TJB

I really hope that Olympus finally pair their wonderful IBIS and PAL frame rates + 24p.

Totally agree. Olympus are missing out on sales by not giving us 50p/25p and 24p. Their IBIS is unique. The EM-1 has nothing above it to protect. I would have bought an EM-5 for video because of the IBIS but haven't. Same story with the EM-1. No non- US/Japan frame rates = No sale. It's a bit ironic that m4/3 sales are strongest outside the US - however Olympus continue to give the faithful 30p. Hope they wake up!

My wish list isn't long- Broadcast HD 4.2.2 codec option. Better viewfinder - meaning better optics and peaking - the GH3 (IMHO) has an unusable EVF. IBIS. Done.

To my eye the RX10 shot is slightly underexposed compared to the others giving it the appearance of better dynamic range.

It must have a 1080p 25fps broadcast codec and a decent viewfinder otherwise I'm not interested. It can have 4K but I probably wouldn't use it until I have a means of viewing, editing and sharing the material in 4K.

The camera industry and it's consumers have had a digital honeymoon for many years now, and of course it wasn't ever going to last forever. The consumer of digital cameras has finally realised that- For a given sensor size, the camera can always be made smaller and lighter but the lens can't thanks to the laws of physics. Using a DSLR or a FF camera of any sort (mirror or not) does not make one a better photographer. A larger feature list is not the upgrade consumers need or want. Image quality across sensor size and brand is more than good enough for almost everyone. A digital camera should simply have two things -(now that image quality across sensors is largely an upgrade of the past.) It must be easy to use and easy to carry.

This seems too good to be true. Broadcast standard video and audio in a usable (proper EVF) form factor (unlike BMCC) for $3K. I've been looking forward to this happening eventually, but I still won't believe it until it's in my hands.

Still waiting on the Canon EF and FD to m4/3 mount version. Still waiting........................................................... Please wake me up when it's here.

Interesting comments about the EF 100mm f2.8 macro. I heard the 35mm f2 IS has a stiff focus ring as well. Shame as both lenses could be a unique video solution for some who want to maually focus.

And then again, if you're looking for a stabilised lens which would suit video production then the new Canon 35mm f2 IS looks pretty good as well. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=824&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

What a mess.

"I challenge you to go out in any street in any big city and ask people at random what the difference is between AVCHD and 422."   I totally agree with you. No one in the street knows the difference. Those of us that know there is a difference can't often see the difference except when pixel peeping. However, picture editors can usually pick the difference and most at least that read this website or are looking at the difference between say the C100 and the C300 know there is a reasonable difference especially when it comes to post. Despite this, I don't think it's a hinderance for manufacturers to market, design and sell cameras according to video quality alone without destroying the core functionality of a camera. Leaving a headphone jack off a camera or omitting ND filters is really not the best way to convince me to spend another $1.5K or far more on the next "best" model. Hence, the money stays in my pocket, sales fall by almost half and my perfectly good 5 year young camera continues to get used.    I also agree that the boom will slow. Here's some free advice for Canon, Pana etc. Design, market and sell a high spec camera at a reasonable price and sit back and rake it in. What would Sony's balance sheet look like if the FS100 had ND filters, a proper viewfinder and a 4.2.2 codec. They need to know that the marketing strategy of tiny incremental improvements on cameras don't sell anymore if at all. Either does giving us IBIS and then neglecting to give us a mike jack. No thanks, no sale.

"I’m all for segmenting models from one another – so how about improving video dramatically on the higher end models leaving more room to improve video on the mid-range cameras?" I totally agree!  The consumer is aware enough of image quality to tell the difference between the AVCHD codec and a superior 4.2.2 codec. No need to cripple a viewfinder spec or leave out a headphone jack. Crippling usability is simply nasty and cynical marketing.  If sales have almost halved then it's their own fault. 

I'm not surprised. I find both equally redundant. A viewfinder that's difficult to pick sharp focus whilst recording is to me as equally useless as a monitor balancing on top a small camera in bright sunlight. The only use I have for a monitor is maybe when shooting long interviews indoors or as a director/field producer confidence booster. When I'm not using a monitor, I don't miss the crowd gathering over my shoulder. I've used my Zacuto EVF on flapping mirror cameras and it's not very robust and I don't need more cables to fail and more batteries to charge. The fewer accessories the better. For me THE best feature to arrive with mirror-less cameras is the EVF. For me it's the most tactile and immersive means of composing and following accurate focus.  I was surprised when Panasonic left peaking off the GH3 but won't be surprised when they now include it with each and every camera in the future. Lesson learned and sales go up.   Back on topic. I'm glad to hear Panasonic may include focus peaking on the GX7 and glad to hear that finally we may have a quality video experience with a usable viewfinder, fast lenses, large(ish) sensor and IBIS! Now all we need is for Panasonic to adopt ProRes422. Please don't reply and tell me to get a BMPCC. No viewfinder, no IBIS, small(ish) sensor. Fail.

