kye

Oh yeah, they absolutely do.  And as the article you linked said, they look like optical shallow DOF instead of simulated!
Another possibility is that they release two versions, one with a small sensor for the traditional action sports use case - and one with a bigger sensor for the vlogger crowd.   If they DID release something like the Z Cam E1, but with a modern SOC supporting 10-bit, a flat profile, and a decent H.265 implementation, I'd be excited for a GoPro for the first time in years.
 

All true, but the sample images from the promo video all have shallow DOF, so that means another kettle of fish entirely with AF and/or focus guides (peaking etc).



I'd question if it might have lidar rather than PDAF etc, but it's a GoPro, so let's just assume it's 95% marketing and only 5% actual specs, like almost everything else about their cameras (no proper log profile, barely-passable bitrates, etc).

It reminds me of how the people that do rug cleaning videos name their cleaning equipment.
My favourite is this:

Wides are a completely different thing depending on the circumstances.  If you're hand-holding and moving around for video it's a completely different beast than doing stills or doing video but on a tripod with very careful camera placement and subject movement etc.
I also think it's pretty difficult to make wide angle lenses look professional - that demo from ARRI showcasing their ultra-wide zoom had more "amateur with an action camera" vibes than a shallow-DOF 85mm portrait shot from the standard video mode on a 5DII.  
This is the elephant in the room for amateurs - the pros choose equipment in support of the vision of the project whereas amateurs choose an aesthetic and then use it for completely inappropriate projects.

I'm back from Guangzhou China, and starting to evaluate the footage, especially my modified Takumar 50mm F1.4 with the custom "insert" made from post-it notes and sticky tape.

I managed to get out and shoot with it on a couple of nights.  One in Beijing Road and the other in Yong Qing Fang.
Some images from Beijing Road...  these are all wide open, and lightly graded with Resolve and Film Look Creator.










Overall, I'm really liking the aesthetic, which reminds me of mid-budget Hong Kong cinema, which I have a soft spot for.
I mostly exposed to protect the highlights and then adjusted exposure in post under the FLC, and the GH7 has just enough DR for this, despite the scenes being quite challenging.
The lens has a shallow enough DOF to be able to direct the viewers attention by choosing what is in focus, and the FOV (equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF) is great for these type of scenes where the scenes would mostly overwhelm a wide lens with pure chaos.
Some images from Yong Qing Fang.. same as above but with a touch of sharpening.








This was a lot darker and I needed to push the ISO to get more levels in some scenes.  It was also a lot higher DR, so some shots will be limited in post for how I grade them and I'll probably reach for NR in places.
The lens is actually quite sharp in the middle, but the sides are more distortion than I'd like with quite a bit of bokeh distortion and coma from bright sources.  
The experiment with this "insert" was how strong a look it would be and I think it's probably too strong because the bokeh shapes are too distracting due to the sharp corners.  It's distracting on frames with a clear subject (where you want the background to get out of the way) and on other shots its pure chaos and completely negates the idea of directing where the viewer will look.



Getting DOF this shallow on MFT isn't easy, so I'll have to think about it more for future trips.

I'm back from Guangzhou China, and starting to evaluate the footage, especially my modified Takumar 50mm F1.4 with the custom "insert" made from post-it notes and sticky tape.

I managed to get out and shoot with it on a couple of nights.  One in Beijing Road and the other in Yong Qing Fang.
Some images from Beijing Road...  these are all wide open, and lightly graded with Resolve and Film Look Creator.










Overall, I'm really liking the aesthetic, which reminds me of mid-budget Hong Kong cinema, which I have a soft spot for.
I mostly exposed to protect the highlights and then adjusted exposure in post under the FLC, and the GH7 has just enough DR for this, despite the scenes being quite challenging.
The lens has a shallow enough DOF to be able to direct the viewers attention by choosing what is in focus, and the FOV (equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF) is great for these type of scenes where the scenes would mostly overwhelm a wide lens with pure chaos.
Some images from Yong Qing Fang.. same as above but with a touch of sharpening.








This was a lot darker and I needed to push the ISO to get more levels in some scenes.  It was also a lot higher DR, so some shots will be limited in post for how I grade them and I'll probably reach for NR in places.
The lens is actually quite sharp in the middle, but the sides are more distortion than I'd like with quite a bit of bokeh distortion and coma from bright sources.  
The experiment with this "insert" was how strong a look it would be and I think it's probably too strong because the bokeh shapes are too distracting due to the sharp corners.  It's distracting on frames with a clear subject (where you want the background to get out of the way) and on other shots its pure chaos and completely negates the idea of directing where the viewer will look.



Getting DOF this shallow on MFT isn't easy, so I'll have to think about it more for future trips.

I'm back from Guangzhou China, and starting to evaluate the footage, especially my modified Takumar 50mm F1.4 with the custom "insert" made from post-it notes and sticky tape.

I managed to get out and shoot with it on a couple of nights.  One in Beijing Road and the other in Yong Qing Fang.
Some images from Beijing Road...  these are all wide open, and lightly graded with Resolve and Film Look Creator.










Overall, I'm really liking the aesthetic, which reminds me of mid-budget Hong Kong cinema, which I have a soft spot for.
I mostly exposed to protect the highlights and then adjusted exposure in post under the FLC, and the GH7 has just enough DR for this, despite the scenes being quite challenging.
The lens has a shallow enough DOF to be able to direct the viewers attention by choosing what is in focus, and the FOV (equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF) is great for these type of scenes where the scenes would mostly overwhelm a wide lens with pure chaos.
Some images from Yong Qing Fang.. same as above but with a touch of sharpening.








