The wraps are off! Panasonic EVA1 compact cinema camera announced with Super 35 5.7K sensor and Dual Native ISO

[mat33]

17 minutes ago, deezid said:

You can attach it to an external recorder and record ProRes 444, it will look the same.
The problem is the "enhanced" processing of the GH5 and there's no way to bypass it. You can only try to minimize the symptoms.

And look at the Digital Bolex (Quite Low DR and small sensor). Beautiful and cinematic, thanks to great color science and the lack of processing. You can even convert it to 10 bit H264 and it will stay beautiful.

The digital bolex is a great example of how spec's don't always equal real world IQ.  It has at most 12 stops DR and less than 1080p real resolution but it does have such a great image which I think comes down to:

1. Global shutter gives the best motion cadence out there

2. Zero noise reduction in camera

3. The noise that is present is largely luma noise, which gives a great texture to image and while not exactly film grain is similarly quite pleasing.

4. Great colour science especially mid-tones -its a real credit that such a small and inexperienced team managed to fine-tune the sensor & processing to give such colour, but makes you wonder why the industry behemoths still seem to struggle.

Its a real pity the industry became so obsessed with resolution rather than colour science and motion cadence -Arri is the only ones who didn't rush into the 4K, 4.6K, 5.7K, 8K band wagon and well, it has worked out pretty well for them.

[jax_rox]

11 hours ago, mercer said:

The problem with the EVA is its price. They basically announced a concept camera that will be a +$10,000 camera once it's fully kitted out with an evf, media, paid external raw upgrade and external recorder. It will probably be closer to $12,000. Who would pay for that when you can buy a base Varicam LT for only a few thousand more?

This camera takes SDXC, and let's get real for a minute: raw is wholly unnecessary for 98% of the camera's target market. 

The Varicam LT may be 'only' a few thousand more - but Starr factoring P2 cards and the price jumps drastically. And since when does the LT do raw internally..? 

The FS7 doesn't even have a proper EVF. Stick a loupe on the LCD and voila - you've got the same solution as the FS7. 

You know the URSA Mini also doesn't come with an EVF? And really, the 'back of the body' EVFs on the C series and FS5 are next to useless.

But sure, feel free to denigrate a camera based on the cost of wholly unnecessary accessories

[jax_rox]

4 hours ago, mat33 said:

1. Global shutter gives the best motion cadence out there

2. Zero noise reduction in camera

3. The noise that is present is largely luma noise, which gives a great texture to image and while not exactly film grain is similarly quite pleasing.

4. Great colour science especially mid-tones -its a real credit that such a small and inexperienced team managed to fine-tune the sensor & processing to give such colour, but makes you wonder why the industry behemoths still seem to struggle.

Its a real pity the industry became so obsessed with resolution rather than colour science and motion cadence -Arri is the only ones who didn't rush into the 4K, 4.6K, 5.7K, 8K band wagon and well, it has worked out pretty well for them.

I think what you're mostly describing here is simply the result of using a Kodak CCD sensor. Had Kodak had any foresight, we could have seen a truly great high-end Kodak digital cinema camera... maybe. 

CMOS is cheaper and rolling shutter isn't as bad as CCD smear - and in fact using global shutters or just faster readout, rolling shutter is either entirely eliminated, or reduced hugely.

RED is the company that really started the 'resolution wars' for lack of a better term.

Consumers are enticed by large numbers. Sure, a small subset of consumers are more enticed by something as airy-fairy as 'colour science' - and those people went for Arri.

The rest talk non-stop about sensor resolution as if it's the determining factor of a camera system 

[DBounce]

I would love to love this camera, but with not a single frame of footage I'll hold off from praising it. Knock Canon all you want, but they bought actual footage to back up their claims. At this time no one knows if the EVA1 will be an overpriced GH5 or a bargin priced Varicam LT.

[mat33]

2 hours ago, jax_rox said:

I think what you're mostly describing here is simply the result of using a Kodak CCD sensor. Had Kodak had any foresight, we could have seen a truly great high-end Kodak digital cinema camera... maybe. 

