What would you like to see Nikon, Olympus, Fuji do to improve video?

[Flynn]

What sorts of things could they realistically do to improve the usefulness of their video? And why aren't they doing these things, given they don't need to worry about protecting higher end video cameras.

[fuzzynormal]

I think Oly might get locked into throttling the video side of the sensor tech because of who they're buying 'em from.  Some sort of competitive clause, perhaps?

At any rate, Oly is rumored to be adding 4k to it's next gen of cams.  And I'm a fan of their models.  I'd rather shoot with an Oly than a Panasonic or Canon, fer instance.  But it's a nuance.  I like Oly's viewfinder and ergos, but I use 2 GX85's because the 4k is a good fit for a production I'm doing.

Personally I think it's all good at this point, going forward.  If you pushed me out the door and told me I had to shoot with any upmarket consumer stills/video camera that came out this year (or next), I'd be fine with that.

[Flynn]

I wonder why none of them are offering things like raw though? I think BM is a much smaller company than all three of them and look at what they were able to do early on. Is it a lack of vision, a lack of resources...hadn't considered that Sony might force those buying from them to cripple their video.

[tupp]

 

1 hour ago, Flynn said:

What would you like to see Nikon, Olympus, Fuji do to improve video?

≧10 bit, 4:4:4 (and 4:2:2), global shutter, APS-C/super35 sensor, shallow lens mount (micro 4/3, Sony E, Canon M, etc.).

[Michael Coffee]

Good video auto focus, 10 bit, low rolling shutter, bluetooth audio input, wifi video and audio streaming, better wifi remote control..

[Cinegain]

13 hours ago, Flynn said:

I wonder why none of them are offering things like raw though? I think BM is a much smaller company than all three of them and look at what they were able to do early on. Is it a lack of vision, a lack of resources...hadn't considered that Sony might force those buying from them to cripple their video.

Because they want to do everything well and appeal to consumers, they don't want to add fluff and invest resources in something that would sell better if it was more generic and priced cheaper. The Blackmagic range is not really something for mass market, so they can focus on making it excel at one particular area. Their area of expertise is video production. You wouldn't pick a BMD camera to go and shoot stills however.

But yeah, that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see Panasonic do something like that. Talked about that before, I think they should bring out a prosumer up from the GH-range. Like a tiny little VariCam. So... you'll get the GH5 and up from that, say the VC5 that's roughly the same idea, but just a little crazier (and more expensive). Sort of a AF100 follow-up, but then again, not really. Still more like a GH5, compact and capable, somewhat reasonably priced, just a little more with a prosumer videographer in mind, rather than a hybrid shooter. So yeah, then it would be nice to see some sort of RAW and ProRes and some proper data and audio handling. But as a mass market camera division, you can't bring out your top of the line camera for hybrid stills and video with overkill on features driving up the price. That's why I suggest to put a VariCam-label on there and drive up the price for the folks that do need those extra features.

Nikon seriously needs to do a mirrorless APS-C line-up. They've got great sensor know-how what extraction/processing concerned and I know they can deliver lenses that are on point, but I just don't care about fuzzy DSLRs. D5500 as a mirrorless camera, or perhaps even something like the D750... that would be golden (but would need to include 4K). But I guess they are scared of the competition in that segment and are afraid that losing the mirror will also mean people won't see Nikon as a solid AF performing brand anymore... I think they'll be sticking to a pro-stills strategy.

Olympus. Here's what I think the thing is... they had the E-M1, people found it decent, people liked to have image stabilization, they saw a use for video and would like more. So... they were like, well, now that we have the E-M10-range as the mini-E-M1, let's just make the E-M5-range the new video-centric model. BAWHAMMO. E-M5II. No mention of 'video' in the press release, remember? It was all 'professional film', 'cinema movies' and all that stuff. Boy, it didn't exactly live up to the raised expectations... The E-M1? It's the Olympus pride and joy... on stills level. They don't want you to go and shoot awesome video with it. They want to carry the tradition that they're the classy stills camera brand. In the successor of the E-M1? The 4K will just be the feature that they 'have' to add. 2160 is a bigger number than 1080 after all. Sex sells, more/bigger numbers too. And if a flagship has to be relevant for atleast the next 2 to 3 years, people will be bummed to learn it's going to be outdated soon, which could potentially harm sales. So yeah, I don't suppose it's more than the obligatory 4K (not that Canon cares). But hey, Fujifilm didn't have to step it up that much with the XT-2, but they seem to have done quite well for themselves, so who knows?

