Emanuel

Yes, this camera is a no brainer. But, this doesn't mean you are accurate when you infer no one will choose the Panasonic model you mention. Only if because there is a GH5S instead ; ) Never mind... Please take a look now in those links in my signature and tell me I am not a serious player ;-) GH5 is my favorite cinema camera today if I would have the need to choose only one camera FYI. GH5S is a better cinema camera but for some reason I'd pick the standard GH5 at first rate.

No one can practice medicine becoming retired of any field else, correct? ; ) Worse, to be entitled as an authority, lecturer, whoever at a certain level and degree. Why should the things be different with cameras from one day to another? ;-) No Christmas fantasy can save random internet when shit happens...

Only a bit?! Nah, where have you gotten such idea?? Nowadays, it is the user who makes the cinema camera (specs are the most irrelevant), not the opposite... actually, never was! LOL ; ) That part where you mention "more important is autofocus" mixed-up with the meaning of a cinema camera is also fairly funny... OK, got it, you mean from 2018 on. :X Let alone your negative considerations on a small format factor (towards the 4/3" size, go figure!) in the same line or paragraph(s) along the usual AF mantra these days, oh yeah! Cassavetes, among many others, must find out now the meaning for his actor career in his case study, poor guy ; )) Jonas (Mekas) -- if one of these days, you'll read these lines, let me tell you straight away: "YOU ARE AN IMPOSTOR !!" (Finally, we got it all clear! hehe) (Internet is a comedy at times!! :D) Again @Yurolov you meant accurate focus, right? ;-)

LOL Sure, it is. Just nothing impedes you to have a better omelet with two eggs rather than strictly with the double... that's the whole point. As much as a millionaire is made after the 1st million, not nolens volens a couple of millions later as a few idiots want to always (or almost that) misshape ;-)

Man, wrong camera thread... "@#%

On this 8-bit vs 10-bit thing, I recall when I almost was crucified :D in a thread two years and a half ago only because I had tried to justify 8-bit is nothing but a spec. Others can count much more to the outcome. Here is only to begin with: To follow in the next pages. Have a good read! ;-)

LOL Yeah, I read that : ) The guy seems to me some DJI employee or connected with. It is too much DJI love from his tweets.

50% off for 1x Blackmagic Ursa Mini 4.6K PL mount + 2x 4K video assist... last Black Friday

No need Jon, you've already beat me with your previous post! ;-)

Sure all this is BS from the head of Imaging at Panasonic... the man behind the GH5S and EVA1 -- another consumer camera! *cough cough* :D LOL :-)

Well, the same guy had "guessed" the Air model earlier than their announcement (last January 23). Tell me where to order his Crystal ball please ;-)

Underestimating the tool is absolutely nonsense...

https://twitter.com/ositalv

There is 8-bit and 8-bit... There isn't "one 8-bit". To dismiss bit rate is simply to ignore determinant variables. As much as NR doesn't cross the whole ISO range on GH5 series. GH5S is also a different camera on that regard. Neither resolving detail is a panacea of another than the regular GH5 nor a trouble for oversharpened edges on and from such capture device instead. Seems to me you lack experience about the tool you've chosen to discuss. I'm sorry but some BS detector still stands when a superior Fuji's color science is misplaced for anything else. :-)

Apples to oranges. If you go on wide shots where the sky as for instance will show banding or you'll apply radical grading or yet for green screen, without mention demanding motion where a higher bit rate can really help you out, go on 10-bit with the respective protection as far as a good codec concerns. If you want to take your chances for a rather filmic slow motion @ post mainly: 50p in the PAL part of the universe as much as possible especially where not for the big screen when there is artificial light even though you may use the shutter in order to avoid flickering or you'll end your master there; 60p for the remainder. Including both cases with stereoscopic aim to match a soap opera look by those who are used to the gaming world and its own perspective of motion based on the mantra of high frequency refresh rates, not actually the cinematic route at all but, at the same time not necessarily a 3D synonymous either, as a few people tend to convince themselves to believe as closer to the real side of the things... and by consequence, apparently to the truth itself. It is not. You shoot for an alternative range of reality instead (E ;-)

To me, the closer rival out there is the Ursa Mini 4.6K PL mount. One of these past days for a little bit above 2 grand... That's the next mark, it is just waiting for a cyber deal next end of November or summer sales. Count on it.

The funny is the fact the parade doesn't end there at 10,000 lumens... Take a look on this example here: And the utmost is when the 10,000 lumens theory proves to be the spot number. If not, the difference from 10,000 to 20,000 should duplicate the impact. It simply doesn't at all. Interesting to say the least. @zerocool22 you got a home run here, pal (E :-)

...you see, David...? Never outdated ;-)

Jon, man, from a former instructor to another one... you are a good one! ;-)

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-digital-projectors-under-3-000-usd-msrp/2947392-benq-ht2550-4k-review-coming-very-soon-2.html#post55480932 I know black levels on OLED TV can't be compared to : ) Neither the lower price range of this new entry as you accurately concurred ;-) BTW, Optoma UHD60 the reviewer compares to is slightly sharper but offers the same UHD output instead :-) He adds a different scope as far as color rendering concerns, though: "One thing that I want to mention here that I didn't mention in the review is that the HDR performance of this projector is better than the UHD60 when the HDR mode is activated. The colors are more vibrant and the image has more depth than it does on the Optoma. Just keep in mind that it looks best on a screen smaller than 120 inches." (source:) http://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-digital-projectors-under-3-000-usd-msrp/2947392-benq-ht2550-4k-review-coming-very-soon-2.html#post55480932

Have you read those links yet, Jon? Some reviewers add no similar priced 1080p they compared to actually matches it... :-)

Well, "True 4k", "Faux K" or even "4K-enhancement" are only terms... This is also information you can pick up from any typical search: (interesting post as note of this scribe here) https://www.projectorreviews.com/the-art-of-home-theater-projectors/fauxk-vs-4k-projectors-look-true-4k-4k-uhd-1080p-pixel-shifters/#comment-3475477844 (from six years ago!) http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?77171-REDray-Projector&p=1012303&viewfull=1#post1012303 (BTW, here's a link to the same topic discussed on this other forum: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?165342-4K-projection-home-for-1-grand-and-a-half-Funny-times-Thanks-Jim!-(E-)) http://4k.com/news/optomas-newest-4k-hdr-projector-is-first-ever-to-sport-amazon-alexa-23018/ "As for the UHD51A’s resolution, it’s not true native 4K of the type you’d get from one of Sony’s much more expensive models, but the UHD51A does deliver a high quality pixel shift upscaling engine for taking native 4K video inputs from any source (or video in lesser resolutions) and upscaling them to a simulated ultra HD resolution that does look sharper than native 1080p HD. We saw this technology at work in other Optoma projectors we’ve reviewed and we can safely say that it works exceptionally at simulating 4K video quality. This aside, the HDR support for high dynamic range movies or programming is what will really deliver the goods, more than a minor difference between native 4K and upscaled 4K picture resolution." And here's one from an usual suspect: https://www.projectorreviews.com/benq/benq-ht2550-at-1499-the-most-affordable-4k-uhd-projector-yet-first-look/ Not exactly OT but, here's some food for thought (actually already referred by our Jon @jonpais along this thread): https://petapixel.com/2017/11/18/testing-sonys-new-pixel-shift-feature-a7r-iii/ Probably only bad luck, mate?! Since my native 1024x768 PB6200 has worked without flaws from 2004 (!) on, for 14 years now... (time enough for a resolution update BTW :-)