CMOS is cheaper and rolling shutter isn't as bad as CCD smear - and in fact using global shutters or just faster readout, rolling shutter is either entirely eliminated, or reduced hugely.

RED is the company that really started the 'resolution wars' for lack of a better term.

Consumers are enticed by large numbers. Sure, a small subset of consumers are more enticed by something as airy-fairy as 'colour science' - and those people went for Arri.

The rest talk non-stop about sensor resolution as if it's the determining factor of a camera system 

Yeah the CCD (and the dyes used in the colour matrix filter) is certainly a large part of the magic -a bit like the lecia M9. There is zero image processing going on on-sensor with CCD, so digital bolex still had a lot of work to do to get the image right.  I think I prefer to deal with CCD smear than bad rolling shutter -on the D16 it only reared its head in fairly extreme circumstances so was easy to avoid.

 

[Fritz Pierre]

On 6/3/2017 at 5:57 AM, jax_rox said:

The GH5 and Varicam lines are two quite different lines. To really be competitive, they were going to have to make a S35 camera, and MFT is simply not that. 

The mount choice and sensor size have nothing to do with one another...the relevance to everyone, you included if this camera is of interest to you, is that if they used an M4/3 mount on a s35 sensor , the camera could have adapted any and all lenses including cropping to M4/3 and S16...please see below if in doubt. As for the professional EF mount on the EVA...why no locking ring...it's a DSLR style lens release button...the only action this "Cine Camera" will see in it's current incarnation will be weddings, Corporate interviews and run and gun....any idea of the cost of a Canon Cine Lens...lol...the lens will be 3 times the price of the camera...I collect lenses....not cameras...cameras come and go...for me personally the EF mount is dead as a choice

 

@AndrewReid

The mount is perfect for the customers they are targeting the EVA1 at. If they'd gone with the Micro Four Thirds size sensor and mount to match, the amount of extra M43 glass they would have sold would probably not compensate for the losses Panasonic would experience through damaging their presence in the C100/C300/rental market, which is all about Super 35 and EF lenses.

 

Why does the M4/3 mount have to be synonymous  with a M4/3 sensor....it does not, as JVC released exactly the same iteration in a camera in 2015...with a variable crop sensor...people invest in a system for years...the pro range mount is a hollow concept to me...the only place pro belongs is behind the cameraI...one could shoot a feature on any M4/3 GH or whatever camera...I would choose a Varicam style camera for the rigors of production and form factor...The EVA with EF mount...lol....I don't think so!...

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1096581-REG/jvc_gy_ls300_4kcam_handheld_s35mm.html/printPage/N?c3api=2572%2C138045322040&gclid=COmt-9qapNQCFQFDhgod3kcFFQ

 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=ProductDetail&A=showItemLargeImage&Q=&sku=1096581&is=REG

been around since 2015....Matias on this forum owns one.

 

[Fritz Pierre]

On 6/3/2017 at 5:08 AM, BTM_Pix said:

The price has surprised me to be honest. CVP are saying it will be 'under 8000 Euros', which will be an ex-VAT price.

Thought it was more likely be a bit above the BM Ursa Mini Pro level and certainly not to be more than the new Canon.

Its not that its particularly wildly expensive for what it does but I just thought they'd be more aggressive.

Sony and Canon are the safe bets for most people in that price bracket so I'd have thought if you were going to take them on it would make sense to at the very least be a few quid cheaper rather than more expensive. Seems to me that someone looking to take a chance and go another way from Sony and Canon would be more tempted by the Ursa Mini Pro now?

The other surprise is the mount.

I just don't get the mount choice when you are an actual manufacturer of a wide range of MFT lenses and the users that you want to bring up to this new level of camera all own those lenses and all of the adapters to convert anything to that mount, why would you NOT put that mount on it?

JVC have already shown what a great combination the Super35 sensor with the MFT mount is. (By the by, JVC actually got their firmware update out a day late this week but I haven't had chance to put it on yet.)

