MattH

Thanks for posting all of these tests. The flexibility of the GH4 seems to be pulling it far ahead of the competition. One thing I would like to see is the affect of picture style adjustments. Specifically, lowering the highlights on cinelike D and V but keeping the shadows at default. The affects of the saturation and sharpness settings would be interesting too.

Which interview are those? What is said in them? Could you possibly link to them or remember their names?

Doesn't the d800 only need an extra anti aliasing filter because of how it line skips to get video from a 36mp sensor? The A7s is supposed to read every pixel, and presumably has a photography low pass filter optimized for its native resolution. If this is the case then It probably wont need an extra anti aliasing filter. Looking forward to your GH4/ 5d raw shootout btw.

I agree with maxotics. I wish I had read first that it was the last shot that was the iphone as i was trying to look for crap quality shots the whole way through :). Thank you for taking the time to explain all this. I will definitely be returning to your post for your info on sound equipment.

I think it still does a full sensor readout for full frame 1080p at 24/25/30p, so its probably going to have the same rolling shutter in that mode. 60p may line skip, halving the readout time, but then does resolution, noise and image integrity suffer? I'm not sure how binning effects this. Apsc crop might help with having about 2/3rds the number of lines to read. But we will have to see.

The one thing I can say off the top of my head is that I think a simple vote up and down system that rearranges the order of comments is a bad thing because it ruins the flow of a discussion with posts not being in order. It also buries new posts and makes people respond in disproportionate amounts to the top post at that particular time. One thing I just thought of: Whenever you post a new article I feel there is a race to rush though reading it to place a comment. A lot of the time i feel like I get there at the end of the discussion where everyone has had their little say and left. Even if i think i have something important to say I get the impression that few people will read it. What you could do is roll out access to your articles in waves. Those you like or trust the most could get access 30 mins before it becomes live to the internet. Another wave after 20 mins maybe for people you are on the fence about. Then that would allow constructive people to direct the shape of the discussion before other people come to contribute. It would also give a chance to proof read. Correct minor tipos ect. Or to give you friendly advise if something isn't quite clear or give you the heads up like the black magic thing yesterday. How were you to know that black magic had given that response to everyone. Obviously not everyone would be there to see the advanced article it on time, but it would be better than nothing.

Any forum named after a particular company or camera is very likely to be dominated by fanboyism for that company or camera. People don't like to think they have spent money on the wrong thing so they justify their decisions by defending the product they own with little regard to the validity of the perceived attack. You can always tell this because the comments are overly defensive and emotional. I especially enjoy when videos from announced cameras come out that reveal an issue. (rainbow moire, sensor noise) You can always tell who has pre-ordered the camera because they claim they cannot see the issue, or that it is illegitimate to make any negative observations because the four digit price is "so cheap".

To me it really would make sense for them to sample UHD 4k at 1 to 1 crop (and to also downscale this for 1080p) which is roughly a 1.1* crop which is practically nothing anyway. As opposed to sampling the full 4240 pixel width and downscaling to 3840, which would be more processor intensive and would seem to me to have a higher risk of image issues. In fact, the 1.1 crop is so slight that my guess is that sony might think no need to mention it. Not that its a bad thing, just that it makes it more complicated to explain. Much easier to sell "a full sensor readout",and then put the 1.1 crop in the fine print after nab or at least after the first few days. On the other hand an apc crop, as the article says, has 2768 horizontal pixels which is sufficiently greater than 1920 to make a downscale sensible.

It didn't seem a lack of empathy to me. More a skewed perspective from a privileged/professional position. I don't feel I need any sympathy. I was just ball busting.

I don't know what opulent persian hanging gardens pathed with gold you come from, but where I come from and 99% of the world, six THOUSAND dollars isn't chump change. You want to know why else I think six thousand dollars is expensive? ....... Because I don't have six fucking thousand dollars. Which is exactly the reason I think an Alexa is too expensive. Would I like an Alexa? yes. But it is by definition too expensive because it costs more money than I have. btw, the main things you list are in the BMPC except the 10 inch screen. "wow it has a ten inch screen, oooooooooh, look at how big it is. look at how big the ten inch screen is that it has." Its too fucking big! Give me a good 5 inch screen and make it smaller, lighter and cheaper.

As Blackmagic have proven that they can only deliver broken products a year late, I see this as a concept design. The concept of having everything in one compact, easily movable package is a good one...... Except this design isn't compact as it is too bulky and it isn't easily movable because its too heavy. Also its too expensive. Come back when; 1. It's ready to ship 2. It works without issues (can delete clips, space remaining, no black hole sun, no banding etc etc.) 3. It takes and formats ssds. 4. It's a third of the size and weight 5. It's $4000

This might actually end up being a version 2 of either the cinema or production camera with a fancy new name. The same sensor but with the stuff they missed off the first time. One thing I know is that I wouldn't trust the supposed release date.

