Panasonic Teases New Compact Cinema Camera

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Keep in mind that Sony had a big gap between the A7S II and FS7 for a long time before they finally released the FS5. Besides, it's not mission-critical for them to fill in every price category with a new camera, especially since $5-6.5k is something of a sweet spot for owner-operators and low-end rentals. 

[mercer]

8 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Keep in mind that Sony had a big gap between the A7S II and FS7 for a long time before they finally released the FS5. Besides, it's not mission-critical for them to fill in every price category with a new camera, especially since $5-6.5k is something of a sweet spot for owner-operators and low-end rentals. 

That's true and maybe I just feel like being a contrarian today, but Canon and Nikon repeatedly get slammed on this site for protecting product lines, when Panasonic does the same exact thing.

The price and feature gap between the G85 and GH5 is huge, especially if you are an HD shooter. To have to pay $2000 to get the high bitrate, all-i 1080p is kind of ridiculous. Sure you are getting a bunch more features with the GH5, but for half the money you can get an 80D with fairly high bitrate all-i 1080p, with DPAF, with a S35mm aesthetic, with better native lens options.

Unfortunately, as of now, it seems Panny's cineX camera will be the same. Without exporting Raw, I don't see the point in paying $6500 for the cineX camera. But admittedly this is all conjecture at this time. 

[Kisaha]

@mercer 80D is a joke of a video camera, I do not understand why it is mentioned here.

I guess you have misunderstood the whole industry, the productions that need raw are so few in the general video creating scheme of our times that it ain't even make a dent to sales. Even for documentary TV series C100markII or 8 bit 4:2:2 is mostly adequate.

If you do a few projects per year and have all the time in the world or a big budget, then ok, most of the time we are rushing to keep into deadlines, and raw workflow isn't the fastest or most convenient one (both pre/pro and production wise).

Every company protect their product lines, and that make sense for customers as well. What is the point to have a lot of similar options from one company, it doesn't make sense. Just check car companies and their models (take Citroen par example, where their product line is very clear) and you will understand how things work.

Also, to keep with the car terminology, a racing car (raw) has the absolute power, but a professional needs a small van 7 times out of 10, and the rest 3 ain't a sports car either!

[mercer]

5 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@mercer 80D is a joke of a video camera, I do not understand why it is mentioned here.

I guess you have misunderstood the whole industry, the productions that need raw are so few in the general video creating scheme of our times that it ain't even make a dent to sales. Even for documentary TV series C100markII or 8 bit 4:2:2 is mostly adequate.

If you do a few projects per year and have all the time in the world or a big budget, then ok, most of the time we are rushing to keep into deadlines, and raw workflow isn't the fastest or most convenient one (both pre/pro and production wise).

Every company protect their product lines, and that make sense for customers as well. What is the point to have a lot of similar options from one company, it doesn't make sense. Just check car companies and their models (take Citroen par example, where their product line is very clear) and you will understand how things work.

Also, to keep with the car terminology, a racing car (raw) has the absolute power, but a professional needs a small van 7 times out of 10, and the rest 3 ain't a sports car either!

Haha, okay. I guess if your biggest take away from my post is my mention of the 80D, then enough said.

But I guess I'll play, I never said Raw is mandatory but when your biggest competitor in that price range offers it at a cheaper price, then...

But you're right, without Raw, I wouldn't spend an extra $2500 for Panny when I can get class leading AF, C-Log, Canon color in a small bitrate for $2500 less with the C100ii. But that's just me. 

[Kisaha]

@mercer Read 80D, replied with the only words worth of this camera.

As you know C100markII is my favorite camera for most uses, but if there is a C100markIII with 4K capabilities (and it should be, really soon) then it won't cost 4500 euros, so the new Panasonic will compete with the III, and not the II. The C100markIII it can be north of 6500euros, to close the gap between the 13.000 euros Canon C300 mark II (and look at those specs for 13.000euros).

When they are both out we will compare and decide (I am definitely in the market for such a camera), I favor Canon in general, so many years they have treat me good, but as you know I am brand agnostic, whatever works; but in 2017 I can't buy a 4500 camera with only 35Mbps 8 bit bitrate, even though it is a magically robust codec.

Raw isn't something they will give for cheap, even the new Ursa reaches 5 number price territory if you include all things necessary. I can accept such a camera for 6500euros, if it has everything else I need in that price range, and get raw out of a Atomos or Video Devices recorder.

Seriously, for more expensive products we just rent a camera, but of course it is good to have raw with some way. Now, if Pana gives as raw in that price range, then thank you very much!

In my next buy I would like to use more dual pixel technology, so ideally I would like a C100markIII (or C200, whatever it's called) and a CN-E lens.

