Julian

@jurgen: I think pixel refresh is a software thing so it won't do harm. Not 100% sure though. The black pixels 'might' be really there, could be that ACR automatically fixes it. Maybe try with some GH3/GX7 files if you get the same artefacts? Can't be autofocus pixels, the GH4 doesn't have any I think so? Contrast AF only (with the new DFD system, that is more like an algorithm?) no phase detection focus pixels.

I downloaded this file: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gh4/GH4LL002007XNR.RW2.HTM Made Photoshop think the raw is from a GH3, opened in ACR. I can't find the black spots. 100 % crop (click):

I'm using ExifTOOL GUI so I don't have to bother with the command line. Not sure if that's available for Mac. If you upload some raw files (wetransfer.com - send it to yourself, paste the link here - or dropbox etc) I can convert them and re-upload them.

Just curious: how are you going to decide when to shoot All-I or IPB? I can understand you'll shoot 4K when there is less motion involved because of the rolling shutter, but what would trigger you to change to 200mbps? Extreme movements?

Nothing wrong with this list so far, but why present it like this? Of course I'd love 1080p96 with supersharp images. But it is understandable that Panasonic has to do some tricks to get so many frames of the sensor. Even though not as sharp as normal 1080p, I think it's perfectly usable. Especially with shallow dof shots it looks lovely imo: With deep dof and lots of detail, the resolution doesn't look as good indeed: Is this a 'problem' of the GH4? Don't think so. I still think the 96 fps is a huge PLUS for the GH4. Which other camera has this possibility?? Regarding AF: I haven't seen any proper tests in video mode. Have seen an example where the GH3 gets it focus faster in AF-S mode, but is that a big deal? In AF-S you are shooting something static anyway, it's just to get the focus point right for the beginning of your shot. How about continious AF compared? GH4 should be better with the new focus system indeed, although I'm not sure if that works for video. Anyway, I don't have a problem with a list of points that are worth mention, but don't present it like things that are wrong with the camera. Also Panasonic is pretty open about things like the extra crop. You can see it as a downside, but also as a upside, because it gives you 1:1 pixel readout so no ugly artefacts from scaling. Do you have a GH4? Or are you looking for reasons not to buy one? :)

Download a exif editor. Open the GH4 raw files and change the camera model flag to GH3 or GX7. Now you can open then raws in ACR. See if you get the same problem.

Yep. Works fine with my UHS-1 cards! 64GB Lexar 600x for example. Actually the most demanding mode is 1080p 200 mbps. This als worked with the Lexar card, but havent stress tested it. Probably I won't be using that anyway. ©4K 100 mbps works fine with all my older fast cards, like Sony 95mb/s etc. It's only 100mbps after all... a whopping 12.5 MB/s :) I agree that the GH4 is the only camera that meets your requirements. Also the reason I'm buying one. Just buy the body - maybe an adapter / speed booster (or cheap clone) for your current lenses - and you are done.

If you crop to cinemascope I'd go for C4K to get the wider angle of view. If you want 16:9, C4K doesn't make much sense, although you could use the information to crop a bit from left or right. True, the UHD mode (3840) will give you perfect down sampling, but I don't think downsampling a few extra pixels in post is a big problem. I don't think there'll be visible difference. Easiest thing to do would be to make some shots and compare them.

GH4 shoots also 'just' H.264. With a higher bitrate than Sony though. I can understand you point regarding the Speed Booster. But it might be a nice excuse to try out some (cheap) vintage glass for the GH4 ;) No need to re-shuffle your whole collection yet.

Yep. If you are shooting ML raw, I'd go for 4:3. That'd give you a resolution of ~1706x1280. Stretch 2x and you'll get a resolution 3413x1280, aspect ratio 2,66:1

Which setting/menu do you mean? H264 on the 7D/5D3 is only possible in 16:9. Or maybe 4:3 @ 640x480... Or are you shooting Magic Lantern raw? That is the only way you can change the aspect ratio...

Might be a good idea to mention it only shows up while monitoring the audio with headphones - not in recorded file...

Andy, share you YT links! Would be nice. I have a lot of Minolta lenses, so the video below was very useful to me. Even if you don't have such lenses it gives you a good sight of all the parts inside.

