Jump to content

Fuji GFX 100 ProRes RAW?


Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

D44ED0BE-9725-4094-8764-C18B01FCCD36-sca

The Fuji GFX 100 along with the Panasonic S1H is the most advanced mirrorless camera for video on the market at the moment. There are reports today that Fujifilm are working on a big firmware update for the GFX 100, with ProRes RAW on the list of features.

NEW BLOG POST:

https://www.eoshd.com/fuji/rumor-fuji-gfx-100-to-get-prores-raw-internal-recording-or-external/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Z-CAM with ProRes RAW is in many way more useful on that camera, because you need to add the screen anyway, and it doesn't have a standard or widely supported internal RAW codec, so you may as well us

Speaking as an experienced FPGA design engineer, if you can implement it in an FPGA you could put into an ASIC (or into software, depending on how fast you need your processing to run). There is

Yes! Beta firmware enabling Ninja V ProRes RAW recording from the GFX100 was made available today (also Sigma fp).

Posted Images

quote from your blog;

"What is interesting about this is where will Fuji draw the line? Will the X-T4 get it? Will it be internally recorded on the GFX 100 to high-speed UHS-II SD card? I doubt it, but we can dream".

Probably the best dream after the rumor of Samsung NX-2

Fingers crossed. Let dream come tru!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
4 hours ago, androidlad said:

It'll mostly likely be heavily subsampled to maintain Fuji's no crop philosophy.

Internal recording uses 11604 x 4352 oversampling which exceeds HDMI 2.0 bandwidth and obviously Atomos Ninja V's processing power.

Is it Quad Bayer?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

The actual 4K recording on my cards from the GFX 100 doesn't really look like 11K oversampled.

It looks more like a modern pixel binning technique. It's a bit above the A7R IV but not as detailed as an X-T4 and there's some aliasing.

So I doubt it is doing an 11K sensor output.

Fuji once did a presentation on "their best solution for 4K" from the GFX 100's sensor. And it had a quad bayer pixel mix going on.

If it does have 11K RAW video in the buffer before it gets downsampled on the image processor... I am sure it could be downsampled while remaining RAW data. Just as there are medium and small RAW stills options.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The actual 4K recording on my cards from the GFX 100 doesn't really look like 11K oversampled.

It looks more like a modern pixel binning technique. It's a bit above the A7R IV but not as detailed as an X-T4 and there's some aliasing.

So I doubt it is doing an 11K sensor output.

Fuji once did a presentation on "their best solution for 4K" from the GFX 100's sensor. And it had a quad bayer pixel mix going on.

If it does have 11K RAW video in the buffer before it gets downsampled on the image processor... I am sure it could be downsampled while remaining RAW data. Just as there are medium and small RAW stills options.

11K horizontally yes, vertically 2/3 lineskipped.

That presentation was about an X-Trans version of the GFX100 sensor, which was designed with 3 x 3 colour aware binning. But that project has since been shelved.

Yes the sensor will have to be heavily subsampled for ProRes RAW. It can’t send 11K RAW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't internal/external recording more an issue with Prores Raw licensing than with the camera's ability to do so or not? 

Not sure if this has been officially stated anywhere but I highly suspect the reason Panasonic made a partnership with Atomos was because the latter carries the license burden.  So I would imaging Fujifilm taking a similar approach or else it might have to be a paid upgrade to offset the cost of licensing. 

Canon, on the other hand, is able to offer internal raw on the R5 so matter-of-factly because they have their own Cinema Raw codecs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ak Ns said:

I have shot this video using GFX100. Autofocus in video and lack of slowmotion in 4k are drawbacks. but  image and handling are better in GFX100 than Xt-3. I wish they really add better Phase-detecting system and add full frame 4k 60fps. 

Better highlight retention or low light?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Yes the autofocus is pretty, erm, shall we say... Hybrid. Somewhere between contrast detect AF and phase. It hunts. Not sure why. It's extremely unreliable in video mode. 32-64mm zoom has internal stepping motor, silent, fast, but the camera does not make the most of it. The X-T4 is far better for AF. Some lenses like the 63mm f2.8 are incredibly bad on the GFX cameras and it's not much better on the GFX 100 with phase-detect AF on sensor. I am hoping for a firmware update that dramatically improves it as I can see no good reason why it has to be so bad! Reminds me of the X-Pro 1!!

Apart from that, it's my favourite all-round camera right now. Love it.

You can put a £20 lens on it and it still looks like medium format. So cinematic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew,

Wow, I was going to reply to a thread on dpreview linking this thread for them to read, however they ban EOSHD links?

I was actually trying to help them, however if they want to continue such highbrow stupidity...:

My censored reply to a lot of confused dpreview thread entries below:

>>>  Re: GFX 100 may become a monster video camera ....

FYI...

Wow, this website bans EOSHD URL listing.
Stupid and lame...

There are a lot more GFX 100 threads in the EOSHD forum.

I have actually learned a lot from the EOSHD site, as for the past many years shooting videos of my families life events.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2020 at 7:56 AM, JR Lipartito said:

Isn't internal/external recording more an issue with Prores Raw licensing than with the camera's ability to do so or not? 

Not sure if this has been officially stated anywhere but I highly suspect the reason Panasonic made a partnership with Atomos was because the latter carries the license burden.  So I would imaging Fujifilm taking a similar approach or else it might have to be a paid upgrade to offset the cost of licensing. 

Canon, on the other hand, is able to offer internal raw on the R5 so matter-of-factly because they have their own Cinema Raw codecs. 

Yeah, regarding Prores Raw licencing, I read somewhere about implementation of PRORES RAW internally in MAVO edge 8K camera, whether there were any issues regarding patents. Kinefinity replied that "Patents are restricted to US but not in other countries and we don't sell any products in US."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...