P.S what's wrong with G85?! I consider it to be a more advanced camera than the 80D, and native lenses are just fine. GH5 is extremely cheap for what it offers. Unbelievably cheap, and there is the GH4 for less than 999$ as a worthy option. 

[mercer]

22 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@mercer Read 80D, replied with the only words worth of this camera.

As you know C100markII is my favorite camera for most uses, but if there is a C100markIII with 4K capabilities (and it should be, really soon) then it won't cost 4500 euros, so the new Panasonic will compete with the III, and not the II. The C100markIII it can be north of 6500euros, to close the gap between the 13.000 euros Canon C300 mark II (and look at those specs for 13.000euros).

When they are both out we will compare and decide (I am definitely in the market for such a camera), I favor Canon in general, so many years they have treat me good, but as you know I am brand agnostic, whatever works; but in 2017 I can't buy a 4500 camera with only 35Mbps 8 bit bitrate, even though it is a magically robust codec.

Raw isn't something they will give for cheap, even the new Ursa reaches 5 number price territory if you include all things necessary. I can accept such a camera for 6500euros, if it has everything else I need in that price range, and get raw out of a Atomos or Video Devices recorder.

Seriously, for more expensive products we just rent a camera, but of course it is good to have raw with some way. Now, if Pana gives as raw in that price range, then thank you very much!

In my next buy I would like to use more dual pixel technology, so ideally I would like a C100markIII (or C200, whatever it's called) and a CN-E lens.

P.S what's wrong with G85?! I consider it to be a more advanced camera than the 80D, and native lenses are just fine. GH5 is extremely cheap for what it offers. Unbelievably cheap, and there is the GH4 for less than 999$ as a worthy option. 

The 80D is just about price reference and how Canon gets hit with a double standard more than Panasonic or Sony gets hit for the same tactics. The point of my post is not what is better, it's about what you are getting for your money. And in my opinion $6500 for a cinema camera that doesn't shoot Raw is not that great of a deal. 

The G85 is also a great camera. But there is a major price gap between the G85 and GH5. It almost seems like Panasonic doesn't know what they're doing. It benefits a lot of people, but these price gaps could also have a negative effect on brand loyalty.

Take Canon for example... if you are a Canon shooter and you started with a Rebel series camera, you've bought into their ecosystem with some good primes and zooms but you're ready for an upgrade, you can buy an 80D. When you're ready for another upgrade, you can buy a 7Dmarkwhatever, then a 5D? Or a C100mk? Or a 1DX, etc... 

With Panasonic you can start with a GX85, then go to a G85, then you have to take a big jump to the GH5. At this point most buyers have accrued some native lenses and maybe they're ready for another jump... but the next logical jump is this cine camera that is $4500 more than your current camera and it doesn't use your lens collection... UMM?!?! So, JVC here you go...

[Kisaha]

@mercer 

Understood, Canon and Sony have the most complete line in photo and video, that is why they are market leaders in most categories. But whatever entry or middling Canon you buy, EF-S lenses do not work on their full frame cameras anyway, so it isn't exactly true that there is a great continuation. Also their mirrorless range is another mount to consider, EOS M, and with just a few lenses, so you have in reality at least 4 lines, EF-M / EF-S / EF / Cine line while in Pana you have only m43 and the pro mounts in Varicam.

There is the GH4 still on sale, for most people that is a perfectly fine hybrid and do not have to pay 2000$ for, more or less half of it!

The problem isn't that Panasonic do not have a middle camera between G85 - GH4 and GH5, is that Canon charges too much for their 80D, 7D and up. Except dual pixel, which is truly incredible, middle Panasonic cameras are much better than 80D and down, even if they cost the same amount of money.

Do not forget that GH5 is reaching dSLR levels in size and weight, you can't have that for cheaper m43 cameras, their biggest selling point was always how light and small were, you can't just make them bigger than full frame dSLRs, you can do that to a specialized video tool like the GH5, but not for the rest of your line.

I consider the JVC a camera to bridge the gap between GH5 and the new Panasonic, it is close to the GH5 price anyway, no 10 bit (and IBIS of course), but everything else is there.

We don't even know the Pana price yet, why we are so certain that it will be 6500?!

There is also the DVX200, a little more than 4000$!

[ntblowz]

19 hours ago, mercer said:

I get that everybody is stoked about this camera but once again, Panasonic has a huge gap in their camera pricing. There's already a gap between the G85 and GH5 and at $6500, there's a huge gap between the GH5 and this new camera. I know the GH5 is in a different category than the new camera, but with the hybrid nature of the GH5...

So, if the pricing is correct, how does Panasonic fill the gap between the GH5 and this new camera to lure GH5 users who are ready to upgrade to move to this new camera instead of going to a Sony A7Siii and then the cheaper FS5?