I just do not understand it having an EF mount as a real benefit to anyone other than, erm, Canon. Who will now win whichever of these two cameras that you choose.

Exactly!...lol if I want to shoot a feature with either of these to cameras now, I'd be better off buying the C200 and shooting RAW internally...and I've been shooting on Panasonics since the DVX100....way to go Panasonic!!

21 hours ago, mercer said:

The problem with the EVA is its price. They basically announced a concept camera that will be a +$10,000 camera once it's fully kitted out with an evf, media, paid external raw upgrade and external recorder. It will probably be closer to $12,000. Who would pay for that when you can buy a base Varicam LT for only a few thousand more?

Because a Varicam is 27000 unless you just want to buy it and sit and stare at a very expensive paperweight...these cameras are very far apart in every way...they may call this a Cine Camera but starting with the push button lens release on the mount the resemblance stops there...at least Panasonic was generous enough to include 2 bolts for their top handle as where Canon could only afford 1 lol....though initially very curious, this camera is not for me with this mount!

[mercer]

18 hours ago, ntblowz said:

Mercer is from one man band with low to zero budget production and unlimited time so he have different requirement than most people who do video as full time job and have tight schedule

 

For our company c200 is more preferred since its mostly internal video or YouTube/Vimeo, but for me if I want to be projects to be shown on TV/Netflix EVA1 is more suited for me need. (After using c100 for those boring jobs for sooo long my mindset is set, Canon for boring corporate stuff while sony/pana for exciting projects lol)

Yup, my criteria is based on a different paradigm. But... 12bit internal Raw and DPAF... for $5999... that's gotta put a little rise in your Levi's.

11 hours ago, jax_rox said:

This camera takes SDXC, and let's get real for a minute: raw is wholly unnecessary for 98% of the camera's target market. 

The Varicam LT may be 'only' a few thousand more - but Starr factoring P2 cards and the price jumps drastically. And since when does the LT do raw internally..? 

The FS7 doesn't even have a proper EVF. Stick a loupe on the LCD and voila - you've got the same solution as the FS7. 

You know the URSA Mini also doesn't come with an EVF? And really, the 'back of the body' EVFs on the C series and FS5 are next to useless.

But sure, feel free to denigrate a camera based on the cost of wholly unnecessary accessories

Questioning the pricing of a camera is hardly denigrating it. Otherwise, good points. The LT would need plenty of accessories as well.

My statement was really about the price being off for the market they're trying to get a slice from. If both of your competitors have built in EVFs, then it may be a good idea to include one, especially if you're priced higher than them.

[mercer]

1 hour ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Exactly!...lol if I want to shoot a feature with either of these to cameras now, I'd be better off buying the C200 and shooting RAW internally...and I've been shooting on Panasonics since the DVX100....way to go Panasonic!!

Because a Varicam is 27000 unless you just want to buy it and sit and stare at a very expensive paperweight...these cameras are very far apart in every way...they may call this a Cine Camera but starting with the push button lens release on the mount the resemblance stops there...at least Panasonic was generous enough to include 2 bolts for their top handle as where Canon could only afford 1 lol....though initially very curious, this camera is not for me with this mount!

Exactly, Panasonic missed the mark completely IMO. If they use the same Super 35mm Varicam sensor as planned, with a Micro 4/3 mount... or very least a swappable mount, with 5-axis, include an EVF, with 4K up to 72fps and some form of internal/external Raw... it DOESN'T NEED to be a yet to be developed 5.7K Raw (although that is pretty damn cool) and price it between $6000 and $7000, they would have nailed this for the market (I assume) they're going for.

Who knows, maybe they have plans for an AF200 that will fit in between the GH5 and the EVA, or maybe this was supposed to be the AF200 but they feared they'd lose some GH5 sales or vice versa.

But, as is, it is an an exciting camera. The dual ISO sounds sweet. And it should be a great codec with beautiful colors. We'll know more when some footage gets released. The problem with early announcements like this is it gives Canon and Sony plenty of time to adjust accordingly.

