fuzzynormal

I work almost every day as a freelancer. I do stuff on lots of different gear. Still, I would like to have 4K. And when I do I'll continue to work almost every day as a freelancer and do stuff on lots of different gear...

Gotta job tomorrow or else I'd go check it out. Intriguing machine, this.

This raises a bigger question about market health overall. And it's legitimate. Elsewhere on the forum you can find a discussion about the digital Bolex. A lot of folks believe that it's not technologically advanced enough to be successful. However, I begin to wonder if smaller enterprises like the crew that built the DBolex might be heralding the future of the Enthusiast/Hobbyist market? When image technology is so advanced that most consumers are satisfied with smart phones as cameras, then what's left? And is that piece of the pie better suited for more nimble/smaller businesses? 15 years from now I imagine all portable technology is going to be able to produce incredibly high resolutions at wonderful detail in low light. Then what? It'll be interesting to see who's still here as a manufacturing business and what they're offering. In the meantime, I'm off to go shoot on my 1080 machine.

You figured it out. Buyer beware. What someone does with their money is their problem and their decision. How they're influenced is their responsibility no one else's.

It's touched on in Andrew's article.

From what I understand, depending on sensor circumstances, yes.

Good point. On the other hand, even if it is obvious bias, so what? No one is entitled to the "truth" on the internet. Sorry to be cynical, but with most things on the web you have to assume skepticism. Your course of action is wise. Take issue with disagreeable words, dismiss the review(er), and then move onto someplace else. Now, about that camera: I still maintain it's a strong niche product with great value for end users such as university film students.

Yes. http://nofilmschool.com/2013/12/digital-bolex-d16-review-part-2-comparison-test-blackmagic-pocket-si-2k-mini/

It is, but the internet being the internet it amusingly doesn't always work that way.

I guess the short/simple answer being that 4k capture with a 1080 post-production-down-conversion looks great.

I don't know what it's like in Europe, but here in America, Panasonic's upscale cameras are not readily available in retail outlets. Not only are they absent from the "big box" American retail companies like Target, WalMart, etc., but they have limited display space in actual camera shops where the enthusiast's spend their money. In my city, San Diego, there are 4 reputable camera stores that cater to the hobbyist market. None of them sell the upmarket Panasonic cameras. A few point and shoot cams on the shelves of the consumer stores, but that's it. Fuji has a bigger presence here than Panasonic. Bad sales are not for the lack of good product, IMHO. They just don't have the penetration in retail. From where I'm sitting, it's all on the sales distribution regarding the bad numbers. It's not the feature set. I'm going to disagree with Atkin's assessment. Correlating bad sales to the product features might not be the actual causation. That said, I don't expect Panasonic to go away with their product line anytime soon. Because I believe that, I just bought two Panasonic m43 cameras and four m43 prime lenses. I expect the cams to easily get 4 years of use for the gigs I do. That's a fair investment. The lenses should have life well beyond that as other companies continue development of m43 camera bodies that support 4K video. If you want to be a "glass is half full" kind of person, you could even rationalize that these numbers might be good for Panasonic's development. If the m43 camera division needs to grab headlines because of slumping sales, perhaps really unleashing and pushing the video capabilities of their sensors will be a useful tool; mixed with proper marketing and dealership.

http://nofilmschool.com/2013/12/digital-bolex-d16-review-part-1-first-impressions-pre-order/ Joe Marine's of NoFilmSchool recent 2-part review of the Digital Bolex seems not very skewed in favor of that camera. In fact, it's a reasoned balanced opinion, I think. Personally, I like the idea that some folks had an idea and made it happen with "Kickstarting" support from the filmmaking community. I also like that they developed a camera for 16mm lenses. So many American university are full up on 16mm lenses going unused. This camera is near-perfect for those programs. I'd go so far as to say that the RAW workflow is a nice parallel to traditional film production. That's good for students. Learning footage discipline is a worthwhile skill.

It might appear someday as a hack on cameras like the GX7. You never know. At least I can hope. And, of course, Panasonic is hitting the market with a 4K camera this year that (from what I've seen with my limited wisdom) may share the same sensor as the GX7 and GM1. The point being that 4K is happening in the marketplace. More important, it looks like it has a chance to be a big deal in the consumer market -- because of companies wanting to upgrade/sell 4K monitors. As you know, the consumer market is where the DSLR/M43/Mirrorless products are. As such, adapting them to a useful workflow is important. It'll happen fast.

At that price point it's worth giving it a go. Thanks.

Thanks for this suggestion. I hadn't heard of it before, but seems like a good option. Is there anything else you can tell us about it?

To be fair, if your subjects are not near the lens, shallow depth of field isn't too hard to handle. Wide shots at night wouldn't be an issue at all. Medium shots with disciplined blocking is viable. If you want closeups then yeah, you'd have to be strategic with what you're doing with your actors or subjects. Also, softness that's quite noticeable in hires photographs, isn't that bad, imho, @1080. One has to decide if the DOF is worth the edge softness, I guess. Still, you can always just shoot an f4 and save the wide open apertures for times when the light is low and can't be controlled. For instance, I know that I found myself shooting pretty wide-open on a documentary where I was inside night clubs and in dark backstage areas. In that case, every little bit helps. In those situations, I wouldn't mind having a .95. Not willing to pay 1K for just that 1 extra stop though. Yet. I got a doc shoot coming up this spring... Might have to rent the .95 and see what I see before then.

In the case of the Panasonic GX7, I do wonder if there's enough bandwidth in it to eventually pull off 24fps @4K. Sure would be a nice bonus to have that option in the future. The sensor specs certainly allow it; not sure on the other bandwidth components. Also, the cheap little Nikon V1 does a short 1sec burst at 60fps. You can check out the popular thread here on EOSHD for examples. If these cameras could even just manage a modest 10 second record time with a firmware update, then lots of high res creativity would be available for the filmmaker. It would be great for music vids, for instance.

I think it would be pretty good for that too. Not sure on the low light capability yet, but having those audio inputs would be nice.

Tee Hee. C'mon, it's the internet. Taking things personally here is a fool's game. My response was just meant to illustrate how I think your earnestness is misplaced.

And laughing. Thanks for offering the amusement.

I'd say that's good advice.

Assuming you know what kind of camera I want to use based on this conversation is amusing. Maybe we just don't find PB's statements as much of a big deal as you do? Try not to get worked up about it. People don't agree with you. It's not that important.

I really don't think you understand what that guy is doing on his blog. What he wrote is not a review. He can offer advice from his perspective. Exercise some free will and use that advice or ignore it. That's it. If you think that statement discredits him, great. That's your call. If you find his opinion about codecs seemingly contradictory, so be it. I don't. Nor, based on what I shoot, would I concern myself too much with it regardless.

Yes. It's his ideas and his writing. His opinion. He's not entitled to do anything beyond that. If he has a favorable initial impression over one piece of gear to another, that's fine. He was enthusiastic for the C100 awhile back, but that isn't a viable camera for a lot of people. Big deal. He's not doing a "Consumer Reports" market study, he's writing His Thoughts about a camera. Welcome to the internet, BTW, hope you like it here.

As someone that just did a shoot in NZ barely a year ago on 60i HD and a 5 year old Canon camcorder, I'd just like to say I'm crazy jealous that someone got to run around the country using this gear. What I would have given to have shot my assignment on this cam. Man, I know a lot of y'all never seem satisfied with limitations, but just take a breather and realize that you're looking at a camera that shoots 4K for less than 2K. I don't know, seems impressive to me.