Leaderboard

Key word there being 'Recommendations.' This is not a requirement. This 'list' is meant to be a guide for the local stations when selecting cameras to purchase for their photogs who go out into the field. They select these cameras because they use a codec that plays smoothly with Grass Valley (the editing and ingesting software commonly used in TV news). The idea is, we need a camera that imports quickly into our servers so Jimmy the photog can shoot/import/cut/send to control room within minutes in case there is breaking news. Additionally, many journalists shoot and edit by themselves, having only hours to cut together their package for airtime. These folks aren't doing complicated edits, because they don't have any idea how, beyond basic cuts and voice overs. They're too worried about being dressed and prepped in time for their live shot to worry about color correction or anything like that. So these 'recommended cameras' are ENG cameras designed to do as much in-cam as possible, with editing an afterthought. I'm guessing anyone mulling over the 'GH4 vs BMPC' decision aren't news photogs or multimedia journalists with the BBC. You're likely thinking about using it for documentaries. In that case, you'll have plenty of time to edit, color correct, etc. to get it perfectly cut together for broadcast. The '4.2.2 standard' thing isn't meant for you. It's meant for the company when choosing which cameras to purchase for their news team, so that they get the ones that play nicest with the control room, AND so they can have unified equipment in case a journalist's camera breaks, they wont have to waste time trying to figure out how to use a different model.

  The external add-on isn't a "4K add-on" it is a HD-SDI and XLR add-on, you don't need the external add-on or a external recorder for 4K on the GH4 it does it internally. You know that right?! Surely you do. So are you just trying to make things look worse than they actually are with your list? If so I think that's a bit unfair.   Hopefully available by the end of the year? Try April at the latest (TBC)!   As for form factor, clunky is not a word I'd use to describe the GH4. Incidentally the Blackmagic is a lot heavier, the wrong shape, has no articulated screen, and a very cut down feature set in comparison. Still love Blackmagic but you've gotta state the facts!   My view of it is as follows...   BMPC 4K 1.5x crop Super 35mm sensor (1.0x crop in cinematography terms) EF mount (good if you have lots of nice Canon EF lenses, not so good if you have Micro Four Thirds or lenses requiring a mirrorless mount) Global shutter - nice - but comes at expense of dynamic range and low light 10bit ProRes - very nice Raw - great for heavy grading and VFX work   GH4 2.17x crop in 4096x2160 mode, 1.7x crop with Speed Booster in 4K mode (1.2x crop in cinematography terms) Mirrorless mount Better low light performance (goes up to ISO 6400 in 4K mode) 8bit 4:2:0 internal recording may lead to some artefacts and won't grade as well as ProRes, but it will still look stunning Better audio support and quality, with optional XLR box Articulated screen 16MP stills Built in EVF 10bit 4:2:2 available to external recorder Larger feature set   The Blackmagic Production Camera has enough unique features to be considered for certain jobs. The GH4 is the better all rounder.   If you need global shutter, EF mount, 10bit ProRes internal and raw, but don't mind the very basic feature set overall, basic ergonomics, heavier weight overall, need for external battery and poor low light performance go Blackmagic.   If you need mirrorless mount, better ergonomics, likely better 1080p especially via HDMI, better audio, more features, smaller form factor and internal battery go GH4.   Dynamic range probably quite similar on the pair.   And on price, the GH4 is a lot cheaper. You don't NEED the external box. You can shoot with it like you can the GH3. The Blackmagic puts more demands on storage space and processing power, and needs an external battery plus SSDs.

Normally I disapprove of using the forum just to flog lenses...but screw it, I'm having a clear out! Thought it worthy to post, as there are a couple of lenses that I'm selling that I have not seen featured on the forum, and are pretty interesting. They are listed on ebay but would be happy to answer questions here. For sale: 'Centascope' 1.5x (fixed focus) Super-80 'Magnum' 1.5x Iscomorphot 16/2x (non MC) + Redstan Clamp Sample footage of centascope in low light (super-80 'Magnum' is same optical recipe/same flare but with bigger optics and focusable helicoid):

I haven't tried it, but probably not. But if your main use of 4K is to slightly re-frame your shot and deliver in 1080P, I think that it's fine for that. Also, using the 5D with anamorphic lenses can offer pretty high resolutions. Using the 1600x1200 crop mode with a 2x lens can give you a 3200x1200 image, in raw. I'm not saying that the 5Diii is going to be better for everyone. I think that the GH4 will probably be a really nice camera. But even before production models start rolling out, we already know that it can't match the 5D's 1080P codec. So, if you're mostly interested in really good-looking 1080P, I think that the 5D with Magic Lantern remains a strong contender.

