Leaderboard

Hey gang, You may have noticed that VIMEO recently changed their public playback structure to be exactly like YouTube's - meaning it will now "Auto-Select" a playback quality for viewers. The tab where you could specify what playback quality got assigned has been removed. So far their P.R. people have been saying "Too bad, we're being competitive." but controlling the playback quality is pretty much the ONLY reason any of us use Vimeo over YouTube. It is ABSOLUTELY the ONLY reason I pay for their "Plus" or "Pro" service. This little campaign here got started by Oron over on DVXUser and he has already had some email exchanges with them that he posted for all to see. When he told them that controlling playback quality was his ONLY reason for buying their paid service, and that he would be terminating it if this control is not restored - well, they quickly stated changing their tune. To be certain - ANYTIME I have watched any of YOUR Vimeo videos recently, my stream defaulted to their "Auto" setting EVEN THOUGH THE "HD" INDICATOR WAS STILL ON. My system and connection plays 1080p perfectly smoothly all day long - and ALL of YOUR videos are displaying at a drastically reduced quality for me because of this "Auto" YouTube-style setting. Here is some of the email exchange Oron posted: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This is part of an emails they sent me from customer support: part of email 1: "Unfortunately, adaptive streaming is the future of Vimeo’s streaming capabilities and we completely understand your hesitation if you content is not displaying as you’d like it to." Part of email 2 (after I replied I don't like this idea): "I’m sorry to hear that my rely has disappointed you. We strongly encourage you being able to find and use a video hosting platform that is best for your needs and we’re sorry to hear that we cannot be that for you at this time." After I decided to stop my Vimeo plus membership that will end next month, they send me this email: "I want to be clear that I do understand your concerns about HD video, and having control over what qualities your viewer sees. Our product team is evaluating this kind of feedback, and I will certainly pass yours along for consideration." So, again, if more people will say something it will change, I'm sure people that have Vimeo Plus or Pro don't want other people to view their videos on 720p or 360p just because vimeo thinks they don't have the bandwidth, I want to decide those things, that's the all point of vimeo. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ PLEASE join in and send VIMEO's customer service an email if you are a paying customer of their "Plus" and "Pro" subscriptions. Thanks all !

After having read article again I still do not see any reason why Panasonic would complicate a successful product with such a proposal ...it would be folly to make such a change for what is a very niche sector (essentially a small group of people who can not afford to buy the camera that does everything they want) the capabilities that are stated are available now in much higher end cameras and I put it to you that 90% of users of gh4 would'nt need these features ...those that would ...are likely to be in a group who would bolt on thousands £'s worth of Cooke panchro's instead of these new lens products proposed anyway ...the gh4 is available for £900 it was not (in my humble opinion ) intended to compete in the high-end tv or cinema ,the fact that it can and does is a testament to its capability as it stands you can take almost any legacy lens or high end cinema lens and go make a film, a documentary, a wollace and grommit style animation ,anamorphic epic, 4K internal ,4K photo,journalism and the list goes on what Sony does or does not is bollocks because it's twice the price,it's full frame glass costs more ,it does'nt have the feature set ,menus are hap hazard ,the discussion about the 6300 is irrelevant ,how is it viable to compare a brand new product with a two year old one, Panasonic 4K at that price point, changed the market...everyone reacted ,that means Panasonic are and have been leading ,only now does Sony do 4K internally( at twice the price)....even today you want to beat it you have to buy another pansonic product g7,lx100, the people making these proposals think nothing of then spending £1200 on a shogun,or an odyssey ,thousands on glass,gimbal's etc ,when at the heart is a£900 camera ,the fact that it's there at the heart seems to carry no credit,go buy a red dragon or an arri alexa ...build that up see what that costs (house money). All it has to do is minor improvements, the question is will they be big enough for existing users to warrant the upgrade, and there are a lot of us ...their sole motivation should be that

Here it is! We recorded hdmi 8-bit 4:2:2 out of it and went to the odyssey skin tones overall are nice! and stabilization is amazing. The camera was interesting to use - especially considering that it's a 200 ASA camera and has moire and dynamic range challenges - sometimes this is interesting to have to maximize something with limitations. It's difficult, but I guess it disciplines you.

Thanks mate! Here in the USA, under that section called "UPGRADE THIS VIDEO" - beneath it "Choose the HD format(s) for this video" is now greyed out and I cannot make any selection. But here's the biggest problem, as I wrote originally: "To be certain - ANYTIME I have watched any of YOUR Vimeo videos recently, my stream defaulted to their "Auto" setting EVEN THOUGH THE "HD" INDICATOR WAS STILL ON. My system and connection plays 1080p perfectly smoothly all day long - and ALL of YOUR videos are displaying at a drastically reduced quality for me because of this "Auto" YouTube-style setting." When I say "drastically" I mean LESS than 720p. It won't "say" what it is because it just says "Auto" until I go in and change it to one of the other quality sizes. Again - we PAY for the ability to control; that - YouTube already has that "default to 'Auto' thing" and so for many of us Vimeo users it is the ONLY reason we PAY for Vimeo instead. If viewers are going to randomly get DEGRADED playback streams ONLY UNLESS they take the extra step and go in to the playback settings and change that - then what the hell am I paying for - that's already YouTube. But we know that MANY users won't do that EVERY SINGLE TIME. And we also know that that choice is very often not even available if the video has been embedded.

Oh for sure. APS-C sounds fine! So why a GH4 over the A7SII or A7RII for example? Well, first of all: yes, the price. Sure, we'd all be shooting ARRI Alexa XT and Alexa Minis if we had the budget to run our operations like that, but if you're starting out at an indie level, you kinda hope to achieve a whole lot with a whole little. And that's where the folks at Panasonic have found themselves a real market. You can spend the money you saved on more important stuff like lenses, lighting, audio and talented people... To stick with saving on a camera... the A7RII does really well at S35... why not just buy a S35 camera to begin with and save a few pennies that could be put to better use? The new Canon and Nikon flagships are fullframe and do 4K, do they set the bar? Well, here as well. Not exacty in everybody's ballpark financially speaking! And they must be great for shooting stills and fun as hybrid cameras, but since they rely heavily on the traditional DSLR approach, they're not really optimized for video use... besides, there's video crops there too. The 1D C does things well, but still doesn't have all the mirrorless gizmos. I think the times where we'd pick up cameras like the T2i/550D, 7D and 5D are long gone. Ok, so back to fullframe and then mirrorless with Sony. You could get a 2nd hand A7S, that shouldn't set you back too much? True. Why did people ultimately go and pick-up an A7S? Because if you're running and gunning things you won't be setting up much lighting at all. The A7S excells at lowlight. That's the main issue with micro four thirds, the performance just isn't quite there. Everybody tries to avoid cranking up the ISO above ISO800. With an A7S you crank it up to in the thousands and just not care. That's a huge benefit. The A7S is fullframe, there's no muliplying the crop factor, so your wide lenses stay wide. Additionally fullframe enables you to more easily get a shallow depth of field, again, something that people would say contributes to a filmic look. Bitdata usually is better and more accurate too when you increase the pixel surface, allowing it to gather more light, although we haven't really seen any of that back in the colors, which require some work with both Panasonic and Sony. So... sounds like things are in the favor of the A7S over the GH4? Depends on what you're going for. Let's first take a look at how we might go about getting the GH4 more up to A7S level... we could make the image brighter by concentrating light onto the smaller sensor by use of one of these speedboosters, lens turbos, focal reducers, whatchamacallit. This also helps with creating a shallower depth of field. Better... still not there by a long shot though. So what's the point, then? Well, the real power I think Micro Four Thirds has is the size of the system. Not so much in physical size of the camera itself perhaps as it's a no smaller of a camera than the A7s, but as a system, combined with the lenses to go with the sensor inside. To cover that A7S sensor you got to bring serious glass with serious coverage. Besides, serious lenses ask for serious prices too. The GH4 gives you a really discrete low profile camera to shoot with, be it with an affordable pancake lens or quality Vedyra Mini Prime cinema lens, not drawing too much attention, or just being able to cram it in every nook and cranny... or fit it underneath an aerial platform. Yet at the same time it's an enough of a powerhouse to behave well when fully rigged up in frankenstein fashion. For example rigged up with rods, follow focus system, matte box, external monitor/recorder, audio, V-lock battery, speedbooster, Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 D. It's just so multi purpose. And... you can really grow with your camera. As we've seen you can even try out some anamorphic stuff. Then... what do you have to complain about anyways? You seem happy enough. Why not settle for minor improvements? Well, yeah, I'm very grateful to have something like availlable to us. But at the same time... we were still not able to bridge to gap in performance or get that really shallow depth of field. Now... the Nikon D5300 showed us that it's not a stretch to get nice organic rendering and great quality 1080p out of APS-C. And the look's just right somehow. Actually, not somehow. APS-C translates to S35. Guess what that before mentioned ARRI Alexa XT shoots at? You betcha, S35! One of the reasons people fell in love with the Samsung NX1. S35 and nice organic colors! The A5100 and A6000... APS-C too, yet, not the Sony mirrorless cameras known for their breakthrough video features, although the effecient XAVC-S was a nice touch. However, with their new A6300 they take everything people liked about its bigger sensored brothers and crammed it into the APS-C mirrorless body... perhaps with a few exceptions like in-body stabilization. Still though, internal 4K. The A7S didn't even do that. There's some new sensor tech inside which should mean it should perform nicely... better than MFT, still short of its fullframe brothers. It can do the same trick as the Panasonic though, concentrate light onto the smaller sensor for better performance and increased capability of creating shallow depth ot field. The A7RII has a great S35 crop mode, if it's anything like the performance there, it's more than enough for most people! It just sounds like it will leave the GH4 eating dust... that's all I'm saying. Just about the bigger APS-C sensor? Well, again, taking the ARRI XT as an example... you know what some of its keypoints are? Film-like, organic look, High Dynamic Range, Sharp, natural images for HD, 2K, 4K UHD or 4K Cine deliverables, High sensitivity, ARRI color science, Multiple in-camera recording options, ARRIRAW, Apple ProRes, DNxHD, Two independent HD-SDI outputs... sounds familliar? Some of these points remind of Blackmagic cameras as well. BMD Pocket Cinema Camera, Micro Cinema Camera, options at around a 1000 bucks. Along the lines of the GH4 that is. So, no, it's not just fighting APS-C, it's fighting the same Micro Four Thirds standard for other aspects that are appreciated for good video. What stops you from buying an A6300 or BMD Micro Cinema Camera? Well, exactly, nothing. Except the change from MFT to APS-C might not be so easy when you're heavily invested in native MFT glass. The BMD Micro Cinema Camera just doesn't do 4K, so that could be a reason to pass up on it, yet it has some of the features that makes an ARRI camera an ARRI camera... it's film-like, has that organic look, high dynamic range, sharp, natural images, decent color science, RAW/ProRes recording, which is worth something. And let's not forget optional global shutter mode! The A6300 gives you that performance boost and has those great features. It will provide that S35 look or even goes overboard with a focal reducer attached. So the question really becomes... what will Panasonic do to keep you from buying any of these? Well, that's why I said 'Panasonic needs to make it be worth it, which is going to be tough, especially if they really will take their time and not release it this year, with people switching away... so yeah'. Like I said, I still have the E-M1 as well, so I won't just part with my collection of native lenses just yet and the GH5 might up things enough to ditch the A6300 again (which I will initially primarily adapt Nikon mounted lenses to)... but it has to be more than a minor improvement. They'll have to pull out all the stops and really go for it. I don't understand why people would get this camera if they don't want its video features, so yeah, maybe there shouldn't be a GH5, or atleast, not in the capacity we're talking about here. Maybe they should brand it Varicam already. The Panasonic DMC-VC5, because the GH-range is more than just another addition to the G-string of stills cameras. You want a camera that does stills and still has some fun 4K video features without spending the money on getting too serious, get yourself something else. A G7 or so. Anyways. Time will tell. And different opinions and insights aren't a bad thing.

