Philip Lipetz

I made my previous comment before watching the Jenni Tech video. After seeing heir claims here is my response. I am far from a RED fan boy, so this is just based on my experience working with tech patents. OK, first public use or sale starts one year clock, before one year is up RED files provisional patent that starts new one year clock for full patent application on what was claimed in the provisional patent. RED filed the full patent in less than one year. So, the question is if filing a provisional patent satisfies the one year clock that started ticking with public disclose or sale. It does but only if it makes sufficient disclosure in the provisional patent. So, the Jinni Tech claim appears to be valid only if the provisional patent did not cover the tech that was covered in the non-provisional patent. At first glance, and I do not have the time to find and read the patents, that appears to be the critical issue under American patent law, and it is not addressed in this video. If you look at the dates of the provisional and non-provisional patents they are barely less than one year from first public disclosure and from filing the provisional patent respectively. I cannot think that is a coincidence, is appears that they were scrambling to meet these two one year deadlines. At first glance it appears that RED was aware of this provisions of US patent laws and complied with them, The only issue is if the non-provisional patent application included any material not in the provisional, if that is the case then RED lost the the ability to patent any feature not in the provisional patent and publicly disclosed more than one year previously.

Opps, was that the sound of the industry being turned upside down?

https://www.diyphotography.net/the-first-chinese-hasselblad-x1d-clone-is-coming-and-its-coming-from-dji/

Yes, notice as video. What matters most is the effective color resolution, and in that the BMPCC2 will be better. Introducing more spatial resolution without also increasing color resolution results in the video look. Something looks off, and it is discontinuity in color gradient as it does not change at the same frequency as does the spatial information

Why is everyone comparing this to the GH5? It has the same sensor as the GH5s. That is it’s direct competition

I used to work in finance. Some companies can get loans against their order book.

EDIT: this information was covered by a prior post in this stream. No need to read this, The rumored is that Atomos has a period of exclusive use. Hence Apple cannot license ProRes RAW to BM.

+1 The best for our scripted setups.

He could have a GH5s for testing. He has long had a back channel into Pannie. Good for him.

Yep. Canon said upgrade is 8 bit

Exactly.

Don't forget that the 2018 internal 4K upgrade will be 8 bit only. The 1080 is only 35mps. All of these specs fall just a little short of what I am asked to deliver. RAW is nice but none of my jobs ask for RAW, they hate it. The C200 is an enthusiast camera. Great for passsion projects and micro budget narratives, not for my niche, event and quick turn around docs Just so you don't think I am a Canon hater we have had several C100s at time, both models, but time moves on. We sold ours I hope the Panasonic Cinema cam fits our needs.

The problem with a -5 NR setting is that the GH5 has a special function that enhances collie gradients in areas of similar color, the GH4 did not have this, and turning NR off will turn this off also. Guys, this is not a GH4. I wish I had time to create and post tests but this is March Madness basketball tournament time.

The key is that with the 709 profile you have to adjust the knee in order to get the extended dynamic range.

Why hasn't someone said it? The GH5 is what the Canon XC10 should've been. Same professional market hybrid.