sanveer

The ProRes and RAW started out too slowly and the codec (especially log and other features) was also slow. That along with the pricing slowed down stuff. They should have just thrown in a cheap 5inch monitor along with the thing. Once ProRes and RAW come along (along with a small price correction), interest should go up in the Z2. GS cameras always have much lower dynamic range. Plus the Sony Sensor in this anyways doesn't have much rolling shutter anyway, so global shuttwr won't really bring much of an advantage. Unless it's a new sensor with much larger pixels and higher dynamic range (which I frankly doubt). We should know soon enough.

Why?

Unlikely. Panasonic and Samsung aren't even in the game. They never really were. I am also curious as to who actually made the sensor for the NX1. Would love to see the datasheet on that one. It could be AltaSense or OneSemi (not not absolutely likely). The Panasonic's promised organic sensor is a very recent development (If at all), and way too high end to every make it to a camera under 50k. I must say it again. RED had practically infinite resources at hand, to begin with. And while RED seems like a great success story, it's like Spielberg making a Zero Budget Feature. For THE most influential filmmaker of our time, who also happens to be a billionaire it really is a Joke. RED was big enough to buy a few camera makers to start it's cinema camera journey. Kinefinity is not on the same footage. I read a Superb article a few days/ weeks ago about how the original RED cameras had some terrible issues with quality control, extreme delays with delivery, very poor availability of parts and very low dynamic range (well under 10 stops and barely above the 7 stops of the REC709 standard). The C200 has the same sensor as the C700. Which means it had superb low light and dual autofocus. And good RAW. And about $7.5k with great ergonomics and a body that appears way more ready to shoot (it does need lenses, batteries, Monitor, EVF, CFast Cards etc). Do you see what I am getting at. The MAVO is unable to justify the price. The ProRes and RAW are still in development and it's a $2k camera. Which puts greater pressure on MAVO and other new entrants with much higher prices (maybe not compared the absolute high end of cameras). Blackmagic does it well by offering a usable camera out of the box (you actually only need a lens and Memory Card), which costs $1295, but with $300 worth of the Software Suite. And it already shoots ProRes and RAW out if the bix (unlike the ECam Z2) and will shoot even better RAW (BRAW) soon.

Could you share the datasheet of the IMX551 sensor.

Wow. You're an encyclopedia of camera sensors. I now know who to contact if I ever make my own smartphone or ILC ???

Offering RAW and ProRes? The Mavo LF price is just the brain of the camera. There are many other components (like on all major modular cinema cameras). People who can usually afford the $15000-20000 can afford another few thousand dollars for upgrading to a subjectively better camera. Actually it does. While the Ursa Mini 4.6k may be more on the price range war, things like options for better low light, various flavours of RAW, high speed options and limitless recording put it as a competitor in some ways. The lack of more audio options, SDI and other connections, along with EVF and other accessories do obvious matter. GH5/ GH5s have other advantages of extremely long batter life, weather proof bodied, extremely affordable recording media options, huge lens line-up and practically limitless lens options with adaptors, IBIS/ OIS, etc. The cinema cameras probably don't even have OIS (except perhaps Canon EF lenses), but except for shoulder mounting (especially without stabilizers), they dong need them. All I an saying is that between the high end rentals of tge 30-65k camera range and the 4k options of DSLRs and cameras that record ProRes and RAW below the 10k mark, the middle market is more of less pushing filmmakers towards the high end, unless they are penny punching. And I am not sure why they would trust Kinefinity in the 10k (and under) and 10k+ price bracket of cameras.

I guess the Kinefinity Mavo LF exists at a premium cinema camera price range (especially with all necessary accessories), where users want to use a system they are familiar with, by a known corporation/ manufacturers, something that has a SUPERB sales and after sales network, and something that is built and works like a tank. At that price range, newer entrants are a disadvantage, especially if their price is not a fraction of the established lot. The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema 4k crashes the Cinema Camera party by offering 4k RAW and ProRes at a fraction of the cost, along with a built in (huge) LCD, and cheap memory options, and nothing extra needed to be able to use the camera (apart from a memory card and a lens). Maybe Kinefinity should have started by making a DSLR form factor 4k camera at $2k or less and taken it from there. Jim Jannard had billions to blow (along with a markwting genius brain) when he entered the Pro Cinema Camera Market), so RED cannot be compared with the smaller players. Also RED started out at a time when the Cinema Camera market was still in its infancy wrt to RAW and other standards, so it was in many ways, a level playing field.

It's great news and I just hope they hurry on that. Also I noticed that he didn't say how quick can one expect it on the BMPCC 4k, which probably means it's gonna take a while. I guess Blackmagic may be trying to figure out how to recover costs and make money from BRAW if other Camera companies use it in the future. They may not be targeting obscene profits like Apple but they probably don't wanna give it away for free either I guess.

