sanveer

Actually once it trickles down to Smartphones, then probably yes. The Exynos 9820 can already do 8k ("...encoding and decoding of 8K videos at 30fps.) 8k could be used for super HDR in high res photos (8k bursts of sports or action photography). Also for VR and AR (most of which aren't that sharp when viewed at closer distances in 2k and 4k on headsets). The whole 8k sensor thing seems strange. I already find 4k TVs disturbingly strange. 8k would make it seem almost indistinguishable from reality if the colour and other aspects are there too (60-120hz?)? It's almost like a conspiracy to do something very strange.

Some guy on YouTube was upscaling 1080p with reasonable success. I know that one of the Bond films (Skyfall?) had 2.7k Alexa footage upscaled to to 4k rather successfully. If the dynamic range, artefacts and noise are within control, I don't think it should be an issue.

Not 8k, but 5k and 6k, perhaps. Mostly because the delivery standard has been set at 4k by Netflix and so many others. 5k and 6k only add more flexibility in framing and other things. Also 5k RAW or 10-bit could be great for high speed sports and action photography, especially on smartphones (most flagships of which currently hover around 12MP).

For the longest we have been debating the quality difference between smartphones and Point and Shoots and DSLRs/ ILCs (based on computational photography to compensate for the smaller sensor and thus poorer dynamic range and low light, apart from detail and sharpness). It's stupid to compare the quality of photos from Pixel 3 and 24MP ILCs simply for the reason that those have very different pixel counts. But for the Same Pixel count, the difference the Pixel and MUCH larger camera sensors is practically inexistent. Here I compared the GH5s, the A7Sii, the Pixel 3 and the Pentax Q. The Pixel 3 did surprisingly well (I am guessing these are solely JPEGs), and the Pentax Q was rather terrible. So the whole soft plastic lenses of Smartphones doesn't seem to hold water. https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7sii&attr13_1=pentax_q7&attr13_2=google_pixel3&attr13_3=panasonic_dcgh5s&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=55&attr16_3=160&attr126_2=2&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.893640338567055&y=0.777062638323769 Now, Sony has another sensor in the offing which will probably make it to Smartphones in early 2019. The sensor is 38MP (1/1.8") and has Triple Native ISOs of 50, 50 and 5000. It is also created for use with Dual Sensor or multi sensor setups. It seems to have some new Dual Bayer pixel setup which I am guessing will cause a mild resolution loss, removing the need for down sampling for improving low light. It also has 8-bit, 10-bit and 12-bit RAW options for video (and 24fps 10-Bit HDR for photo). The Huawei P20 and Mate 20Pro are already photography beasts (I prefer the Mate 20's low light to the Pixel 3). With improved low light and higher resolution than 10MP, this new sensor does seem to be taking the fight to the high end Point and Shoots' court. The video on the new iPhones also seem to be in (non 10-bit) DSLR territory, so if a smartphone can process better HDR and use the 10-bit in video, it could finally be a year when we seem to have finally bridged the gap. @androidlad could probably help us with the complete sensor details. https://m.gsmarena.com/sonys_38mp_imx607_sensor_specs_leak_could_end_up_in_the_huawei_p30_pro-news-34667.php

As well as those for camera features and functions (both software and hardware). Like the Focus Transition isa great feature and needs to be developed further.

I guess price seems like a big consideration for any sensor and camera system. And for M43 it seems more obviously difficult to justify a higher price range. Even if the EM1-X seems like a mag-allow bodied, weather sealed BMPCC4k with much better battery life, weather sealing, photography capabilities, IBIS and a few other tricks. Hopefully a lot of its (EM1D-X's) tech should trickle down into smaller and much lesser priced models.

The conditions of warranty along with the seller are mentioned in the products. You could check that before any purchase.

Actually the GH5 has helped create a sub category of high end cameras where video is the reason for the premium pricing. If the GH5 had a FF sensor it would easily cost Atleast $1000-1500 more. Now imagine the GH5 with BRAW and ProRes, and dual mini XLR and larger screen, 4k at 120fps and even greater battery management. And some serious improvements in photo too. If the Olympus EM1-X doesn't have great video, it will have very poor sales. Photo quality alone won't save it. Even if it's in the 14.6 stop APS-C territory and IBIS that's as good as a steadycam.

True. I remember reading comments saying that they aren't shooting in the recommended ISOs for some cameras. There are many such comments and maby of them merely state what the manufacturers have recommended. Which seems both fair and reasonable.

This new XEVC codec seems pretty amazing. It does 4k (3840) at 10-bit 4-2-2 at 100mbps which is the same bitrate the Sony A-Series does for 8-bit 4-2-0 internal (so this new Codec seems way more efficient than HEVC or anything else out that for compression). It also has 4k at 12-bit 4-4-4 at 240mbps (the BRAW 12:1 is around 215mbps or so I think, I had calculated it roughly from the 4.6k bitrate on the Ursa Mini Pro and done a rough estimation for the 4k based solely on frame size). It suddenly looks like a codec face-off is in the offing.

Maybe the high end will save them in the end. They could have both cost and feature advantage. Something that the big boys don't wanna sell cheap.

Are there ANY Sony sensors that Do Not Do ATLEAST 10-bit at full res??? The GH5 autofocus has improved substantially in video from how it was, when it was released. Though it's still nowhere near PDAF territory.