FS5's weakness is sensor is old and codec not solid, I know cause I own one, I also have A7RII which I can get better colour from a7rii than fs5 anyday, a7rII colour just feel more solid, though non compares to C100MKII which with a few tweak will have good colour even if straight from camera footage looks crap.

 

I know many people waiting for AF100 successor, me included, price is still within reach so thats ok lol (gonna trade my FS5 for it), I got GX85 and loads of M43 lens, also got Sigma 1.8 zoom lens on EF mount (for FS5). So what if new camera doesn't use mft, I can use it on GH5/GX85, but I know my sigma 1.8 zoom will be on new Pana camera so that works ok fine. 

 

And I hate native Sony lens because their MF is really terrible, that why I use Canon mount lens on FS5 for solid MF support, still dont know what the big fuss about af, I know AF lens suck ball when you try to use MF, they are totally unusable! Vice versa for Canon lens too, only STM lens have really nice AF (but suck MF) on C100MKII, L lens is only ok but I wouldn't rate it stellar and they make noise, but MF is reliable.

[IronFilm]

On 5/7/2017 at 0:38 AM, pablogrollan said:

My bet is on SDXC, too. P2 cards are dead, as most absurdly overpriced and obsolete propietary media (Sony SxS anyone?) in favour of more readily available and universal media.

SxS and P2 are both used still often enough on many many sets. I used SxS very recently, & I think next weekend's shoot will use P2. 

On 5/7/2017 at 0:38 AM, pablogrollan said:

True, but you also have to consider the very, very useful electronic variable ND of the FS5, its ability to shoot over 200 fps with top 1080p 422 10 bit quality (plus ridiculously high framerates at lower quality), the adaptability of E-mount, and the fact that 500$ plus renting an Oddissey (or a Shogun) gives you gorgeous raw video.

 

Wait and see what the specs are of the Panasonic. 
For all we know, it too might have: adaptable mount, high FPS modes, variable ND, 10bit internal, raw output, etc 

But even if it doesn't.... wouldn't you rather have the dual ISO and colors of the Varicam over the FS5's limitations?

On 5/7/2017 at 4:22 AM, Fritz Pierre said:

I'm curious as to why you're so certain no SSD....The camera is physically large enough to use it....

Because only the small oddball outsiders like Blackmagic Design and Kinefinity are letting you use off the shelf consumer SSDs. 
All the big established players are insisting you use typical media formats like in the rest of their cameras. 
Which is why I'd be very surprised to see a Varicam that let you record straight to an off the shelf consumer SSD.

20 hours ago, mercer said:

I get that everybody is stoked about this camera but once again, Panasonic has a huge gap in their camera pricing. There's already a gap between the G85 and GH5 and at $6500, there's a huge gap between the GH5 and this new camera. I know the GH5 is in a different category than the new camera, but with the hybrid nature of the GH5...

So, if the pricing is correct, how does Panasonic fill the gap between the GH5 and this new camera to lure GH5 users who are ready to upgrade to move to this new camera instead of going to a Sony A7Siii and then the cheaper FS5?

Going from GH5 to a7S mk3 would be a strange sideways "upgrade". Anyone doing that is probably suffering from gear addiction syndrome.....   and needs to slow down!

I suspect the price gap between an FS5 and this new Varicam will probably be small enough that it won't be the biggest factor when people are choosing which camera to go with. 

19 hours ago, mercer said:

The price and feature gap between the G85 and GH5 is huge, especially if you are an HD shooter. To have to pay $2000 to get the high bitrate, all-i 1080p is kind of ridiculous. Sure you are getting a bunch more features with the GH5, but for half the money you can get an 80D with fairly high bitrate all-i 1080p, with DPAF, with a S35mm aesthetic, with better native lens options.

 

No thanks, 80D would be a massive downgrade from a G85

And it is just a momentary blip in time that there is a large price and feature gap between the G85 and GH5, because the GH5 just came out. 

Very soon enough if we are just patient and wait, the G90 will come out which will close down the gap with the GH5.  And we'll probably see a successor of the G90 to come out as well before a GH6 arrives, further reducing the gap between the GH and G line ups (even catching up and exceeding the GH5! Like happened with the GH4 and GH3 before it). 

[IronFilm]

17 hours ago, mercer said:

And in my opinion $6500 for a cinema camera that doesn't shoot Raw is not that great of a deal. 

When even multimillion dollar productions are not shooting in raw, I don't believe it to be a big deal breaker at all if it is missing out on raw from the new lower priced Varicam. 

So long as there is from the Varicam sensor an internal 4K 422 10bit and 2K 444 internal as well, then we should all be very happy indeed! :-) 

[mercer]

51 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

When even multimillion dollar productions are not shooting in raw, I don't believe it to be a big deal breaker at all if it is missing out on raw from the new lower priced Varicam. 