Sony man. Just about everyone and their neighbour's dog is using Sony sensors these days, yet they all seem to do a better job of extracting/processing what's coming out of it. Rolling shutter issues. Overheating. I'd honestly almost rather shoot a Canon, because they might be underwhelming, but atleast they do what's expected of them. They should just buy up the laid-off folks over at the Samsung camera division already. They need to work on color and reliability/performance. They need to be as good for actual shooting as they seem on paper.

I think there's room for improvement everywhere. Bitrates, datahandling, processing, color, codec, dynamic range and pushability, noise levels, rolling shutter. Still would like to see intermediate resolutions. 1080p to 2160p is somewhat of a leap. There's room in between to allow for 1080p projects to still have a little wiggleroom up for framing correction and/or stabilization, but for that you don't need the full 2160p. Which most notably means as well that you can shoot at higher than 1080p res, but do not have to drop your framerate as hard as when you'd go 2160p. Anyways, I'm good with the options we have for the time... next up is Photokina, around that time (fall) Craft Camera is supposed to be doing rounds showing off their system... we'll just have to see about that... then it's CES and NAB already. That's about 6 months of sitting back and looking what happens and just keep shooting with what you have. That's doable.

[The Chris]

2 hours ago, Flynn said:

I wonder why none of them are offering things like raw though? I think BM is a much smaller company than all three of them and look at what they were able to do early on. Is it a lack of vision, a lack of resources...hadn't considered that Sony might force those buying from them to cripple their video.

Blackmagic cameras don't shoot stills and they don't use large MP sensors that need to be compressed into lower resolution video files. Olympus, Nikon and Fuji have a lot of photo-centric features to focus on and very little space in many of the bodies for added processing, cooling and so on. The processing for full sensor readout 4k video is immense, the demands of the spec sheet are moving faster than the smaller players can keep up. IMO the future of the smaller mfr's is shakier than ever. All three could make a killer video camera if they put resources into it, but it likely wouldn't be profitable and all three aren't exactly raking in boatloads of cash from their camera sales. 

[Liam]

For something so beginner, or at least non-pro (well some of their customers), an 8 bit and 1080p limit with a still manageable bit rate, and the DR, color, sensor size, lenses etc offered in a nikon d750 and xpro2.. that's hard to improve upon. You can always make every camera an alexa of course with 12 bit raw global shutter more more more. And 4k is something everyone is whining for all the time, but as things keep getting "better".. a lot of people are more excited watching older tech prices drop >:) Though i hate to be the one guy with an old, cheap computer, it's nice to find a camera with magic that also just freaking works!

[IronFilm]

I'd like to see Nikon/Olympus/FujiFilm make a camera which is FS5/C100 sized (i.e. smaller than a C300 or FS7, more in line with the size of a larger full frame DSLR instead in size) which does (at a minimum) 4K DCI 30fps 10bit internal + 2x XLR inputs + internal ND filters + full size HDMI out + SDI out + 120fps FHD 10bit internal

Anything extra on top of that would be pure gravy, but I'd like to see that at a minimum. I don't care if it is FujiFilm X mount, or Nikon F mount, or Olympus MFT mount, just make it please!

9 hours ago, Cinegain said:

But yeah, that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see Panasonic do something like that. Talked about that before, I think they should bring out a prosumer up from the GH-range. Like a tiny little VariCam. So... you'll get the GH5 and up from that, say the VC5 that's roughly the same idea, but just a little crazier (and more expensive). Sort of a AF100 follow-up, but then again, not really. Still more like a GH5, compact and capable, somewhat reasonably priced, just a little more with a prosumer videographer in mind, rather than a hybrid shooter. So yeah, then it would be nice to see some sort of RAW and ProRes and some proper data and audio handling. But as a mass market camera division, you can't bring out your top of the line camera for hybrid stills and video with overkill on features driving up the price. That's why I suggest to put a VariCam-label on there and drive up the price for the folks that do need those extra features.

I like that name "VC5"! Be like a GH5, but with much much more (internal NDs, XLR inputs, etc). And at a size much much smaller than an AF100, but would still have a bigger body than a GH5 to fit in all the extras they'd pack in.

9 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Nikon seriously needs to do a mirrorless APS-C line-up. They've got great sensor know-how what extraction/processing concerned and I know they can deliver lenses that are on point, but I just don't care about fuzzy DSLRs. D5500 as a mirrorless camera, or perhaps even something like the D750... that would be golden (but would need to include 4K). But I guess they are scared of the competition in that segment and are afraid that losing the mirror will also mean people won't see Nikon as a solid AF performing brand anymore... I think they'll be sticking to a pro-stills strategy.

 

Nikon never made camcorders for the consumer/prosumer market like Canon did? Maybe that lack of knowledge/experience is one big factor holding them back from making a "N100" (i.e. a "Nikon C100", N for Nikon rather than Canon! ha).

[Ivanhurba]

I'm OK with 1080 50p, but I didn't went Oly due to their horrible oversharpened look even at minimum sharp settings. Their flat profile improved it on the OMD EM5II, but it was too late and limited to that model, they have to expand that to their other models. Now that Pana has IBIS on the GX80 I hope it spreads too to the GH5. On the M43 they need better low light performance. They're getting there, but just a little better noise and It will be great for me. If the EM1II gets dual card as rumored and by some miracle can record backup video to both (never seen on DSLR or mirrorless body) it will be a no brainer except if the GH5 gets it too.

My father rocks Fuji now and he loves it, just not the last one. Maybe IBIS and FJ-log to the card? The lenses are great, the rendering is beautiful and APSC size is perfect. It's nice to see them finally throwing a little love to us video freaks.

We gave up Nikon completely for a lot of reasons and just keep our Canon lenses for compatibility. I nearly went with the 80D but the image is too soft and I could see moire in a lot of examples. I can't go to the C100 line for price and size. I can fit three mirrorless with their lenses in a lowepro backpack and a C100 is just too tall, not even talking about Pana videocameras (I used for a while a HC-x1000 and it was just too big and cumbersome with the un-detachable handle) 

And in Sony camp, I'm just happy with the RX10II for casual photos and videos as it does all well in all fields except battery life. Never had a problem with it, not like with the rest of their line up as @Cinegain said. Overheating is intolerable.

[David Bowgett]

10 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Nikon seriously needs to do a mirrorless APS-C line-up. They've got great sensor know-how what extraction/processing concerned and I know they can deliver lenses that are on point, but I just don't care about fuzzy DSLRs. D5500 as a mirrorless camera, or perhaps even something like the D750... that would be golden (but would need to include 4K). But I guess they are scared of the competition in that segment and are afraid that losing the mirror will also mean people won't see Nikon as a solid AF performing brand anymore... I think they'll be sticking to a pro-stills strategy.

They'd need something akin to Canon's Dual-Pixel AF before they could go all-out on an APS-C or full-frame mirrorless. As a D5500 owner, I can tell you that only being able to use the camera's Contrast Detect AF would not be a fun experience in the slightest. I suppose it'd be a different matter if you were using it only for video, but then a lot of people buy cameras in that category specifically because they can pull double duty as still and video devices.

What Nikon really need (with the obvious exception of 4K, which little by little they're rolling out already) is zebra indicators on their lower-end cameras and focus peaking across the range. Or, they need better contract lawyers if the rumours about Sony forcing restrictions on what Nikon can do with their sensors are true.

[sandro]

Buy Samsung camera division and make the NX2

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, David Bowgett said:

They'd need something akin to Canon's Dual-Pixel AF before they could go all-out on an APS-C or full-frame mirrorless. As a D5500 owner, I can tell you that only being able to use the camera's Contrast Detect AF would not be a fun experience in the slightest. I suppose it'd be a different matter if you were using it only for video, but then a lot of people buy cameras in that category specifically because they can pull double duty as still and video devices.

What Nikon really need (with the obvious exception of 4K, which little by little they're rolling out already) is zebra indicators on their lower-end cameras and focus peaking across the range. Or, they need better contract lawyers if the rumours about Sony forcing restrictions on what Nikon can do with their sensors are true.

Agreed, on all the points.

[The Chris]

The Nikon 1 series has some pretty amazing PADF capabilities, and had it before Canon or Sony, they can do mirrorless AF.

They're in a tough spot to do large sensor mirrorless because of their commitment to the F-mount, Sony isn't exactly lighting the world on fire with the kludgy LAEA adapters that mate A-mount glass to E-mount bodies, reception to and adapter will probably be equally cold.