Terrible arguments. Fast and expensive media. For example, the Panasonic GH4 requires a UHS-II Class 3 SDXC card. Not just a 95MBs capable card, but a state of the art one that costs US$250 for a 64GB card. That might net you 80 minutes of video (still haven’t gotten a chance to verify that). It’s possible we’ll see some cameras that use far more compression that can use slower cards, but isn’t the point of 4K to get ready for the next generation of TV, whenever it comes? You don’t want to be the “fuzzy†provider of 4K output, do you? False. 100mbps 4K works fine with pretty much all my UHS-II cards. Also, sd cards are dirt cheap (for example, a Lexar 64GB 600x works like a charm, this is an expensive brand. Cost? a whopping $70 :)) Really, 100mbps isn't exactly lots of data/second. It's hardly more than the GH3 at max bitrate (70mbps). Lots of storage. Thing is, you’re likely to want to preserve video quality during editing, which means transcoding into something like ProRes format. Prepare to be shocked at how big the files get. Really shocked. As in your 80 minutes of video off that expensive card is now 256GB or larger. By the time you build proxies, create a timeline, etc., your single card now may taking up more than half a terabyte. Remember, you also need backups to everything, so okay, we’ve probably crossed the terabyte line. Why would you transcode during editing? When you open the source file in a 32 bit project (standard in premiere I think?) You'll always have the maximum 'room' available. Just choose your codec of choice for export. Keep the source files in their small 100mbps format. A new MacPro. This was an eye-opener to me. My current gear is quite capable of editing and running the video projects I do (all 1080P at the moment) in real time. My first 4K test? Uh, not so much. Not at all. I have a PC that was high end 3 years ago (Intel i5 2,4 Ghz, 16GB ram, 180GB SSD, Nvidia GTX 660) and I can edit the Panasonic GH4 files just fine. Maybe you need to upgrade a part of your system a bit, you really don't need a $3K MacPro. Definitely don't let those arguments get in the way of your interest in the GH4 :)

In video? What situations? I've only tested AF in photography since it has a whole new system. Worked great with AF tracking and fast moving subjects @ high fps..

Nope, not even close.. Redstans are beautiful. Website seems to be back online. Did you get in contact?

Interesting to read someone's take on the camera from the broadcast perspective, but quite limited as a complete 'overview' of the camera I'd say.

You say nobody wants to work with 4K because of storage, but ProRes 1080p is a lot bigger than the internal 100 mbps 4K from the GH4. If people are afraid to handle it, I'd say shoot 4K yourself, transcode to DNxHD/PRORES... 1080p 4:4:4. Saves you the trouble of using the Blade during recording, and you are recording small 100 Mbps 4K files... Keep the 4K files for the future :)

It depends on the lens design... some 35mm's may work, some may not. Not all 35mm's are equal. For example, a big fullframe 35mm f/1.4 (like Canon/Nikon/Samyang) probably will give problems, since it has a huge front element. Also lenses with a front element that is protruding into the lens might show more vignetting, since the anamorphic adapter can't get close enough. It's trial and error, simple as that. My Kowa for B&H 2x works fine on my GH2 + Minolta 35mm f/2.8. But if I combine it with a 14-42mm Panasonic kitlens, i'd have to zoom in to 42mm probably.

He's talking about 1080p 100 mbps. Wasn't the conclusion with the GH3 that AVCHD 50 mbps was better than MOV 72 mbps? And with the 5D3 (h264) also the ALL-I had some troubles if I recall correctly? Don't ask me why... and I think it's weird indeed. Maybe it's not so much the grading that makes a difference but macro blocking or movement?

If 85mm is 'pushing it' you should go for a longer focal length, not shorter. With shorter you'll get vignetting. Are you aware of the dual focus mechanism? Don't expect to be shooting sports with continuous AF and an anamorphic lens. You have to focus both the taking lens and the anamorphic. So following fast moving subjects is kind of out of the question.

Wait for raw tests. JPG high iso is always crap imo.

What is 3 by lens? I think the crop factor of the BMPCC is 2.88x. RJ FD's are 0.72x (0.71 = Metabones). So with the RJ FD the cropfactor will become 2.88 x 0.72 = 2x (2,0736).

Only SSD's are sexy... ;) A storage topic wouldn't hurt. Doesn't have to be sticky I think. But would be nice to see what everybody is using. I myself am very ignorant with backups for example. Going to regret that one day...

">April 30, 2014 "> ">April 30, 2014 Nope, it doesn't look quite so 550D indeed. But... I think that it's this film: