markm

[quote author=Tzedekh link=topic=569.msg3836#msg3836 date=1334253690] [quote author=markm link=topic=569.msg3782#msg3782 date=1334237013] The Sony fs700 4K should be good if you want to colour correct but they only made it 8 bit Although I think if you downconvert uncompressed 8 bit 4k to 1080p it will give more colour information. But then you need the recorder that isnt even built.[/quote] Although the details regarding 4K on the FS700 haven't been released, from what I've read, 12-bit raw will be an option for 4K, but an external recorder will be necessary. [/quote] 12 bit raw? Technology moves ahead at a rapid rate. This new fs700 recorder not yet made and might never be is going to be great for professionals Probably in a few years maybe all our tools will be cheap enough to work in 4k. I can't really see the point though. 2k is good enough to be shown in cinemas so isn't 4k severe overkill for most of us? The only really advantage I can see from 4k and the main reason I would want red is for the headroom and colour correction. But then you do need all the 4k tools to do this. 4K is like a promise of bigger must be better and its like enticing your wallet that little further I can hear it now must have the next tool when your £50,000 in debt. Come on do people really have the kind of money where you could spend £7600 on a fs7000 only for a new camera within 6 months to appear. If they do then maybe more money than sense. IE The lure is so great. For me the most sensible conclusion is a GH2 which has all you need to make cinema epics albiet with annoying workarounds

aaronofnero The problem is we know what the hacked GH2 can do at £700 So how should we be grateful for paying a huge price for a what I think is neccesary like added ND filters. All I personally would like is a large sensor 1080p 25fps camera with 10 bit out Nd filters a few cine gammas and Slog. We know thats easily achievable The af100 Nearly did it. Just needed a better sensor 10 bit out and slog and bingo. So why should doing that cost any more than £5000? Surely at £7000 you can have 1080p slow motion too. The Sony fs700 4K should be good if you want to colour correct but they only made it 8 bit Although I think if you downconvert uncompressed 8 bit 4k to 1080p it will give more colour information. But then you need the recorder that isnt even built. Therefore we can see how manufacturers are deliberatly crippling cameras putting on bells and whistles that amount to gimics. How people are resorting to uncrippling cameras like the canon mark 3 removing the OLPF or even the Nikon D800 and adding a anti moire filter. There is a lot of people now uncrippling Putting right or adding stuff to crippled cameras by manufacturers eager to make as much as possible and protect high end equipment. This has become like a game of how can manufacturers make as much as possible and how customers can sidestep. Its the hunter and prey and I have to say I don't think much. Today Sony announced 10,000 job losses. Many will think poor Sony cutting back. But now I feel suspicious, are they cutting back or getting rid of some of their higher paid workers and replacing them with cheaper ones in the near future. Some might say thats business But I say loyalty fair play and a reputation are also valid promotion or at least used to be. Maybe in todays uncaring world we bought this on ourselves. As a customer I want to see manufacturers make money and improve. What I don't like seeing is fleecing tactics. It should be easy really as business has to compete. What we seem to be be seeing though is a collaberation between camera manufacturers to protect their interests. In the business world that is illegal. Capitlism is good but it needs rules without rules capitilism is evil. Sorry I just feel so disapointed whenever they bring their new wares out and leave consumers out in the cold. At this moment in time I have a GH2 and might upgrade to a Nikon DSLR whereas what I really want is a proper video camera so I dont have to mess about with fiddly menus and ND filters. FAT CHANCE.

I don't understand why people want to work in 4k when the tools to do this basicly take you up to professional levels anyway at which point you would buy a professional camera. Unless I'm wrong surely a 4k codec has to lose 3/4 of what it could have done if it was dedicated to 1080. The 4k recorder hasn't been built yet and may not be. But if it is then I imagine Sony will ask a premium for it and it and maybe find a way that only their recorder can be used. Second manufacturers may not be keen to make a device solely for the FS700. I'm not sure if you could use an atomos ninja for example and record 1080p in 8 bit but then so can the nikon d800 which also has the ability to use different frame sizes as well as a full camera frame So 1) It cant currently be used for 4k and if it can add on at least another £5000 2) Downconverting from 4K will give worse results and add another step you dont need 3) The pricetag of £7000 for this 4) If you can use the 8 bit out to record the slo motion then its got a use. 

Looks like an FS100 with ND filters added. Only 8 bit though and yet the FS700 costs £7000 Unbelievable. Should I buy this or a new car. Makes you wonder if they got the price from the model number. Guess we'll have to wait till Nab next year for 10 bit out. Would be a great addition for those wanting slow motion. Maybe it should have been an XDCAM As it will suit professionals for that one function Surely though the consumer market wouldn't pay this? One year on and still a big gap for a large sensor cam 10 bit SDI out with ND filters at the 4k - 7k Price range. Maybe panasonic will updtate the ill fated af100 Not holding my breath though for any common sense manufacturer to give consumers what they want Only gimic laden 4k crippled toys.

Andrew is the D4 uncompressed 4.2.2. HDMI out image better or worse than the D800 HDMI out?