This was a lot darker and I needed to push the ISO to get more levels in some scenes.  It was also a lot higher DR, so some shots will be limited in post for how I grade them and I'll probably reach for NR in places.
The lens is actually quite sharp in the middle, but the sides are more distortion than I'd like with quite a bit of bokeh distortion and coma from bright sources.  
The experiment with this "insert" was how strong a look it would be and I think it's probably too strong because the bokeh shapes are too distracting due to the sharp corners.  It's distracting on frames with a clear subject (where you want the background to get out of the way) and on other shots its pure chaos and completely negates the idea of directing where the viewer will look.



Getting DOF this shallow on MFT isn't easy, so I'll have to think about it more for future trips.

I found an interview with the person who shot the under-water sections of a GoPro promo video (IIRC it was for the Hero 3 or 3+), and the level of effort they put into it was simply incredible.  He had a team of about 5, three crew and two cast, and they had a week for production.  He was an independent DOP and had done some pre-production as part of his 'pitch' to GoPro to get the gig, but I think they did detailed pre during the week as well as camera tests and lots and lots of shooting.
This was only for the underwater shots (the bikini girl diving beneath the waves).  If we assume that each of the (maybe half a dozen?) locations each got 5 people for a week, then that's ~7500 hours just to film the 1-2 minute promo video.  The level of cherry-picking is extreme - professional DOPs pitching projects, travel to the most exotic locations, testing of all modes with all manner of equipment, everyone in cast and crew are professionals, long shooting days at the best times (golden hour, etc), dozens of hours of footage just to make a short promo.  Then people set it to auto, hold the tiny camera in their hand and film their family at the beach with whatever lighting and weather happens to be there at the time and then we wonder why it doesn't look like the promo videos...
Having said all that, if GoPro make an interchangeable lens camera with a half-decent bitrate and a colour-managed LOG profile then it might be the tiny camera we've been wanting!

For sure, and I'd be excited to give it a try!  I was a Kickstarter backer of the Z Cam E1 and I've bought a few Ribcage kits/cameras over the years.  I was disappointed by all of them, but I'm still hoping for that magical/usable tiny sensor camera!  I have a little bag full of D-mount and C-mount lenses just waiting to go on something!
(I still wish there were a way to get a decent/non-laggy video feed from the Insta360 One R/RS series - I have a Ribcage-modded 1" module and the quality is really decent - but focus is hard, given the only options for monitoring are the camera's tiny screen or laggy wifi)

I found an interview with the person who shot the under-water sections of a GoPro promo video (IIRC it was for the Hero 3 or 3+), and the level of effort they put into it was simply incredible.  He had a team of about 5, three crew and two cast, and they had a week for production.  He was an independent DOP and had done some pre-production as part of his 'pitch' to GoPro to get the gig, but I think they did detailed pre during the week as well as camera tests and lots and lots of shooting.
This was only for the underwater shots (the bikini girl diving beneath the waves).  If we assume that each of the (maybe half a dozen?) locations each got 5 people for a week, then that's ~7500 hours just to film the 1-2 minute promo video.  The level of cherry-picking is extreme - professional DOPs pitching projects, travel to the most exotic locations, testing of all modes with all manner of equipment, everyone in cast and crew are professionals, long shooting days at the best times (golden hour, etc), dozens of hours of footage just to make a short promo.  Then people set it to auto, hold the tiny camera in their hand and film their family at the beach with whatever lighting and weather happens to be there at the time and then we wonder why it doesn't look like the promo videos...
Having said all that, if GoPro make an interchangeable lens camera with a half-decent bitrate and a colour-managed LOG profile then it might be the tiny camera we've been wanting!

Hi! I just stumbled upon this thread and thought I'd share an OKLab conversion DCTL I wrote about a year ago. It;s written as a header file to be included in any other DCTL you may need it for. It supports conversion from ACES, Davinci Wide and Rec.709/sRGB. 

