro?) would give them economies of scale and synergies, while being able to configure the other things (NDs, brighter screen, etc) to be different.
It makes sense as a commercial move for them in terms of pricing and manufacture.  I've had the sense through their seemingly random previous camera models that they were leaping from one design to the next perhaps based on what was cheap and available at the time.  This meant that every camera was largely a new design, making them more prone to QC issues.  Seems this update is aligned to that perhaps.
Pity it wasn't a Komodo-style box design though.  The BMMCC still has no replacement, and nothing even remotely close in terms of size, so I'm still holding out hope for a box camera.  If it has a usable top display I'd consider it.

I think the major issue is that the defined, specific minimum frame rate (and lesser extent resolution) RED used in their patent is the standard for an entire industry that existed for a century before RED. Not a great analogy, but it would be like Tesla patenting electric cars capable of going over 65mph while the U.S. interstate system is largely built for that exact speed of traffic with combustion cars for over a century.

I guess I disagree that anyone should have been allowed to patent 8K compressed Raw, or 12k, or 4k 1000 fps--a decade before any of that was possible. I see arguments that the patent is valid because Red were the first to do 4k raw, so to the victor go the spoils... but since we're talking about differences like 23 vs 24, it's a valid point that they patented numbers that they could not achieve at the time.
And in a broader sense, I don't understand why a parent should be able to prevent other companies from applying known, existing math to data that they generate. Without even inventing an algorithm, Red legally blocked all compression algorithms.