Now if Canon could pull the stick out of their greedy asses and stop worrying about cannibalizing one of their 2-3 year old cameras, they could easily make their XF-AVC FW update at 10bit instead of 8.

Hell, they could also throw in a high bitrate, all-i mov if they want to give their customers more options. Shamefully, they probably won't do any of that.

For me they don't need to, I am only interested in the internal Raw with MP4 proxies. The question will become, over the next 6 months, is how interested I am to buy one or just rent one.

Now if they put out a 5D version of this camera, without the FW update, for $4000 to $5000 (won't happen) I will be buying one. 

But honestly, the two cameras are so different that any comparison is kind of completely unnecessary. The only real comparison to be made is that both cameras seem to be designed for low end cinema (narratives, commercials, docs, music videos) and neither seem designed for the high end event videographer... which I would think is the bread and butter of that market segment. Both are weird cameras.

[mat33]

Has Panasonic stated why they developed a new sensor rather than using the Varicam 35 sensor?  It would seem reusing that sensor would be much cheaper for them, and no-one would complain about its performance or the lack of 5.7K. Could have a Varicam mini -heck even follow Canons lead and give it internal raw but only 8bit codecs to protect your higher end.  Makes me wonder if it will turn out to be closer to the DVX200/GH5, but then why go with EF mount as many would be happy with a AF100 successor with m4/3 sensor and mount.  It kind of makes a bit of a mockery of m4/3 as being suitable for higher-end applications -buy our' professional' 42.5 nocticron for your Gh5 which offers 'professional versatility around the world' but if you want to create 'cinematic moments' with your EVA1 then you need to buy some Canon glass - bit of a mixed message for their marketing.

[jax_rox]

11 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

The mount choice and sensor size have nothing to do with one another...the relevance to everyone, you included if this camera is of interest to you, is that if they used an M4/3 mount on a s35 sensor , the camera could have adapted any and all lenses including cropping to M4/3 and S16...please see below if in doubt. As for the professional EF mount on the EVA...why no locking ring...it's a DSLR style lens release button...the only action this "Cine Camera" will see in it's current incarnation will be weddings, Corporate interviews and run and gun....any idea of the cost of a Canon Cine Lens...lol...the lens will be 3 times the price of the camera...I collect lenses....not cameras...cameras come and go...for me personally the EF mount is dead as a choice

The problem is no MFT glass that covers a S35 sensor. You're suggesting Panasonic shoot themselves in the foot with an obscure (at pro video level) lens mount, one that already doesn't lock, and you want to build that up with adapters...?

As I said previously, when they were building the LT, they did extensive market research, and the cry was for EF mount - not MFT. I understand the adapting possibilities. I do it myself with Sony. But I just don't believe that it's a huge market at this level.

As for why no locking ring? Why no locking ring on the FS5? Why no locking ring on the C300? 

And what 'action' do you think the FS5, FS7, C300 et al see? Weddings, corporate interviews, doco/run 'n' gun, reality tv, etc. Many FS5/7 users have adapted their E-mounts to take EF glass.

If you really wanted to, any of these cameras could be used to shoot a feature film. You really think that the only reason major production companies are say not shooting feature films on an EVA1 is because of a non-locking lens mount..?

These cameras are aimed squarely at 'weddings, corporates, run 'n' gun' etc. I'm not sure where you got the idea that they weren't...?

11 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Why does the M4/3 mount have to be synonymous  with a M4/3 sensor....it does not, as JVC released exactly the same iteration in a camera in 2015...with a variable crop sensor...people invest in a system for years...the pro range mount is a hollow concept to me...the only place pro belongs is behind the cameraI...one could shoot a feature on any M4/3 GH or whatever camera...I would choose a Varicam style camera for the rigors of production and form factor...The EVA with EF mount...lol....I don't think so!...

What's the point of releasing a S35 camera with a lens mount that forces you to crop hugely without adapting lenses...? Sure, the JVC may have done it, but how popular is it..? 