OKLab_Transform.h:
#line 2 #ifndef ENCODING_ENUMS_DEFINED_IN_UI enum Encoding { gAcc, gAcct, gDWI, gLIN, g709, gSRGB }; #endif #ifndef COLORSPACE_ENUMS_DEFINED_IN_UI enum ColorSpace { cACES0, cACES1, cDWG, c709 }; #endif // ============================================================= // Util // ============================================================= // ============================================================= __DEVICE__ float powCf(float base, float exp) { return _copysignf(_powf(_fabs(base), exp), base); } __DEVICE__ float3 VecMatMul3x3(const float3 m[3], float3 v) { float3 r; r.x = m[0].x * v.x + m[0].y * v.y + m[0].z * v.z; r.y = m[1].x * v.x + m[1].y * v.y + m[1].z * v.z; r.z = m[2].x * v.x + m[2].y * v.y + m[2].z * v.z; return r; } // ============================================================= // Matrices // ============================================================= // ============================================================= // These matrices are the concatenated forms of (colorspace -> XYZ -> OKlms) // or, XYZToLMS @ ColorspaceToXYZ and, XYZToColorspace @ LMSToXYZ // original matrices are included as comments at the bottom of this script // ACES (AP0) // ============================== __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_ACES0_LMS[3] = { {0.90454662f, 0.26349909f, -0.15602258f }, {0.35107161f, 0.6766934f, -0.03056591f }, {0.13684644f, 0.19250255f, 0.62038067f } }; __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_LMS_ACES0[3] = { {1.2881401f, -0.58554348f, 0.29511118f }, {-0.67171287f, 1.76268516f, -0.08208556f }, {-0.0757131f, -0.41779486f, 1.57228749f } }; // ACES (AP1) // ============================== __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_ACES1_LMS[3] = { {0.64173446f, 0.35314498f, 0.0171437f }, {0.27463463f, 0.63099904f, 0.09156544f }, {0.10036508f, 0.18723743f, 0.66212716f } }; __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_LMS_ACES1[3] = { {2.04479741f, -1.17697875f, 0.10982058f }, {-0.88115384f, 2.15979229f, -0.27586256f }, {-0.06077576f, -0.43234352f, 1.57164623f } }; // ITU BT.709 // ============================== __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_709_LMS[3] = { { 0.4122214708f, 0.5363325363f, 0.0514459929f }, { 0.2119034982f, 0.6806995451f, 0.1073969566f }, { 0.0883024619f, 0.2817188376f, 0.6299787005f } }; __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_LMS_709[3] = { { 4.0767416621f, -3.3077115913f, 0.2309699292f }, { -1.2684380046f, 2.6097574011f, -0.3413193965f }, { -0.0041960863f, -0.7034186147f, 1.7076147010f } }; // Davinci Wide // ============================== __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_DWG_LMS[3] = { { 0.68570951f, 0.45574409f, -0.14156279f }, { 0.27427422f, 0.81179945f, -0.08604675f }, { 0.04351009f, 0.15072461f, 0.80624495f } }; __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_LMS_DWG[3] = { { 1.8836253f, -1.09713301f, 0.21364045f }, { -0.63460063f, 1.57752473f, 0.05693684f }, { 0.01698397f, -0.23570436f, 1.21814431f } }; // OKLab <-> Cone Response // ============================== __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_LMS_LAB[3] = { { 0.2104542553f, 0.7936177850f, -0.0040720468f }, { 1.9779984951f, -2.4285922050f, 0.4505937099f }, { 0.0259040371f, 0.7827717662f, -0.8086757660f } }; __CONSTANT__ float3 mat_LAB_LMS[3] = { { 1.0f, 0.3963377774f, 0.2158037573f }, { 1.0f, -0.1055613458f, -0.0638541728f }, { 1.0f, -0.0894841775f, -1.2914855480f } }; // ============================================================= // Transfer Functions // ============================================================= // ============================================================= // ACEScc // ============================== __DEVICE__ float ACEScc_DecodeBase(float v, float a, float b, float upperClampThreshold, float lowerDecodeThreshold, float two_m16) { float out = v; if (v >= upperClampThreshold) out = 65504.0f; else if (v < lowerDecodeThreshold) out = (_exp2f(v * b - a) - two_m16) * 2.0f; else out = _exp2f(v * b - a); return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 ACEScc_Decode(float3 in) { const float two_m16 = _exp2f(-16.0f); const float a = 9.72f; const float b = 17.52f; const float lowerDecodeThreshold = (a - 15.0f) / b; const float upperClampThreshold = (_log2f(65504.0f) + a) / b; float3 out = in; out.x = ACEScc_DecodeBase(out.x, a, b, upperClampThreshold, lowerDecodeThreshold, two_m16); out.y = ACEScc_DecodeBase(out.y, a, b, upperClampThreshold, lowerDecodeThreshold, two_m16); out.z = ACEScc_DecodeBase(out.z, a, b, upperClampThreshold, lowerDecodeThreshold, two_m16); return out; } __DEVICE__ float ACEScc_EncodeBase(float v, float a, float b, float negConstant, float two_m15, float two_m16) { float out; if (v < 0.0f) out = negConstant; else if (v < two_m15) out = (_log2f(two_m16 + v * 0.5f) + a) / b; else out = (_log2f(v) + a) / b; return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 ACEScc_Encode(float3 in) { const float two_m16 = _exp2f(-16.0f); const float two_m15 = _exp2f(-15.0f); const float a = 9.72f; const float b = 17.52f; const float negConstant = (_log2f(two_m16) + a) / b; float3 out = in; out.x = ACEScc_EncodeBase(out.x, a, b, negConstant, two_m15, two_m16); out.y = ACEScc_EncodeBase(out.y, a, b, negConstant, two_m15, two_m16); out.z = ACEScc_EncodeBase(out.z, a, b, negConstant, two_m15, two_m16); return out; } // ACEScct // ============================== __DEVICE__ float3 ACEScct_Encode(float3 in) { const float a = 9.72f; const float b = 17.52f; const float X_BRK = 0.0078125f; const float A = 10.5402377416545f; const float B = 0.0729055341958355f; float3 out; out.x = (in.x <= X_BRK) ? (A * in.x + B) : ((_log2f(in.x) + a) / b); out.y = (in.y <= X_BRK) ? (A * in.y + B) : ((_log2f(in.y) + a) / b); out.z = (in.z <= X_BRK) ? (A * in.z + B) : ((_log2f(in.z) + a) / b); return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 ACEScct_Decode(float3 in) { const float a = 