Jacek

They are doing it, but only when they have more expensive gear to "protect" (as in your example). If Olympus is planning to release more expensive or video oriented camera in near future it is ok, but otherwise it is just stupid to cripple their flagship product. It is also stupid to cripple the flagship product in order to introduce more features in next generation product after few years. Olympus is not the only camera manufacturer in the universe and have to deal with strong competition.

Maybe there will be only external 4k support?

Depends on software. RAM is always important. GPU is extremely important if software can use it (like in DaVinci Resolve it's most important). CPU sometimes (can be bottleneck if poor). - the difference between mobile and desktop GPU is big. - iMac's GPU choice is poor. - iMac is probably restricted to 16GB (and 32GB - 27inch) of RAM [ http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5908 ].

There is a nice site which can help you decide when to buy a new Mac: http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac As far as I know, Apple is now using desktop CPU (and probably desktop GPU) in iMac's, so although still poor, it's not complete disaster these days..

Try also Windows Phone - very user friendly. If you have experience with Windows 7-8, you know what you're doing. If not - It's different usability than Windows 3.11, NT, 2000, Vista, and other..

Current Windows (7 and 8) is very stable operating system. Not as pretty as MacOS, but perfectly usable, especially if you will have editing software turned on 90% of the time (so there will be no difference). Don't know why people are so afraid of Windows. I have seen many Windows machines working without any problem for many years (especially Windows XP, 7 and current 8 also looks ok). Just remember to use account WITHOUT administrative rights! This is the main reason why people have instable and vulnerable to viruses Windowses. They just use it in a wrong way. In other operating systems (Linux, MacOS) this is the default user account type (restricted). In Windows it's easier to do a mistake and use inproper account type.

Why not just a Windows machine? You will have more hardware choices and it will be simpler i suppose.. My advices: - don't use Administrator account. Create restricted user for everyday work (you will have much more stable and secure system) - don't install any software you don't trust. The hardware: Latest generation core i5 CPU (desktop CPU-s are much faster than mobile CPU-s. i5 desktop is like i7 mobile) - get the cheapest from: http://ark.intel.com/pl/products/family/75024/4th-Generation-Intel-Core-i5-Processors#@Desktop 1x16GB RAM (leave other banks for later upgrade) Cheap motherboard and case (best would be ATX format, but if You like smaller cases: micro-ATX) Well known brand (not no-name) but not expensive PSU SSD Drive (note that bigger capacity means usually also faster speed, but you will be ok with 128GB+) The best GPU you have the money for (optional) If you use software like DaVinci Resolve, You would need second GPU just for UI (cheap card mounted in PCI-Express x1 slot)

It's also most expensive camera under 5000$ :D It would be more interesting if it would be for example: - the best all-round moving-image camera over 5000$ or at least - the best all-round moving-image camera under 10000$ It's easy to beat only cheaper cameras...

without SpeedBooster - yes with SpeedBooster - no

Judging by the Studio Camera 4K dimentions: http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicstudiocamera/techspecs/W-CST-02 Just by removing big lcd screen from back you get quite small camera: 5 in x 5 in x 2.7 in (Pocket is 5 in x 2.6 in x1.5 in) So i hope they will come with Pocket 4k.

It's all subjective. For me, a7s is also similarly priced as gh4: - gh4 nedds 400$ SpeedBooster to get closer with sensor size Lens options look better and can be cheaper for a7s - a7s native lenses are the same price as gh4 equivalent native lenses or little pricier, but better quality: 35/2.8 FF Zeiss vs 12/2 m43 Olympus 50/1.8 FF Zeiss vs 25/0.95 m43 Voigtlander 24-70/4 FF Zeiss vs 12-35/2.8 m43 Panasonic Not to mention lenses with adapters, even Speedbooster.. It is much easier and cheaper to get fast wide lens for a7s. And that what's important for me. It's just my point of view. Everybody want something else from their camera.

Looks like a sudden end of evolution of your "evloving review" :D

Blackmagic pocket - similar colors, different dof, Sony a7s - different colors, same dof, gh4 - different colors, different dof :P

Go to vimeo pages for original clips downloads: (ungraded raw: https://mega.co.nz/#!TEVEgYIb!LuYc4DluTRG9EkeZOPbkbMVytMEyxSW88stb3xEwHNU)

Not many a7s vs gh4 tests so far, but It looks like much more are comming next days. The first interesting - dynamic range: http://***URL not allowed***/dynamic-range-sony-a7s-vs-arri-amira-canon-c300-5d-mark-iii-1dc-panasonic-gh4/ Not sure If I agree with their methodology, but pure pictures speak for themselves: '> '>

My opinion on GF3: It sucks. - resolution is low. - no manual video controls. - the hack does not imrove its video quality like in case of GH2 (I tried many hack variants in past few years). The only thing you get after hacking GF3 are much bigger files :) - it's old camera: many current non-video oriented cameras are much better.

Call me crazy, but I'll probably buy it instead of Sony a7S :)

Next video from James:

No, it's up to UHD: http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/compare

Awesome! Looks great.

There is one direct comprison on vimeo, may be helpfull:

On their FAQ page, they say they ship only to France, Spain and UK :(

The movie looks very nice. It would be great if you could compare in your review Slog2 (minimum iso=3200) vs iso100: - dynamic range in demanding scene (like dim indoor with daylight window) - resolution/microcontrast (Not sure but I have seen in latest footages that people faces look a lot different in slog2 - skin looks like lost some details..).

So FFs have advantage here actually. Some of them have crop mode option in video (like Sony a7S) so you will get exactly what you want: 2 fov-s from 1 lens. But in opposite to smaller sensor + SB: - you don't have to unmount lens and mount SB to change FOV. Just press a button. - you don't have to pay for expensive SB (even worse if you want to use lenses with different mount-s). - you get 2 fov-s even with native lenses (with their advantages: perfect fit, autofocus. IS, size, software in-camera corrections etc.)

first not fake GH4 vs a7S: