Andrew Reid

Is it the 1.75x version like Seb has?   '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>   Cheers!

  It's hardly usable though is it.   My idea of a revolution is that you get something usable out of it! Otherwise it isn't worth spilling blood for!   It's just not reliable enough. I challenge anyone to use the 70D or 7D 2 or C300 dual-pixel AF in place of manual focus and keep all their shots intact and have it do what you want it to do throughout the shoot.   The last thing I want to have to contend with is reshooting again and again because the camera is too stupid to focus on the right thing.

  It made sense as the feature is at the moment *really* targeted at photographers.   Photographers need 30p and 25p to avoid strobing with light sources at shutter speeds other than 180 degrees.   If you shoot at 1/200 and 24p under certain kinds of 60hz lights instead of at 30p, your stills aren't going to come out nicely.   Panasonic in the US are pushing for the feature to made of use to filmmakers with 24p.   For me it is still of use to us, just select 25p for the film look and make sure you set the right GH4 syncro scan rate depending on your lights.

Yes it's a very clean camera. I find noise in the shadows starts to become an issue at ISO 6400 when using the flat picture profile, but if you're crushing your blacks in the grade as you should do, then raising the bottom of the curve to give the illusion of higher black levels, most of that vanishes.   It's not as clean as the A7S above that though in low light.

I don't agree with any of the above and I hope you were joking about the 'glass tower', that's just nuts.   They can still get pros to pay $20k in the same way Panasonic charge 3 times that for their 4K Varicam S35, yet give us 4K on the GH4 for $1699.   4K is mass market. GoPros and mobile phones have it for $500.   4K TVs can be had close to $1300.   4K is the new 1080p. Nobody shoots 480p standard def any more do they!?

Just noticed I can't set slow shutter speeds on the D750 like I can on A7S, like 1/8th for blurry movement. I was using both cameras for a dance piece. A7S came in handy there. Overall though both performed well... such a clean, smooth noise free codec on that Nikon!!

  Panasonic understand indie filmmaking better than any other manufacturer and with this, they're showing some real cinema DNA in their products. Great gift for us and can't wait to see what happens next.

  Excellent suggestion!

  Indeed, and focus hasn't come much further than the 70's in 2014. Time it was sorted out.

  Yeah apparently this is what filmmakers do according to Nikon :) George Lucas crouched over a 3.2" flippy LCD.

  Go into the menus, dig deep and you have option of assigning 1:1 focus assist, or two other magnification levels to the OK button.   The magnified assists here are better quality than the ones you get from a single tap of the + button but the frame rate is a bit choppier.   Also you can't use any of them during recording, which is bloody stupid.

New firmware for the Panasonic adds higher vertical resolutions in various aspect ratios, making further use of the camera's 4K video ability. For photographers an in-camera workflow to extract high resolution stills from "4K Photo Mode" is now available. For 4K video, resolution increases from 2160 lines in 16:9 for standard 4K to 2336 lines in 3:2, 2496 lines in 4:3 and an enormous 2880 lines in 1:1. By comparison the Red Dragon in 6K records up to 3160 lines vertically (2:1 aspect ratio). An anamorphic lens is needed to take advantage of the resolution gain in squarer aspect ratios such as 4:3 and 1:1. As a huge advocate of anamorphic at EOSHD, I'll be testing this out very shortly with my collection (below). I'm expecting the results to be stunning. I caught up with Panasonic recently to discuss the firmware update and more... Read the full article here

  Nice. Let's see your next film without a camera in that case :)   Hand gestures and a projector light!

  That makes literally no sense!

Absolutely, raw is still a benchmark for ultimate image quality. Let's be clear, I'm not denying that.   For me, now it's all about how close we can get to that beauty....but with more practical solutions like the GH4, A7S and D750.   I am over regular raw shooting now, as I ran out of space at the local aircraft hanger where I stored my hard drives.