9.72f; const float b = 17.52f; const float Y_BRK = 0.155251141552511f; const float A = 10.5402377416545f; const float B = 0.0729055341958355f; float3 out = in; out.x = (in.x > Y_BRK) ? _exp2f(in.x * b - a) : ((in.x - B) / A); out.y = (in.y > Y_BRK) ? _exp2f(in.y * b - a) : ((in.y - B) / A); out.z = (in.z > Y_BRK) ? _exp2f(in.z * b - a) : ((in.z - B) / A); return out; } // Davinci Intermediate // ============================== __DEVICE__ float3 DWI_Decode(float3 in) { float3 out = in; float a = 0.0075; float b = 7.0; float c = 0.07329248; float m = 10.44426855; float log_cut = 0.02740668; out.x = in.x > log_cut ? powCf(2.0f, (in.x / c) - b) - a : in.x / m; out.y = in.y > log_cut ? powCf(2.0f, (in.y / c) - b) - a : in.y / m; out.z = in.z > log_cut ? powCf(2.0f, (in.z / c) - b) - a : in.z / m; return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 DWI_Encode(float3 in) { float3 out = in; float a = 0.0075; float b = 7.0; float c = 0.07329248; float m = 10.44426855; float lin_cut = 0.00262409; out.x = in.x > lin_cut ? (_log2f(in.x + a) + b) * c : in.x * m; out.y = in.y > lin_cut ? (_log2f(in.y + a) + b) * c : in.y * m; out.z = in.z > lin_cut ? (_log2f(in.z + a) + b) * c : in.z * m; return out; } // ITU BT.709 // ============================== __DEVICE__ float3 BT709_Decode(float3 in) { float3 out = in; out.x = out.x < 0.081f ? out.x / 4.5f : powCf((out.x + 0.099f) / 1.099f, 1.0f / 0.45f); out.y = out.y < 0.081f ? out.y / 4.5f : powCf((out.y + 0.099f) / 1.099f, 1.0f / 0.45f); out.z = out.z < 0.081f ? out.z / 4.5f : powCf((out.z + 0.099f) / 1.099f, 1.0f / 0.45f); return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 BT709_Encode(float3 in) { float3 out = in; out.x = out.x < 0.018 ? out.x * 4.5f : 1.099f * powCf(out.x, 0.45f) - 0.099f; out.y = out.y < 0.018 ? out.y * 4.5f : 1.099f * powCf(out.y, 0.45f) - 0.099f; out.z = out.z < 0.018 ? out.z * 4.5f : 1.099f * powCf(out.z, 0.45f) - 0.099f; return out; } // sRGB // ============================== __DEVICE__ float3 sRGB_Decode(float3 in) { float3 out = in; out.x = out.x < 0.04045 ? out.x / 12.92f : powCf((out.x + 0.055f) / 1.055f, 2.4f); out.y = out.y < 0.04045 ? out.y / 12.92f : powCf((out.y + 0.055f) / 1.055f, 2.4f); out.z = out.z < 0.04045 ? out.z / 12.92f : powCf((out.z + 0.055f) / 1.055f, 2.4f); return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 sRGB_Encode(float3 in) { float3 out = in; out.x = out.x < 0.0031308 ? out.x * 12.92f : 1.055f * powCf(out.x, 1.0f / 2.4f) - 0.055f; out.y = out.y < 0.0031308 ? out.y * 12.92f : 1.055f * powCf(out.y, 1.0f / 2.4f) - 0.055f; out.z = out.z < 0.0031308 ? out.z * 12.92f : 1.055f * powCf(out.z, 1.0f / 2.4f) - 0.055f; return out; } // ============================================================= // Convert // ============================================================= // ============================================================= __DEVICE__ float3 Decode(float3 in, int tFunction) { float3 out = in; switch (tFunction) { case gAcc: out = ACEScc_Decode(in); break; case gAcct: out = ACEScct_Decode(in); break; case gDWI: out = DWI_Decode(in); break; case g709: out = BT709_Decode(in); break; case gSRGB: out = sRGB_Decode(in); break; } return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 Encode(float3 in, int tFunction) { float3 out = in; switch (tFunction) { case gAcc: out = ACEScc_Encode(in); break; case gAcct: out = ACEScct_Encode(in); break; case gDWI: out = DWI_Encode(in); break; case g709: out = BT709_Encode(in); break; case gSRGB: out = sRGB_Encode(in); break; } return out; } __DEVICE__ float3 OKLab_OKLCh(float3 lab) { float C = _hypotf(lab.y, lab.z); float h = _atan2f(lab.z, lab.y); return make_float3(lab.x, C, h); } __DEVICE__ float3 OKLCh_OKLab(float3 lch) { float a = lch.y * cosf(lch.z); float b = lch.y * sinf(lch.z); return make_float3(lch.x, a, b); } __DEVICE__ float3 RGB_OKLab(float3 rgb, int colorspace) { const float3* mat; switch (colorspace) { case cACES0: mat = mat_ACES0_LMS; break; case cACES1: mat = mat_ACES1_LMS; break; case cDWG: mat = mat_DWG_LMS; break; case c709: mat = mat_709_LMS; break; } float3 lms = VecMatMul3x3(mat, rgb); float3 lms_; lms_.x = cbrt(lms.x); lms_.y = cbrt(lms.y); lms_.z = cbrt(lms.z); return VecMatMul3x3(mat_LMS_LAB, lms_); } __DEVICE__ float3 OKLab_RGB(float3 lab, int colorspace) { const float3* mat; switch (colorspace) { case cACES0: mat = mat_LMS_ACES0; break; case cACES1: mat = mat_LMS_ACES1; break; case cDWG: mat = mat_LMS_DWG; break; case c709: mat = mat_LMS_709; break; } float3 lms = VecMatMul3x3(mat_LAB_LMS, lab); lms.x = powCf(lms.x, 3.0f); lms.y = powCf(lms.y, 3.0f); lms.z = powCf(lms.z, 3.0f); return VecMatMul3x3(mat, lms); } __DEVICE__ float3 RGB_OkLCh(float3 rgb, int colorspace) { float3 lab = RGB_OKLab(rgb, colorspace); return OKLab_OKLCh(lab); } __DEVICE__ float3 OKLCh_RGB(float3 lch, int colorspace) { float3 lab = OKLCh_OKLab(lch); return OKLab_RGB(lab, colorspace); } // ============================================================= // Ref Matrices // ============================================================= // ============================================================= // DWG -> XYZ // 0.70062239, 0.14877482, 0.10105872 // 0.27411851, 0.87363190, -0.14775041 // -0.09896291, -0.13789533, 1.32591599 // XYZ -> DWG // 1.51667204, -0.28147805, -0.14696363 // -0.46491710, 1.25142378, 0.17488461 // 0.06484905, 0.10913934, 0.76141462 // 709 -> XYZ // 0.4123908, 0.35758434, 0.18048079 // 0.21263901, 0.71516868, 0.07219232 // 0.01933082, 0.11919478, 0.95053215 // XYZ -> 709 // 3.24096994, -1.53738318, -0.49861076 // -0.96924364, 1.8759675, 0.04155506 // 0.05563008, -0.20397696 , 1.05697151 // XYZ -> LMS // 0.8189330101, 0.3618667424, -0.1288597137 // 0.0329845436, 0.9293118715, 0.0361456387 // 0.0482003018, 0.2643662691, 0.6338517070 // LMS -> XYZ // 1.22701385, -0.55779998, 0.28125615 // -0.04058018, 1.11225687, -0.07167668 // -0.07638128, -0.42148198, 1.58616322
Using it another DCTL looks something like this:
 