I just talked with a computer scientist. He states that reverse engineering would be possible, but very time consuming, especially not knowing exactly the hardware. But he thinks there must be some visible numerical parameters, since those are variables for the main software. Unfortunately he hasn't got time for delving into this and he's not a camera enthusiast, so no personal interest into this :-(

done. and i didn't even swear.

Hey araucaria, You shredded me and my post, but I'm gonna do you a respect here. First, drop the anger and smugness. I'm not "Telling you to"...I'm just asking you to. I'm asking....could ya? Earlier on you made a good point that most people didn't focus on. Piracy in certain other countries. You mentioned Turkey, but I'd like to add China and India to that, because historically those two countries were hotbeds of huge amounts of movie piracy. At first, the worldwide movie selling industry didn't even attempt to get into those countries because the Governments really didn't let them. So the worldwide movie industry grew for decades without them. (Of course China and India have made their own great movie industry - but that's not what we're talking about here.) There's a difference now - the difference is that all of the countries that DID support the worldwide movie industry are now DRASTICALLY increasing their participation in piracy and so they are reducing the industry's ability to earn it's money fairly. I never said we "Have to give up our Privacy" but I did say "What society has or does accept as any sort of privacy on the Internet is going to have to change RADICALLY or we risk losing one of the most cherished aspects of our modern life - Movies." We don't really have all that much privacy online already anyway - and I only suggest that what we "accept" as privacy (cuz it ain't really much already) is going to have to change IF...IF...we want to keep our movie world going as great as it has been. I have been a monetary supporter of the Electronic Frontier Foundation for 8-years now, so I am ABSOLUTELY on the side of Internet privacy and freedom. So, I understand and respect your position of NOT wanting to relinquishing any more online privacy. No one is saying that's "wrong". Although maybe it seems that's what people are saying - it's really not. What we ARE SAYING - is that it is going to be one or the other. One or the other. We will NOT be able to keep both. That part is already obvious. Pick one, and understand that you will be saying goodbye to the other. If you ONLY like 'flag pole" (big budget) films like superhero movies, then you'll still be happy. But if you like the other varieties of movies too then maybe you won't be so happy when no one will make those anymore. YOU ARE FULLY ENTITLED to only like superhero movies if that's your thing. No judgement of you there. You're on this forum, right? So I'm kinda guessing that you have an interest in all varieties of movie making. We all just want to see those movies continue to get made, and NONE of us has the answer yet of how that's going to happen.

