Panasonic GH6

[sanveer]

3 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

But the original picture looked like a boxy zcam type prototype camera taken with a 2009 cellphone camera.

😂

[Wronzoff]

[IronFilm]

 Nah, that is a Z Cam

[sanveer]

7 hours ago, sanveer said:

Some user posted a comment with  "looks like"

"looks like"

[sanveer]

The M43rumors guy was specifically asked to remove the leaked photo, which means there is something to the rumour. 

 

And now this 

https://photorumors.com/2020/09/25/new-panasonic-dc-bgh1-camera-registered-in-russia/

 

The next GH camera may gave a larger body and perform some great cinematic tricks, it appears? 

I hope the larger battery is used for Dual Gain processing. 

[Kisaha]

This is very interesting.

Hope this is the answer to the C70.

The official price of the Canon here is 5.999€, add the adapters and an extra battery or two, and you are reaching easily the 7.000€ mark.

If one can get similar performance, except AF of course, for half the price, then why not? 

For most people a convinient m43 "camcorder/cine camera" will be a dream come true, that can be even more significant than the new GH and something we are waiting for since that m43 cine camera that I even forget it's name!!

Most of us even have the adapters and the lenses to go straight to it.

[Michael S]

On 9/25/2020 at 12:37 PM, IronFilm said:

 Nah, that is a Z Cam

The battery looks remarkably similar to the Panasonic AG-VBR89GC

[Video Hummus]

8 hours ago, Kisaha said:

This is very interesting.

Hope this is the answer to the C70.

The official price of the Canon here is 5.999€, add the adapters and an extra battery or two, and you are reaching easily the 7.000€ mark.

If one can get similar performance, except AF of course, for half the price, then why not? 

For most people a convinient m43 "camcorder/cine camera" will be a dream come true, that can be even more significant than the new GH and something we are waiting for since that m43 cine camera that I even forget it's name!!

Most of us even have the adapters and the lenses to go straight to it.

If it doesn’t have AF it’s dead in the water in my view. I can already see the reviews...

[ac6000cw]

The important (management) question for Panasonic - who don't have a market-dominant position in cameras like Canon do - is 'can we make a sensible return on investment' with a GH5 successor?

Making development prototypes isn't necessarily a big investment (I'm sure they've got all sorts of prototypes in the labs) but putting it into production and marketing it is.

Obviously there is less investment required if they just 'warm over' the GH5 and make it even more video-centric e.g. update the electronics, IBIS and DFD to G9 standard, switch to the GH5s sensor for better low-light, maybe replace the mechanical shutter with some sort of internal ND filter. Much beyond that it's probably a rather bigger development effort and is going to be a harder sell to the higher management in the current economic climate.

This wouldn't be a direct GH5 replacement, but personally I'd like them to put as much as possible of the GH5/G9 tech into the smallest possible camera body - a GX9 size body with 4k60p (even if it had to be cropped a bit) and a mic input would almost be my perfect camera. Combine lens IS with just EIS if IBIS is too space hungry. They could probably get away with dropping the mechanical shutter as well to save space - phones don't have them after all. Small size with good performance is the original ethos of m43, isn't it?

[Video Hummus]

I just don't understand the form factor. It looks like a Zcam, will compete directly with ZCam, and the Zcam E2 is now defunct. GH5 owners will surely want something closer to a GH5 or even something S1H sized if it meant they got internal NDs, RAW or ProRes internal, autofocus, IBIS.

This is either entirely a prototype housing for ease of testing or, maybe a long shot, the bigger boxy body with a MFT organic sensor in there. I would much rather see something more integrated like a C70 design than a cube.

But all of that just doesn’t make sense to me unless they want to get organic sensor out in the wild. I think its fair to say most people that want a low-tier cinema camera are wanting S35 or bigger sensor and most want FF now full stop.

[Kisaha]

It may be a special GH video camera, not a hybrid. mini XLR, ND and the goods...

[Towd]

It is interesting that the top three spots on Andrew's list of the most popular cameras on EOSHD are all M43 cameras.  Yet every day we have new posts bemoaning the impending death of the format.  And here we are posting on a GH6 "rumors" thread that is 27 pages long and has been active for over a year.

