sanveer

Interesting. How about a faster version of the 12-100 f4 with a little bit of the range shaved off? Like, perhaps a 12-60 f2.8? It could be mildly bigger to accomodate the extra light gathering.

It's a superb lens. And there was an offer on it recently (dunno if its still on, I saw it on 43rumors.com)

Fast zooms are not as common as they should be. I wish there were like 2-3 zooms for the M43 ecosystem that could relieve filmmakers and photographers of the headache of constantly changing lenses to reframe shots. Also if they were Fast, low light wouldn't really be an issue. I wish Olympus and Sigma could perhaps collaborate on the following Zooms: 1. 12-25mm f2. 2. 24-50mm f2. 3. 45-100mm f2. Also if they could have good OIS and smaller sizes, along with being under $1500, it could be a runaway success. DO you think they should some other specifications for zooms in the M43 ecosystem? Or would you prefer constantly changing lenses?

Lots of Zoom H1s (for reference and ambient sound to dialogues via lapel mics, it's super cheap and quite tiny), Zoom H5 (mostly for the shotgun mic) on small budget shorts. On large budget features I guess lots of different brands (the sound guys have their own brands, though sound devices seem very popular). I would love to use the Tascam DR 10L and DR10X (I wish it had a long L shaped mic that could be used with it for booming) kind of recorders. Maybe I pick up those or the Zoom F1. I love the Instamic concept. I wish they could bring the mic quality up to the level of the HTC10 and LG V30, and also have a lapel mic in option along with auto sync. It's superb in terms of size and the concept is genuinely progressive.

EXACTLY. A 1 inch sensor is 16mm Diagonal, whereas the GH5s sensor is 21.63 mm Diagonal. How could it then, possibly, be smaller than a 1inch sensor??? The guy who has reviewed it, obviously did no research at all, and despite almost every fact being incorrect, he arrives at a conclusion which he believe to be of great accuracy. He doesn't even know the specifications of the sensor, leave alone the exact number of pixels on it in different modes (which Panasonic itself shared in various literature). Suddenly, after seeing this one, one would wonder how off the mark, the rest of his results are (with regard to the other cameras mentioned). It is one thing to get a conclusion incorrect, but a Totally Different thing to start on a Completely Erroneous Footing. This is the site that came up with: https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/tech3335 This reminds me of one of Murphy's famous laws (on experts): "An expert is a person who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy." - Weinberg's Corollary

Excellent. What's more even impressive is the turn around and how it was shot. Please share details of lighting and setup. Thanks in advance.

That's the sole reason I stopped visiting the site too. It smacks of too much bias. They have brands that they glorify, and others they try to run to the ground.

"The sensor has about 11 megapixels according to the specification and is a Micro Four Thirds format (sensor size 17.3x13mm which means 4:3 aspect ratio). The specification says that only “10.28 Megapixels are active”, making the resolution about 3704×2778 if it’s 4:3. So the individual photo-sites must be about 4.7μm square, about the same as a conventional 3-sensor HDTV camera. Alan found that neither of these sets of dimensions was enough for 4096×2160 recording unless his assumptions are over-simplifications – which seems likely from the measurements above. ... The camera achieves HD Tier 1 because of the sensor size, while smaller than the preferred 1” size, is greater than the minimum-acceptable 2⁄3” size. The wording of R.118 is not completely consistent on this because testing is required whatever the sensor size, but the camera passes the tests anyway. ... It is also important for users to know that they can obtain more dynamic range shooting in the HLG or CineLike-D picture profiles than V-LogL. In saying that, V-LogL and HLG have a lot more dynamic range in the stops allocated above middle grey than CineLike-D. The amount of stops isn’t as important as where they are located above or below middle grey. Just because Cinelike-D has more DR than V-LogL doesn’t mean it’s a better picture profile to shoot in." The edifice of his research itself is wayyyyyyy off. It is NOT a 4/3 ratio sensor, and this is NOT the aspect ratio for 10.23 MP. They Are actually these: 3680 x 2760 (10.2 MP, 4:3), 3840 x 2560 (9.8 MP, 3:2), 4016 x 2256 (9.1 MP, 16:9), 2752 x 2752 (7.6 MP, 1:1), 2592 x 1944 (5.0 MP, 4:3), 2736 x 1824 (5.0 MP, 3:2), 2816 x 1584 (4.5 MP, 16:9), 1936 x 1936 (3.7 MP, 1:1), 1824 x 1368 (2.5 MP, 4:3), 1920 x 1280 (2.5 MP, 3:2), 1920 x 1080 (2.1 MP, 16:9), 1360 x 1360 (1.8 MP, 1:1), 3328 x 2496 (8.3 MP, 4:3), 3504 x 2336 (8.2 MP, 3:2), 3840 x 2160 (8.3 MP, 16:9), 2880 x 2880 (8.3 MP, 1:1) I am guessing the GH5s could have about 1/5 stop more dynamic range than the GH5 for raw, and less than that for video. Also, I doubt ANY camera can do 14.6 Stops in a 10-bit codec. I doubt even the highest grade ProRes 10-bit will reach 14.6 Stops. As a matter of fact, after this review, I am curious as to how many Stops of Dynamic Range the Alexas and REDs Achieve on their ProRes Codecs. Also, if this sensor were So Capable, Blackmagic would have advertised the 14.6 stops as the USP, above the Dual Native ISO. Also he says Cinelike-D has more dynamic range than Vlog. How? Take this review with a ping of salt. Or something stronger.

