Derek Weston

GH3 has better dynamic range than the 5D III. Go look at the sensor charts on dxomark. It doesn't quite have the resolution, though.

Have you played around yet with dropping/pushing shadows/highlights in camera? (there was a setting for that, I remember reading, past the regular profile adjustments) Also. . . have you noticed what the exposure time limit is for electronic shutter exposures is? With the GH3 it was 1 second -- it'd be awesome if we had longer exposures for night timelapses. Thanks.

Bit confused on time recorded as it relates to space on card. You noted that it was around 100 megabyte per 10 sec of video. That's 600MB per minute. The math on 100mbps is 750MB per minute. You then state that it's about a GB per minute. Was that just lazy rounding on your part or am I missing something? Thanks.

Also... link to footage? If you're talking about the camcorder linking, no, I don't think that was more impressive.

Sensor on the gh4 is better than gh3, so the stills will be. Though I wouldn't expect a giant difference.

Yeah, raw is the lack of processing.

As I've noted before, dxomark is useful for measuring sensor capability in existing dslr video enabled products. The gh3, for example, has 12.x stops of DR. It's how the video is processed of course, that affects actual realized DR. The red dragon, for example, could have very poor processing and output only, say, 10 stops of DR range. (it doesn't, it's a 30 thousand dollar camera) My point is... most of the DSLRs we see have really good DR should it be realized, but they're all saddled with poor video processing that causes this not to be realized.

They're useful for cameras that can actually output unprocessed 10bit 422... most cameras don't. Something like the GH4 should compare very favorably -- even better than -- the blackmagic prores. The sensor should support it. Of course it probably won't beat raw, because it doesn't offer... raw. The d600 would easily beat the blackmagic if it could output raw or prores 422

You're never going to create good art without strong content. Content is primary. Good art gets a higher ceiling with good technology. The end.

Found the comment on recording time with a 64gb card at 100mb/s to be odd. Shouldn't it be: 100/8 = 12.5 megabyte per second. 12.5 x 60 = 750mb per minute. 64,000mb/750mb = 85.33 minutes of video.

Perhaps I'm just not reading very closely, but is 96fps on available as slowmo in 24/30 as converted by the camera? Or does it actually record 96 and allow you to edit as you wish in post?

Good to hear. For me I'll need it to pair with a 8-16mm sigma lens to get the widest field possible for landscapes. Really hope it does it's job at infinity focus, as I'll be there a lot.

Interesting to hear him talk down the quality of the metabones speed-booster. From all the analysis I've seen it looks to perform quite well. Anybody else notice what he speaks of?

Probably the standard profile used for the GH4, gives it the plasticy look you saw in videos. Most DSLR video looks like that with overly contrasty/colored shots.

Ah, yeah. That was confusing. Raw is lack of anything.

What do you mean it can't match the 5D III codec? Everybody considers the gh3(and 4 surely) codec to be superior. (unless you're talking raw, which, of course, doesnt have a codec)

Although the actual horizontal crop is less, around 11% for DCI, 17% for 3850. (I guess I worry more about horizontal space loss and feel a bit better know there isn't as much lost there)

It's going to be hard to beat raw quality, even if with good 10 bit output. But there are tons of other useability/price questions you need to factor in -- only you can decide what makes sense for you.

4:3 is awesome for me because I don't want bokeh -- I'm shooting landscapes and want everything in focus.

Also: interesting write up that seems to say we shouldn't expect that resolution to necessary bitrate is a linear relationship. http://alexzambelli.com/blog/2013/01/28/h-265hevc-ratification-and-4k-video-streaming/ As in: 4k at 100mbps isn't necessarily quality equivalent to 1080 at 25mbps. (it's better, from a bitrate perspective)

Although it again becomes less critical if you're shooting 4k to only to downres the final product.

For me, the count down is on. If this lands at < 2000 it's absolutely the tool I want to use to document my storm chasing this spring. I just hope it shows up before May otherwise I'll probably pass until next year.

I'm sure if it was easily done somebody would be doing it and making a killing. We just took a big step forward with this offering and we'll continue to take steps forward.

Wasn't expecting 120fps at 4k, just 1080p, which would still be great. Had seen earlier that it would offer 8 and 10 bit output... only assumed 4:2:2 would be for 10bit

4:2:2 10bit + 4k + 120fps 1080p + other features mentioned + < 2,000 = huge hit if true.