So long as there is from the Varicam sensor an internal 4K 422 10bit and 2K 444 internal as well, then we should all be very happy indeed! :-) 

Multi million dollar productions don't need Raw because they have so much other budgetary freedoms. It's us indie filmmakers that need every little bit of IQ help we can get. How do you compete against the FS5 and BM Ursa Pro at the same price range when they both shoot Raw? After using Raw in my current short, I don't think I would shoot anything but for a serious project. For smaller 2-3 minute pieces, yeah I would love a good solid space saving codec... probably 4K but that may even be overkill. 

[ntblowz]

7 hours ago, mercer said:

Multi million dollar productions don't need Raw because they have so much other budgetary freedoms. It's us indie filmmakers that need every little bit of IQ help we can get. How do you compete against the FS5 and BM Ursa Pro at the same price range when they both shoot Raw? After using Raw in my current short, I don't think I would shoot anything but for a serious project. For smaller 2-3 minute pieces, yeah I would love a good solid space saving codec... probably 4K but that may even be overkill. 

I dont care about RAW, that why I never bothered getting the $500 upgrade for unlimited RAW on my FS5, it doesn't fit to my business and doesn't make economical sense as well, I rather spend on that 120fps unlimited upgrade which is more useful.

[ntblowz]

By the way I just noticed "13 Reasons Why" is shot on Varicam 35. the night scenes in the tv look pretty clean! I really wish they use the same sensor on this cam!

http://www.digitalcinemareport.com/article/two-looks-13-reasons-why#.WRE1R-WGOHs

The DP also considered Arri 65 and Sony F55 but decide to go for Varicam 35 at end after testing them out

[Emanuel]

3 hours ago, ntblowz said:

By the way I just noticed "13 Reasons Why" is shot on Varicam 35. the night scenes in the tv look pretty clean! I really wish they use the same sensor on this cam!

http://www.digitalcinemareport.com/article/two-looks-13-reasons-why#.WRE1R-WGOHs

The DP also considered Arri 65 and Sony F55 but decide to go for Varicam 35 at end after testing them out

Dual native ISO (800/5000) is priceless and you'll find it even on LT version for a fraction of price charged on the big boys!

[Kisaha]

@ntblowz interesting, I am in tape 4 right now, I will be looking at it with a different eye now!

[webrunner5]

Here is a short video shot on the Varicam 35.  Jesus I want one!

 

[AaronChicago]

Definitely renting the Varicam LT next time I have a night shoot. The UM46K is okay with fast lenses but sometimes I really wanna push to ISO 3200 or 5000.

[Fritz Pierre]

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Here is a short video shot on the Varicam 35.  Jesus I want one!

 

I know!...lots of talk about the new mystery camera....but the LT is what I really want....IMO simply nothing to touch this exept the F35.... which was over a $200,000 more than in 2008 and shoots in 1080P only....but this dual ISO feature is saving producers a lot of money as the Varicams are being used more and DP's love it....but the color and the image!...it's all there!...even the LTis a brute in size though....you hit the 20lb mark with it pretty quickly!

[webrunner5]

6 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

I know!...lots of talk about the new mystery camera....but the LT is what I really want....IMO simply nothing to touch this exept the F35.... which was over a $200,000 more than in 2008 and shoots in 1080P only....but this dual ISO feature is saving producers a lot of money as the Varicams are being used more and DP's love it....but the color and the image!...it's all there!...even the LTis a brute in size though....you hit the 20lb mark with it pretty quickly!

Yeah but I shot, as you know, ENG Sony Cameras for years, and they weighed 20 lb or more, but they are easy as heck to Handhold because of it. That is why they were that big, and still are. They were a dream to use, but you get used to the weight for shorter periods of time, but I will admit it got ugly after a hour or so! Thank God for GOOD tripods LoL.

[Fritz Pierre]

4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah but I shot, as you know, ENG Sony Cameras for years, and they weighed 20 lb or more, but they are easy as heck to Handhold because of it. That is why they were that big, and still are. They were a dream to use, but you get used to the weight for shorter periods of time, but I will admit it got ugly after a hour or so! Thank God for GOOD tripods LoL.

Agreed...I actually much prefer the look of a handheld heavy camera over a gimbal...or of course a skilled steady cam operator...when I fantasize about the LT, I think more about the rest....the support gear...like my 22lb Miller head on a 75 

mm bowl will probably not cut it??....so in addition to the 20,000 ++ Varicam package I'd have to also factor in a $5000 Cartoni or something...but what a joy this camera would be....and everyone says if you get the Panny sliding shoulder pad, the camera balances so well that you can practically let go of it???ahhh....desire will be the death of me!