newfoundmass

????? Legitimately laughed out loud at there being a flip out screen.

Good for them for doing that.

It should also be noted that nothing has been announced, as far as I know, about codecs.

Camera Conspiracies is hilarious! C'mon, lighten up.

I'm in agreement overall. I don't think full frame is necessary at all! The GH5 was worth every penny at $2000. It was literally 2 years ahead of its time. It's still a great deal at the $1300 or whatever price point it's currently at.

Sony and Canon are doing it but with S35 sensors and more expensive.

Because it's full frame? I'm in the camp that thinks full frame is overrated. I'm happy with my micro four thirds loser sensor (™Camera Conspiracies)!

Panasonic clearly isn't targeting people that are shooting on a $2000 full frame hybrid and trying to get them to switch. There's literally nothing on the market that can do what the S1H does in its price range. To get something that can you're heading into RED, Arri, Canon C700, or Sony Venice territory. I am not sure what part of any of that you don't understand.

The S1H is clearly made and marketed towards production professionals. It was released at Cine Gear and the "cine" and "cinema" verbiage used to announce it should give that away. Most of the folks buying this camera will use external monitors anyway. You weren't going to be happy short of it having PDAF and a flip out screen. That it leads the way in every other category is irrelevant to you, so I don't think you're their target customer. Best to wait for the A7Siii maybe and hope that it can do 4K60p without combusting?

No, I don't believe there was, which is "eh."

I too like the flip out screen, but cinema folks aren't relying on a flip out screen to begin with, they're using an external monitor. I also don't understand why people thought the body would be much different than the S1 or the S1R. Overall $4k for a camera that does full frame video with all those features is very reasonable for anyone that wants/needs those features.

The A9 isn't targeted towards filmmaking. The A7Sii was $3,000 on launch. If the A7Siii is less than $3,500 I'll be shocked. I agree though about lenses, they are definitely the weak point.

I mean, there's no camera on the market that can do what it can do in that price range. And given there was speculation that it'd be in the $6k range, $4k sounds reasonable enough. If you think the A7Siii will be that much cheaper, and come even close to the capability of the S1H without the risk of exploding you will probably be really disappointed. I too though am waiting for the GH6.

Nothing too surprising about the specs. That it can be "matched" (their words) with the Varicam is interesting. $4000 sounds reasonable but still way too much for me. Really weird naming for the firmware upgrade coming out in July though. The SFU2? ?

That's a new one.

You've been very negative about it from the start, I feel. Just let them announce it and then react. Oh, and be realistic with your expectations. Panasonic, for better or worse, isn't going to be ditching CDAF anytime soon, and if they did I don't think they'd do it for just one camera in an entire lineup. And given the S1 and the S1R don't have flip out screens, it's unlikely that the S1H will. Is that a bummer? Yeah, but it's just the way things are.

Might the B4 lens cover the entire M43 censor in ETC mode?

Viltrox has been good about releasing firmware updates too.

There's an awful lot of people that rely on Lumix cameras for their professional video work and businesses, so I'd have to disagree. "Serious video work" shouldn't be based on the size or scope of the work. Certainly wedding filmmakers are doing serious video work? Or the indie filmmakers that shoot their films with Lumix cams.

It's obviously a nice lens, but can't justify buying it until Panasonic shows that it's still committed to M43. Even then, it's still a hard sell for me. The Sigma 18-35 covers a lot of what I'd use this lens for.

Because Canon knows that there will always be a huge segment of the market that'll buy whatever they put out, because they're invested in Canon lenses, etc. or have bought into the Canon PR machine. It's why I get frustrated when my Canon friends constantly complain about this stuff but put up with it.

I've used both Metabones and Viltrox focal reducers and I noticed minimal differences between the two in terms of image quality, certainly not enough to justify the price difference anyway. The only issue I had with my Viltrox, and it was an easy fix with the supplied tools, was adjust the back to focus better with the Sigma 18-35. I haven't used it but I've also heard good things about the Commlite focal reducer.

I personally went the mirrorless route because of the versatility and flexibility it gives me, even though for sports a camcorder is probably more ideal. But I shoot interview, corporate, wedding and commercial video too, so investing into camcorders just didn't make sense for my personal work. I did, however, go the camcorder route for the pro wrestling live streaming company I co founded, because they were only going to be used for sports.

Yeah, that's not an issue in sports venues that have people in spandex throwing each other around and fans hooting and hollering?

We rarely find out in real time what cameras are being used on major film projects. So yeah, it takes time to hear about it. Again though, I don't think you actually care, given your overall argument is dumb when you've got Soderbergh using iPhone's to shoot multiple features in 2019. Perhaps @John Brawleycan share some info on the Pocket4K's usage, given I believe he has been using it?