Leaderboard

Hey guys, I've written a really simple command line app for Mac that will resample GH4 footage from 4K 4:2:0 to 2K 4:4:4 using pixel summing. This will give you real 10 bit data in the luminance channel, so it's not just doing a brute-force bump from 8 bits to 10 bits. There actually is some interesting pixel finagling going on here: http://www.mediafire.com/download/f7h950spj5hrn9f/gh444.dmg There's no GUI, so you'll need to run it from the terminal. Do this by copying the app into the directory that contains the GH4 MOV files and using the following command in a terminal: ./gh444 INPUTFILE.MOV Make sure you cd to the current directory first if necessary. You can do this by typing "cd" into the terminal, add a space, and then drag the folder containing the MOV files into the terminal window. It will automatically add the path to the cd command. It'll look like this: cd /path/to/gh4/files The app will spit numbered DPX frames out in a folder named "dpx_out." I'd love for you guys to give it a try and see if you find it useful!

People have been saying similar things in the GH4 threads. You really have to look at the context of the video, because at the end of the day, video that isnt made to look cinematic will indeed just look like video. The sensor is only part of what makes an image. For example, in the Gordon Liang video, the weather is overcast with neutral colours, he's using the kit lens and Program priority (meaning it may not even be the right shutter speed). And to top it off, he's shooting at 50 fps. It's just going to look like video no matter what.

I am an american and I stand for capitalism. If you sell for xxx price and someone buys it, that means both parties are happy. It's not like Zack is forcing anyone to buy anything.

For my needs I find the HDMI model a very useful companion for my future GH4; its a YAGH on steroids, its an external 4K recorder, it has an fullHD iPad-like video monitor, and more... all that in one single package, for me I found that convenient. 16 pounds of awesome, I know, a heavy price but its workable. If I want light weight for run and gun gigs or get some quick shots just unplug it and you're good to go. Now, price its not available for this model, if its more than $2k - $3k, I would not buy it... although thats the price for external recorders only, if you want XLR inputs thats another accessory... Also, theres no info on whether it can be upgraded to add a sensor in the future. I think it's to early to celebrate or complain, so will see. PS: I honestly don't know WHY they used a 5D for the preview picture... makes no sense.

I'd love to see a win version ;)

Well guys, I have been testing the camera for a couple of hours now and here is what I have found so far: RAW Photo: Brightening the shadows from high ISO (~3200) files produces purple colouring similar to the Nikon D5200. The GX7 does not do this (see figure 1). The a6000 does clip less at the very extreme of highlights. Not near enough to make a difference to photographers though. Colour depth may be slightly better on a6000. I'm not sure how to test this exactly. Video: At the same exposure and similar contrast settings, the a6000 is more prone to blowing out highlights than the GX7. There is noticeably less picture detail. But also more aliasing and moire than on the GX7 (see figure 2). The noise is quite nice. On the GX7, noise is very dancy and distracting. On the a6000, noise seems more calm; less sharp; less chroma. Some may even say film grainish. The trade-off however is that there is less detail. (see figure 3) The colour might be more accurate in low light on the a6000. I need to do a bit more testing. On the flip side, the GX7's video is so sharp that the codec has trouble fitting it all into a 24mbit/s file and I often see artefacts when viewing at 100%. Handling: The EVF is miles better than the NEX 6 and GX7. There is no rainbow tearing and the refresh rate is fast. Everything is clear. Usable in low light too. Even the eyecup is better. The menu system is miles better than the NEX6. On the whole, I still find the GX7 to be more usable due to the AF/MF switch, front/rear dials and touch screen. Strangely, the focus peaking becomes less intense whilst shooting video. The AF is indeed very good. It can focus in even less light than my GX7 (which has incredible low light AF ability). The AF tracking is good too but not great. I'm not sure if it could actually handle a cyclist riding towards you. I've tested with both the kit lens and the 16mm f2.8. The latter doesn't have Phase Detection, but the contrast system works just as well. When you manually focus, a distance scale comes up on the screen, which is very nice. I don't think the NEX 6 had this feature. Only problem is it doesn't work whilst filming. Samples below all shot at 25p @ 24mb/s. Dynamic range settings were tweaked to bring the images closer together. Noise reduction turned off (although honestly there isnt any difference that I can see when turning it on on the GX7). Figure 1: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1094036/a6000/raw_shadow_adjustment.JPG a6000 left, GX7 right. f3.5, 1/50th, ISO 3200. Lightroom Shadows +100 Figure 2: '> a6000 top, GX7 bottom. f5.6, 1/50th, ISO 400 Figure 3: '> a6000 top, GX7 bottom. f3.5, 1/50th, ISO 3200, WB 5500k. Overall I'm thinking I'll probably send the a6000 back. There is not enough improvement to justify me swapping systems.

Some interesting test footage here, https://www.youtube.com/user/halim870904/videos Low light looks clean.

The stretch factor changes with your focus. If I remember it right, the stretch factor they put on the lens is for infinity focus.

I don't know, it's very very detailed (zeiss helps here) but has a bit too much aliasing compared to the gh4, and some extra noise for a S35 sensor. Still looking for a real gh4 competitor ;)

I don't have a mustache I can wax nor do I live in Echo Park and visit NAB on trust fund money. Am I still allowed to buy the camera?

I can understand that. For anyone, who is used to *shoot video* with a classic camcorder, it's terribly unpractical. The same was true, back then, for shooting with a bulky 35mm adapter or later with a DSLR. But as the bible knows, you love the prodigal son the most. Imho it can best be compared to ancient mechanical 16mm cameras, with which people also had their trouble. To achieve good results, you had to know them by heart, to a point, where knowledge about stock sensitivity (and characteristics) in correlation with aperture and the (mostly fixed) shutter angle turned into intuition. I don't use a light meter, and according to some comments in other places, only few still do, even in professional cinema. You can learn to judge correct exposure with the Pocket by doing a lot of tests and comparing them to what you saw during recording. Here are my rules of thumb: 1. ISO 800 offers the best possible DR for ProRes. To have a fixed ISO also facilitates things, less factors to be calculated on the fly by your CNS. 2. ETTR is also - partly - valid for ProRes. Fill the well, avoid the noise floor. It's 10-bit, so you are not simplifying skin tones by slightly overexposing, like with 8-bit codecs. Use 95% zebra then. 3. For RAW, use 100% zebra. If the image appears too bright on the display, lower the ISO (has no influence in RAW). 4. When I still had a MFT system lens that set exposure automatically when I pressed IRIS, I realized that I always was in the same ballpark manually. No wonder: The automation uses ETTR as well. My suggestion regarding your trip to far east: 1. Make at least ten test shots every day, document them, evaluate them, you will improve your intuitive skills. 2. Buy a used GH2 or G6 (ridiculously easy cameras compared to the Pocket). They can use the same lenses. Compare, as I did, these cameras in the same situations. At first, the results with these Lumixs will be three times better. But not for long. 3. Learn when to use RAW (seldom) and when ProRes (almost always). 4. Learn how to use Speedgrade. Not just in an afternoon. Watch whole video trainings by Lynda or the like, and delve into CC. As I wrote before: The Zacuto Pocket finder (quite affordable) makes you see every single pixel on the muddy display and helps only a little bit as far as focussing is concerned. But you need it anyway when you shoot in daylight. And it adds a comfortable stabilization point. What you also need is some kind of additional support. Mine weighs below 100g and cost 14 € (new!).

Anamorphot is now SOLD. Thank you.

take a look at the pictures please. This lens support is made for a PL-mount adaptor – so, yes it is solid. But, if you plan to use this special adapter (vocas PL-mount support) you have to cut 2mm from the VanDiemen ISCO's rear element !!!!!! The Vocas inner diameter is 2mm smaller than the VD ISCO … Again, please take a look at the pictures. bye.

@Sean, yes, the +0.4 is MUCH more valuable, but even when the +0.5 single element was available on ebay, it went easily for $100-150, so the guy who snatched those three is still gonna make some profit out of it. It's not so easy to find reliable quality low-powered diopters, and they're still worth some money, even when they're not doublets. :)

And they might have over-paid for either the +.5 or one of several other 72mm AT-X close-up filters that are not the one folks really want. You don't seem to be getting that.

I think the concern is you are buying something advertised as a 4K camera that can't actually record 4K unless you buy something as expensive as the camera itself, and carry around something as bulky as the camera itself (probably more so). The A7S might be better termed "4K Ready". Michael

That was very stupid. Form factor matters alot, theres a reason why its been the way it has for so long, not because it "looks" cool. It works, you hold a dslr and then you hold an old film camera or the equivalent shape. You will instantly notice the stability and comfort, along with the ability to use your other hands to do more things. Think of it this way, sure small is great, but there a reason why people have to rig it up, and guess what shape seems to work so well: Over the shoulder. A Progression to a more suitable design is great, it doesnt take away from their previous design either, if this doesnt work for you then check out the prior models.

