jasondhsd

Yeah Panasonic rep confirmed that the 300mm wasn't happening & they wanted to go in favor of making compact standard zooms for the GM1. The 150mm f2.8 is still suppose to happen, too short for wildlife or birds but a good focal length for sports & action. I think they are making a mistake though abandoning the pro 300mm zoom, they could of won over a lot of wildlife photographers who are tired of carrying a $8k bazooka lens into the forest.

I know you guys are mainly video but I like using mine for photography as well, I think with GH4 new AF it could really be a competent bird in flight or sports camera if it had a pro-level lens at a longer focal length with a fast AF motor. I would vote for an Lumix G Vario X 100-300mm F4 with stabilization & weather proofing. Maybe throw in a 600mm F5.6 prime.

I was going more for satire, not sure I can do funny.

Umm, really?

BREAKING NEWS!! CONFIRMED!! FIRMWARE WILL UPDATE SENSOR TO FULL FRAME WITH INTERNAL 4K RAW!!

I have a photo of the person leaking these rumors:

Ah thanks I think newsshooter is where I might of saw that article about WSJ and yeah they shoot to web & it's probably edited & adjusted but it was the fact they were a news company that made the question pop in my head. I found this article just now about a Sky cameraman using a GH2 (unhacked I assume) http://www.newsshooter.com/2011/12/14/size-matters-sky-news-beijing-bureau-cameraman-andy-portch-reports-on-a-year-with-the-panasonic-af101-and-gh2-cameras/ it seems like the qualifications for HD broadcast quality are pretty loose though & doesn't seem to describe the actual quality of the image itself. The two things I see a lot of people mentioning is 50mbps bitrate, 2/3 sensor, 4.2.2 output. Now I'm not sure why the sensor size would matter all that much & I'm guessing the 4.2.2 would mainly be useful if you were throwing the footage up behind a newscaster in front of a green screen but I don't see green screens being used that much anymore it's mainly big flat screens isn't it? So in most cases now I think GH cameras would be fine.

Any of the GH cameras but Gh3 in particular

This post is just pure curiosity as I just read about how the Wall Street Journal uses GH2 for all their video work & have upgraded to GH4s anyway that got me thinking what would be the best settings to shoot video when you're not going to grade it or even run it through an NLE to do sharpening or adjust contract, etc? You're shooting news footage that will be delivered and put on air shortly after it's shot. Like would you still keep sharpness and noise reduction -5 or just shoot standard or natural with everything at zero?

Maybe he means adjusting the picture profile,ya know setting it natural dial down the sharpness to -5. I like to shoot with natural, -3,-5,0,-3 if it's a dreary day I might put the contrast back up a bit. I was thinking about getting into weddings as well I'm a bit concerned as some reception venues can be pretty low light, have you ran into any issues where you've been forced to use a higher ISO then you'd have liked? I mean your friend in particular, I think you'd be good with the sigma and speedbooster...you might want to have your friend pick up something like a lens turbo & a samyang/rokinon 35mm just have in case the lights go too low.

Someone needs to come out with a battery grip add-on for the A7s but instead of it just being for an extra battery it would also be a 4k recorder....essentially giving you 4k that you can hold in one hand like the gh4.

Read Andrew's review of the 1DC he was never happy with it and I agree 100% with the issues he brought up. http://www.eoshd.com/content/10179/the-canon-1d-c-review Canon really needs to rethink it's business model. Maybe they could get away with their overpriced crap a few years ago but IMO if they want to continue to sell high-end cameras for $10k plus they need to do internal 6k and external 8k, global shutter, 16-20MP, xlr inputs, etc. Right now 4k is being used to acquire and deliver to HD, so what Canon needs to do is anticipate when consumers want 4k delivery and make a camera that will do 8k or 6k for a 4k delivery.....I say this because the best advantage in using 4k and delivering in HD (besides a cleaner image) is you don't need as many cameras you can have a wide shot and crop in to close-ups.

Huh I guess this was already discussed awhile back http://www.eoshd.com/content/605/what-smart-glass-means-to-dslr-video-digital-nd-filters

Can something like this be adapted to cameras as an ND filter? http://www.smarttint.com/

But when you think about it the Panasonic considers the two X zooms equivalent to canon L zooms. The Canon 70-200 f2.8 sells for $2300 compared to the Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 which sells for $950 so roughly the panasonic is 60% smaller and 60% cheaper. So from that perspective just comparing the physical attributes the lens are prices competitively against one another. On the other hand if you want to try and directly compare full frame dof, angle of view, etc like the video has then you'd only have to compare it to the 24-70 L f4 which is only $1500 the higher aperture number is compensated by using a higher ISO. See I do get what the video is TRYING to say but the problem is 1. No one is lying. 2. Doing crop factors for ISO noise is a moving target with no baseline. 3. Not everyone cares about full frame equivalent. That said, I think if Panasonic revised their zooms to f2 or below constant aperture and could keep the price within $100 or $200 of the current prices I would be an extremely eager buyer and I think they'd boost mft sales significantly.