maxotics

As Araucaria alluded to, decent tilt-shifts start at about $800 (for Rokinon knockoff). Good ones are close to $2,000. I had the Canon for a while and came to these conclusions: 1. The lens is heavy and cumbersome. All focus is manual. NOT remotely run-and-gun. 2. Tilt is a fun effect, but rarely used. 3. Shift is VERY useful (controls perspective). However, people are used to the strange perspective of buildings, say, with normal lenses, so when you make the image look straighter through shifting, architecturally speaking, it's a bit distracting in video. A similar problem bedevils super HD. All the detail distracts from the overall feel of the image. 4. I experienced inside the lens adapter (Canon to Sony) flare problems when shifting. Complex subject. In photography, I can get good enough shift effects through photoshop. A great benefit of tilt-shift lenses, however, is you can see in the camera the immediate effect of your settings. This is even more important in video. Also, the lens evenly disburses the image on the sensor. Post-process tilt effects degrade resolution at the edges. With 4K you should be able to get good post-shift at 1080 (again, keep in mind that post shift requires throwing out some resolution). In short, you have to really WANT, and understand, the effect you can get from TS lenses to use them. TS lenses are NOT easy to use! But as righg101 pointed out, in certain shooting situations they do what no other lenses can.

Fuji is developing code for a chip platform that has probably changed little; that is, the time and money they're spending is for new Fuji cameras, the code of which, they're back-loading if they can. Your somewhat arguing another of my points, that the manufacturers want their customers to have as much power as they can. So I think we're in agreement ;) My only real point is that 4K is more than a tweak! Again, Panasonic has solved problems (like heat dissipation) which must be designed-in at the hardware level.

Why would a camera manufacturer spend time (money) adding more "power" to an older camera that does nothing to pay their bills? Why do people believe manufacturers limit or turn off features? Why would Olympus, which has no video line, throttle back a camera to stop it from competing with their non-existent video cameras? To me, EOSHD has improved immensely from last year by staying away from this type of (naive to me) conspiracy thinking. Wake up camera people :) In a very difficult camera market ALL manufacturers are looking to put in as many features as they can to compete against smart-phones. A win for any of them is a win for all. Panasonic didn't come out with 4K out of the blue. They have been working on this technology for years. As for Magic Lantern, when the 50D came out there weren't CF cards fast enough to write RAW video. Anyway, RAW is STILL not for consumers, for a long list of reasons. I want built-in Canon RAW as much as the next guy, but I don't believe it's as easy a decision as it looks (overheating issues for one). Sadly, people may leave EOSHD because Andrew isn't feeding into this fantasy of picking up a used E-M1 for $300 and turning on 4K video. They will follow people who feed into the dream, rather than the reality. This is true in all areas of expertise (why there are so many charlatans). DON'T FALL FOR IT ;)

Yes, I would get a case that doesn't let any corner of the camera hit anything hard. The case I had is soft all around. So you'd want a somewhat hard outer shell.

My guess is I can drop my GF3 down a flight of stairs and it will come out fine too. The first thing I thought when I got the GM1 was "Wow is this thing small and light (almost cheap feeling)." I had the 14mm pancake on it when I dropped it. The housing near the flash became a tiny bit warped and a small crack appeared in the black plastic whatever on the corner. Very small, but the camera looks like it fell down the stairs. I'm torn about what to feel. On the one hand, I dropped the camera and a fact is a fact. Panasonic shouldn't have to replace every broken camera. On the other hand, it's an EXPENSIVE camera and I took the time to explain what happened to Panasonic and I had no idea the camera was so flimsy so feel they bear some of the responsibility. My conclusion is I wouldn't recommend this is an only camera to someone with limited funds. For portable video, it's still kick-ass ;)

Yes, I agree it's all in the angle, just like car accidents. The camera fell on its top left corner. I think if it has been a flat-fall, relative to the shutter it would have been okay. Silent mode is the best thing about the camera so I'm glad that's still working!