You can shoot a feature on any camera if you really want. The lens mount is not stopping you from shooting. I'm invested in E-mount glass. I think it's great that Sony have expanded their E-mount offering both in lenses and in cameras. But I'm under no illusions that E-mount is going to be around forever, or that all cameras will have E-mounts. If Sony release another FZ-mount, or PL mount camera, I won't bemoan them for not catering to me. If I really want lenses that will last a lifetime, I'll buy PL. I can't afford to buy the sets I want, so for the moment I'm sticking with what I have.

If Sony's next camera is an $8,000 EF-mount camera, I'll probably say things like 'confusing for Sony, seeing as they already have two E-mount cameras'/'I wish it wasn't E-mount'/'I wish I didn't invest so heavily in E-mount'. I certainly won't say things like 'omg with this lens mount, there's absolutely no way anyone is going to take this camera seriously!!!!! lololol'

10 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

 if I want to shoot a feature with either of these to cameras now, I'd be better off buying the C200 and shooting RAW internally...and I've been shooting on Panasonics since the DVX100....way to go Panasonic!!

Panasonic's market for this camera is not people who want to shoot micro-budget features. If you want to shoot a feature, they want you to get a Varicam - which, by the way, is PL or EF mount only....

You want to shoot a feature with an MFT mount, I guess you have to go to Blackmagic... If there really was a market for S35 cameras with MFT mounts, don't you think Blackmagic would've gone there already...?

9 hours ago, mercer said:

12bit internal Raw and DPAF... for $5999... that's gotta put a little rise in your Levi's.

Not really... I've never liked Canon's colour all that much, always hated the ergonomics of the C-series, and never use auto focus. As for internal raw, I don't have the need for it at this level of camera. If I'm shooting a project where raw might enter the equation, I'm not going to be shooting on a $6k camera. And even then, I'm more likely to shoot ProRes444 or similar because I just don't really see the need for it in most of the stuff I shoot. I used to shoot REDraw because it was the only thing you could shoot on a RED, and comparing the workflow to an Alexa shooting 444, I'd much rather shoot ProRes unless we really truly have the budget to deal with raw.

As for everything else, specs and price-wise it's positioned more as a competitor to the FS7. And again - the FS7 doesn't have an EVF. It's always surprised and confused me as to why the FS5 does. 

We still don't know the final price either, so who knows. Silly, I think, to make assumptions without: final price, any footage or even final specs...

9 hours ago, mercer said:

If they use the same Super 35mm Varicam sensor as planned, with a Micro 4/3 mount... or very least a swappable mount, with 5-axis, include an EVF, with 4K up to 72fps and some form of internal/external Raw... it DOESN'T NEED to be a yet to be developed 5.7K Raw (although that is pretty damn cool) and price it between $6000 and $7000, they would have nailed this for the market (I assume) they're going for.

Then it becomes a more expensive camera. A swappable lens mount alone would make the price rise drastically, and I just don't think at this level that there's enough market for it to justify.

2 hours ago, mat33 said:

 It kind of makes a bit of a mockery of m4/3 as being suitable for higher-end applications -buy our' professional' 42.5 nocticron for your Gh5 which offers 'professional versatility around the world' but if you want to create 'cinematic moments' with your EVA1 then you need to buy some Canon glass - bit of a mixed message for their marketing.

Consumer and professional divisions are always separate. Also, that lens came out like two years ago... M4/3 just isn't a lens mount or sensor option that is available in really any high-end camera. That doesn't mean it can't be used to create high-end work... But it also means that competitiveness of the market dictates what lens mount you should go with. And if you release a camera with pretty decent specs, in a cropped sensor and with an obscure lens mount, you're dooming your camera into obscurity.

And yes, I know that you can have an MFT lens mount with a S35 sensor, but it just doesn't really make sense from any standpoint, unless Panasonic decided to start making S35 MFT lenses, and then everything gets confused - as it did for Sony when they first started making full frame E mount lenses and cameras.