You'll get more help if you post a couple of frames from the footage so we can see it. Because this issue does not sound normal.

@Andy, or anyone, will do whatever tests you'd like. My pleasure. In Nikon, I have a 24mm 2.8D, 50mm (both D and AIS), and an 85mm rokinon. I'm a bit stuck between the Rokinon 16mm cine and Nikon 16mm (which would work on my d600 I believe). No plans to get either but thinking... The 7mm Vivitar I have has too much barrel distortion on the BMPCC. Thoughts Andy? @ZEBRAWORKZ I would be surprised if the gx7 has better sharpness in good light than the GH3 because though the Achilles heel of APS-C size sensor is the amount of pixels they must skip to get a 1080p frame, and line skipping creates moire, pixel binning, while improving that, doesn't change the fact that you would probably get more sharpness from pixels that are physically closer to each other.

Hmm mine doesn't do that. I woul also check the eye sensor or turn it off...its way too sensitive it activates if you just pass something within 2 inches of it. Although I do feel a bit abandoned I really wish they would give us some new features like focus peaking or some focus aid during recording.

I am not so negativ about the success of this camera. Yesterday I was the whole day walking back and forth between the Pana, Sony, AJA and BMD cameras at the NAB show. To get to play with one of the Sonys or the GH4 it wasn't that a long waiting line. But wow, at AJA and especially at BMD it was crazy. Everybody has to see and play with this cam. From the people around me I often could hear them serious wanting to buy one of these big boys. So just because it is maybe not made for most member here does not mean anything. Yesterday night I had a look at the Redusers forum and they like the URSA a lot. This week I have to decide if I order the A7s, GH4, URSA or even Cion (the only PL mount is holding me back). Ok, now I have to walk across the street to the NAB show again. Maybe today I will change my opinion.

Stunt shots are not significant pluses. In virtually any of these cases the SI2K and One Cam are even better and can go into even tighter places than camera the size of a GH2. I'm talking about the shots composing 99% of all other shots and making films that don't care about putting a camera in a cupboard. The best films that have ever been made, that might ever be made, were made with cameras that couldn't go in these tight places and, guess what, nobody missed not having a shot from a cupboard, or looking out a glove box, or from behind a steering wheel or whatever gimmick you care to come up with. The DSLR is bad for general shooting and must be kitted out to move right and let the operator see what they're doing, be held in a good position, and often these things are at odds with one another.

I am not a pro, not in the cinema field. I write free-lance articles and illustrate them with my pictures. Nowadays, more and more magazines ask for motion pictures for their online presence, so I am learning film. I can probably sell smaller reports, short films, documentaries… I trust Panasonic. They have been focused on my segment. They have listened to our ideas and criticism and developed the GH2-GH3-GH4 family accordingly. The GH4 looks like a finished product, not like a must-have idea. The M43 system has a good range of lenses, and the size/weight is certainly a benefit when travelling. I don’t trust Blackmagic Design. They are very sympathetic but I don’t know, how interested they are in my segment. They look to be more interested in developing new ideas, instead of completing existing ones. I don’t know about Sony. They look interested but they are so focused on the pro segment, they will probably forget me concerning some features. I am sure about Canon. I will sell my stuff, I am just fed-up. What can I expect from a company, whose most interesting video features are handled by an enthusiastic hacker/reverseengineering community? At last, I shouldn’t forget my first love, Nikon. There have been an April’s news about, Ricoh is buying them… I certainly hope so, because I don’t think Nikon is around here as an independent company in 3 years from now.

The GH2 was the last GH Panasonic will ever sell me, the last DSLR/Mirrorless I'll ever buy to shoot anything but stills with. I find nothing appealing about the GH4 or the Sony. I'll never buy another compressed camera (lossy, h264 or variants), one that tops out at 422 or needs another box to shoot RAW. BMD has done nothing to sway my interest in their products and these new cameras only solidify my resolve that if I can't have an Alexa it'll be a Blackmagic.

Panasonic cameras use a pixel averaging system to dump data for video where Canon use line skipping to achieve the same thing. Panasoinic Cameras are very very good at pixel averaging that is why the images from their cameras are so good and have so little moire compared to other cameras - so Im not really that concerned that the GH4 is a 16mp sensor. , and mega hi iso does not really appeal to me , I rarely ever shoot over 400 iso

Amen! Go in peace brothers!   Stoker is all i have left to offer...

Wesley 24mm f/1.4 - YES - pics to follow Cosmicar 25mm f/1.8 - YES - pics to follow Pentax 25mm f/1.4 - YES - pics to follow