There is actually a Behind the scenes video:

From a youtuber / journalism / film making perspective I think the following features would yield the most IQ progress: - Global shutter, - 4k 60p - 4k 10bit 422, 200Mbit recording - Full sensor read out downscaled to 4k - NX1 level of focussing + tracking. - Auto iso in manual mode - + 1 stop in DR and iso. - 5x IBIS would be nice too. I like the idea of an oversized and/or multi aspect sensor. A cinema lens set would be cool too. Great to see so many responses here. I wonder if Panasonic employees actually read along.

New short film from Macgregor shot on Sony F35 is simply mouthwatering. I dare to say that I haven't seen anything better imagewise in digital camera world, but I have to admit that great grading also helps in this case.

The more I watch it, the more I really love the overall style and color! Great!

Obviously the gh4 is near and dear to many people's hearts. It also seems like they'd feel abandoned by Panasonic if a s35 sensor was introduced even if the sensor supported the old lenses. Let's not forget that a great part of the gh4 was it's body being the same as the gh3, backwards compatibility plays well with budget minded customers. A larger sensor might benefit noise and low light, but not much else. And many people have suggested great improvement ideas that don't require a larger sensor (global shutter is my favorite). Instead of wondering how they can compete with Sony, which mostly exists at a different price point and customer base, I wonder how the can better compete at their economy price point. Why did Mad Max use an Olympus and Blackmagic cameras instead of Panasonics? It definitely wasn't because of low light noise or 6k. Panasonic customers interested in video are not going to go for headline specs, they are intelligent enough to see the camera as a whole. Given all the flame on this topic, I think Panasonic can rely on some brand loyalty also. The gh4 isn't going to be obsolete anytime soon. If the gh5 hits the right price point, doesn't estrange it's current customers and offers at least one nominal improvement over the gh4, I think it will sell just fine.

It is apparently because, slog has a 16-235 (or something like that) range, whereas other picture styles have 0-255 range. The histogram shows range from 0 to 255 brightness values, but slog's highest value is just 235 - not perfectly white. Same with blacks. That doesn't mean though, that your image is not overexposed. It actually is, but it is overexposed at 235 brightness value, not 255. When first time shooting with a picture profile, that has a max value of 235, you have to be careful not to blow out highligts. Because if you don't know, that 235 is the max, you're looking at histogram and thinking - nice, the exposure is ok - but actually your highights are blown out at 235 and there's nothing you can do about it in post.

Cheers for the tip! I'll keep an eye out for the Tokina AT-X 60-120mm f/2.8

This camera looks like an evolution of the old DV cameras. Super 35 sensor and LOG is cool but the image to me seems "news program" or "reality show" esque.

Ehm, I think your overestimating the part of users that use this for stills primarily (or at least the '90% of users of gh4 would'nt need these features'). To me it makes hardly any sense to buy the GH4 if you're hardly interested in its more advanced video capabilities (Olympus seems a far better choice for stills, or even other Panasonics like the GX8, or the G7(0) if you want stills but 4K as well, because should you shoot video at some point, you want the latest and greatest, it's still a numbers game that gets some people to play). Thats the thing it does, that is what they've come to push the GH-range for. It's being used for aerial video, on many productions as alternative angle/B-cam and even as A-cam. With the BLEGH-unit released along beside the GH4, how can you deny it's not just a small market that cares about the video on the GH-range. That IS its market. And they've done great with it too. Panasonic US even puts pressure on the folks in charge overseas to give it more advanced features and make it more suitable at pro level, just take this recent talk on shooting anamorphic with Matt Frazer: Just now with fierce competition, mainly Blackmagic and Sony... myself, heavily invested in the MFT system, I will probably be going with the A6300 next... I can still see me using the E-M1 for stills (IBIS with primes especially, compact and pretty), but for video I've come to appreciate the performance and aesthetics of the APS-C D5300. Now, Sony has a very adaptable system, the S35 crop makes it easier to find and use wide angle lenses in comparison with MFT, smart adapters and focal reducers getting close to fullframe, making it easier to create a shallow depth of field, which often contributes to a filmic look. Not to mention the better performance when using it at and above ISO800, especially with the new sensor tech. I bet everyone would appreciate more usable ISO1600 and ISO3200. ISO6400 even perhaps. As well as the other tech feats. So Panasonic needs to make it be worth it, which is going to be tough, especially if they really will take their time and not release it this year, with people switching away... so yeah, I'm not so sure about that ('All it has to do is minor improvements').