Oh ok, thabks foe the answer. I am looking forward to improvements in the video quality with HLG.

Has anyone tested the new HLG on the X-T3?

Wow. I am guessing you will be, officially, the first person to be using the Weebill with BMPCC4K. Sounds pretty interesting.

I am very curious about that tiny flange distance. I wonder if it reduces or limits the stops of stabilization possible, especially across the pitch and yaw axis. And especially during walking (Sony does a decent job for stills but a terrible one for walking). I also think walking movements in video should have its own CIPA Ratings (or whoever else measured it) for Stops of Correction for Movement (different from those for Photo)

Actually most of the West (ironically) is living in this Orwellian Universe which people aren't even aware of. The Matrix is real. I see it all the time. The internet is just a tiny fraction of the stuff around. Atleast in Communist countries like Russia and China people KNOW IT. In most of Europe and the US, and most othwr parts of the world, people have been brainwashed for decades and centuries, and therefore unable to see anything that's in plain sight. They imagine that people who actually realise this, are conspiracy theorists. I am sure most people here too imagine that Andrew is imagining all this. Maybe they think he needs to change his beer brand or stop smoking up or something equally weird. I realised it long ago. When I first started using the net I researched on trojans (rats), and I suddenly realised that many organisations and groups are constantly spying on us and programming us in the process. There isn't much one can do to change it though.

The Nikon D7200 is an APS-C sized sensor that has 14.6 Stops of Dynamic Range. That's more than a lot of Full Frame Sensors. Like a lot of other Nikon cameras it uses the common 24.2MP sensor that is part of many cameras (likely across many other camera systems). Nikon is proof that that Sony's Sensors are class leading, and that with the right tweaks in fabrication and processor technology the difference between FF, APS-C (and arguably M43) can be be reduced to almost insignificant proportions. Which basically means that M43 have more scope for improvements based solely on processing and fabrication (I read about the shorter new gapless micro lens technologies improvements in both Canon and Nikon cameras). The FF sensor is about 2.5 Times that of APS-C and APS-C is about 1.5 Times that of M43, meaning the size gap between M43 and APS-C is MUCH smaller than the size gap between FF and APS-C. I read somewhere that the EMD1-X is apparently the next generation of M43 with improvements across various parameters. Hopefully they've pushed a little bit more in the Dynamic Range and Low Light potential, apart from implementing PDAF way better. If they can, there is no reason this should not replace some high end APS-C sensors.

Do this: 1. Light the room enough with soft lighting to maintain exposure at ISO1600 at most with reasonable contrast between areas. Don't go higher than that, because you may need to bring down exposure to ISO800 later, if need to, to ensure there is no noise in shadows. Also ensure none of the lights are anywhere near the frame and are super soft. 2. Fill the room with smoke (the fastest and easiest way is to use a Vape/ eCigarette) and spread the smoke around to make a Very even but thin layer. Ensure that there isn't any moving air once you fix the smoke in the room. 3. Use a strong torchlight and see how glary or contrast the light it. Adjust the smoke and light intensity accordingly. 4. Maintain a cool colour temperature in post, to give it the correct night look. It's shouldn't look warm. Also try and set the lighting similar to the torchlight so that the colours don't dance around.

I couldn't agree more. The LX100ii is such a piece of crap. I really don't know what they were thinking. I am also noy sure how the GX9 (or even GX85) is not vastly superior to the LX100 ii and actually eating into its market. Also the GX line has shown that there is a serious issues with the naming scheme and feature set on certain Panasonic lines. The GX8 was this 600 pound gorilla after the GX7 with enormous shutter shock (so much so that they had to change the entire shutter mechanism, giving a huge boost to Panasonic's shutter improvements across most of its cameras after that), and much larger body. Also why the GX line doesn't have a mic in is another strange question. The GX9 is what the GX8 should have been. True, but it's over a stop slower. Which seems a lot for a camera system which doesn't have very high ISO capabilities. The way I see this, is that M43 system started out as this extremely innovative way of handling smaller bodies and newer technologies from getting rid of the mirror; to touch focus, to focus and exposure and other stacking options (improving dynamic range, exposure, creating wider depth of field etc); Live Composite Mode and other similar modes On the Olympus and thay new compositing mode on Panasonic that merges many images into a single where a person or thing is shown performing an action (sequence composition?) etc. The are SO MANY feature sets, both in Hardware and Software, but they have just not been fine tuned and advertised and polished enough. Like the Touch to Focus has been around for the longest, in both photo and video, and yet the focus in video has been terrible since the GH1 (in 2009?). It's like the different between Apple and a lot of Android phones that aren't doing too well. Apple mostly doesn't create any new tech and has so many hardware and software glitches. But it fine tunes many features almost seamlessly, from opening its API for video Apps, to fine tuning colour accuracy on its screens, to having that superb FaceID unlock etc. The way I see it, M43 is not thinking ahead of the competition, like it used to. It was the first with IBIS, 10-bit video, Mirrorless and touch screen functionality, super tiny ILC form factor (the Panasonic 4/3 sensor GM1 was smaller than the Samsung NX1 which has a 1inch sensor, and which lacked an EVF and had less buttons too) etc. It it hasn't fine tuned it's feature set.