the Angenieux 28-70 f2.6 is a legendary lens with great look and is very very collectable $$$$$$ ££££££ Tokina did make a version of this lens using the Angenieux plans and design - it is alos very rare and collectable Tokina AT-X PRO AF 28-70mm 1:2.6-2.8 Ø 77 JAPAN (Pro I with screw on hood) This is the original Pro version which is also the most sought after version by those new D700 owners in the know since its the version that's based on the Angenieux optical formula. Recognized easily by the ugly and short screw-on hood. Multi-coating was applied to a large number of lens surfaces to help improve contrast while at the same time reducing reflections and ghosting. There is also some suggestion that this version had one HLD (High Refraction Low Dispersion) glass element, though this is not certain. 28-70 for me is better range if you want a killer stunning lens the Carl Zeiss 24-85mm in N mount is absolutely stunning razor sharp with micro levels of detail

I'm sure the GH5 will do 1080p at 10 bit 422 in body. I can wait 1 year no problem. I think the GH4 could have done it. I just don't understand why it doesn't.

This is a reply to forum member who made a comment about broadcast news and colour subsampling. I know this is probably the wrong website to make this comment - please excuse me. Generally broadcast News acquisition uses 4.2.0 chroma subsampling. Simply because News material is not graded or used for green screen before it goes to air. Some broadcasters request but don't necessarily require acquisition for longer format programs such as documentary material to be shot at a certain standard. This ensures that the material can be graded easily. The standard for SD or HD material is generally 50/100 Mb/s 4.2.2. DVCPRO 50 is one such codec which is accepted. Some programs have a lower ceiling on this standard and accept 4.2.0 material for documentary work. Think GoPro etc. It is very hard to see the difference between 4.2.2 and 4.2.0 and that is exactly why it is used - colour information is harder for the human eye to judge as luminance information. Therefore to compress the image further, codecs throw out half the colour information knowing we probably won't notice. Since the 5DMKII came about we've been asking for better image quality. This website is one of them. Andrew Reid particularly has called for higher bit rates and better codecs to improve image quality. This is now happening - however for those of us who grade material or simply don't care for banding on a blue sky for instance - a higher standard colour sampling codec is needed. Andrew knows this and so does Panasonic. I think the GH4 looks like a great camera however it is not a great camera if I have to bolt on two additional boxes which is clumsy and does away with portability just to get it to a standard that we have been pushing for for 6 years. I personally would not turn up to a paid job with a GH4 and XLR/SDI box and an external recorder. I would however turn up to a paid job with a GH4 if it had internal 4.2.2 recording and a simpler / smaller XLR adapter. For of us who make a living as videographers/ cinematographers/ cameramen/women - this is actually a big deal and not just an idle gripe for the sake of it. It's ok that the new GH4 doesn't record a minimum standard for broadcast HD requisition. Andrew and Panasonic clearly thinks it's ok as well. But it is one big reason why I and others won't be using a GH4 for work where reputations and day-rates are held accountable.

There will always be people with unreasonable complain that weren't going to buy it to begin with. Latest rumors goes for €1,499, if it's true, this camera is even more compelling like nothing ever before. 4K for this price? Plus 1080p VFR up to 96fps @200mbps ALL-I and @100mbps IPB, full readout, HDMI out 4:2:2. etc. Sure, there are things that could had been better resolved, like the 4K crop, lack of multi-aspect, the flexibility using the interface unit, etc. But even if it's really $1,999, there is nothing like this camera and let's not forget that even though this can be used for professional work with some standards to fill, this is ultimately a still camera form factor. In this level, I can hardly think of any must have feat that was left out so anyone would claim that they won't buy it because of that, anything that was left out can only be found on cameras much more expensive and clearly aimed at a different initial target.

I still for the life of me have no idea what people are on about when they say you must shoot in 4.2.2 to meet some television standard. I have worked in broadcast television for years and have never ever ever heard of something 'rejected' because it isn't 4.2.2. Ever. Matter of fact, when working for television news, I would personally shoot plenty of full news packages in 4.2.0. Nobody cares. They filter it through a switcher. It's not like if you shoot something internally with this camera and then give it to the BBC or another national news outlet they'll go, "WHAT?! YOU AREN'T USING THE PROPER SUBSAMPLING?! WE CAN'T USE THIS!" and throw it out the window. News flash, people: cell phone video makes the news every single day. YouTube clips are pulled. Half the national news packages in the feeds that are used in broadcast aren't even full 1080p. This whole 'BBC Approved Color Space' thing is a load of malarkey and is only thrown around by folks who have absolutely no clue how television broadcast works.

It's ironic that some on this thread are saying "look at the broader picture, not just resolution" and then constantly repeating that they won't be buying the GH4 because it doesn't do one small feature of the overall image (4:2:2 internally).   Actually it does do 4:2:2 internally. The whole image pipeline is 4:2:2 until the compression kicks in and goes to 4:2:0. That counts for something.   Furthermore a full pixel readout from the sensor with true 4:2:2 sampling internally is more important than the final compression format. Want proof? See the Nikon D800 internal 4:2:0 vs HDMI 4:2:2... Not much difference, and still lots of aliasing and stair stepping. 4:2:2 is actually a very minor thing in the grand scale of things. Pixel binning, line skipping, all that stuff - there's no point having 4:2:2 if you are doing that. In 4K on the GH4 you have no pixel binning or line skipping, it's a full pixel readout, like a crop of a 16MP JPEG still to 8MP. If you're not satisfied by that at $2k then you really need to reassess your expectations. Feel free to spend $12,000 on the 1D C if you want internal 4:2:2 in 4K.

  Tiresome. I didn't say people don't give a rats ass about 4:2:2 I said most people don't give a rats ass about having their camera on a short-list drawn up by a man in a cupboard at television centre.

Please also add smell-o-vision and replace the onboard flash unit with a fold away copter for spontaneous aerial shots.

I've taken your argument back in time a bit and resized your image to SD.   Same argument, same flaw, but by taking it back in time hopefully you will see the flaws more clearly.     Technological progress is essential!

I'm pretty new here but I think the tone in Tim's mail is.... Unnecessarily harsh. Why "you failed to" etc? It's not that eoshd.com owes this person anything. The tone is a shame because there are some good points in Tim's mail. Anyway I thought the article was a good read.

Seconded. If this with the speedbooster can give performance like or a stop lower than the 5D mk3 (non RAW) I'll buy TWO!

Great summary! Nice to know you are confident in good low light performance in the gh4, hope you are right!

External recorder price is far too high... not sure what the 4K 'add on' is, or why you would need it... but in my opinion you're missing out on: - The added cost of workflow for using Blackmagic Production Camera (HDD, Capable Editing System, etc.) - Quality Control of Blackmagic Products - Will ship by the time we're all in the grave. (I kid... hopefully.) - Additionally, I actually find it far more 'clunky' than the GH4, if the BMCC is any indication. The lack of buttons is actually MORE frustrating for me because I found myself having to constantly use that bloody awful touchscreen that I could barely see outdoors. Plus, no articulated screen. Plus, required a rig because handheld was too jittery. Plus, no ability to play back clips, delete clips, see how much time left on memory card, etc. So, yeah, this is a big big factor for me, and I believe should be for anyone who wants to avoid serious headaches on set. Then again, the BMPC or other Blackmagic products may work swimmingly for you. More power to you! I have just experienced nothing but headaches on set with them, and ultimately got rid of them. I could not justify the lack of basic quality assurance. Having to stop every 30 minutes on set because of technical issues was frustrating for everyone involved, and I began valuing getting jobs done on time and headache free over the awesomeness of RAW. The GH4 looks like the best thing an indie filmmaker could ask for at the moment, and the fact that I see people on twitter/forums complaining that it 'only does 96fps' is moronic. Some folks are never satisfied... even with the latest and greatest.

Samsung: Blu-Ray 4K UHD Standard Could Be Commercialized by End of the Year In a bid to distribute UHD content, Samsung Electronics proposes to use more advanced Blu-ray media that complies with the BDXL standard that supports triple-layer 100GB RE (rewritable) and R (write-once) discs as well as quad-layer 128GB R discs for commercial applications Another technology that is needed for distribution of 4K movies is high efficiency video coding (HEVC, also known as H.265 and MPEG-H part 2) technology that is used for UHD video compression. Being 51% -74% more efficient than currently used MPEG4-AVC/H.264, the HEVC technology allows to compress 4K movies to around 80GB – 90GB, which means that 100GB – 128GB BD media should be enough to store it. The H.265 is currently supported by numerous decoder/encode chips that can be used inside players. extract from Xbit http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20140113232834_Samsung_Proposes_to_Use_Multi_Layer_Blu_Ray_Discs_for_4K_UHD_Video_Distribution.html

The first poster (20s of wall) said it was 980MB for 20s. So it looks like: 49 MB/s = 22 min 17 sec for 64GB card.