They probably made 2 production versions of the 5d3. One for you, and one for everyone else.

Firstly this review was with the old firmware and Samsung addressed most of the issues with the later firmware. The credibility of Cinema5D is probably less than Mata Hari the double agent. And their ability to take criticism is worse than Uwe Boll. The sheer number of rude comments on this very post of Cinema5D highlights the very problem with brazenly biased reviews. They wrote a scathing initial review of the GH5 too calling the Vlog a joke or unusable or something on those lines. I believe Panasonic threatened to sue, so they took down their article to re-write It, removing all the vitriolic rubbish that had made itself to the initial review. This kind of shamelessly biased writing dismisses any hope of credibility. That's more than a lot of full frames of that time (including the 5D Mark ii and iii).

Actually the 5D Mark ii and iii had pretty low dynamic range (lower than the Panasonic GH5 cameras at base ISO). And let's not forget the soft HD for video. Evey camera has its issues and limitations, somr way more than others.

I wrote to one of the biggest 3D manufacturers out there. And I guess it's just a terrible rumour. As, arguably, the sharpest mind (and one of the sharpest wits too) on the forum implied, speed would be a factor for 3D Printing. It would havr delays running into decades ? Actually it may be possible that the sensor as way too many crop factor and resolution combinations. Since it is a 14-bit sensor, I won' be surprised that in one of such combinations it does 14-bit RAW at 4k or cinema 4k too.

Wow. You did cover some very important questions.

I am curious, does anyone know the Exact size of the GH5s sensor? Someone on DVD Forum claimed it was 17.8x10mm, but that aspect ratio seems VERY strange. The sensor on the BMPCC 4k is 18.96mm x 10mm as stated on its own site. Sony states that it's IMX294 sensor has a Diagonal Measurement of 21.63 mm (which is in the 17:9 ratio. So, effectively the sensor on the BMPCC 4k is an off the rack Sony IMX294 sensor. Which curiously seems to be the same sensor on the GH5s as well as the Z Cam E2. But, the GH5s seems to have uncropped HD at almost 200fps, and then after that it seems to crop in for higher frame rates (please correct me if I am wrong). Whereas, on the BMPCC it claims not to crop in at upto 100 fps or so, and then it crops in. How is it possible that 2 different ratios exist for the same sensor?

The NX1 Mark ii would be the most important and wanted camera ever. It would, presumably, Again, redefine photography and videography in a Camera, if it ever hit shelves. This topic is both so Relevant and Divided, that we should have a Regulated Wager on this one. Andrew should probably hold bets on both sides of argument. It would be fun. Should we start with a Poll?

'Not at the moment' is what one of the Blackmagic guys said at NAB.