#line 2 #define ENCODING_ENUMS_DEFINED_IN_UI #define COLORSPACE_ENUMS_DEFINED_IN_UI #include "OKLab_Transforms.h" DEFINE_UI_PARAMS(p_InCSpace, Input Color Space, DCTLUI_COMBO_BOX, 2, {cACES0, cACES1, cDWG, c709}, {ACES (AP0), ACES (AP1), Davinci Wide Gamut, Rec.709 / sRGB / BT.1886}); DEFINE_UI_PARAMS(p_InGamma, Input Gamma, DCTLUI_COMBO_BOX, 2, {gAcc, gAcct, gDWI, gLIN, g709, gSRGB}, {ACEScc, ACEScct, Davinci Intermediate, Linear, Rec.709, sRGB}); __DEVICE__ float3 transform(int p_Width, int p_Height, int p_X, int p_Y, float p_R, float p_G, float p_B) { float3 in = make_float3(p_R, p_G, p_B); float3 out = in; // Convert to OKLCh: float3 linear = Decode(in, p_InGamma); float3 oklch = RGB_OkLCh(linear, p_InCSpace); // Convert back: linear = OKLCh_RGB(oklch, p_InCSpace); out = Encode(linear, p_InGamma); return out; }  

This reminds me of using my old Sony camcorder with the 5.1 surround sound microphone. I would shoot with it, then in post be able to isolate each channel and choose which one to use and ignore the ones that were just location noise. Pretty handy without much effort when shooting.
This might be similar in that sense.

Fair enough. I just wish they'd spent time and resources elsewhere. I want a small, up-to-date, Panasonic M43 camera, not an overly complex version of a on-camera mic. This seems like a great product for 2010. But what do I know, maybe this THE MIC, the one that everyone was waiting for. What I can tell you with 100% certainty, people are ready and willing to pay vast sums of money for old gear, only because it's small. What happened Panasonic? The whole miniaturization of components thing has been apparently disregarded. 

Getting prepped for my next trip and have further refined my setup.
This trip is a quick trip to China, but it's also a test case for a trip I'm taking later in the year to Europe where the packing approach will be minimalism.  Unlike the way I like to travel in Asia, the Europe trip will involve changing accommodation every few days, so packing and unpacking and hauling bags around will be much more of a pain, so I'll try and travel really minimally.
As such, my approach for this trip is "when in doubt, don't take it" and see what I actually use.
So the setup for this trip is:
GH7 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom, which I use during the day at F5.6 which means my 1-5 stop vND is enough 12-35mm F2.8 zoom, which is a great walk-around lens after dark Takumar 50mm F1.4 with M42-MFT Speedbooster (with bokeh insert) for "night cinema" iPhone 17 Pro setup (Neewer phone filter mount, K&F 1-9 stop vND, MagSafe Popsocket) The GH7 and zooms are self-explanatory, so here's the 50mm F1.4 setup.
I have played around with "inserts" and ended up with a pretty extreme design, so this is a test to see if the vertical edges are too strong a look for me.
It's made from the sticky part of the post-it note, and a layer of sticky tape over the top to keep it a bit more together.  It sits between the speed booster and the lens, and I won't use the speed booster for any other lenses while travelling so this  will stay in there and protected, so doesn't need to be that robust.

It's a strong look in some situations and quite "painterly" in others, so I'll be curious how it goes.


For my iPhone 17 Pro, it's a phone most of the time and a camera only as a backup, so I searched for a setup that would:
Protect my phone from drops (I dropped it on the last trip and the screen shattered, despite it being in an Apple case - the only one available at the time...  sigh) Still be right-sized for getting in and out of pockets etc Have a vND solution for when I want to shoot and use 180 shutter I'll spare everyone from the rant about the options out there (everyone wants you to buy into their "ecosystem" now) so I ended up with the Otterbox Defender Series Pro case, which makes the iPhone feel even larger than it did in the Apple case (which doesn't seem possible but is true), but seems very robust.
The vND is the Neewer phone filter mount, which sort-of clips onto the phone (It's designed to screw onto and clamp the phone but you're clamping against the screen, so I wouldn't tighten it that much).  It's designed for a naked iPhone, so I had to modify it (and the Otterbox case) slightly where it interfered with the Otterbox case to get it to sit a bit flatter.  It still doesn't sit flush, but it goes on and seems to be fine.  I haven't got around to actually taking it out to shoot with it, so that remains to be seen.
I paired it with the K&F 1-9 stop vND, which boasts 18 layers etc, but doesn't claim to be a "True Colour" one like the 1-5 stop ones do.  It doesn't have hard stops and I think it still gives the X at the max amount, but I'll see how I go.  Not having an aperture sure sucks considering you're not really losing having shallow DOF.  
That is all combined with the MagSafe Popsocket as a safeguard.  I've used the adhesive popsockets before and they're great for giving a much better grip on the phone, but I wasn't sure how strongly the MagSafe would be.  The Otterbox claims to have magnets in it that strengthen the MagSafe connection, and this might be true.  It feels quite sturdy actually, and I tested it to require 1.75kg of force to pull off, compared to the 1.45kg of force it took to pull it off my naked iPhone 12 mini.  No idea what strength a naked iPhone 17 Pro MagSafe connection would have, but it's not terrible.
Lots of compromises involved, but it's really my backup camera, and the Otterbox case is very grippy, so I'll see how I go.

