kye Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 @Mark Romero 2 @SteveV4D @herein2020 Good conversation, and I think it's actually clarified things for me. I don't have any issue with people shooting 4K, or 6K, or freaking 12K if they really want, but I think the issue I have is that people do so without really knowing what choices they're making. I'm speaking more broadly, and you guys may be well aware of the pros and cons, but many people reading this aren't posting or even logged in, so I'm conscious of those people, rather than just you guys 🙂 I think the issue is how we talk about these things. People talk like 4K has no downsides. When you bring them up, they get countered individually, and the net result seems to be that the arguments against 4K have valid counterarguments, but that's kind of a false impression. It's like.... "4K takes more processing power to edit" - "yeah, but modern computers are fine, so that's not enough reason to swap" .... 4K: 1 point, 1080p zero! "4K lets you crop in post" - "1080 is pretty good though" - "but not as much as 4K, so that's not a reason to swap" .... 4K: 2 points, 1080p still zero! "4K is what some clients ask for" - "that doesn't mean 4K is always the right choice" - "yeah but some do" .... 4K: 3 points, 1080p still zero! etc. It looks like 1080p scored zero points, but the problem with this logic is that it's just not true. 1080p won a few and came runner up in most of them. If the scores were a percentage rather than a winner/loser mentality then an overall score might be something like 4K 70% and 1080p 55%, but when you talk about 1080 people don't say "I've weighed up the pros and cons", they just look at you like you're suggesting they film with the lens cap on. Unfortunately it creates a situation where new people don't understand there's a choice to be made, and that depending on what you value more, the winner can be flipped to 1080p without that much effort because it's actually a much closer argument than people think. 15 hours ago, SteveV4D said: We have veered widely off the original point, which was that Panasonic would be foolish to add ALL-I to the S5, when it could compete with the S1H. The S1H is the fullframe successor to the GH5 in the eyes of Panasonic I feel. The S5 is the smaller budget versions, perhaps more akin to the G90 vs the GH5. That makes sense and is very sad actually. It means that Panasonic will have taken the video features of the GH5 and essentially doubled their price. Also, they've smashed the S5 with the Canon Cripple Hammer in order to protect their own line of 'cine' cameras. Panasonic used to be the underdog who gave what they could, rather than the big corporate who took all they could. Assuming it's true, it's not a good look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.