"This is an unpaid opportunity, however all travel and accommodation expenses will be covered, including food and excursions. In exchange you will document the entire trip on behalf of She Went Wild and our partners and create a 10 - 15 minute short film. It will document the dramatic scenery of the region, the personal trials and tribulations of the women involved and the core values of both WOAM & SWW; women supporting women. You will require your own 'professional grade equipment' and be physically fit." They don't need a filmmaker, they need a chaperone for old women who are on a holiday where they cannot walk (I won't be surprised if none of the old beneficiaries are there, and Only members of this shady NGO for adventurous women are brought). Basically this charity is using the platform to get people to work for free, whereas it will pocket all the money it makes under the guise of charitable work. Nice little scam it has going there. Get your RED and shoot some old hags (who mostly won't be the real veterans they promise to be), and you also be fit enough to also double as a mule at 15000 feet, using your body as a rope and pulley, moving these women and the NGO members across treacherous landscape. Luckily they didn't advertise for Bruce Lee or Chuck Norris to make love to them.

Hahaha. It's apparently ... 50x Faster, 20x Cheaper ?

I heard this news from a source a little while ago, but was not sure whether to believe it because I was not sure of durability issues. Now I can safely say that wrt to quality and durability, it should not be an issue and hopefully Blackmagic doesn't have me killed or sue me. I believe that the delays with Blackmagic's original pocket camera were a manufacturing nightmare attributed to their contract work. Also, Cost is a Huge Factor for the Body, and while Blackmagic is basically pushing the software of the Ursa with tweaks on the BMPCC 4k, and working around the new Sony Sensor, they wanted to cut costs as far as possible. So they are now (according to what I believe to be true), doing 3D Manufacturing for their BMPCC 4k on carbon composite (actually continuous carbon fibre printing). They are basically doing it all in-house. The manufacturing process may be speedened up Big time, and manufacturing costs should also come down substantially. The only problem, if any, is that they apparently haven't done this before. So they may have initial testing issues and a special department for in-house manufacturing with the necessary know-how that may take a little time to be completely ready. Strength and durability is apparently not an issue, because Aeroplane manufacturers also use some of the printers for manufacturing components in-house (which are stronger than aviation grade aluminium). If this is true, I hope all manufacturers make their products in-house if they can pass on the cost benefits to the customer (instead of selling 5 year old sensors and disappointing tech in re-branded camera bodies). Another Important Update. I wrote to Z Cam asking them about the E2, namely whether it has Dual ISO or have they not bother implementing it; the limited recording options, and whether Z Cam could do a blackmagic and allow for recording by way of SSDs via the USB-C, to get good LOG profiles, and to get partners on board for having things like electronic variable NDs. These are their replies. I find them all very promising (except the ambigious reply on whether they have implemented the Dual ISO, unless it means Dual ISO AND 13.5, which would be Insane). "Sanveer, 1) It is a dual native ISO Sony CMOS sensor. 2) There are multiple recording options including what you are asking for. 3) We will provide customisable LUTs. 4) Working with several accessory partner now." btw the turnaround seems Pretty fast. I did not notice they had replied and this is like 3 days old (I was probably searching the wrong name). The Z Cam E2 is looking to be one seriously kickass camera.

For the simple reason that they have to protect their higher end camera offerings. That is also why Both the BMPCC 4k and the GH5s Do Not have 4k at 120fps (despite the sensor being capable of it).

Wow. You've nailed it.

Both. Everything in hardware has implementation in software. And vice versa. Even Sony Entry-level ILCs like the A6300 ans A6500 have dual native ISOs and that is why their low light is pretty usually upto ISO320 or ISO6400.

How? It's strange and sad how they're cutting corners.

But it's a strange situation. It's almost like having 13 or 12.75 Stops at ISO 400 and ISO 3200, or, 13.5 Stops at ISO 100. The low light would be hit big time. I won't be surprised if it may then be unusable at ISO 1600.

I seem to have discovered a series of bad news. To make it less severe I will disburse it in Installments. 1. The Z Cam E2 doesn't seem to have implemented the Dual Native ISO on their camera. I am sure it requires some custom circuiry or wiring with regard to the design, and Z Cam didn't think it was worth the effort or the sensor was too much effort for a small startup such as theirs and they circumvented the entire effort of implementing it with dual ISO. I am guessing, as a result the low light may suffer (greatly). There is a likelihood, that the Native ISO is ISO 100 and curiously at that ISO it seems to have/ they claim it has a dynamic range of 13.5 Stops. I could obviously be wrong, so we will have to wait for confirmation from Z Cam.