This video is muddy. Most detail seems to be lost in noise reduction.

I couldn't agree more. If Panasonic puts an APS-C sized sensor in a GM sized body that has similar dynamic range and to the top end Nikon APS-C along with good PDAF (not in terms of price, since they have similar sensors to the entry level D3400 series), it will have a serious winner. It may require a few lenses to be designed specifically for it. It could be Marketed as the most pocketable high end Mirrorless camera, and if battery swapping isn't a concern, it could easily compete with some top end sports APS-C cameras. One doesn't have to carry point that shoot cameras that don't have good low light or can't do sports photography (the RX100 v seems to be excellent with sports photography though, especially in bright light). I am sure if it could pull 14 Stops of Dynamic Range like on many of the Nikons (even the $500 D3400 does 13.9 stops) and has fast and accurate autofocus, people could easily shell out $1500 for a travel camera that is a real work horse. It could, more importantly, go where many DSLRs may not even be allowed. Think about it. Here is a size comparison between the D3400 and the GM5: http://j.mp/2T2yimW https://camerasize.com/compare/#570,681 I am also curious why Panasonic doesn't have more pancake lenses on the lines of the 20mm f1.7. That one's a superb lens, especially for the tiny size. Or have a roadmap for smaller cameras like the GX85 and GM5 with IBIS and PDAF. I can't think of one good reason why travel photographers wouldn't want a more capable travel camera. I guess we could all agree that the missing PDAF is arguably the biggest downside of the Panasonic Cameras.

Welcome.

I saw a video of Tony Northup (I hope that's the correct spelling), and the Z6 exhibited noticeable shutter shock at lower shutter speeds and banding at high ISOs with higher shuttwr speeds in electronic shutter. In the photo nice obviously. I am guessing the rolling shutter should better than the Z7.

Quite good actually. IMHO the background score and foley need a little not work, especially since its a horror flick (and a little interplay between them in the sound design). In the edit if you could do a little more back and forth, especially when the light first goes out and in the end, by hanging between frames and angles, it could look very scary. Nice work

Maybe perhaps more like 24MP. The sensor shift helps create larger res images, like it foes across manu Olympus models.

Hahaha. It was a joke. Many Sony sensors do full res at 30fps and over (some in 12-bit). Even the GH5 sensor does full res at 60fps. Though I am not sure that it's 12-bit. This particular document is so freaking LONG. But it does seem interesting, and the sensor vacillate between 16-bit and 11-bit with mention of some kind of global shutter mechanism too. Anyways too freaking LONG and I don't wanna read it from my phone. Thanks for sharing.

Could you share the data sheet. The 11bit bit seems pretty kickass.

The whole licence agreement of Panasonic from Leica for the L-series Cameras sounds curiously suspect. Because: 1. Not getting Olympus on-board has a Lot more to do with Olympus not being interested in Full Frame. It wouldn't take Olympus to figure that out after spending half a decade patenting all sorts of Full Frame lenses (I will read the literature again to see if it mentioned mount size or name). 2. Like Sigma (and others before it showed us), it is mostly quite simple to re-mount between various Full Frame lens mounts (unless obviously the mount size are enormously different). So it obviously didn't have to do with merely different mounts. Unless the Olympus mount had some seriously Path Breaking advantages over the Leica one (which seems unlikely, atleast until we hear more of that or until the 1st quarter of 2019 when Olympus' new enormous sized camera is revealed). 3. The Varicam and the Eva aren't using Full Frame Sensors or proprietary Panasonic mounts, which makes Panasonic cinema line-up the last to the full frame party (Blackmagic's prices are too low to count). Therefore Panasonic's high end cinema division also would be looking for a (non-Propreitory) new mount usable for Full Frame lenses for the Full Frame Varicam sensor (which should hopefully make it well before 2020). This may be a reason why Leica wants to edclusively make the Cinema lenses for Panasonic and Panasonic probably didn't wanna share the mount with Olympus. The whole M43 collaboration wasn't really a collaboration to begin with with various splattering of lenses and technologies between Panaspnic and Olympus. Also no proper roadmap. In the end Panasonic beat Olympus because Olympus' top end cameras didn't have enough video features to justify their price and Panasonic got the IBIS tech from Olympus, arguably the biggest advantage in Olympus cameras.