I carry around the GM1 in a CaseLogic belt-case. A couple of months ago I dropped it, while in case, turned off, onto a carpeted floor. I couldn't have dropped it more than 3 feet; that is IT WAS ABOUT AS GENTLE A DROP AS I CAN IMAGINE. The shutter stopped working. The GM1 gives that "turn off, turn on" message whenever "silent mode" is OFF. The camera still works in silent shutter mode and video. I sent the camera back to Panasonic hoping for a little mercy but no dice. They wanted $275 to fix it. In short, I would either be VERY CAREFUL if you have a GM1, or not buy it for any situations where the camera is going to get knocked (unless you don't care about the physical shutter). Now I know what trade-offs they made to make a camera so small and light ;)

I've concluded that there is a physical trade-off between MFT and APS-C sensor cameras--has little to do with manufacturer. The MFT is sharper, less moire, less rolling shutter, etc. APS-C/FF is better in low light and has a shallower DOF, however it is MORE moire, rolling shutter etc. If I was shooting mostly video I would go with a Panasonic solution like Andy suggests. In the past year, everything Andy has said has borne out to be right in my experience. I have both a GM1 and a6000. The GM1 is a better video camera, the a6000 a better stills camera (due to larger sensor size). As for Bui's suggestion of going ML, I agree, that will give you some seriously awesome footage, but the file-sizes, and time involved, are immense--might be good for you. Don't know what you want to shoot. If you want the best bang-for-the-buck interchangeable lens video equipment Panasonic is the way to go.

I sold my BMPCC before I bought a Clearviewer http://www.clearviewer.com/ for the GM1. The Clearviewer is a lot better than it looks in pictures (I bought the deluxe version). That is, it isn't just a magnifying class modified for a camera. The details were really sweated out. I would write the maker of it and ask him what he thinks. Not the kind of guy who would sell you something that won't work. I use it both on the GM1 and Sigma DP1M.

Very nice video. It makes my day to see young people embrace black-and-white! The only food I saw in the whole video was a jar of what looked like spaghetti sauce--unopened. AH YOUTH! To think, 100 years ago, to be a young man in Europe meant dying in the mud between Germany and France. Better to roll in it! I hope it stays that way. Again, very nice video!

One of my favorite jokes about economists. Man walking along a road in the countryside comes across a shepherd and a huge flock of sheep. Tells the shepherd, "I will bet you $100 against one of your sheep that I can tell you the exact number in this flock." The shepherd thinks it over; it's a big flock so he takes the bet. "973," says the man. The shepherd is astonished, because that is exactly right. Says "OK, I'm a man of my word, take an animal." Man picks one up and begins to walk away. "Wait," cries the shepherd, "Let me have a chance to get even. Double or nothing that I can guess your exact occupation." Man says sure. "You are an economist for a government think tank," says the shepherd. "Amazing!" responds the man, "You are exactly right! But tell me, how did you deduce that?" "Well," says the shepherd, "put down my dog and I will tell you."

The BMPCC's biggest weakness, I thought was the aliasing/moire. My guess is that the sensor is not true 1080, but something else, which required line-skipping. I wonder if the new camera will have a different sensor or higher res? Anyone have any idea?

Yes, if you save RAW you only need to save 12 bits per pixel (red, green or blue) and then de-bayer in post. 444 assumes pre-debayering, that is, the codec works on full RGB values, so like araucaria said, you're now saving 3x10 bits = 30 bits per RGB pixel vs 12 bits per single-channel pixel.

I agree with Jacek AND Julian. You can finesse it to get close to manual video exposure. I forget how, but can be done. I wasted a lot of time on the hacks too--they don't do anything I can see. It's a nice camera for less than $100. The EOS-M is closer to $300, but you get a camera that still competes with modern tech. Julian has a point. Lighting is everything. Better to have a GF3 with $200 worth of light panels instead of the EOS-M without.

Yes, the GF3 does not have exposure lock, the EOS-M does.

Panasonic GF3 or Canon EOS-M (runs Magic Lantern, even RAW! and is a kick-butt camera IMHO).

I went to order at BH Photo and they are temporarily out of stock.

I sold mine because I wasn't using it, though I loved it. They must have manufactured a lot more than they're on track to selling within a year. My guess is that the next version will have a better screen, might be 4K, better focus, audio, etc. There's probably a limit to what they can do firm-ware wise. The BMPCC is a lot like those Sigma DP cameras. I believe it will be many years before the camera is obsolete for the special thing it does. Aliasing/moire is the biggest problem with the camera, but if that doesn't bother you, or you can work around, it delivers a beautiful image. In certain circumstances, it is STILL an image you can't get with any other small camera and STILL an image that you need to spend $3,000+ to get with other cameras. At this price, I need to get one again. When I bought the GM1 I also bought a Clearviewer--which I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE. I'm hoping this will make the BMPCC easier to use because the external loup was/is big and cumbersome. Will let everyone know.