Andrew I think maybe 220 prores 4.2.2 would be better than any of the hacks? I know its been posted that you have to go through various steps to uncripple the footage using avisynth that means it ends up as 4.2.0 but allen tepper says the footage can be reconformed in AE to make it usable. Now I don't know how this works only that this guy is a pro and he explains the steps he takes and no mention of any other steps.

Just found this on the provideo coalition site  by allan tepper Where he talks about the new update and the hdmi out. He conforms the footage and it works seemingly without going through any other steps??????? [url=http://www.provideocoalition.com]www.provideocoalition.com[/url] And scroll down.

I'm referring to the GH2 of course.

What I don't understand is how I can get a great live picture on an external monitor and yet can't record it without it being crippled. Can anyone explain it to me?

Hopefully they will also put a better sensor in any new AF101!

magnifypictures All panasonic have to do is bring in a new af100 with 10 bit out and bingo they win all! And why wouldn't they. Lets wait n see what NAB brings because they don't have a gold plated C300 or F3 to protect. The GH2 had already beaten the AF100 before they bought out the GH2 improvements. The AF100 has been, at least in my opinion run over by just about every camera out there now. Although I think in the right hands the AF101 can be a nice little camera The zacuto shoot out proved that.

I guess from Canons marketing point of view they protect the C300 and any NEW video cameras in the works while targetting 5D Mark II owners who will stick with what they know and upgrade. They will still have THE good stills photography followers and I think this camera will meet or exceed their predicted market goals. Meanwhile loads of money to be made in their new video venture. The GH2 will be for now (Until NAB possibly) with its new upgrade and the new hacks the poor indie film makers camera of choice.

Looked good to me The fact you can get a usable picture at iso 12800 as good as that is pretty remarkable. An extreme test that could be paving the way for what could be the next big thing!

Thanks Andrew nicely summed up! Although the Nikon D4 is more pricier I'd be more looking at a D4 canon comparison because of the better crop factors in the D4 although image quality would be the ultimate winner for me. I would like to see 10 bit clean hdmi out which none of them have. Maybe NAB might bring us one. I can't help thinking though a camera with 10 bit out will have other problems that will cripple it.

Thanks Andrew!

Just wondering if they did achieve uncompressed hdmi out would it be 4.2.2 or 4.2.0?

Alberto... Oh yes! My humble opinion is because of the new firmware update and new hacks and understanding of certain areas the GH2 can in terms of picture quality compete rather nicely with cams like the C300.  Unless you need 4,2,2 for greenscreen.  But then put £650 for the GH2 against the £12000 for the C300 and really it's a no brainer and [color=blue]who knows[/color] you could buy the C300 and a hack is found for the GH2 to deliver 4,2,2. Of course though another hidden expense is you still need a good matte box, ND filters and a monitor. The good thing is when you have [i]those [/i] things,any new comparable cameras with  [i]those[/i] things IE lenses, come with you! I really think DSLR style cameras could be the way forward for film makers. However NAB could pull out a comeback. Exciting times but maybe the wrong times to invest heavily!

Alberto have you had a look on the DVXuser forums? Lots of info here. [url=http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?175-Panasonic-GH-Cameras]http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?175-Panasonic-GH-Cameras[/url] Mark

I'm not an engineer and I may have this wrong and I've only used driftwoods quantum patch in HBR but if I understand correctly the GH2 has a  4608 x 3456 sensor and if the noise reduction is applied before being down sampled to 1920 x 1080 then I imagine it must be doing a better job. If it isn't I still see a better quality picture which may be totally down to driftwoods hack. For me a major problem in version one was the noise. Version 1.1 has addressed that and although (moan) still 4,2,0 and 8 bit I think this camera with the hack and 1.1 version is now working on the limits of what can be achieved in this format (Pretty damned good). At least to what I can see. What for me would finish it would be clean HDMI out at 4,2,2.

Have to agree jean. Driftwoods new quantum hack using I frames is simply brilliant with the new panasonic upgrade!

Look forward to your patch too!

Would the HDMI do clean uncompressed out to a ninja?

I imagine that allowing indie film makers to use the millions of 16mm 8mm lenses out there will make this very popular if they hit the untapped market the Japanese companies shafted with their crippled cameras and pseudo gurus.

Well they really must have 10 bit uncompressed out, ND filters, Dual recording at a minimum of 35mbits, Picture profiles to include an s log style setting and a crop mode all for around £5000. Cmon this should be easy now. Why? Because if they want to stay future proofed against the HDSLR's for at least a year they will need to. The cats out of the bag now so nothing to protect apart from losing future sales. I think many indie film makers have had enough of cameras like the Canon C300 and the F3 where they charge as much as they can get away with Usually more than a new car for providing a large sensor without the expense of supplying a decent lens. If they don't FINE they will lose out to the HDSLR's. Bring it on so many of us used to disapointment now were almost expecting it to be crippled. 

The 2.7 crop factor on the D4 most interests me. It is better for super 16mm lenses lwhich I can't be sure but I don't think can't be used on the D4 even with an adapter because of its mount. The only other camera I know of that can do this well is the crop mode on the GH2. I'm waiting to see if Vitaliy can hack the GH2 new firmware version. With the new firmware enhancements like noise reduction and what looks to me an improved picture this could put the GH2 into the D800 Ballpark.  It's funny how these cams seem to almost get there only to come up short at the finishing post.