The real successor to the 7D for filmmakers is the C300 and Canon knows this.   This is why they don't need professional standard video on their DSLRs. It really is that simple. C300 sold incredibly well. Job done.   Canon thinks the soft, mediocre 1080p on the 7D is good enough for 90% of their intended user base.   All I can say to that is... hahha... now get back to work.   They are royally underestimated their customers. We demand more. Hobbyists and enthusiast with high knowledge especially absolutely realise how Canon are falling behind on performance terms vs the competition, for stills let alone video. Nikon has refreshed very recently across their entire line and Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus have all innovated with high end mirrorless stuff. Canon has done none of that.   For stills performance look at the aged 5D3 vs D810 or indeed the D750, which is cheaper than both. Or the Sony A7R for resolution and the Sony A7S for low light photography. Dynamic range is also a problem. Canon are 2 stops short. Then for video, ignoring the abject mess that is the DSLRs, the Canon C300 just does NOT compete on equal terms with the Sony FS7. It looks like 7 years older technology and when you see the 10bit 4K of the FS7 next to the 8bit 1080p of the C300, and the 180fps vs 30fps, you will see it in your bloody work as well. I'm not paying money for that kind of shortfall no matter how good the ergonomics and lenses are!!   What I find deeply odd, is Canon's complacency in the midst of all of this.... Vs the big guys like Sony and Nikon it is baffling enough. But then you add into the mix out of left field, Sigma(!?) making significantly better lenses than Canon, and their 35mm F1.4 outselling the Canon 35mm F2.0 IS so much that Canon had to give it a price drop... and of Samsung making more technologically cutting edge APS-C sensors... Samsung!? OF ALL PEOPLE!! I mean come on, wake up.   Canon's whole success has been built on leading the technology race. Best sensors, best cameras, best lenses.   Stills shooters STILL (if you excuse the terrible pun) have no high megapixel sensor from Canon. Why not? Nothing to beat the 36MP offered by Sony and Nikon.   Sony have the best sensor for low light photography and it does superb video. Where's Canon's answer? They don't have one!   Sony have a medium format sensor actually already in cameras right now, getting sold, and Canon could but doesn't.   Sony has mass market 24MP and 36MP sensors which are better performing than Canon's and not only that but they are giving Canon's biggest rival on sales, Nikon, an image quality advantage. It's all very confusing.   If Canon don't fix this, their good karma won't last and they will remember the dissenters like me in a few years wishing they'd listened.

I love raw on the 5D Mark III. Magic Lantern worked a large miracle with it.   The thing is, the more the practical realities hit home, the more I am looking to make a few trade offs in image quality in order to get more manageable file sizes and a more reliable running camera.   I haven't yet had a single shoot where raw recording did not stop unexpectedly.   And I am missing shots because I can't record too much material due to space considerations. I recently did a shoot of a band in a music studio, 4 songs and each musician filmed separately laying down a track. Drums, guitar, bass, keyboard and vocals. I shot it with the A7S at 50Mbit/s, H.264 XAVC-S and ended up with 80GB of material after the 8 hour shoot was over. Can you imagine how much that would be in raw?   This is where pixel peeping fails and fails badly. It's actual of zero benefit when you have a situation as I described above. We can talk about compression artefacts and workflow until the cows come home, but if you have to start missing shots, or managing data whilst you should be shooting, it really interferes with the creative process.   Still a big fan of raw but... you've gotta pick the right tool for the job.

Shots below are ISO 800, F1.4, same lens, same lighting.   In particular the colours are very similar.   After both were graded I couldn't tell the two apart.   The kicker...   For this clip, a few seconds long... D750 weighed in at 10MB and 5D3 raw file at 500MB. What's more, the D750 grade took me about 10 seconds to match the clip from the 5D Mark III. Quick change of the gamma curve in Resolve, and a saturation boost, then done. The auto white balance did a superb job in-camera. The 5D Mark III raw I can sit and grade for hours. Obviously you have more control, more freedom, but at what cost?   I just want the image... and the D750 appears to give me that.   S-LOG2 on the A7S does too... but it's a bit of a hassle.   5D Mark III 14bit uncompressed raw     Nikon D750 compressed H.264 at 24Mbit/s (24p)     By the way, you can tell the difference. The smooth gradation and transition in the mirror of low contrast shades looks blockier on the Nikon shot and the noise grain is finer on the 5D Mark III.   However this wasn't shot via uncompressed HDMI and the difference isn't large enough in my opinion to suffer the file sizes... of raw OR ProRes for that matter, unless you have a lot of fast camera movement, tricky lights and motion blur to contend with then the Atomos Ninja Star on the back of a D750 will really help.

Presumably pairing it with a Ninja Blade would avoid that problem. Because the 20 minute limit is for the internal recording.

Let's call it a purple vignette. Purple fringing is something else, to do with lenses.   The purple vignette I've not had yet, how long was the camera running for when it happened?

Downloaded the original 4K file and it's looking good.     More from Philip here - http://philipbloom.net/2014/09/29/gopro4/

Already have it in Canon mount. Damned annoying.   Situation would be a lot more simple if Canon would just give us a body that was actually better than the last one for video. After 3 years you'd kind of expect them to do that.

  I have a lot of Canon IS lenses that I can't use on the Nikon, and can't afford to replace all of these with Nikon VR lenses. That's what I meant in the article when I say I will miss Canon's stabilisation as opposed to no-stablisation on my Nikon glass.

Depends more on encoding quality than bitrate.   Compare Fuji's codec to the C100. On the Fuji X-T1 it is 36Mbit/s and on C100 it is 24. Nobody will find the Fuji codec holds up in the same way.   Noise and blocking in shadows is introduced by a bad encoder. Wise maths with 24Mbit/s is better than dumb maths at 48Mbit/s!

  It's flat but strongly saturated. On this shoot I didn't have contrast dialled down all the way. You can go even flatter if you want to. I've yet to see if that's an advantage or not but with the lows being so cleanly rendered by the new Nikon codec and the sensor output being so smooth, it really does have a chance to break the 12-13 stop mark for dynamic range in video mode.