I think there's still a chance that 8 bit spec could be wrong. Its only based on that one document.

10 minutes into this presentation I'm already bored. We get it, 4k is important. now Just show us the fucking camera!

You actually don't need this disclaimer as the physical aperture of the sigma was 1.8. you would only need to say this if the lens on the 5d was at 1.8 as well. But the exposure was equivalent to f1.2 so it was the same exposure as if you had used a 1.2 lens on the GH4 without a speedbooster. Cool test by the way.

I "second" the request for examples output at 1080. I'm sure upscaling to 4k and then downscaling back to 1080 will reduce quality, as three quarters of the information you are inputting into the downscale is false. Also putting it into the cinema 4k resolution you get pillar boxes with the 16:9 footage so it isn't even displayed at native resolution. I think filming with the UHD 4k (which will be needed when shooting pal anyway) downscaled to 1080 might even help as it is a perfect 2:1 downscale.

The porshe shot is the one shot i would absolutely choose to not need any further grading whatsoever. It looks like a film shot. In general i find I always hate pretty much everybody elses grades. Theres always too much of something or other. Even in major features. For a lot of the shots in this apart from the porshe shot i found the colours to be too gaudy. I would actually love to see the footage completely ungraded from camera.

must HAVE sorted. Just doing my bit to preserve the language.

Troll much?

Good to see you still doing research with the old hacking spirit intact. I will have a few reads of the article to find the useful information about 7d raw, but for now i'm more interested in joining in your rant. My blood is boiling on your behalf. I don't know exactly why but those tossers pissed me off. If they had grinned at the same time i would have said fair enough, but they had cold expressions as if they were bad asses. If they had skin heads and stafordshire bull terriers on leads, if be pragmatic and submit to their violent potential. but they weren't. they were just some tossers acting like they were hard. Forget not appearing like a tourist to them. I'm not even patriotic but I would have felt like walking over to them and reminding them who won the war. Or at least walked towards them whilst continuing to point the camera directly at them, calling their bluff, and see if they are willing to walk the walk, or just stand their like the dweebs they really are.

Small sensor and moire is why i haven't gone for the bmpcc. But yeah there is a high chance the gh4 will still be very videoey.

I think its become clear to me that there are certain camera companies who just do not care about video and never will. FUJI is the biggest one, followed by Nikon, then Olympus. Until we get to the point in still camera evolution where 24 continuous shots per second is a selling feature, there is no point even hoping they will come out with a decent video mode.

There is a very coy comparison here. I found it pretty easy to guess which one is which.

You're interpreting a negative connotation from "invade" that isn't found in the definition itself. An invasion can be negative, but it doesn't have to be. For example: D-day was the allied invasion of France, but no-one would think of that invasion as negative in its intentions.

Ah yeah, so it is the mark ii. I wondered why the resolution he stated was 1872x850. You are right that the bmpc is basically in a category of its own in terms of the unique things it offers. But the usability issues and the low light incapabilities prevent it from having a landslide victory in my view. Plus I would be downscaling 4k to HD myself anyway, which is why i think the 5d3 is still a relevent contender for someone like myself who is thinking of buying at the moment. An aside on 4k in general: I saw the wolf of wall street at the cinema this week and from the 2nd row i could see the individual pixels on a presumably 2k screen. So i do think 4k delivery is superior, but i recon i was the only person in the cinema who noticed or would care. So i think that getting to the point where 4k is seen as essential is going to be a long long road. So for me I would just see 4k as oversampling for now. I'm more interested in the overall look of the image. And the bmpc and 5d3 look the main contenders in this regard at this price point, and i can't afford both which is why I'm particularly interested in a comparison. But i'll wait to see what the gh4 cine-like profiles look like and also anything else that comes at nab before making a decision. If you were to do a comparison I would maybe suggest the following, if I may be so bold: 1.Comparison with both cameras at 400 iso in daylight and in low-light 2. Comparison with both cameras at native iso for their maximum dynamic range in daylight and in low-light. 100iso for 5d3 and 400iso for bmpc with exposure reduced in bmpc to compensate. (one comparison i saw between 5d raw and bmcc didn't do this which gave an advantage to the 5d3 in the highlights) 3.Then maybe one more extreeme low light comparison with the 5d3 at 1600 iso or something with bmpc at 400 or 800. showing first out of camera and then with the brightness brought up to match. My guess is that the bmpc will have better resolution obviously, but that the 5diii raw will have far less noise. Dynamic range and colour will be what is interesting to compare. Either way I look forward to seeing any further work you do.