A link to footage I shot of the aurora in Saariselka (Lapland, 3rd Jan 2016). Not claiming it's cinematic or has any artistic or technical merit. But the A7S impressed me. Unfortunately the Manfrotto video head froze (-28) so the camera movement isn't great. Slog at 25/40k iso recorded in Shogun with Samyang 24mm T1.5. All realtime and graded to look as it was. https://click.email.vimeo.com/?qs=ff270841caf6f31e744cb88599a9d8de085489b11b5dbc3463e3bbbeb700f83f45a0e34df8e2abf53c8965fc89d1490a

Ooh...dayum. You're good with the warrior words there Kaylee. Nicely done.

i didnt either i was nice!! lol im a vimeo user but i dont pay for plus or pro – ive just used it for ~watching~ video. i was *planning* on getting a plus or pro account to support the new stuff im working on but as soon as they made these changes i was like Uhhh no. anyway, i wrote them feedback, they even have an option for people who arent paying members yet i wrote: Hi friends, I've enjoyed using Vimeo very much over the last several years, and I have been looking forward to upgrading to a Pro account to support my first feature film, but it has come to my attention that Vimeo's public playback structure has changed insofar as it will now "Auto-Select" a playback quality for viewers; and the tab where one could specify what playback quality is assigned has been removed. Since controlling playback quality is the one and only reason that I would pay for a Plus or Pro account, I am no longer planning to do so. I wanted to share this feedback in hopes that your product team will take it under advisement. Very best wishes, Me see how nice i was Zak??

Pretty cool to see the camera used in some pretty tricky situations. I for one am pretty impressed with the results. We shall see what this looks like when more cameras get released into the wild.

Congrats on the Vimeo staff pick. Your work looks amazing. I posted the link to your short earlier in one of Ed's posts (probably not the best place), but I was curious if Ed had seen it. (bought the F35 myself thanks to you and Ed.)

It took about a year to make. The budget for the shoot was about $25K, includes permits and crew getting paid a bit. A couple regular kinos for this but mostly practical lights.

Huge thanks Andy!!

the Pantax 28mm f2.8 is not that sharp fully wide open - the best cheap 28mm f2.8 is the canon fd version it blows the Pentax away for sharpness at 2.8 fully wide open you can get one on ebay for $50 ish the best 28mm f2.8 you can get this the Nikon AIS 28mm 2.8 and the Contax Carl Zeiss C/Y 28mm 2.8 - both are stunning lenses another great option is the SIGMA 30mm f1.4 it has aspheric elements and is also stellar!!

They might go up in price when the new pentax fullframe is released ^^¡

Came Single is $1000, I paid $650 for the DS1, the Single weighs more but the DS1 has a much higher capacity - 2.6 vs 3.8 pounds. Interesting they they're claiming 20 hour life when they use the same batteries as the DS1, but only 2 cells for the Single compared to 3 for the DS1. Without a battery or lens the Micro weighs more than twice what a GoPro weighs (88g just the camera, 150g with housing vs 301g for just the micro body), I seriously doubt a GoPro gimbal will be able to handle the weight of the bare camera, much less one with a battery and lens. It will also be much more front heavy than a tiny go pro or a flat phone, that gives the small motor gimbals issues. I know someone that tried to rig his RX100 to one of the GoPro gimbals and it wouldn't stop vibrating, it was too heavy and it weighs just 298g with battery and card. Not saying it won't work, but it seems unlikely. For a few hundred more you can get a larger gimbal that will work with no issues.