Come on John...  everyone knows that anyone who wants better footage than a smartphone can provide is 100% totally fine with a camera the size of a microwave oven that looks like a Borg prototype!
Being slightly serious though, it's easy to criticise, but as someone who wants flexibility and better sound options, this is FAR better than the previous options, so it's a welcome addition in my eyes.  The worst enemy of progress is criticising everything that isn't perfect in every conceivable way.

Getting prepped for my next trip and have further refined my setup.
This trip is a quick trip to China, but it's also a test case for a trip I'm taking later in the year to Europe where the packing approach will be minimalism.  Unlike the way I like to travel in Asia, the Europe trip will involve changing accommodation every few days, so packing and unpacking and hauling bags around will be much more of a pain, so I'll try and travel really minimally.
As such, my approach for this trip is "when in doubt, don't take it" and see what I actually use.
So the setup for this trip is:
GH7 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom, which I use during the day at F5.6 which means my 1-5 stop vND is enough 12-35mm F2.8 zoom, which is a great walk-around lens after dark Takumar 50mm F1.4 with M42-MFT Speedbooster (with bokeh insert) for "night cinema" iPhone 17 Pro setup (Neewer phone filter mount, K&F 1-9 stop vND, MagSafe Popsocket) The GH7 and zooms are self-explanatory, so here's the 50mm F1.4 setup.
I have played around with "inserts" and ended up with a pretty extreme design, so this is a test to see if the vertical edges are too strong a look for me.
It's made from the sticky part of the post-it note, and a layer of sticky tape over the top to keep it a bit more together.  It sits between the speed booster and the lens, and I won't use the speed booster for any other lenses while travelling so this  will stay in there and protected, so doesn't need to be that robust.

It's a strong look in some situations and quite "painterly" in others, so I'll be curious how it goes.


For my iPhone 17 Pro, it's a phone most of the time and a camera only as a backup, so I searched for a setup that would:
Protect my phone from drops (I dropped it on the last trip and the screen shattered, despite it being in an Apple case - the only one available at the time...  sigh) Still be right-sized for getting in and out of pockets etc Have a vND solution for when I want to shoot and use 180 shutter I'll spare everyone from the rant about the options out there (everyone wants you to buy into their "ecosystem" now) so I ended up with the Otterbox Defender Series Pro case, which makes the iPhone feel even larger than it did in the Apple case (which doesn't seem possible but is true), but seems very robust.
The vND is the Neewer phone filter mount, which sort-of clips onto the phone (It's designed to screw onto and clamp the phone but you're clamping against the screen, so I wouldn't tighten it that much).  It's designed for a naked iPhone, so I had to modify it (and the Otterbox case) slightly where it interfered with the Otterbox case to get it to sit a bit flatter.  It still doesn't sit flush, but it goes on and seems to be fine.  I haven't got around to actually taking it out to shoot with it, so that remains to be seen.
I paired it with the K&F 1-9 stop vND, which boasts 18 layers etc, but doesn't claim to be a "True Colour" one like the 1-5 stop ones do.  It doesn't have hard stops and I think it still gives the X at the max amount, but I'll see how I go.  Not having an aperture sure sucks considering you're not really losing having shallow DOF.  
That is all combined with the MagSafe Popsocket as a safeguard.  I've used the adhesive popsockets before and they're great for giving a much better grip on the phone, but I wasn't sure how strongly the MagSafe would be.  The Otterbox claims to have magnets in it that strengthen the MagSafe connection, and this might be true.  It feels quite sturdy actually, and I tested it to require 1.75kg of force to pull off, compared to the 1.45kg of force it took to pull it off my naked iPhone 12 mini.  No idea what strength a naked iPhone 17 Pro MagSafe connection would have, but it's not terrible.
Lots of compromises involved, but it's really my backup camera, and the Otterbox case is very grippy, so I'll see how I go.

Getting prepped for my next trip and have further refined my setup.
This trip is a quick trip to China, but it's also a test case for a trip I'm taking later in the year to Europe where the packing approach will be minimalism.  Unlike the way I like to travel in Asia, the Europe trip will involve changing accommodation every few days, so packing and unpacking and hauling bags around will be much more of a pain, so I'll try and travel really minimally.
As such, my approach for this trip is "when in doubt, don't take it" and see what I actually use.
So the setup for this trip is:
GH7 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom, which I use during the day at F5.6 which means my 1-5 stop vND is enough 12-35mm F2.8 zoom, which is a great walk-around lens after dark Takumar 50mm F1.4 with M42-MFT Speedbooster (with bokeh insert) for "night cinema" iPhone 17 Pro setup (Neewer phone filter mount, K&F 1-9 stop vND, MagSafe Popsocket) The GH7 and zooms are self-explanatory, so here's the 50mm F1.4 setup.
I have played around with "inserts" and ended up with a pretty extreme design, so this is a test to see if the vertical edges are too strong a look for me.
It's made from the sticky part of the post-it note, and a layer of sticky tape over the top to keep it a bit more together.  It sits between the speed booster and the lens, and I won't use the speed booster for any other lenses while travelling so this  will stay in there and protected, so doesn't need to be that robust.