Many of us are disappointed about the lack of focus peaking on the GH3. It was a deal breaker for me and I imagine many others.  Panasonic have said openly at least twice in articles I've read online that the GH3 can not be upgraded with peaking. Sad but true.

Interesting but not exciting. Still happy shooting the GH2. Noticed a GH3 at my local camera store on sale - 150 Euros off recommended retail price! Give me peaking and I'll think about it.

Thanks for the review. I disagree with the summation that the GH3 EVF is better than the GH2. Maybe it is on paper, but I tried them side by side and the GH2 was clearly brighter, slightly larger (esp. shooting stills in 4:3) and sharper. I find it much easier pulling focus in video mode with the GH2 EVF but impossible with the GH3. For me, the single biggest advantage of mirror-less over flapping mirror is the inbuilt EVF - but if it's unusable, then unfortunately I can't shoot with it. (And no, I can't manually focus moving subjects accurately with the LCD either.) The only other advantage was body size. Remember? No mirror - smaller lighter? Certainly camera body size is not an advantage anymore. The GH3 is as big as most of the APS-C DSLR's. Luckily I'll stick with my GH2.

Absolutely, totally agree. I come from a film background as well and really wonder when someone is going to design a camera based around a useable viewfinder. That said, I'm really impressed that Blackmagic have proven that it is possible to record ProRes 422 in a compact form.

Ok, so it is possible- ProRes 422 recording in a pocket camera. No waiting for at least a m43 sensor size.

"I would suggest a small green focus confirm box which moves around the frame and sits over the focus point like a face detection square."   Sounds great, but until then, good old fashioned focus peaking would have been better than nothing at all. Even the tiny hint of peaking from aliasing I see with the GH2 viewfinder makes it 100% more valuable for tracking moving subjects than the GH3.   Thing is about the GH3 - it's one of the few really worthwhile mirror-less EVF cameras out there for video and IMHO, having the EVF built in places it way ahead of the flapping mirror competition. It's a shame it comes short for my applications, however I'm happy to stick with the GH2.

I really wanted to talk myself into the GH3, however I found I can't (nearly as accurately as the GH2) manually focus whilst recording. Shooting low profile, documentary style means I don't use an LCD monitor. I come from a broadcast background so I'm used to using quality viewfinders. I find the GH2 viewfinder pretty good as it displays slight aliasing on sharp focus areas providing a type of peaking. The GH3 viewfinder in comparison seems a little softer, slightly smaller and without the aliasing to help pick sharp focussed areas. Although I agree that the magnified focus assist is an option for stationary subjects and to check focus before hitting record, I have trouble seeing how it would help assist focus for times when peaking is invaluable - like moving subject matter or pulling focus with an unscripted dialogue between two people. Without peaking - I just can't hit sharp focus where and when I choose. This is a problem and this is why I think it's a shame the GH3 will not get peaking.

Can the magic magnified window be used to manually track focus on moving subjects using the viewfinder whilst recording? 

Dpreview.com recently posted an interview with Michiharu Uematsu and Yoshiyuki Inoue.   quote from article -   "They explain the challenges of making and marketing a high image quality compact and suggest the GH3 won't get focus peaking. Uematsu spoke about how the market has reacted to the company's products: 'GH3 has been well recieved, especially for motion pictures. As you know we interviewed many people in the industry in Europe and North America, so it would offer what they needed - broadcasters needed bitrates above 50Mbps so we offer 50 and 72Mbps. In Europe they needed 25p, not 50i. And they're using GH3 - it's much smaller and lighter than a professional camcorder and doesn't need several people to operate it.' However, he says, there is still one feature they're calling for. 'Focus peaking and zebra pattern. More than 90% of the requests we're getting are for these features. We haven't been able to offer it - because of the limits of resources and of the Venus Engine processor. Because it is not included in the Venus Engine, focus peaking is very hard to introduce - anything we added in software would be very different."

The topic is how to avenge the price of a 1DC not something 4 times less expensive like a BMCC or 5DMK3. That's why my comment refers to "serious" cameras- ie: something that's over 10K.

I think buying serious cameras these days is a mugs game. They're outdated very quickly and really the client should pick up the tab on equipment costs. If you're shooting your own project - rent. The rental cost will reduce your taxable earnings. This is usually more cost effective than depreciation on purchased assets.