that's right, piracy is not currently an issue for my movie. Down and Dangerous was a micro-budget title released *two years ago* to the day (we opened on Feb 14, 2014). the height of its piracy/file-sharing issues were during the crucial opening quarter. basing your assessment on what is now a library title, doesn't convince me of... i don't know, anything really. and of course it comes with your characteristic and underhanded insults, which you have been weaving into your posts here for years. but i'm not beneath fighting fire with fire so i'll happily do the same and point out that taking shots at people who risk failure is typical behavior for *sideline naysayers* not actively taking their own bumps and bruises in this arena. what you find amongst fellow doers is a sense of empathy and optimism and a more nurturing form of criticism. and here's a big surprise for you! no one knows the flaws of my movie better than me. hell, I'm the jerk who lived and breathed it for two years. more than that, as it's inspired by a brief chapter in my dad's life story. which explains why the title's anagram is D.A.D. i know where I succeeded. I know where i stumbled. and more importantly, I know how to do it better next time. side rant: why people expect filmmakers to emerge fully-formed is beyond me. no one is given an opportunity to grow into better storytellers anymore -- to close that gap between the vision in their heads and their ability to execute it in the real world. it didn't used to be that way. I think it was steven soderbergh who said that he wouldn't have a career if he started out today because no one is forgiven when they fail anymore. i'm familiar with the story behind marianne. they had a tough go of it. piracy hit them harder than it hit me. I got through it relatively unscathed as my movie has grossed four times its meager budget. what worries me is as i embark on larger endeavors with more money at risk, its cast and genre appeal will be stronger, and so will its piracy-appeal. and i'm not experienced enough to know where the tipping point lies, meaning, the point where piracy makes things untenable. I currently feel safe in the micro-budget world because I think we've cracked the nut of making it profitable as well as creatively fulfilling. thank you for pointing out the movie is up on youtube. the uploader applied an aggressive vignette to the whole thing making it pretty much unwatchable. issued a takedown. the slow wheels at youtube will likely have it down in a few days. what follows is usually an angry message from the uploader, pissed at me because youtube closed their account. to your last point... what I believe you are missing is that piracy doesn't only affect existing titles. it greatly reduces the number of low and mid-budget movies that get made in favor of tentpole pictures because they are a riskier, execution-dependent, proposition. if the last 100 hundred years of produced movies had been influenced by piracy the way they are now, that list would look very different. now please excuse me, I have a screenplay rewrite to get back to. it's about a guy who goes out into the streets to pick fights with strangers as a way to punish himself. which means I can chalk up my time here to: "research".

A beautiful spot shot in anamorphic. Looks like a Kowa?. Anamorphic zoom? Anybody on EOSHD shoot this? Great job!

No, a 50mm f/2.8 will be two stops darker than a 25mm f/1.4. Same depth of field, but that's it. The lens size advantage is indisputable. And it's not just sensor size; it's aspect ratio. Designing a lens with good edges and corners becomes much easier with a squarer aspect ratio, and requires a much smaller image circle. The G7 has already improved 1-1.5 stops in noise performance from the GH4. If the GH5 sensor offers any noise improvement at all over the G7, we're looking at a usable ISO 3200, which is more than enough for me. I don't understand how you can argue that m4/3 isn't a standard. Of course it is. We have 6 different manufacturers making lenses for it. And with a simple speed booster, you increase your low light performance by 1 stop and gain a s35 sensor with Canon or Nikon mount. Sounds plenty standard to me. M4/3 offers lots of advantages. Smaller, better-corrected lenses, faster fps, lower rolling shutter, broader dof, less overheating, better battery life, a 4:3 aspect ratio for anamorphic shooting, easier to process higher bit depths, etc. And if its performance in stills isn't enough for you, nothing made before 2006 must've been either. It's only a half stop behind APS-C in every metric. And though their sensor tech has stalled a bit, m4/3 will perform as well in 3 years as APS-C does now; at that point, I'd target have the reduced size and weight than a fractional bump in IQ. Also, keep in mind that we have no idea what we want. I mean none at all. After the GH2, what did everyone ask for? Better low-light, DR, color science, build quality, bitrate/codec, and menus. What did the GH3 deliver? Every single one of those improvements...yet everyone panned it as a minor step forward because the spec sheet didn't wow them. Here's what I want. -1 stop increase in noise from the G7. - reduce the crop factor to the native 2x, or bring back the multi-aspect sensor for 1.86x (APS-H with the speed booster) -1 stop increase in DR -V-LOG, with view assist and the green/magenta blocking issue fixed - anamorphic de-squeeze -10-bit internal recording, and a 200mbps 8-bit option - dual card slots (It'd be cool if you could record to both slots simultaneously, or your big files to one slot and 1080p proxies to the other, but that's dreaming) -A full sized HDMI port. There's room, and it would make external recording much easier and more reliable. -a better implemented YAGH brick than can run on 2 GH4 batteries I feel like that's an attainable wish list and a compelling enough tool to keep people on board until the next big leap. I'd buy one.