It's a strong look in some situations and quite "painterly" in others, so I'll be curious how it goes.


For my iPhone 17 Pro, it's a phone most of the time and a camera only as a backup, so I searched for a setup that would:
Protect my phone from drops (I dropped it on the last trip and the screen shattered, despite it being in an Apple case - the only one available at the time...  sigh) Still be right-sized for getting in and out of pockets etc Have a vND solution for when I want to shoot and use 180 shutter I'll spare everyone from the rant about the options out there (everyone wants you to buy into their "ecosystem" now) so I ended up with the Otterbox Defender Series Pro case, which makes the iPhone feel even larger than it did in the Apple case (which doesn't seem possible but is true), but seems very robust.
The vND is the Neewer phone filter mount, which sort-of clips onto the phone (It's designed to screw onto and clamp the phone but you're clamping against the screen, so I wouldn't tighten it that much).  It's designed for a naked iPhone, so I had to modify it (and the Otterbox case) slightly where it interfered with the Otterbox case to get it to sit a bit flatter.  It still doesn't sit flush, but it goes on and seems to be fine.  I haven't got around to actually taking it out to shoot with it, so that remains to be seen.
I paired it with the K&F 1-9 stop vND, which boasts 18 layers etc, but doesn't claim to be a "True Colour" one like the 1-5 stop ones do.  It doesn't have hard stops and I think it still gives the X at the max amount, but I'll see how I go.  Not having an aperture sure sucks considering you're not really losing having shallow DOF.  
That is all combined with the MagSafe Popsocket as a safeguard.  I've used the adhesive popsockets before and they're great for giving a much better grip on the phone, but I wasn't sure how strongly the MagSafe would be.  The Otterbox claims to have magnets in it that strengthen the MagSafe connection, and this might be true.  It feels quite sturdy actually, and I tested it to require 1.75kg of force to pull off, compared to the 1.45kg of force it took to pull it off my naked iPhone 12 mini.  No idea what strength a naked iPhone 17 Pro MagSafe connection would have, but it's not terrible.
Lots of compromises involved, but it's really my backup camera, and the Otterbox case is very grippy, so I'll see how I go.

Doh - forgot to list the 9mm F1.7 lens.  That's the ultra-wide I'll be taking too.
So the total count is one body, 5 lenses, my phone with vND.
I was slightly conflicted about the "wide-angle night cinema" slot. The SB+50/1.4 is equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF, so having something wider seems an obvious thing but I'm just not sure if I would use it.  
I've mentioned the 12-35mm F2.8 as my night walk-around lens, and when combined with the GH7 low-light capability it's a fine combination, but it's not crazy fast/bright and isn't the best "cinema" option around.
The things I considered were:
my TTartsans 17mm F1.4, which is small and light and despite being soft wide-open is probably quite cinematic my 14mm F2.5 which is small and light but is bettered by the 12-35mm on flexibility grounds being a zoom my Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95, which is a great performer but is quite heavy my c-mount 12.5mm F1.9, which is similar FOV when you crop in to its S16 image circle my 9mm F1.7 combined with the GH7 cropping, which is fast but sacrifices resolution and doesn't have the DOF advantages of other options (although I am already taking it) SB + 28mm F2.8 combos, but it's hard to get a reasonable quality 28mm F2.8 in M42 mount and it's not that fast anyway I opted to take the 12-35mm (which I sort-of take as a backup lens to the 14-140mm zoom) but if I do end up wanting a wider fast lens for night cinema, I think I might just bite the bullet and get the PanaLeica 15mm F1.7 as it'll be light and have AF and be sharper than I could ever want.
I looked at the reviews of a bunch of budget F1.4 or faster lenses around the 14-20mm mark but I'd never be sure if it was as sharp as I'd like, and spending money to get something that isn't that much faster than my 17/1.4 or that much lighter than my 17.5/0.95 seems silly.  MFT is the wrong format for ultra-fast wide lenses, and I already have lots of options for something I might not use, so the whole thing might end up being academic anyway.

Come on John...  everyone knows that anyone who wants better footage than a smartphone can provide is 100% totally fine with a camera the size of a microwave oven that looks like a Borg prototype!
Being slightly serious though, it's easy to criticise, but as someone who wants flexibility and better sound options, this is FAR better than the previous options, so it's a welcome addition in my eyes.  The worst enemy of progress is criticising everything that isn't perfect in every conceivable way.

Panasonic just released a new on-camera mic.  Looks like an excellent option for events etc where you want something small or something really flexible.

I've watched a few YT showcases and for me, the best features are:
It gives you 32-bit without having to have the external mic preamp box (and then adding microphones to that, making it larger again) It's small, much smaller than an on-camera shotgun mic You can quickly swap between modes (I assume?) it's powered by the camera It unlocks the ability to record >2 channels of audio into the files (one person said you can record left/right/mono/mono-20dB as a combo, and left/right/left-20dB/right-20dB as a different combo) It's definitely not magic and the laws of physics still apply.
There don't seem to be any really good on-location stress tests posted yet, but there's a few examples.
Media Division did an in-kitchen test to compare it to in-camera mics and lav and a DJI clip-on, and also applied a bit of AI voice isolation too to see how far you can push it:
Dustin did some good tests including walking a 360 around the camera in each mode, which showed how directional it is, which seems pretty impressive.  He also compared it to the Sennheiser MKE440.
This shows the different modes out in nature:
This is probably a complete revolution for a number of niche uses.  Content creators would be one, where they're recording in noisy environments but still staying relatively close to the camera where physics will be helping them.  Another is where the flexibility really helps, like shooting events where getting pristine audio isn't an absolute must but working super-quickly is more important and perhaps the 32-bit would really come into its own.
This reminds me of how people used to talk about Panasonic when the GH4 and GH5 were around and people were saying that Panasonic just listened to people and then implemented the features that people would use rather than trying to be flashy and grab headlines.  This will be an invisible workhorse for lots and lots of people.

