Andrew Reid

  On the EVF:   OLED is certainly a superior technology to the panel used in the GH2. It doesn't do the rainbow-flicker when you pan, the contrast is far higher, you get inky blacks with it, the new panel is 16:9 so suited to video and very wide. Colour from the OLED panel is richer and deeper although different in tone to the main screen. The resolution isn't quite as crisp as the GH2 though, you're right.   The main thing that lets the EVF down is the optical side rather than OLED. It does smear too easily at the edges when your eye isn't dead straight on. All EVFs do this including the GH2 but on the GH3 it is particularly easy to get blurry edges.   On the dynamic range, I never said it could compete on same level as Blackmagic raw with 13 stops, so not sure what this refers to.   Thanks for comments!

  Indeed they should, but I don't think there'd be enough room for both in the adapter. Maybe in a medium format adapter.

  It could be a wheel with different NDs rotating over the sensor, or it may be a vari-ND (two polarisers) that flip down over the sensor when in use, and up again when not. Either way it is much more convenient to have these in the lens adapter or camera, and not have to add them in front of every one of your lenses on a shoot.

Today sees the announcement of a new DSLR sensor from one of Nikon's recent sensor supplier's Aptina which has a headline spec of 4K video at up to 80fps. The highly rated company says it is 'combining DSLR image quality and 4K digital cinema' with the new AR1411HS sensor. Along with Nikon being on the record for wanting to add 4K video to future Nikon 1 mirrorless cameras, could the new Super 16mm sized Aptina sensor pave the way for them to do a Cinema EOS style range and 4K on DSLRs? [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10158/could-nikon-be-about-to-enter-digital-cinema-market]Read the full article here[/url]

[media]http://vimeo.com/63910035[/media] First 1.50 minutes is sample footage, you can fast forward to 1.50 for the technical info This is something I've wanted for a long time! Focus and exposure are the most important things on a movie camera yet DSLRs don't have a built in ND filter and you're often left to shoot at ugly high shutter speeds such as 1/1000 in bright light to control exposure. With this adapter you can add a variable ND filter wheel to any mirrorless mount camera (E-mount, Micro Four Thirds) effectively adding the main ergonomics advantage of the Cinema EOS C300 and Panasonic AF100. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10149/holymanta-the-nd-filter-lens-adapter]Read the full article here[/url]

  This is a good point. Dynamic range in video depends more on how the sensor data is treated, how it is downscaled to 1080p and the codec.   Don't read too much into DXOMark.

The PureView branding dropped for EOS, a trademark of Canon? I find that unlikely although there IS a Volkswagen EOS car.   I've corrected a few things in the post - the sensor isn't Carl Zeiss, it is by Toshiba. The lens is Zeiss. The source of the news is PetaPixel.   I have the PureView and it really is an amazing camera module, and deserves a better phone. If they get the phone right I may well replace my iPhone with one.

The topic title is highly misleading.   SLR Magic's current lenses the 12mm F1.6, 25mm F0.95, 35mm T0.95 and 50mm T0.95 HyperPrime CINE are original optical designs.   I have edited the title.

  C100 vs GH3 coming next week.   Also Philip Bloom has already done GH2 / C300 resolution comparison shots.

  Thanks for this, very nice to see rolling shutter measured so clearly.

  The EVF panel technology is superior on the GH3 but as noted in the DPReview the optics are smeary at the edges if you wear glasses or don't look directly through the centre. I get the same on the NEX 7's OLED viewfinder and on the OM-D E-M5 so it is not a problem unique to the GH3's OLED.   I'd like to see the optics and eyecup beefed up for future models and articulation, if that requires a yet still larger body so be it. If you want a Pocket Cinema Camera sized camera there are plenty of options, yet never truly pocketable due to the optics. I'd rather have the better handling than the cute downsizing.

  I'm currently using Portrait but without turning contrast down. I leave that in the middle. Saturation too. Sharpness I dial right down to -5 and add in post. Noise reduction I also dial right down. I use 1080/25p IPB 50Mbit rather than ALL-I. Saves card space and looks a bit better.

  Well there's certainly no touching the image quality on the Blackmagic Cinema Camera for the price. Although the Pocket version won't have quite the same amount of detail as 2.5K raw on the BMCC it will maintain similar ProRes 1080p results and they are also DSLR beating.   The Pocket Cinema Camera sensor is smaller than the GH3 by quite a considerable margin though so the look of your current M43 glass will change, and the main advantage with the GH3 is that the workflow is much faster and the ergonomics far more convenient. You get more features too, like 1080/60p, audio-meters, etc.   Even if you don't edit in raw, the Blackmagic cameras all urge you to spend hours in post tweaking the colours. With the GH2 and GH3 I hardly ever felt the need to heavily grade the footage so I worked far quicker.   If you're shooting a documentary I think the GH3 wins.

For those asking for a chart test, Slashcam did a scientific test of the GH3 with regards resolution on a chart, aliasing and moire. Very good test but the article is in German so you will need to use a translator. http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Panasonic-DMC-GH3---Messergebnisse--alles-.html

  There will be a review of the Lanparte stuff. I have got the carbon rods and matte box, follow focus with hard stops and the quick release baseplate. You are right about the quality vs price thing - it is just right. Quality is American standard but without the US price tag.

  OK point taken. Please do calm down.   I'm not proclaiming it a failure but nothing it can do internally match what amazing stuff it can do externally at 4K and in raw so in comparison the internal codec is wimpy. That is what the headline means.   I really enjoyed my time with the FS700. Loved the slow mo and had mostly good things to say about it but the ergonomics are not the best, the new ND filter implementation is rather clunky and I had major issues with aliasing and worse low light performance than the FS100. Picture profiles are unlikely to help with the aliasing. I will keep my FS100 until I've seen what it does in raw.

Hacked GH1 is best option for $350.   GH2 won't be that cheap! 550D is OK but GH1 has less moire and aliasing, rotating screen, mirrorless lens mount for a wider variety of lenses and the hack.

  Canon 1D C... $12,000.   NEX series have 1080/60p as does the new Samsung NX300... But poor video quality especially on the Samsung.

It does in-camera slow-mo, didn't cover it in the review as it is best to shoot 1080/60p and do the slow-mo in post.   WiFi... Not convinced it replaces an HDMI monitor! I don't use it.

https://vimeo.com/63892665   Things that stand out...   Compressed raw will likely come to the 2.5K camera, with firmware update Firmware on the Pocket Cinema Camera is identical to BMCC, only sensor part is different (debayering etc.) They hope to do a Quicktime wrapper for Cinema DNG making it easier to edit. Raw frames in Quicktime MOV!   All very positive stuff and I like how knowledgable and engineering lead their CEO is. Not a business strategist but a proper technical man with ideas.

Above: my GH3 kitted out with Leica 14-50mm F2.8, Lanparte follow focus, carbon matte box and baseplate Six months in the making here is my final and full review of the Panasonic GH3 jointly published with DPReview.com. I highly recommend checking out that review as well, to which I contributed the video mode insights. The Panasonic GH3 is an affordable $1299 hybrid camera and has a special legacy to build on with indie filmmakers. Does it succeed? Read the full article here

  Anything that goes to Canon EF mount. M42, etc. yes. FD no.

Leang has now been banned for months of unpleasantness. I've had enough of it.   If a contribution isn't good for the atmosphere of the forum then it is no longer welcome in my view.

Detail and sharpness are separate things really. Like JG says, too much sharpness = video.   But there are many complicating factors.   For example if you have a 50mm on the 60D and shoot some actors or people at reasonably close range with a reasonably shallow depth of field, that really helps to mask any resolution shortcoming. Then you put an ultra wide angle lens on it and focus to infinity - it ain't pretty. Same camera. Why does one shot come out so much cleaner than the other?     I mean, you're not going to notice 4K in the bokeh are you!?   Sometimes you just DON'T NEED a high resolving power or 4K. A high detail level is more important for shots at infinity focus with lots of very high contrast fine detail.   We tend to band about the word 'sharp' as a catch all phrase for high resolution, high detail, sharp lens, sharp image, etc. 'High resolution' would be a better phrase. A 4K film scan is high resolution without being too sharp looking. With high sharpness you get a very high contrast between pixels and that can be quite fatiguing for the eye in motion and un-film like. Too much micro-contrast is bad for motion cadence with digital. What is also important is the integrity of the detail you're seeing. If it is falling apart like on a Canon DSLR with false detail and moire, that to me is unacceptable for certain types of shot... Like the one above... But less noticeable with soft lighting and people!   A lot of my work had cityscapes, vistas and wide shots which is why I went for the GH2 over the 60D.

Some C-mount stuff is designed for small digital CCTV sensors, TV cameras, etc. I'd avoid those. Super 16mm is larger