A newscast is copyrighted content, nothing about it is public domain. In fact virtually nothing has entered the public domain in the U.S. in decades, you can thank the fuck-tards at Disney for that one because every 10 years when Mickeys copyright is about to expire they shovel truckloads of cash at lobbyists and get the copyright extended. Rant off. I just hate copyrights being extended in perpetuity for the sake of greed, that was never the intention of copyright protection.

actually, on opening weekend, most of the ticket for major and mini-major studio titles goes to the distributor. the longer a film plays, the more the cut swings in the theater's favor. This is why concessions are priced so high. The theater isn't making much on new titles so they have to make up for it in popcorn sales.

wow kewlll!!!! its coming this year i swear. ill send u a link great link, ive been there before but havent spent enough time. this is going in my queue lolol ??????? so true and the ppl who lift stuff from fine art usually look like geniuses to their peers because no one knows the source material hellz yeah for people who have never seen stuff like this before, you should definitely check it out, as filmmakers it might broaden your horizons, in a good way~! the cremaster cycle is kinda like taking dmt in relation to filmmaking (only it lasts way, waaay longer lol) the thing that amazes me the most about contemporary artists is how unique each respective practice is i like bill a lot. on a personal level, ive been disappointed in the relative reluctance of collectors to embrace video, as they do other media. i hate to say it, but rich old [white] people want a jeff koons sculpture in their backyard. when it comes to satisfying that need.... ::sigh:: even i have to give jeff credit i am seriously a terrible resource for this its kind of embarrassing. the truth is, i havent been paying too much attention to the fine art world for the last 5 years or so, ive been learning everything i can about dealing with hollywood and commercial filmmaking in general, fine artists are terrible at being a community. we tend to not get along well with each other, and we spend a lot of time alone. tbh its very competitive when i first got into filmmaking i breathed a sigh of relief... its a much more welcoming environment believe it or not. in filmmaking theres this idea of a team, and we all need each other, no one does this stuff alone~! graduate film students all help each other, while graduate fine art students all hate each other lol

good night, brave troll. and it's spelled "genius", genius. The movie was distributed by paramount internationally. that included both those countries and whatever rock you just crawled back under.

well, i think you're misinformed about that. just about everything is up there. from Tarkovsky to Dr. Who episodes, from BAFTA award nominees to B-movies. even my own movie was torrented one week before its US release from the VOD broadcast in sweden. and mine is just a $50,000 microbudget crime drama made by a crew of six on an AF100. hell, I've had to submit takedown notices to YouTube because people in Thailand and Turkey posted the entire movie on their channel.

Was driving passed my old neighborhood today, where the "Building of Moire" lays. I had the NX500 in my bag and the R1 buckled in the back seat. I also had some Magic Lantern shots at home. So I stopped. The Cameras are: Sony NEX5t Sony a6000 Sony FS100 Sony AX100 Sony A7 Sony A7ii Panasonic LX100 Panasonic HMC151 Panasonic GM1 Canon XC10 Canon EOS-M Raw Canon EOS-M Crop Blackmagic Pocket Blackmagic 4K Production Digital Bolex Samsung NX1 Samsung NX500 HD Samsung NX500 4K Crop LG G Flex 2 at 200mbps Red One MX

I see. But I would be more than happy with a 6.5k video with 12bit and 4:4:4 at 200mb/sec ;-) Theoretically 6.5k is possible since the nx1 samples at that res and then downsizes the image. Not sure about the other settings. But bitrate could definitely be increased.

True, I think I might call JVC this week and pretty much beg them to lend me one

Well then your chosen route will also probably ensure that most of the movie industry goes bye-bye. Leaving us (and you) with little more than superhero sequels. If that's all you want to see out there anymore - well then, by all means, have at it.

I'm afraid I struggle to see the business case here. Panasonic aren't doing that well selling cameras (in Japan they are now selling less mirrorless than Canon) and new lenses just trickle out. I doubt anyone inside Panasonic sees throwing lots of money into an all-new camera system as likely to be a winner, especially in a generally declining market. I think they only sell a decent number of GH4s as it offers a lot for the money and is stills and video. No way will videographer sales (if they effectively ditch the stills side by only having 8MP with m43 lenses) get them back that money at similar prices on a new format. I think if they go to a different sensor size they will have to use 3rd party lenses (developing their own being an unlikely investment), so whose mount would be possible - Canon EF maybe using the V35 sensor (4096x2160)? Won't be any good for stills. Plus sounds tricky to avoid damaging higher-margin V35 LT sales... I can't see it. To do your suggestion at a minimum they'll need someone else to have designed a sensor just for this camera and to be happy about low sales volumes for that sensor (which usually means prices that drive 5-figure camera pricing, so they've pretty much just designed the V35 LT again). P.S. I read your whole article before coming to the forum for my first post on the subject.

