tugela

It probably can do a full pixel read out, but not process all the data generated. So there is a compromise. I don't doubt that it can get focus quickly with PDAF, what I am more concerned about is the field of focus and exactly where that is. If you want to control what is in the image, instead of hoping the camera gets it right, you need tools to help you with that.

My experience is with the NX1, and my old Canon did not have PDAF, so I can't comment on that. But personally, I have found that when it comes to critical focus with narrow depths of field, peaking is an important tool for ensuring that what you want in your field of focus actually is in focus. Perhaps you might not use it, but others may. Given the options of having the tool and not having the tool on a 6k camera, it is IMO sort of mind boggling that they would leave it out. There is no good reason for leaving those sorts of tools out. It's applications are not just for video, but stills as well, especially if you are doing macro work. I would rather not guess or rely on what the camera thinks is right.

Why would it? I assume that because EF lenses work fine on crop cameras, the distances must be the same.

The other issue with the crop is that it will not be oversampled.

Focus peaking is important for controlling your field of focus. Not just for video, but for stills as well. I think it is what the D5 was panned for.

It will be the processor. If you can produce uncompressed 4K without a fan, the sensor isn't the source of the heat, it has to be the processor.

If the reason suggested for the implementation in the 1DXM2 is correct (that Canon processors need fans to do 4K using hardware encoding), then the 5D4 would have to use MJPEG as well if it did 4K. More likely however is that it would not do 4K, only HD. That would be unfortunate, since it would mean that we probably will not see 4K in Canon consumer cameras until 2018 at the earliest (assuming Digic 7 arrives in 2016 and serves through 2017).

Editor issues.

Well, MJPEG, as I predicted since it was rumored to have Digic 6 processors. Guess they didn't have the Digic 7 processors ready in time when they locked the design. It is the only way they could do 4K with the older processor technology they used. I guess they did not get the tech in the DV5 transferred to the 7 in time. That means that Canon are about two years behind Sony/Panasonic/Samsung processor technology. No. The reason is that the processors they are using do not have 4K capable encoders in them. The Digic DV5 does, and presumably the Digic 7 will as well, but the Digic 6 does not. But I am guessing that the 7 wasn't ready in time so they had to use the old MJPEG software workabout.

If they use Digic 6 processors they will not be able to encode in hardware, so it would have to be MJPEG and a high bit rate. I think it is more likely that they would use Digic 7 along with the XFAVC codec. So it should have similar overall specs that the C300M2 has.

The original OP's assertion was that the C100M2 was a DSLR killer. That has not turned out to be correct.

The guy who wrote that thread is full of shit. I have a 4K TV, and the difference is pretty obvious. I think the problem is that some people are just so vested in the status quo that they simply refuse to consider things as improved, even when it is staring them in the face. Instead they come up with subjective comments like "it just doesn't look right" or "it just doesn't have that indefinable quality about it", and stuff like that. Or they rehash "theories" about viewing resolution that don't hold up in practice. People will watch HD content happily because the story is king. But they will watch the same story in SD as well, if it is compelling, and their brain will adjust for the reduced resolution. Given the choice between SD, HD or UHD side by side (especially on any TV 60" and above), they will take the UHD. Particularly on natural history shows, where reality trumps everything. The fact of the matter is that 4K panels have become mainstream and are affordable.

That site also claims that it will have dual Digic 6 processors. Unless they are using the same sort of alternative codec like the C, it would mean HD footage only. Hardware encoding like that used in the C300M2 and XC10 would require Digic 7 processors. In other words, those specs are probably made up from expectations and rumors rather than actual knowledge.

I would stick with the NX1 if I were you, the ergonomics are not going to be substantially different going to the Sony cameras. Quality wise you probably won't see too much difference. In terms of cost you can get an NX1 + S lens for what the Sony body will price at. No doubt in a two or three years there will be better cameras anyway, so bouncing around between cameras for minimal advantage isn't being smart IMO. If you do go for the Sony, get the a7RII. It should be the better of the two for stills.

I can understand it with their consumer cameras, but not the others. Unless pro/prosumer video cameras sales make up a very small part of the overall market for cameras like that. That would be surprising though. Maybe those little consumer cams sell more than I thought. Or do the Japanese simply have preferred brands for video and are inflexible when it comes to anything else?

http://***URL removed***/forums/thread/3959588 Excuse the cross-link, but I am curious what people think about this. In particular, the bit about digital video camera market share. In Japan apparently Sony, Panasonic and JVC collectively have about 95% of the market share. Presumably Canon has most of the remaining 5%. Are Canon video cameras really that unpopular in Japan?

No one talked about Ed. The way it worked is that Ed talked about "issues" as he saw them. Others disagreed with his point of view on the "issues". Ed took the disagreement as a personal attack. If you are not prepared for other people to have opposing views, then don't present your view in the first place. Because it is going to happen, and it shouldn't be taken personally. Pretty common sense I would think.

Looking at some of those stories you have presented they appear to have been made up. A company storing and shipping camera equipment is not going to be generating toxic dust. And they are not going to be wanting toxic dust falling all over their very expensive merchandise either. Where did this "asbestos" go to? It doesn't just disappear, and since site has been inspected multiple times, apparently without incident, it was probably never there to start with. For an example (excuse the lack of proper quotes, since the editing function on the board is messed up), in one of the quotes you talk about a worker who "temporarily" lost his job after collapsing on the job. It doesn't sound like his medical condition had anything to do with his job (since he says he had cancer). If he temporarily lost his job, it means he got it back again once he was fit to resume work. My guess is that his non work related illness is what caused him to collapse, and probably prevented him from working for some time. Once his sick days ran out he would no longer be paid. That's how it works pretty much everywhere else if you have a non-work related illness, so I imagine that is how it worked there. Regarding the fire, no doubt the local fire department would have been on the scene and would have been making decisions regarding evacuation, not management. If there were significant problems the OHSA would have found them. If there were undocumented workers present, unionization would push them out the door pretty promptly, so I find that claim dubious. I think there is a whole lot of rhetoric going on, probably being pushed by individuals or parties with a vested interest in unionization.

My understanding was that only Canon cameras can capture skin tones though.

Teal looks good?

The sensor can do a full read at 240 fps. This has been known for quite a long time, but apparently that mode was only used for debugging purposes. I would guess that shooting becomes unstable at those frame rates, or the processor quickly overheats, so it was not used for operational modes.

My guess is that it is because the professionals are not impressed by the same things enthusiasts are.

I think it will be similar to what the XC10 has (but better effective resolution of course) in terms of overall specs.

I have found that editing on this board can be really wonky at times. IMO it is related to the server side script that contracts multiple posts into a single post. That definitely seems to have a few bugs in it!

If you are buying your first camera I would suggest something more modestly priced than a 5D3. There are plenty of more recent cameras that cost a fraction of what a 5D3 costs and shoot superior footage.