Olympus has nothing to lose and no cinema line to protect, and that is why it needs to seriously work on its video capabilities. Maybe it needs to collaborate with someone like Blackmagic, since they do compliment each other in many ways. Olympus had superb hardware (great lenses and OIS in lenses, IBIS in bodies, superb weather sealing, good photography capabilities etc); Blackmagic has superb colour for video and excellent video capabilities and codec (BRAW). They both also have the M43 as a common factor, so it should be beneficial for both, that they support each other. Also, unlike Panasonic, Olympus is not a competitor to Blackmagic and also doesn't have a cinema line that prevents it pushing the RAW capabilities down to lower priced cameras. Blackmagic could get a DSLR sized camera that can shoot RAW (and ProRes, in Multiple Flavours), is weather sealed with IBIS, and Olympus could get a DSLR sized camera that does RAW at a fraction of the cost of most players around, and has features as good as Full Frame Mirrorless cameras and better. They naturally compliment each other. Also the Panasonic and Leica collaboration has shown that even big players need to band together.

I don't know why, but since Sony makes the sensors, I suspect that the autofocus and dynamic range (including line banding and low light other issues), are things that Sony had handicapped for Nikon. As long as Sony is the manufacturers of sensors for other major manufacturers, it will either not make certain sensors available to others or have them mildly handicapped in comparison to the ones in its own cameras (A7iii vs Z6). Which is also the case with the sensors in the 1inch cameras that it makes for itself and other companies. Maybe that's why Panasonic and Fuji are in such a hurry to move out of the Sony Sensor monopoly and Canon is still sticking with its sensors.

Whoa. That was a long and wide compilation. Maybe I'll check it tomorrow sometime. Maybe if you added the date to the tests it would help one understand whether they were conducted around the same time, under different profiles, or over different periods of time when their methodologies and co cousins varied. I read one of the tests which showed the A7s or A7s as having 14 stops. That couldn't possibly have been the improvement from downressing it from 4k to 1080p.

You obviously didn't search properly or even sufficiently. Unfortunately.

I could help you understand it, but I am guessing it would be better if you simply did a Google search of atleast 10+ random test results of Cinema5d doing dynamic range tests. It could include any and every camera you can think of. Check the history of the results over a few years and all your doubts will be answered. Your defence of them is either ernest and genuine ignorance or something much worse. Either ways, only you can answer your own doubts. Anything else would be an exercise in futility.

I think they do it as a private joke for themselves or they are genuinely never reliable. I actually suspect that they would have tested the Alexa at UNDER 14 stops, but are too afraid to publish it. The Alexa standard being indisputable, they would probably invite a plethora of brickbats. Almost as ludicrous as that 14.6/ 14.7 stops of Dynamic range on the Panasonic GH5s done by that freak which was published by NewsShooter.com. Cinema5d measured the same camera's dynamic range at 10.7 stops, 4 WHOLE STOPS less. If their measurements differed by 4 stops on the Alexa, one of those sites would have shut down. It is indeed an amusing world.

Whoa. Share the datasheet again. This sounds almost insane.

If that were the case, there would be no place for LuTs and other quick turn around processes. That's the same as saying why do Olympus and Panasonic need to introduce M43 when there already are APS-C and Full Frame sensors? If that were the case, Blackmagic and Kinefinity also would have no place. Thank God Blackmagic didn't feel the same way. The Original Pocket and the new 4k one are genuinely Path Breaking in many ways. New players could offer a lot of benefits and advantages. For one, a Price Advantage. And two, each of those systems has its minuses and pluses (the Compression ratio and the RAW codec itself probably has a long way to go). If the Organic sensor is as good as it claims, this could further shorten the divide between the high end and the prosumer market for video.

That Quad-Bayer HDR is a bit of a scam. It down-resses first (I am guessing to HD), and then up-resses (back to 4k/3860), to improve dynamic range. So the image is soft and not real 4k. If it's the same sensor as on the GH5s then the 14-bit is not in 4k. I vaguely remember it at some other (lower?) resolution. Overall the ECam Z2 is coming along as a great camera. If only they could do great accessories for monitoring and recording (and battery life?), they could have a great camera. And shave off $500 of off the price, while they're at it.

Considering that Fuji seems to have nailed the 10-bit formula (in the XT3), has good Log and other features in its ILCs, the transition shouldn't be too difficult. They could probably start with Cinema DNG and ProRes (off the shelf codecs) and pick up hardware (much of what may be quite easy too). And they have a history of film and photo colours, so they could be great with LuTs and grades. Also the cinema and broadcast market has huge potential for many more players, especially in the $1000-3000, $3000-6000 and $6000-10000 price bands like Blackmagic, Kinefinity and others have shown. If Fuji makes competing cameras to the Canon Cinema line at much lower prices, and more codec options, they could easily take away many customers and attract many more new ones to their entry level cinema line.

Or something even greater. Fuji is making a comeback to motion pictures by producing cameras that compete in the professional filmmaking space. With a sensor that does justice to such an ambitious plan.

Isn't it already S35

Maybe we need a New Thread Solely dealing with issues that DJI needs to address by way of firmware for the Osmo Pocket.