[Kisaha]

@jax_rox How the popularity of a technological solution affects its usability? ("Sure, the JVC may have done it, but how popular is it..? "). This variable sensor is a brilliant idea, and have implemented some unique features and innovations because of that. Actually the biggest selling point of this camera is the variability(sic) of this sensor, certainly not its high ISO capabilities.

and in some circles (weddings, events) and some markets it is an option, it is a sleeper camera, that didn't make the news like these Cine cameras did (and JVC marketed it as an advanced camcorder and not a cine camera) but slowly and steadily has build some dynamic. Together with the Atomos it offers 4K/60frames, and fixes the monitoring issues (its little monitor is very bad!), and you pay less than half.

Popularity isn't the one and only measurement, believe me, I have 3 NX cameras, and I use the JVC frequently!

[jax_rox]

38 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@jax_rox How the popularity of a technological solution affects its usability? ("Sure, the JVC may have done it, but how popular is it..? "). 

It doesn't affect its usability. But, as it seems everyone forgets when a new camera is released and the pile-on on here starts for every little thing; companies are in business first and foremost to make money.

Making customers happy with features they want is not done because a company is nice. It's done so that customers will buy their product, and they will make money. As Panasonic, if you look at the (lack of) popularity of the MFT mount in the market they're targetting, the popularity of the Canon C-series and the Sony FS-series, and the popularity of over-sampled S35 sensors - you'd be questioning an MFT mount. Do you not think the discussion was had? Do you think they're sitting reading this forum now thinking 'oh damn, how did we never think of making it an MFT mount??!!!'. 

Every decision is made for a reason, and it's (almost) always about what's going to be the best solution to get the most money out of the market. EF is a deliberate choice, not an arbitrary one.

Camera manufacturers don't make cameras so you have lots of options to choose from, and can choose one that best suits your needs. That's simply a byproduct of competition. Camera manufacturers make cameras to make money. That's their business. RED started making cameras because they knew there was a hole in the market for affordable digital cinema cameras. That meant they could make money out of it. Making high quality film-making accessible to lower budgets was a byproduct. 

If a camera is a 'sleeper camera,' 'another option,' or 'not very popular,' it's a failed model. Why do you think Samsung are no longer making cameras? Sure - you've got three, and there are many on here who invested. But it obviously wasn't profitable, so they preferred to pull out of the market entirely. Again - Samsung attempted the mid-range DSLR market to make money. Many (including you) think the camera's great. Samsung don't care. Samsung care about their bottom line, and if they're not making money out of their camera manufacturing, then why would they continue to pour money into it? Obviously the decision was made that even if they could gain a foothold down the track, the massive investment to get them there is not worth it at this point in time. 

If you're Panasonic and you're bringing out a competitive mid-range camera, you're looking at how you can make the most money. If a S35 sensor with an MFT mount was what was going to bring in the most money for them, then you can be sure the EVA1 would be an MFT mount camera with a S35 sensor.

I'm not sure how far they are from release, but I'm sure if there's enough want in the market for an MFT camera, they'll release something. Again, it will be a decision made out of whether they can make money from it, not whether a few people on the internet think it would be a good thing to have in a camera.

[Fritz Pierre]

@jax_rox...I only own 4 Panasonic native lenses...and I bemoan NOTHING...I'm expressing why this mount and camera means nothing to me...please refrain from inferring that you have any idea of my intent with my equipment...you don't....I am expressing my point of view re why this camera does not suit me with an EF mount and I don't give a fuck who Panasonic targeted with this camera...but it's not me...and as for the value in being able to adapt a multitude of lenses to one system....plenty of forum material on the internet.

[mat33]

1 hour ago, jax_rox said:

Consumer and professional divisions are always separate. Also, that lens came out like two years ago... M4/3 just isn't a lens mount or sensor option that is available in really any high-end camera. That doesn't mean it can't be used to create high-end work... But it also means that competitiveness of the market dictates what lens mount you should go with. And if you release a camera with pretty decent specs, in a cropped sensor and with an obscure lens mount, you're dooming your camera into obscurity.

