yupmouthteeth

Really wish rather than trying to port it to so many cameras, Magic Lantern would work on fixing these dropped frames. I keep hearing all this language online about 'Why would Canon cripple their cameras so much and not allow this amazing quality?!' I think the proof is in the pudding: because this stuff is mad unstable and at best unreliable. I wouldn't call the 50d a 'monster' worth selling your GH2 for if you can't even get 10 stinkin' seconds out of it before the thing freezes up. Just my two cents... 

  That's the thing, though... it's NOT free. Not everyone owns the 5D. Most I would say actually don't. And if it's a choice between buying a $3,000 camera that shoots a few seconds of unstable raw and buying a $2,995 or $3,995 camera that shoots stable raw at a higher resolution, I'd say that Blackmagic still wins when presented to undecided customers.   If anything, I'm still tempted to buy the Blackmagic Pocket over this. 1080p raw for $999. Take the two grand you've saved over the 5D and go out and buy some nice m43 glass to go with it.   I agree this is a nice treat for folks who already have a 5D, but I still don't believe the raw abilities of this camera as it currently stands warrants a $3,000 purchase.   But again, if Magic Lantern can actually make this stable and eliminate those image-tearing motion and vertical line issues (that I notice Andrew keeps conveniently ignoring) AND gives us TRUE continuous recording that last for several minutes before dropping frames (which by the way should absolutely make it a total dealbreaker) then I'd be happy to drop the money and buy it.      It's getting there, but it's not quite revolutionary yet. 

Footage looked... strange to me, I guess. Color was nice, but it just seemed... I dunno. Fuzzy. Blurry. Can't really put my finger on it. It gave me a headache to watch in full screen. Some kind of distortion to the image when it wasn't focused correctly. Maybe it's just me, though. 

Heh... years ago they said the same thing about HD. :P

Not meaning to come off as patronizing Sorry if you got that impression. Music videos and demo pieces are awesome. I love them as much as the next guy. I just work in a different medium inside the business. If I tried to produce a TV show 40 seconds at a time I'd blow my brains out. There's just no way. I'm simply stating for all the hype about this cutting into Black Magic's thunder, if you look at it from a realistic and practical use standpoint, while this technology is cool, there's no way it can hold a candle to other RAW cameras on the market. We can argue about image quality all day. If I can't get on set and use it continuously and comfortably, it's not worth the hassle.

Don't wanna burst bubbles around here, but while all of this is great... only 40 seconds of recording time is not gonna cut it for narrative. Hence, I don't think this will be the Black Magic killer everyone is saying it will be. If BlackMagic Pocket/Production can shoot for several minutes, WITH audio, TV and Cinema shooters like myself will need to stick with it. Still, a nice little treat for people who only shoot demo videos or music videos, I guess.

This is all well and good, but my main two questions are 1) How LONG can you continuously record for? and 2) Any chance it'll come to the 5D Mark II or 6D and work near as well? These little 15 second clips are cool and all, but if I'm gonna go out and shoot a movie with it, I need it to be able to record for at the VERY least 2-3 minutes so I can capture performances from actors. And how long will cool down be in between clips?

Just received mine late this afternoon. The quality is awesome. Definitely a step up in terms of resolution and sharpness. Man, that 1 second limit just kills you, though. I can definitely see some cool things coming from this, however. I now have a new tool in my kit if I want to do something sharp, fast, and epic looking. I might post some stuff later on. For $220, it was a total steal. Also... as I've learned today... 4K closeups means WEAR MAKEUP. :P

Bah... crap. I ordered a refurbished one from them yesterday. Here's hoping I'm not screwed over, too. :/

I see. Thanks! E-M5 has better stills quality than GH3, right?

Hmm... if no one knows for E-M5 vs GH3, how about E-M5 vs GH2? Any autofocus difference for the Olympus lenses for these two?   Obviously I'm debating over which to buy next... E-M5 or GH3. If my lenses will go better with the E-M5 then I will lean more toward that.

I'm a news shooter who is looking for a back-up m43 camera for run and gun stories. I need something relatively low key that wont draw too much attention.   I know that when it comes to video quality, save for a hacked GH2 (which I already have), the market is now controlled by either the GH3 or the E-M5.   I have purchased several of the amazing olympus lenses (including the 17mm and 75mm). I am wondering if these lenses are compatible in terms of AF and whatnot with the GH3. I know they share the same mounts, but I am wondering if there are any drawbacks.   For example, will autofocus be faster on the E-M5 with these lenses over the GH3, just simply because they come from the same manufacturer, or is there any difference whatsoever?   And finally, in terms of still image quality, am I correct in assuming that the E-M5 is superior to the GH3? And if so, by how much?   Thanks!