I read the whole article before first responding. But I still disagree. Like I said before, full frame and APS-C existed before Panasonic and Olympus consciously made the choice to build a smaller m43 system. They did this to reduce size of all components and carve out a niche for themselves. Now you're asking them to confuse their niche. They're already competing just fine and GH4 sales are good. They can continue this with a 60fps GH5 and 10-bit internal. Those two alone will sell the next camera to a lot of people. Let's say they dd this tomorrow, who else on the market is offering you a 4K 60p 10-bit camera for under $2000? Will Sony catch up, sure. But that's just the nature of the game. That's why you don't pick cameras based on the latest specs but the one that works for you when you need it. Again, adding a S35 sensor is just going to upset people who are already invested in m43 glass. Because now they can't get the most out of their new camera with their investment in m43 lenses. Which will make them not want to invest further in m43 lenses going forward. If Panasonic makes APS-C lenses as premium glass, that just fragments a system that doesn't need to be fragmented. The only reason APS-C DSLRs exist is because Canon and Nikon needed to find a way to get better yields on their sensors in the early days when making full frame sensors was a lot more expensive and more prone to error on the larger waffers. So they fragmented out of necessity. M43 doesn't need to go this route and I don't think they will. Nor do I think they will become irrelevant if they don't. What you're looking for is a cheaper/smaller Varicam. That's what you should be asking them to make. Not disrupt their m43 line. No they would not. Larger sensors require a larger circle of confusion which requires larger glass elements to retain certain speeds. Why do you think 16mm lenses are smaller and medium format lenses are bigger?

It's almost double focus, but not quite. If you watch my review you'll understand.

why GH5 .. I see no reason for Panasonic to abandon the M4/3 format that Panasonic take so much effort and time to build for themselves. That said, why not take the Varicam line and build something along it as the Super 35 platform , who is to say Panasonic cannot have 2 platform of a system, one 4/3 sensor sized, and one Super-35. Canon Cine EOS is pretty much taking the same route, just in a different fashion. A VariCam model that kind of matching the FS5/FS7 , and yet another one a hybrid like the GH, but likely with interchangeable mount ( active ) for M4/3, PL, Canon EF and might be even Nikon F. Its easy to dream up a GH5 with Super 35 sensor and all the bells and whistle, but seriously that mean a total re do of almost all the lens and that certainly is not a simple undertaking , not to mention having the complexity to serve 2 format, and several cause with the same lineup. By splitting the so call super-35 GH5 and refit it into the VariCam lineup ( even if it still use the M4/3 mount ) it can be easier go for both. Might be just call it the VariCam H ( for hybrid ). In short the GH can stay GH and M4/3 , we just have the VariCam lineup expanded downmarket to include it all the way down to the Super-35 GH ( super GH , should we call it .. lol )

Followed the forum for some time...just signed up to comment on this topic....gh4 is a great camera ...animation, time lapse(built in),slo mo,anamorphic ,high bit rate 4k cinema and 3800 , shutter angle,zebra's log and so on...and at a price point well within everyone's reach it straddles a huge slice of the market place....it does not need to change so dramatically it just needs to get a little better ....96fps a little cleaner or perhaps 120fps ...anamorphic de-squeeze? a little here and there...from a commercial point of view they should invest money in spreading their wings a little no-one including Panasonic have an endless pot of gold ...they should do exactly the same thing again in a different segment of the market ...a medium format camera ...why fight in a crowded sector ...the gh4 is loved as much by photographers as it is by the video crowd ...straddle a large sector again both groups would lap up a medium format camera hybrid...it would do something not done in this field bring a crowd!...this would bring the price point again to larger market...if your going to spend on new sensors then this sector is ripe ...margins would be bigger (nothing less than 5 k in this band) if they could knock 2 off that the photographers alone would bite theirs hands off...your going to invest in new glass?...here it is ....could certainly help in short term if mount was easy to convert legacy glass to..anyone for 65mm?

Mostly pictures of people pretending to be happy and eating food

That's some fine lookin' stuff right there. I looked at a bunch of your other stuff too. I think this Lens-Lut combo is a real high-point. The stuff with the Samsung lenses is unbelievably sharp and clear, but at times almost feels too sharp...know what I mean? Those AI-s lenses are still sharp, but I don't see the almost distractingly sharp edges to things. Kowabunga!

I'd probably have the FS700 / O7Q combo in there too.... When you think what it offers up, it is very underrated and the raw image can be very beautiful. I saw a kit for sale for under $4k recently... 4K/120fps/raw for $4k, genuine bargain.