And yes, I know that you can have an MFT lens mount with a S35 sensor, but it just doesn't really make sense from any standpoint, unless Panasonic decided to start making S35 MFT lenses, and then everything gets confused - as it did for Sony when they first started making full frame E mount lenses and cameras.

I disagree, an active m4/3 mount makes a lot of sense.  You could keep the s35 sensor and bundle the camera with high quality m4/3-EF locking adapter, like a higher quality Sigma MC-11 E to EF adapter, and use the full sensor for s35 glass.  For m4/3 you can use a crop of the sensor -use the smaller crop like the GH2 multiaspect sensor -so 1.86X crop compared to full frame, so would be a reduction in resolution compared to s35 glass but you are starting with 5.6K so shouldn't be too bad. That way you keep your high-end camera market happy with an active EF option, you keep the GH4/5 users who have invested in m4/3 lenses happy with the option to use the same glass and have a smaller, lighter AF option for run and gun, you can potentially use a speed booster and you can adapt pretty much any vintage glass to the camera. If Panasonic itself won't support m4/3 for video then I don't understand why are they spending $$$ on developing GH5 and pushing it hard for professional video use.

[Kisaha]

@jax_rox

Having a variable sensor is a great advantage because 1) they have a complete line of entry level cameras to cine cameras with the same mount. Interchangeable lenses between their cameras, so you can have 2 or 3 different Panasonic cameras and change lenses between them depending the project, and/or use 2) they sell more lenses 3) we can use smaller and lighter lenses 4) great marketing advantage 5) one can use hundreds and hundreds of different lenses, even smaller than m43 6) you use EF lenses, if you want, that is how we use the JVC, we don't own not even 1 m43 lens, but If I change NX to the GH5, I would like to have a few native m43 lenses to use. What is "failed"? JVC LS300 is in the market for a couple of years now, and it still sells. Samsung cameras were great cameras, and still are, the cameras didn't "fail", the mother company just chose to change policy and investments, and they decided that the whole market was going down. I am not going to cry about it, and why should I? I really enjoy using these cameras, and they make me happy, and earn me some income. I follow the market closely, and I will act accordingly. If a lot of people in the internet prefer a variable sensor camera, and not another EF mount camera from someone else, than Canon, then this camera can "fail"! and to be honest, if something doesn't change dramatically before its - unknown - release, most probably will fail.

[fuzzynormal]

Being brutally honest, most of us here are just camera consumers, right?  How many of us are truly filmmakers?  I mean, truly?

I know I'm not half as prolific as I should be to call myself a "filmmaker."  Not really.  I feel more like an enthusiast than a filmmaker.

In addition to that, it's much more satisfying to complain about stuff I want, but then is undelivered --when it's not perfect, that's a convenient excuse to avoid doing the difficult creative work. 

(Well, okay, I'm projecting...but I've had my GH5 for a month now and haven't really done anything special with it.)

Point is, if you put a decent camera in my hands, I should be able to make something. If I don't, it's not because a company failed to deliver an "x" or a "y" or a "z."

Anyway, that's my filmmaker existentialism...pay it no serious mind. Turn back to talk about skin tones, MSRP, and camera mounts.

[mat33]

1 hour ago, fuzzynormal said:

Being brutally honest, most of us here are just camera consumers, right?  How many of us are truly filmmakers?  I mean, truly?

I know I'm not half as prolific as I should be to call myself a "filmmaker."  Not really.  I feel more like an enthusiast than a filmmaker.

In addition to that, it's much more satisfying to complain about stuff I want, but then is undelivered --when it's not perfect, that's a convenient excuse to avoid doing the difficult creative work. 

(Well, okay, I'm projecting...but I've had my GH5 for a month now and haven't really done anything special with it.)

Point is, if you put a decent camera in my hands, I should be able to make something. If I don't, it's not because a company failed to deliver an "x" or a "y" or a "z."