 

It really feels like the death of M43 if it comes, will be due to a self fulfilling prophecy in the minds of its users and not based in any rational assessment of its adoption or the interest of its userbase.  

If Panasonic does decide to abandon a market that they lead and tries to cram the L-mount down our throat it will be one of the silliest decisions a corporation could make.  But I wont try to predict the future as it wouldn't be the first time corporate heads made a bad call.

For the last year or so now Panasonic has been pushing adoption of their new full frame camera line and they probably want to give it as much room to breath and grow as possible.  I think with the new release of the S5, they'll also want to give it some time for new adopters to buy in before they release any news about a GH5 replacement.   At least that is what makes the most sense to me, but I do agree the lack of guidance from them and full support of the format a bit worrisome.  For example, the EVA1 really should have been M43 with maybe a bundled EF adapter or an interchangeable mount-- that alone may have given their user base more confidence in its future.  It is also too bad that the L-mount and M43 have such similar flange distances that an adapter between the two is probably not in the cards.

That said M43 is still my favorite ecosystem and format and none of the full frame cameras have really pulled me away due to some combination of rolling shutter, cropped video, heat issues, or just the size of the bodies and lenses.  The A7S III looks the most promising to me, but I'm still not entirely sold on the need to move to full frame due to weight/size of the lenses and the shallow depth of field that I mostly consider a negative for video.

Anyway, It would be sad to see Panasonic walk away from a mount that arguably has one of the most diverse ecosystems of lenses and adapters on the market.  Hopefully, we'll get some good news soon from Panasonic after they have given the S5 some time to sell through.

[ac6000cw]

Towd - I think that's a perfect summary of how a lot of us feel about m43 versus the alternatives. A much more interesting post than people constantly ranting about AF performance.....

[dgvro]

11 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

This wouldn't be a direct GH5 replacement, but personally I'd like them to put as much as possible of the GH5/G9 tech into the smallest possible camera body - a GX9 size body with 4k60p (even if it had to be cropped a bit) and a mic input would almost be my perfect camera. Combine lens IS with just EIS if IBIS is too space hungry. They could probably get away with dropping the mechanical shutter as well to save space - phones don't have them after all. Small size with good performance is the original ethos of m43, isn't it?

If these are your criteria and you're a bit flexible on IBIS, surely the XT4 is already perfect? I felt the same way as you, I was (and am) really hung up on wanting the small rangefinder form factor, plus really strong video codecs, plus I.S. and so I switched directly from GH5+GX9 to just an XT4

[Towd]

24 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

Towd - I think that's a perfect summary of how a lot of us feel about m43 versus the alternatives. A much more interesting post than people constantly ranting about AF performance.....

Thanks!  I came to M43 due to the GH5, and have grown to love the format due to its versatility and lens options.  It is just so tiresome to see doom and gloom day in and day out mostly due to some groupthink consensus that full frame is the future, or necessary to achieve a professional look.

Anecdotally, I worked on a long form project that was shot mostly in full frame and it was a nightmare in post.  So many good shots had to be scrapped because the subjects were not all in focus or drifted in and out of focus.  This wasn't just a missed focus problem that could be corrected by perfect focus tracking.  Even when the subject was bang on in focus, a shot could be annoying or distracting because in a 2 person shot or group shot with multiple talking heads another person might be a couple feet off the focus point and look soft.  Micro racking focus back and forth was even more distracting.

Its also worth noting that Hollywood has toyed with large formats in the past like VIstavision, Showscan, and now I-Max.  They are beautiful formats if you have the time and resources to deal with them, but for every day bread and butter work, I find large formats unnecessarily cumbersome.

[Kisaha]

28 minutes ago, Towd said:

Thanks!  I came to M43 due to the GH5, and have grown to love the format due to its versatility and lens options.  It is just so tiresome to see doom and gloom day in and day out mostly due to some groupthink consensus that full frame is the future, or necessary to achieve a professional look.

Anecdotally, I worked on a long form project that was shot mostly in full frame and it was a nightmare in post.  So many good shots had to be scrapped because the subjects were not all in focus or drifted in and out of focus.  This wasn't just a missed focus problem that could be corrected by perfect focus tracking.  Even when the subject was bang on in focus, a shot could be annoying or distracting because in a 2 person shot or group shot with multiple talking heads another person might be a couple feet off the focus point and look soft.  Micro racking focus back and forth was even more distracting.