Panasonic just released a new on-camera mic.  Looks like an excellent option for events etc where you want something small or something really flexible.

I've watched a few YT showcases and for me, the best features are:
It gives you 32-bit without having to have the external mic preamp box (and then adding microphones to that, making it larger again) It's small, much smaller than an on-camera shotgun mic You can quickly swap between modes (I assume?) it's powered by the camera It unlocks the ability to record >2 channels of audio into the files (one person said you can record left/right/mono/mono-20dB as a combo, and left/right/left-20dB/right-20dB as a different combo) It's definitely not magic and the laws of physics still apply.
There don't seem to be any really good on-location stress tests posted yet, but there's a few examples.
Media Division did an in-kitchen test to compare it to in-camera mics and lav and a DJI clip-on, and also applied a bit of AI voice isolation too to see how far you can push it:
Dustin did some good tests including walking a 360 around the camera in each mode, which showed how directional it is, which seems pretty impressive.  He also compared it to the Sennheiser MKE440.
This shows the different modes out in nature:
This is probably a complete revolution for a number of niche uses.  Content creators would be one, where they're recording in noisy environments but still staying relatively close to the camera where physics will be helping them.  Another is where the flexibility really helps, like shooting events where getting pristine audio isn't an absolute must but working super-quickly is more important and perhaps the 32-bit would really come into its own.
This reminds me of how people used to talk about Panasonic when the GH4 and GH5 were around and people were saying that Panasonic just listened to people and then implemented the features that people would use rather than trying to be flashy and grab headlines.  This will be an invisible workhorse for lots and lots of people.

Panasonic just released a new on-camera mic.  Looks like an excellent option for events etc where you want something small or something really flexible.

I've watched a few YT showcases and for me, the best features are:
It gives you 32-bit without having to have the external mic preamp box (and then adding microphones to that, making it larger again) It's small, much smaller than an on-camera shotgun mic You can quickly swap between modes (I assume?) it's powered by the camera It unlocks the ability to record >2 channels of audio into the files (one person said you can record left/right/mono/mono-20dB as a combo, and left/right/left-20dB/right-20dB as a different combo) It's definitely not magic and the laws of physics still apply.
There don't seem to be any really good on-location stress tests posted yet, but there's a few examples.
Media Division did an in-kitchen test to compare it to in-camera mics and lav and a DJI clip-on, and also applied a bit of AI voice isolation too to see how far you can push it:
Dustin did some good tests including walking a 360 around the camera in each mode, which showed how directional it is, which seems pretty impressive.  He also compared it to the Sennheiser MKE440.
This shows the different modes out in nature:
This is probably a complete revolution for a number of niche uses.  Content creators would be one, where they're recording in noisy environments but still staying relatively close to the camera where physics will be helping them.  Another is where the flexibility really helps, like shooting events where getting pristine audio isn't an absolute must but working super-quickly is more important and perhaps the 32-bit would really come into its own.
This reminds me of how people used to talk about Panasonic when the GH4 and GH5 were around and people were saying that Panasonic just listened to people and then implemented the features that people would use rather than trying to be flashy and grab headlines.  This will be an invisible workhorse for lots and lots of people.

Panasonic just released a new on-camera mic.  Looks like an excellent option for events etc where you want something small or something really flexible.

I've watched a few YT showcases and for me, the best features are:
It gives you 32-bit without having to have the external mic preamp box (and then adding microphones to that, making it larger again) It's small, much smaller than an on-camera shotgun mic You can quickly swap between modes (I assume?) it's powered by the camera It unlocks the ability to record >2 channels of audio into the files (one person said you can record left/right/mono/mono-20dB as a combo, and left/right/left-20dB/right-20dB as a different combo) It's definitely not magic and the laws of physics still apply.
There don't seem to be any really good on-location stress tests posted yet, but there's a few examples.
Media Division did an in-kitchen test to compare it to in-camera mics and lav and a DJI clip-on, and also applied a bit of AI voice isolation too to see how far you can push it:
Dustin did some good tests including walking a 360 around the camera in each mode, which showed how directional it is, which seems pretty impressive.  He also compared it to the Sennheiser MKE440.
This shows the different modes out in nature:
This is probably a complete revolution for a number of niche uses.  Content creators would be one, where they're recording in noisy environments but still staying relatively close to the camera where physics will be helping them.  Another is where the flexibility really helps, like shooting events where getting pristine audio isn't an absolute must but working super-quickly is more important and perhaps the 32-bit would really come into its own.
This reminds me of how people used to talk about Panasonic when the GH4 and GH5 were around and people were saying that Panasonic just listened to people and then implemented the features that people would use rather than trying to be flashy and grab headlines.  This will be an invisible workhorse for lots and lots of people.

My take on the situation is that I'm super-happy with the GH7.  It basically does everything I want, and apart from having ultra-sharp ultra-shallow DOF, pretty much does most things that FF does.  It does low-light very well, and is only behind the low-light from FF cameras because they have gotten crazy good.

I am planning to use it on my  custom phone with a Linos Mevis c mount 16mm lens. But it will work also with a bigger sensor. In the past I have used super 8 babies on full frame with great results.