Hi leeys, I would like to know if it works consistently with a Sandisk 95mbs card. I don't care about AF. I would care that exposure could be set manually and locked. I imagine you're right that it would be too jittery for sound, but how would it look if one were doing a silent art film type thing? Anyway, if anyone knows of any 20fps 4K samples out that please post. It is strange don't you think that it seems that camera is close to 24fps 4K and their other cameras are, well, as Andrew has pointed out... :)

Hi Henry, I'm long-time Sigma user. Here's my review http://maxotics.com/?p=350 Mercifully, they're removed video from the camera. This sensor is a somewhat bastardization of their original Foveon designs. In order to increase detail they split the top layer, blue I believe, into four pixels per 1 pixel of red and green below. I didn't test against my Merrill, but others have found what I suspected, you lose a little color microcontrast, though gain some speed. If anyone here is interested in getting a medium format image quality at ISO 100, and you can work slow, like in the film days, these are cameras worth having. The lenses alone are generally what an interchangable prime lens of the same quality would cost so you get the body for free. So if you see a used DP1S, X or M, or DP2S, X M (the 1 is around 28mm and the 2 is about 42mm), give them a try. For architectural photography a DP1 simply cannot be beat IMHO. Also, the Sigma software you have to use to process the X3F RAW files is slow and horrible. But again a real 3D look.

I saw that the V3 spec is 20fps in continuous mode? Has anyone tried that? Awful close to 24, and above silent 16fps 16mm days of old ;)

Sorry if I came across the way! The Leica reference was just a joke, well only because I can't afford it and better to laugh than cry ;) The reviews of the lens I've read are good. There's even a 10-18 love group somewhere. When I was shooting with a Nikon 24 and Zenit 16mm I looked at the Flickr photos of the Sony and was very impreessed. My experience with the lens is that it is better than the Nikon mostly because I believe the cheap adapters I use have a little bit of give/take and the Sony is design specitifically for their bodies/sensors. I love manual lenses, but I'm starting to believe they are no match to lenses made for specific lines of cameras. There are also many times I want auto focus and/or IS. So I'm sorry I can't answer your question. All I can say is I've gotten the best wide-angle quality out of that lens compared to those others. Again, I bought the lens for photography. The video is a bonus. Also, Luminase landscapes also compared this lens to others on the a7 and found it very good for the money. My opinion is it is an excellent lens and Sony has finally nailed it with the a7 and a6000. I used to have a nex7 but the proprietary hot shoe and slow focus ended up souring me on it. So I think I know where you're coming from. Hope this better answers your question. Again, apologies for not spending more time in answering your question. If you want me to comment on some specific reviews post the links and I'll be happy to do so!

@Noone, going through the same thought-process myself. The megapixel count on the a6000 is so high I don't really need a full-frame to mitigate bayer color smearing. That only leaves low-noise high ISO and shallow DOF for reasons to keep FF. As for MFT, not a big fan for photography, but for video great benefits. @leeys. What lens would you recommend between 16-28mm? I find Canon/Nikon mound manual lenses a bit iffy. Naturally, I'd prefer a Leica 16-18-21mm f/4.0 M-Tri-Elmar, but short of that ;) Also, I have Sigma DPs which are seriously sharp and don't suffer bayer issues.

Since I have an a6000 it hasn't made sense for me to use in crop mode on the a7. It's an interesting question though, which would be sharper, the lens on the a6000, where it is binning across more 24 mpx, or the a7 where is using less (16?). I"ll have to try an experiment! Check for the rolling shutter thing too. Thanks for the idea!!!

Sorry Inazuma, I should have formatted what I wrote "...which is completely ungraded and boring" Like I said, I couldn't find any samples, so I figured I'd put something up. I wish I could have shot some people. If I did, at a low f-shop, you would have seen shallow DOF that would would show the huge benefit over a gopro, in separating subject from background. The a7S is full-frame, and has larger pixels. The RED has monster processing chips, batteries and I assume sensor heatsinks. So let me clarify what I was saying, I don't see consumer APS-C sensors getting much better at video. The power/heat that would be generated in properly binning all the pixels is too great. Sensors are only part of the equation. You're right, I should have clarified.