Anyway, that's my filmmaker existentialism...pay it no serious mind. Turn back to talk about skin tones, MSRP, and camera mounts.

All of these cameras are amazing really, as a m4/3 user I just find it interesting at the decisions Panasonics Pro division makes.  It seems they really don't like m4/3 and what the GH series have become, which is strange as they once owned the enthusiast/indie market with the DVX100.  First they gimped v-log-l by making it's standout feature be that it matched the varicam curve but in the process threw away bits of data making it pretty useless in 8-bit and now they have seemingly ruled out any solutions that give some chance of m4/3 being a system with GH5 and a more pro style cinema camera sharing lenses.

[tupp]

On 6/3/2017 at 8:06 PM, jax_rox said:

rolling shutter isn't as bad as CCD smear

Not sure I agree here.

 

 

On 6/3/2017 at 8:06 PM, jax_rox said:

RED is the company that really started the 'resolution wars' for lack of a better term.

Actually, Dalsa and Thompson were in the video megapixel wars before RED existed.  Dalsa had its Origin (4k) and Thompson had its Viper (9.2 MP).

 

 

18 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

The mount choice and sensor size have nothing to do with one another...the relevance to everyone, you included if this camera is of interest to you, is that if they used an M4/3 mount on a s35 sensor , the camera could have adapted any and all lenses including cropping to M4/3 and S16

Exactly.  There is no optical problem using any one of the current popular shallow mounts (M4/3, Sony E, Canon EF-M) with S35 sensors.  Personally, I don't care about sensor cropping (auto or otherwise).

 

 

5 hours ago, jax_rox said:

companies are in business first and foremost to make money.

Making customers happy with features they want is not done because a company is nice. It's done so that customers will buy their product, and they will make money. As Panasonic, if you look at the (lack of) popularity of the MFT mount in the market they're targetting, the popularity of the Canon C-series and the Sony FS-series, and the popularity of over-sampled S35 sensors - you'd be questioning an MFT mount.

Using an MFT mount (or Sony E or Canon EF-M) doesn't preclude the use of EF lenses (nor any other deep-mount market to which Panasonic would like to pander).

 

It is very simple to start with an MFT mount, and merely provide an smart MFT-to-EF adapter that, after it is locked into place, additionally bolts onto the front of the camera for reinforcement.  Said adapter could taper seamlessly and organically from the front of the camera body down the the EF mount, and none of the clueless EF shooters would realize that there is actually an adapter in place.

 

 

5 hours ago, jax_rox said:

Do you not think the discussion was had? Do you think they're sitting reading this forum now thinking 'oh damn, how did we never think of making it an MFT mount??!!!'. 

I would guess that they dismissed the MFT option out of hand, because of hubris, laziness, and because solutions such as the organically integrated adapter scenario mentioned above would never occur to them.

 

 

5 hours ago, jax_rox said:

Camera manufacturers don't make cameras so you have lots of options to choose from, and can choose one that best suits your needs. [snip]  Camera manufacturers make cameras to make money.

Some manufactures can actually see past their noses and beyond the immediate "bottom line."  Such camera makers seek to make money in the long term and to proudly innovate in their industry while developing loyal, solid customer base.  I would agree with you that Panasonic (and Canon and Sony) is not that type of manufacturer.

 

 

5 hours ago, jax_rox said:

I'm not sure how far they are from release, but I'm sure if there's enough want in the market for an MFT camera, they'll release something. Again, it will be a decision made out of whether they can make money from it, not whether a few people on the internet think it would be a good thing to have in a camera.

Sadly, with the huge surge of production people in the digital age, many camera buyers seem less sophisticated than those of the pre-digital age , so legions of new digital shooters happily gobble up whatever a huge manufacturer provides.

[HockeyFan12]

What's CCD smear? Is that like the vertical lines you get with bright sources? I have never seen it in F35 footage but that's my only experience with a CCD camera. I only worked with a little digital bolex footage but it didn't have any either (I also couldn't figure out how to transcode it lol).