Its also worth noting that Hollywood has toyed with large formats in the past like VIstavision, Showscan, and now I-Max.  They are beautiful formats if you have the time and resources to deal with them, but for every day bread and butter work, I find large formats unnecessarily cumbersome.

I have seen projects that are 80% out of focus, when I tell the - usually - young lads about it, they do not know what I am talking about!

I thought that was, 2-3 years away, but still people believe just being out of focus is artistic, or alright, they do not understand the medium and cinematic language completely.

A month ago I did sound on a low budgeted feature (still will be at the cinemas and already was bought from a big TV network here) with the FX9 - not raw, by the way - and the DoP used mostly 8 even 11f (Canon Cine primes) and only went to 5.6 and 4 very sporadically. Still we had a lot of issues with focus and the director wasn't very happy.

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, Towd said:

For example, the EVA1 really should have been M43 with maybe a bundled EF adapter or an interchangeable mount-- that alone may have given their user base more confidence in its future.  It is also too bad that the L-mount and M43 have such similar flange distances that an adapter between the two is probably not in the cards.

That said M43 is still my favorite ecosystem and format and none of the full frame cameras have really pulled me away due to some combination of rolling shutter, cropped video, heat issues, or just the size of the bodies and lenses.  The A7S III looks the most promising to me, but I'm still not entirely sold on the need to move to full frame due to weight/size of the lenses and the shallow depth of field that I mostly consider a negative for video.

Anyway, It would be sad to see Panasonic walk away from a mount that arguably has one of the most diverse ecosystems of lenses and adapters on the market.  Hopefully, we'll get some good news soon from Panasonic after they have given the S5 some time to sell through.

 

110% Yes! That the Panasonic EVA1 MFT should have been a thing, I've said it a million times: an EVA1 MFT was needed! But in late 2020, it is too late now. Fingers crossed for a Panasonic EVA2 MFT???
 

 

[kye]

2 hours ago, Towd said:

Micro racking focus back and forth was even more distracting.

There's a solution to that - it's called Manual Focus.  

....and if you upgrade to Manual Focus, then basically Panasonic cameras are best-in-class!

Seriously though, probably the biggest challenge with the AF crowd is that they think that PDAF / DPAF are near perfect and that DFD is unworkable.  The real situation is that neither are fit-for-purpose yet.  AF will be great, once it reliably focuses on where the director wants it to be focusing, and does so with the right transition speed and doesn't pulse when it's there.

[Towd]

6 minutes ago, kye said:

2 hours ago, Towd said:

Micro racking focus back and forth was even more distracting.

There's a solution to that - it's called Manual Focus.  

Yeah, AF pulsing is terrible.  I've never worked on a project that used autofocus... EVER!  Maybe some day AF will be there, but I'm talking about doing a small racking manual focus pulls between people in a group shot because one person is positioned a foot or two off the focus point.  To me that is as annoying as having one person in a group shot out of focus.  Unless you are really trying to draw attention to a rack focus, I feel you want your focusing to be invisible to the audience because nobody cares how blurry your backgrounds are!  They just want to see the subject in focus.  😄

[kye]

1 minute ago, Towd said:

Yeah, AF pulsing is terrible.  I've never worked on a project that used autofocus... EVER!  Maybe some day AF will be there, but I'm talking about doing a small racking manual focus pulls between people in a group shot because one person is positioned a foot or two off the focus point.  To me that is as annoying as having one person in a group shot out of focus.  Unless you are really trying to draw attention to a rack focus, I feel you want your focusing to be invisible to the audience because nobody cares how blurry your backgrounds are!  They just want to see the subject in focus.  😄

Agreed.  Like everything in film-making, it's great if you can make it look nice, but if it gets in the way of the story or content, then it's wrong.

I remember a wedding photographer talking about taking group photos once, and how it is critical to get everyone on focus in a group shot, which if it's a large group of people can be tricky as the people at the edges are a different distance away.  They also mentioned that the most important people at a wedding are the bride/groom, but the second most important people are the oldies as its a very common situation where "the last nice photo of grandma" was taken at a wedding, so making sure to get them in focus should be a huge priority.

It's easy to forget, and make the film equivalent of a cake made entirely of icing.